Theoretical Foundation of the Balanced Minimum Evolution Method of Phylogenetic Inference and Its Relationship to Weighted Least-Squares Tree Fitting

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 587-598

  Desper, Richard ^a   Gascuel, Olivier ^b  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

^b LIRMM   (France)

Author keywords

Consistency; Distance based phylogenetic inference; Least squares; Method comparison using simulations; Minimum evolution

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; GENE SEQUENCE; MOLECULAR CLOCK; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; TAXON;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; LEAST-SQUARES ANALYSIS; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 1542510099     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msh049     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Aldous, D. 1996. Probability distributions of cladograms. Pp. 1-18 in D. Aldous and R. Pemantle, eds. Random Discrete Structures, Springer-Verlag, New York.
2. Bandelt, H.J., and A. W. M. Dress. 1992. A canonical decomposition theory for metrics on a finite set. Adv. Math. 92:47-105.
3. Bruno, W. M., N. D. Socci, and A. L. Halpern. 2000. Weighted Neighbor Joining: a likelihood-based approach to distance-based phylogeny reconstruction. Mol. Biol. Evol. 17:189-197.
4. Bryant, D., and P. Waddell. 1998. Rapid evaluation of least-squares and minimum-evolution criteria on phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15:1346-1359.
5. Bulmer, M. 1991. Use of the method of generalized least squares in reconstructing phylogenies from sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 8:868-883.
6. Denis, F., and O. Gascuel. 2003. On the consistency of the minimum evolution principle of phylogenetic inference. Discrete Appl. Math. 127:63-77.
7. Desper, R., and O. Gascuel. 2002. Fast and accurate phylogeny reconstruction algorithms based on the minimum evolution principle. J. Comp. Biol. 9:687-705.
8. Felsenstein, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony and compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
9. -. 1989. PHYLIP - Phylogeny Inference Package (Version 3.2). Cladistics 5:164-166.
10. -. 1997. An alternating least-squares approach to inferring phylogenies from pairwise distances. Syst. Biol. 46:101-111.
11. Fitch, W. M. 1971. Rate of change of concomitantly variable codons. J. Mol. Evol. 1:84-96.
12. Fitch, W. M., and E. Margoliash. 1967. Construction of phylogenetic trees. Science 155:279-284.
13. Galtier, N. 2001. Maximum-likelihood phylogenetic analysis under a covarion-like model. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18:866-873.
14. Gascuel, O. 1997a. BIONJ: an improved version of the NJ algorithm based on a simple model of sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:685-695.
15. -. 1997b. Concerning the NJ algorithm and its unweighted version, UNJ. Pp. 149-170 in B. Mirkin, F. R. McMorris, F. S. Roberts, and A. Rzhetsky, eds. Mathematical hierarchies. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R. I.
16. -. 2000. Evidence for a relationship between algorithmic scheme and shape of inferred trees. Pp. 157-168 in W. Gaul, O. Opitz, and M. Schader, eds. Data analysis, scientific Modeling and practical applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
17. Gascuel, O., D. Bryant, and F. Denis. 2001. Strengths and limitations of the minimum evolution principle. Syst. Biol. 50:621-627.
18. Harding, E. 1971. The probabilities of rooted tree-shapes generated by random bifurcation. Adv. Appl. Probab. 3:44-77.
19. Huelsenbeck J. P. 2002. Testing a covariotide model of DNA substitution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:698-707.
20. Kimura, M. 1981. Estimation of evolutionary distances between homologous nucleotide sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78:454-458.
21. Kuhner, M. K., and J. Felsenstein. 1994. A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:459-468.
22. Kumar, S. 1996. A stepwise algorithm for finding minimum evolution trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:584-593.
23. Lopez, P., D. Casane, and H. Philippe. 2002. Heterotachy, an important process of protein evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19:1-7.
24. Nakhleh L., U. Roshan, K. St John, J. Sun, and T. Warnow. 2001. Designing fast converging phylogenetic methods. Bioinformatics 17(Suppl 1):190-198.
25. Nei, M., and L. Jin. 1989. Variances of the average numbers of nucleotide substitutions within and between populations. Mol. Biol. Evol. 6:290-300.
26. Nei, M., J. C. Stephens, and N. Saitou. 1985. Methods for computing the standard errors branching points in an evolutionary tree and their application to molecular data from humans and apes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2:66-85.
27. Pauplin, Y. 2000. Direct calculation of a tree length using a distance matrix. J. Mol. Evol. 51:41-47.
28. Robinson, D., and L. Foulds. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147.
29. Rzhetsky, A., and M. Nei. 1993. Theoretical foundation of the minimum-evolution method of phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1073-1095.
30. Saitou, N., and M. Nei. 1987. The Neighbor-Joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4:1073-1095.
31. Semple, C., and M. Steel. 2003. Cyclic permutations and evolutionary trees. Adv. Appl. Math. In Press.
32. Susko, E. 2003. Confidence regions and hypothesis tests for topologies using generalized least squares. Mol. Biol. Evol. 20:862-868.
33. Swofford, D. 1996. PAUP - phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods), Version 4.0. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass.
34. Vach, W. 1989. Least squares approximation of additive trees. Pp. 230-238 in O. Opitz, ed. Conceptual and numerical analysis of data. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
35. Yang Z. 1994. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. J. Mol. Evol. 39:306-314.
36. Yule, G. 1925. A mathematical theory of evolution, based on the conclusions of Dr. J.C. Willis. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B, Biol. Sci. 213:21-87.