Implementing and testing Bayesian and maximum-likelihood supertree methods in phylogenetics

Royal Society Open Science

Volumn 2, Issue 8, 2015, Pages

  Akanni, Wasiu A ^a,c   Wilkinson, Mark ^c   Creevey, Christopher J ^b   Foster, Peter G ^c   Pisani, Davide ^d  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bayes; Maximum likelihood; Phylogeny; Support

Indexed keywords

EID: 84946851886     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20545703     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.140436     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Gordon AD. 1986 Consensus supertrees: the synthesis of rooted trees containing overlapping sets of labeled leaves. J. Classif. 3, 335-348. (doi: 10. 1007/BF018 94195).
2. Wilkinson M, Thorley JL, Pisani D, Lapointe F-J, McInerney JO. 2004 Some desiderata for liberal supertrees. In Phylogenetic supertrees (ed. ORP Bininda-Emonds), pp. 227-246. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
3. McMorris F, Wilkinson M. 2011 Conservative supertrees. Syst. Biol. 60, 232-238. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/syq091).
4. Baum BR. 1992 Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon 41, 3-10. (doi: 10. 2307/1222480).
5. Ragan MA. 1992 Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1, 53-58. (doi: 10. 1016/1055-7903(92) 90035-F).
6. Purvis A. 1995 A modification to Baum and Ragan's method for combining phylogenetic trees. Syst. Biol. 44, 251-255. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/44. 2. 251).
7. Rodrigo AG. 1996 On combining cladograms. Taxon 45, 267-274. (doi: 10. 2307/1224667).
8. Pisani D, Wilkinson M. 2002 Matrix representation with parsimony, taxonomic congruence, and total evidence. Syst. Biol. 51, 151-155. (doi: 10. 1080/1063 51502753475925).
9. Lapointe F-J, Cucumel G. 1997 The average consensus procedure: combination of weighted trees containing identical or overlapping sets of taxa. Syst. Biol. 46, 306-312. (doi: 10. 1093/ sysbio/46. 2. 306).
10. Creevey CJ, Fitzpatrick DA, Philip GK, Kinsella RJ, O'Connell MJ, Pentony MM, Travers SA, Wilkinson M, McInerney JO. 2004 Does a tree-like phylogeny only exist at the tips in the prokaryotes? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, 2551-2558. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2004. 2864).
11. Chen D, Diao L, Eulenstein O, Fernández-Baca D, Sanderson M. 2003 Flipping: a supertree construction method. DIMACS Ser. Disc. Math. Theoret. Comp. Sci. 61, 135-162.
12. Semple C, Steel M. 2000 A supertree method for rooted trees. Disc. Appl. Math. 105, 147-158. (doi: 10. 1016/S0166-218X(00)00202-X).
13. Page RD. 2002 Modified mincut supertrees. In Algorithms in bioinformatics (eds R Guigó, D Gusfield), pp. 537-551. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
14. Wilkinson M, Cotton JA, Lapointe F-J, Pisani D. 2007 Properties of supertree methods in the consensus setting. Syst. Biol. 56, 330-337. (doi: 10. 1080/106351 50701245370).
15. Wilkinson M et al. 2005 The shape of supertrees to come: tree shape related properties of fourteen supertree methods. Syst. Biol. 54, 419-431. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150590949832).
16. Daubin V, GouyM, Perriere G. 2001 Bacterial molecular phylogeny using supertree approach. Genome Inform. Ser. 12, 155-164.
17. BakerWJ, Savolainen V, Asmussen-Lange CB, Chase MW, Dransfield J, Forest F, Harley MM, Uhl NW, Wilkinson M. 2009 Complete generic-level phylogenetic analyses of palms (Arecaceae) with comparisons of supertree and supermatrix approaches. Syst. Biol. 58, 240-256. (doi: 10. 1093/ sysbio/syp021).
18. Nyakatura K, Bininda-Emonds OR. 2012 Updating the evolutionary history of Carnivora (Mammalia): a new species-level supertree complete with divergence time estimates. BMC Biol. 10, 12. (doi: 10. 1186/1741-7007-10-12).
19. Purvis A. 1995 A composite estimate of primate phylogeny. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 348, 405-421. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb. 1995. 0078).
20. Lloyd GT, Davis KE, Pisani D, Tarver JE, Ruta M, Sakamoto M, Hone DW, Jennings R, Benton MJ. 2008 Dinosaurs and the Cretaceous terrestrial revolution. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 2483-2490. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2008. 0715).
