Tools to construct and study big trees: A mathematical perspective

Reconstructing the Tree of Life: Taxonomy and Systematics of Species Rich Taxa

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 97-112

  Steel, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954760633     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1201/9781420009538     Document Type: Chapter

References (72)

1. Fitch, W.M. and Margoliash, E., Construction of phylogenetic trees, Science, 155, 279, 1967.
2. Hendy, M.D. and Penny, D., A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees, Syst. Zool., 38, 297, 1989.
3. Lockhart, P.J. et al., Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution, Mol. Biol. Evol., 11, 605, 1994.
4. Susko, E., Inagaki, Y., and Rogers, A.J., On inconsistency of the neighbor-joining, least squares, and minimum evolution estimation when substitution processes are incorrectly modeled, Mol. Biol. Evol., 21, 1629, 2004.
5. Mossel, E. and Steel, M., How much can evolved characters tell us about the tree that generated them? in Mathematics of Evolution and Phylogeny, Gascuel, O., Ed., Oxford University Press, 2005, chap. 14.
6. Steel, M., Böcker, S., and Dress, A.W.M., Simple but fundamental limits for supertree and consensus tree methods, Syst. Biol., 49, 363, 2000.
7. Semple, C. and Steel, M., Phylogenetics, Oxford University Press, 2003.
8. CIPRES, Building the Tree of Life: A national resource for phyloinformatics and computational phylogenetics (http://www.phylo.org).
9. Maley, L.E. and Marshall, C.R., The coming of age of molecular systematics, Science, 279(5350), 505, 1998.
10. Bapteste, E. et al., Do orthologous gene phylogenies really support tree-thinking? BMC Evol. Biol., 5, 33, 2005.
11. Doolittle, W.F., Phylogenetic classification and the universal tree, Science, 284, 2124, 1999.
12. Salamin, N., Hodkinson, T.R., and Savolainen, V., Towards building the tree of life: a simulation study for all angiosperm genera, Syst. Biol., 54, 183, 2005.
13. Zwickl, D.J. and Hillis, D.M., Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error, Syst. Biol., 51, 588, 2002.
14. Erdös, P.L. et al., A few logs suffice to build (almost) all trees (Part 1), Rand. Struct. Algor., 14(2), 153, 1999.
15. Pollock, D.D. et al., Increased taxon sampling is advantageous for phylogenetic inference, Syst. Biol., 51, 664, 2002.
16. Sober, E. and Steel, M., Testing the hypothesis of common ancestry, J. Theor. Biol., 218, 395, 2002.
17. Aldous, D., Stochastic models and descriptive statistics for phylogenetic trees, from Yule to today, Stat. Sci., 16, 23, 2001.
18. Chan, K.M.A. and Moore, B.R., Whole-tree methods for detecting differential diversification rates, Syst. Biol., 51, 855, 2002.
19. Heard, S.B. and Mooers. A.O., The signatures of random and selective mass extinctions in phylogenetic tree balance, Syst. Biol., 51, 889, 2002.
20. McKenzie A. and Steel, M., Distributions of cherries for two models of trees, Math. Biosci. 164, 81, 2000.
21. Lockhart, P.J. et al., How molecules evolve in Eubacteria, Mol. Biol. Evol., 17, 835, 2000.
22. Steel, M.A., Goldstein, L., and Waterman, M., A central limit theorem for parsimony length of trees, Adv. Appl. Prob., 28, 1051, 1996.
23. Steel, M., and Penny, D., Maximum parsimony and the phylogenetic information in multi-state characters, in Parsimony, Phylogeny and Genomics, Albert, V., Ed., Oxford University Press, 2005, chap. 9.
24. Wheeler, Q. and Meier, R., Species Concepts and Phylogenetic Theory, Columbia University Press, New York, 2000.
25. Mallet, J., Hybridization as an invasion of the genome, Trends. Ecol. Evol., 20, 229, 2005.
26. Maddison, W., Gene trees in species trees, Syst. Biol., 46, 523, 1997.
27. Bryant, D. and Berry, V., A structured family of clustering and tree construction methods, Adv. Appl. Math., 27, 705, 2001.
28. Devauchelle, C., et al., Constructing hierarchical set systems, Ann. Combin., 8, 441, 2004.
29. Legendre, P. and Makarenkov, V., Reconstruction of biogeographic and evolutionary networks using reticulograms, Syst. Biol., 51, 199, 2002.
30. Ané, C. and Sanderson, M.J., Missing the forest for the trees: phylogenetic compression and its implications for inferring complex evolutionary histories, Syst. Biol., 54(1), 146, 2005.
31. Baroni, M., Semple, C., and Steel. M., A framework for representing reticulate evolution, Ann. Combin., 8, 391, 2004.
32. Gusfield, D. and Bansal, V., A fundamental decomposition theory for phylogenetic networks and incompatible characters, in Proc. RECOMB 2005, Miyato, S. et al. Eds., LNBI 3500, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, 217.
33. Huynh, T.N.D., Jansson, J., Nguyen, N.B. and Sung, W.-K., Constructing a smallest refining galled phylogenetic network, in Proc. RECOMB 2005, Miyato, S. et al. Eds., LNBI 3500, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, 265.
34. Moret, B. M. E. et al., Phylogenetic networks: modeling, reconstructibility, and accuracy, IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinf., 1, 1, 2004.
35. Song, Y. and Hein, J., On the minimum number of recombination events in the evolutionary history of DNA sequences, J. Math. Biol., 48, 160, 2003.
36. Baroni, M., Semple, C. and Steel, M., Hybrids in real time, Syst. Biol., 55, 46, 2006.
