Maximum a posteriori probability assignment (MAP-A): An optimality criterion for phylogenetic trees via weighting and dynamic programming

Cladistics

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 282-290

  Wheeler, Ward C ^a  

^a DIVISION OF INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL METHOD; ANATOMY; BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL METHOD; OPTIMIZATION; PHYLOGENETICS; TOPOLOGY; WEIGHT;

EID: 84900541894     PISSN: 07483007     EISSN: 10960031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cla.12046     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Addario-Berry, L., Chor, B., Hallett, M., Lagergren, J., Panconesi, A., Wareham, T., 2004. Ancestral maximum likelihood of evolutionary trees is hard. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 2, 257-271.
2. Barry, D., Hartigan, J., 1987. Statistical analysis of hominid molecular evolution. Stat. Sci. 2, 191-210.
3. Bremer, K., 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10, 295-304.
4. Chor, B., Tuller, T., 2006. Finding a maximum likelihood tree is hard. J. ACM 53, 722-744.
5. Edwards, A.W.F., 1970. Estimation of the bracing points of a branching diffusion process. JR. Stat. Soc. B 32, 155-174.
6. Farris, J.S., 1973. A probability model for inferring evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 22, 250-256.
7. Felsenstein, J., 2004. Phylip (phylogeny inference package) version 3.6. Distributed by the author. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle.
8. Foulds, L.R., Graham, R.L., 1982. The Steiner problem in phylogeny is NP-complete. Adv. Appl. Math. 3, 43-49.
9. Geyer, C.J., 1991. Markov chain Monte Carlo maximum likelihood. In: Keramidas, E.M. (Ed.), Computing Science and Statistics: Proceedings of the 23rd Symposium. Interface Foundation, Fairfax Station, VA, pp. 156-163.
10. Giribet, G., Wheeler, W., 2001. Some unusual small-subunit ribosomal RNA sequences of metazoans. Am. Mus. Novit. 3337, 1-14.
11. Giribet, G., Edgecombe, G.D., Wheeler, W.C., 2001. Arthropod phylogeny based on eight molecular loci and morphology. Nature 413, 157-161.
12. Goodman, M., Olson, C.B., Beeber, J.E., Czelusniak, J., 1982. New perspectives in the molecular biological analysis of mammalian phylogeny. Acta Zool. Fennica 169, 19-35.
13. Harper, C.W., 1979. A Bayesian probability view of phylogenetic systematics. Syst. Zool. 28, 547-553.
14. Hasegawa, M., Kashina, H., Yano, T., 1985. Dating the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 22, 160-174.
15. Jukes, T.H., Cantor, C.R., 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro, N.H. (Ed.), Mammalian Protein Metabolism. Academic Press, New York, pp. 21-132.
16. Larget, B., Simon, D.L., 1999. Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16, 750-759.
17. Larkin, M.A., Blackshields, G., Brown, N.P., Chenna, R., McGettigan, P.A., McWilliam, H., Valentin, F., Wallace, I.M., Wilm, A., Lopez, R., Thompson, J.D., Gibson, T.J., Higgins, D.G., 2007. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23, 2947-2948.
18. Mossel, E., Vigoda, E., 2005. Phylogenetic MCMC algorithms are misleading on mixtures of trees. Science 309, 2207-2209.
19. Mossel, E., Vigoda, E., 2006. Limitations of Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Ann. Appl. Prob. 16, 2215-2234.
20. Neyman, J., 1971. Molecular studies in evolution: a source of novel statistical problems. In: Gupta, S.S., Yackel, J. (Eds.), Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics. New York, Academic Press. pp. 1-27.
21. Rannala, B., Yang, Z., 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. J. Mol. Evol. 43, 304-311.
22. Roch, S., 2006. A short proof that phylogenetic tree reconstruction by maximum likelihood is hard. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. 3, 92-94.
23. Ronquist, F., Huelsenbeck, J.P., Teslenko, M., 2011. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogeny 3.2.1. program and documentation, available at http://morphbank.uuse/mrbayes/.
24. Sankoff, D.M., 1975. Minimal mutation trees of sequences. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 28, 35-42.
25. Sankoff, D.M., Rousseau, P., 1975. Locating the vertices of a Steiner tree in arbitrary space. Math. Program. 9, 240-246.
26. Schulmeister, S., Wheeler, W.C., 2004. Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of developmental sequences. Evol. Dev. 6, 50-57.
27. Smouse, P.E., Li, W.-H., 1987. Likelihood analysis of mitochondrial restriction-cleavage patterns for the human-chimparnzee-gorilla trichotomy. Evolution 41, 1162-1176.
28. Tavaré, S., 1986. Some probabilistic and statistical problems on the analysis of DNA sequences. Lect. Math. Life Sci. 17, 57-86.
29. Thorne, J.L., Kishino, H., Felsenstein, J., 1991. An evolutionary model for maximum likelihood alignment of DNA sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 33, 114-124.
30. Varón, A., Wheeler, W.C., 2012. The tree-alignment problem. BMC Bioinformatics 13, 293.
31. Varón, A., Lucaroni, N., Hong, L., Wheeler, W.C., 2013. POY 5.0 beta. American Museum of Natural History, http://research.amnh.org/scicomp/projects/poy.php.
32. Wang, L., Jiang, T., 1994. On the complexity of multiple sequence alignment. J. Comput. Biol. 1, 337-348.
33. Wheeler, W.C., 1991. Congruence among data sets: a Bayesian approach. In: Miyamoto, M.M., Cracraft, J. (Eds.), Phylogenetic Analysis of DNA Sequences. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 334-346.
34. Wheeler, W.C., 1993. The triangle inequality and character analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10, 707-712.
35. Wheeler, W.C., 1996. Optimization alignment: the end of multiple sequence alignment in phylogenetics? Cladistics 12, 1-9.
36. Wheeler, W.C., 2001. Homology and the optimization of DNA sequence data. Cladistics 17, S3-S11.
37. Wheeler, W.C., 2006. Dynamic homology and the likelihood criterion. Cladistics 22, 157-170.
38. Wheeler, W.C., 2007. The analysis of molecular sequences in large data sets: where should we put our effort? In: Hodkinson, T.R., Parnell, J.A.N. (Eds.), Reconstructing the Tree of Life: Taxonomy and Systematics of Species Rich Taxa. Systematics Association/Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 113-128.
39. Wheeler, W.C., 2010. Distinctions between optimal and expected support. Cladistics 26, 657-663.
40. Wheeler, W.C., Pickett, K.M., 2008. Topology-Bayes versus clade-Bayes in phylogenetic analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25, 447-453.