New metrics for phylogenies

Fundamenta Informaticae

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 199-216

  Bolikowski, Łukasz ^a   Gambin, Anna ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; GENES; HEURISTIC METHODS; PLANTS (BOTANY);

GENE TREE; PARALOG POSITION; PARTITION METRIC DISTANCE; PHYLOGENETIC TREES;

GENETIC ENGINEERING;

EID: 34548644363     PISSN: 01692968     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aho A. V. et. al (1981), Inferring a tree from lowest common ancestors with an application to the optimization o relational expressions, SIAM Journal of Computing, 10(3):405-421.
2. Allen B. L., Steel M. (2001), Subtree Transfer Operations and their Induced Metrics on Evolutionary Trees Annals of Combinatorics 5:1-13.
3. Bourque, G., Yacef, Y., El-Mabrouk, N. (2005), Maximizing synteny blocks to identify ancestral homologs. In Proc. of RECOMB Comparative Genomics Satellite Workshop, LNBI 3678:21-34.
4. Bryant D. (1997), Building trees, hunting for trees, and comparing trees, Ph.D. thesis, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
5. DasGupta B. et al. (2000), On computing the nearest neighbor interchange distance, DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 55:125-143, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI
6. Daubin, V., Gouy, M., Perriere, G. (2002) A Phylogenomic Approach to Bacterial Phylogeny: Evidence of a Core of Genes Sharing a Common History, Genome Research, Vol. 12, Issue 7,1080-1090.
7. Gambin A., Lasota S., Szklarczyk R., Tiuryn J., Tyszkiewicz J. (2002), Contextual Alignment of Biological Sequences, Proc. ECCB'02, Bioinformatics 18:116-127, Oxford University Press.
8. Gambin, A., Tiuryn J., Tyszkiewicz, J. (2006) Alignment with context dependent scoring function, Journal of Computational Biology, 13(1):81-101.
9. Gambin A., Slonimski P. P. (2005), Hierarchical clustering based upon contextual alignment of proteins: a different way to approach phylogeny, C.R. Biologie Acad. Science Paris, 328:11-22.
10. Kubicka, E., Kubicki, G., McMorris, E.R. (1995), An algorithm to find agreement subtrees, Journal of Classification,12:91-99.
11. Li, M., Tromp, J., Zhang, L. (1995), On the nearest neighbor interchange distance between evolutionary trees. J. Theor. Biol. 182:463-467.
12. Li, W-H. (1997), Molecular Evolution,Sinauer Associates.
13. R. Page, Component, tree comparison software, The Natural History Museum, London.
14. Page R. D. M., Holmes E. C. (1998), Molecular Evolution: A phylogenetic approach, Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
15. Robinson, D.F., Foulds, L.R. (1981) Comparison of phylogenetic trees, Math. £í'OíC¿.53:131-147.
16. Rodrigues E. M., Sagot M-F. and Wakabayashi Y. (2001), Some approximation results for the maximum agreement forest problem, in Proc. APPROX and RANDOM'01 LNCS, vol. 2129:159-169.
17. Sankoff, D. (1999), Genome rearrangement with gene families, Bioinformatics Vol. 15 no. 11,909-917.
18. Steel M, McKenzie A. (2001), Properties of phylogenetic trees generated by Yule-type speciation models. Math Biosci. 2001 Mar;170(1):91-112.
19. Steel, M.A. and Penny, D.(1993), Distributions of tree comparison metrics - some new results. Systematic Biology, 42(2): 126-141.
20. D. H. Huson and M. Steel. (2004), Distances that perfectly mislead, Systematic Biology 53(2): 327-332.
21. Steel M., Warnow T. (1993), Kaikoura Tree Theorems: Computing the Maximum Agreement Subtree, Inf. Process. Lett. 48(2): 77-82.
22. Tatusov R. L. et al (2001), The COG database: new developments in phylogenetic classification of proteins from complete genomes, Nucleic Acids Res., 21(1):22-28.