21. Pisani D, Cotton JA, McInerney JO. 2007 Supertrees disentangle the chimerical origin of eukaryotic genomes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24, 1752-1760. (doi: 10. 1093/molbev/msm095).
22. Holton TA, Pisani D. 2010 Deep genomic-scale analyses of the metazoa reject Coelomata: evidence from single-andmultigene families analyzed under a supertree and supermatrix paradigm. Genome Biol. Evol. 2, 310-324. (doi: 10. 1093/gbe/evq016).
23. Cotton JA, Wilkinson M. 2007 Majority-rule supertrees. Syst. Biol. 56, 445-452. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150701416682).
24. Kupczok A. 2011 Split-based computation of majority-rule supertrees. BMC Evol. Biol. 11, 205. (doi: 10. 1186/1471-2148-11-205).
25. Margush T, McMorris FR. 1981 Consensus n-trees. Bull. Math. Biol. 43, 239-244. (doi: 10. 1007/BF02459446).
26. Robinson D, Foulds LR. 1981 Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53, 131-147. (doi: 10. 1016/0025-5564(81)90043-2).
27. Bansal MS, Burleigh JG, Eulenstein O, Fernández-Baca D. 2010 Robinson-Foulds supertrees. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 5, 18. (doi: 10. 1186/1748-7188-5-18).
28. Steel M, Rodrigo A. 2008 Maximum likelihood supertrees. Syst. Biol. 57, 243-250. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150802033014).
29. Cotton JA, Wilkinson M. 2009 Supertrees join the mainstream of phylogenetics. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 1-3. (doi: 10. 1016/j. tree. 2008. 08. 006).
30. Burleigh JG, Driskell AC, Sanderson MJ. 2006 Supertree bootstrapping methods for assessing phylogenetic variation among genes in genome-scale data sets. Syst. Biol. 55, 426-440. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150500541722).
31. Bininda-Emonds OR. 2003 Novel versus unsupported clades: assessing the qualitative support for clades in MRP supertrees. Syst. Biol. 52, 839-848. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/52. 6. 839).
32. Wilkinson M, Pisani D, Cotton JA, Corfe I. 2005 Measuring support and finding unsupported relationships in supertrees. Syst. Biol. 54, 823-831. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150590950362).
33. Creevey C, McInerney JO. 2005 Clann: investigating phylogenetic information through supertree analyses. Bioinformatics 21, 390-392. (doi: 10. 1093/bioinformatics/bti020).
34. Moore BR, Smith SA, Donoghue MJ. 2006 Increasing data transparency and estimating phylogenetic uncertainty in supertrees: approaches using nonparametric bootstrapping. Syst. Biol. 55, 662-676. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150600 920693).
35. AkanniWA, Creevey CJ, Wilkinson M, Pisani D. 2014 LU St: a tool for approximated maximum likelihood supertree reconstruction. BMC Bioinform. 15, 183. (doi: 10. 1186/1471-2105-15-183).
36. Ronquist F. 1996 Matrix representation of trees, redundancy, and weighting. Syst. Biol. 45, 247-253. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/45. 2. 247).
37. Bryant D, Steel M. 2009 Computing the distribution of a tree metric. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. 6, 420-426. (doi: 10. 1109/TCBB. 2009. 32).
38. Shimodaira H. 2002 An approximately unbiased test of phylogenetic tree selection. Syst. Biol. 51, 492-508. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150290069913).
39. Price SA, Bininda-Emonds OR, Gittleman JL. 2005 A complete phylogeny of the whales, dolphins and even-toed hoofed mammals (Cetartiodactyla). Biol. Rev. 80, 445-473. (doi: 10. 1017/S14647931050 06743).
40. Foster PG. 2004 Modeling compositional heterogeneity. Syst. Biol. 53, 485-495. (doi: 10. 1080/10635150490445779).
41. Swofford D. 2002 PAUP * version 4. 0. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and othermethods).
42. Thorley J, Wilkinson M. 1999 Testing the phylogenetic stability of early tetrapods. J. Theoret. Biol. 200, 343-344. (doi: 10. 1006/jtbi. 1999. 0999).
43. Wilkinson M. 1994 Common cladistic information and its consensus representation: reduced Adams and reduced cladistic consensus trees and profiles. Syst. Biol. 43, 343-368. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/ 43. 3. 343).
44. Ronquist F et al. 2012 MrBayes 3. 2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539-542. (doi: 10. 1093/sysbio/sys029).
45. Shimodaira H, HasegawaM. 2001 CONSEL: for assessing the confidence of phylogenetic tree selection. Bioinformatics 17, 1246-1247. (doi: 10. 1093/bioinformatics/17. 12. 1246).