37. Huson, D.H. et al., Reconstruction of reticulate networks from gene trees, in Proc. RECOMB 2005, LNBI 3500 Miyano S. et al. Eds., Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, 233.
38. Bordewich, M. and Semple, C., Computing the minimum number of hybridisation events for a consistent evolutionary history, Research Report (UCDMS2004/21), Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, 2005.
39. Baroni, M. et al., Bounding the number of hybridisation events for a consistent evolutionary history, J. Math. Biol., 51, 171, 2005.
40. Faith, D. P., From species to supertrees: Popperian corroboration and some current controversies in systematics, Austr. Syst. Bot., 17, 1, 2004.
41. Sanderson, M.J. et al., TreeBASE: A prototype database of phylogenetic analyses and an interactive tool for browsing the phylogeny of life, Am. J. Bot., 81, 183, 1994, (http://www.treebase.org/treebase).
42. Bryant, D., A classification of consensus methods for phylogenies, in BioConsensus, Janowitz, M., Lapointe, F.-J., McMorris, F.R., Mirkin, B., and Roberts, F.S. Eds., American Mathematical Society, 2003, 163.
43. Aho, A. V., Sagiv, Y., Szymanski, T. G., and Ullman, J. D., Inferring a tree from lowest common ancestors with an application to the optimization of relational expressions. SIAM Journal on Computing, 10, 405, 1981.
44. Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004.
45. Dress, A.W.M. and Huson, D.H., Constructing splits graphs, IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. and Bioinf., 1, 109, 2004.
46. Bryant, D. and Moulton, V., NeighborNet: an agglomerative algorithm for the construction of phylogenetic networks, Mol. Biol. Evol., 21, 255, 2004.
47. Bandelt, H.-J., Forster, P., and Röhl, A., Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies, Mol. Biol. Evol., 16, 37, 1999.
48. Holland, B. et al., Using consensus networks to visualize contradictory evidence for species phylogeny, Mol. Biol. Evol., 21, 1459, 2004.
49. Huson, D. H. et al., Phylogenetic super-networks from partial trees, IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinf., 1, 151, 2004.
50. Baroni, M. and Steel, M., Accumulation phylogenies, Ann. Combin., 10, 19, 2006.
51. Nakhleh, L., Warnow, T., and Linder, C.R., Reconstructing reticulate evolution in species-theory and practice. In Proc. RECOMB 2004, ACM, 2004, 337.
52. Huber, K.T. and Moulton, V., Phylogenetic networks from multi-labelled trees, J. Math. Biol. 52, 613, 2006.
53. Moret, B.M.E., Tang, J., and Warnow, T., Reconstructing phylogenies from gene-content and gene order data, in Mathematics of Evolution and Phylogeny Gascuel, O. Ed., Oxford University Press, chap. 12.
54. Delsuc, F., Brinkmann, H., and Philippe, H., Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life, Nature Rev. Genet., 6, 361, 2005.
55. Burstein, D. et al. Information theoretic approaches to whole genome phylogenies, in Proc. RECOMB 2005, Miyato, S. et al., Eds., LNBI 3500, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2005, 283.
56. Otu, H.H. and Sayood, K., A new sequence distance measure for phylogenetic tree construction, Bioinf., 19, 2122, 2003.
57. Faith, D.P., Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity, Biol. Conserv., 61, 1, 1992.
58. Barker, G. M., Phylogenetic diversity: a quantitative framework for measurement of priority and achievement in biodiversity conservation, Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 76, 165, 2002.
59. Crozier, R.H., Dunnet, L.J., and Agapow, P.-M., Phylogenetic biodiversity assessment based on systematic nomenclature, Evol. Bioinf. Online, 1, 11, 2005.
60. Mooers, A.O., Heard, S.B., and Chrostowski, E., Evolutionary heritage as a metric for conservation, in Phylogeny and Conservation, Purvis, A., Brooks, T.L. and Gittleman, J.L. Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005, 120.
61. Pavoine, S., Ollier, S., and Dufour, A.-B., Is the originality of species measurable? Ecol. Lett., 8, 579, 2005.
62. Nee, S. and May, R.M., Extinction and the loss of evolutionary history, Science, 278, 692, 1997.
63. Steel, M., Phylogenetic diversity and the greedy algorithm, Syst. Biol., 54, 527, 2005.
64. Pachter, L. and Speyer, D., Reconstructing trees from subtree weights, Appl. Math. Lett., 17, 615, 2004.
65. Levy, D., Yoshida, R., and Pachter, L., Beyond pairwise distances: neighbor joining with phylogenetic diversity estimates, Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 491, 2006.
66. Soutullo, A. et al., Distribution and correlates of Carnivore phylogenetic diversity across the Americas, Animal Conserv., 8, 249, 2005.
67. Wigner, E.P., The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 13, 1, 1960.
68. Kac, M., Rota, G.C., and Schwartz, J., Discrete Thoughts, Birkhauser, 1993.
69. Willson, S.J., Constructing rooted supertrees using distances, Bull. Math. Biol., 66, 1755, 2004.
70. Willson, S.J., Unique solvability of certain hybrid networks from their distances, Ann. Combin., 10, 165, 2005.
71. Ronquist, F., Huelsenbeck, J.P., and Britton, T., Bayesian supertrees, in Phylogenetic Supertrees:Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life, Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P. Ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004, 193.
72. Mossel, E. and Vigoda, E., Phylogenetic MCMC algorithms are misleading on mixtures of trees, Science, 309, 2207, 2005.