Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consensus supertrees: The synthesis of rooted trees containing overlapping sets of labeled leaves

  • Authors Of Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Classification Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Given two dendrograms (rooted tree diagrams) which have some but not all of their base points in common, a supertree is a dendrogram from which each of the original trees can be regarded as samples The distinction is made between inconsistent and consistent sample trees, defined by whether or not the samples provide contradictory information about the supertree An algorithm for obtaining the strict consensus supertree of two consistent sample trees is presented, as are procedures for merging two inconsistent sample trees Some suggestions for future work are made

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ADAMS, E N (1972), “Consensus Techniques and the Comparison of Taxonomic Trees,”Systematic Zoology, 21, 390–397

    Google Scholar 

  • DAY, W H E (1985), “Optimal Algorithms for Comparing Trees with Labeled Leaves,”Journal of Classification, 2, 7–28

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • FINDEN, C R, and GORDON, A D (1985), “Obtaining Common Pruned Trees,”Journal of Classification, 2, 255–276

    Google Scholar 

  • GORDON, A D (1980), “On the Assessment and Comparison of Classifications,” inAnalvse de Données et Informatique, Ed R Tomassone, Le Chesnay: INRIA, 149–160

    Google Scholar 

  • HARDING, E F (1971), “The Probabilities of Rooted Tree-Shapes Generated by Random Bifurcation,”Advances in Applied Probability, 3, 44–77

    Google Scholar 

  • McMORRIS, F R, MERONK, D B, and NEUMANN, D A (1983), “A View of Some Consensus Methods for Trees,” inNumerical Taxonomy, Ed J Felsenstein Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 122–126

    Google Scholar 

  • MAIER, D (1978), “The Complexity of Some Problems on Subsequences and Supersequences,”Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 25, 322–336

    Google Scholar 

  • MARGUSH, T, and McMORRIS, F R (1981), “Consensus n-Trees,”Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 43, 239–244

    Google Scholar 

  • MURTAGH, F (1984), “Counting Dendrograms: A Survey,”Discrete Applied Mathematics, 7, 191–199

    Google Scholar 

  • NEUMANN, D A (1983), “Faithful Consensus Methods for n-Trees,”Mathematical Biosciences, 63, 271–287

    Google Scholar 

  • PHIPPS, J B (1976), “The Numbers of Classifications,”Canadian Journal of Botany, 54, 686–688

    Google Scholar 

  • SIBSON, R (1972), “Order Invariant Methods for Data Analysis,”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 34, 311–349

    Google Scholar 

  • SNEATH, P H A (1983), “Philosophy and Method in Biological Classification,” inNumerical Taxonomy, Ed J Felsenstein, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 22–37

    Google Scholar 

  • SOKAL, R R, and ROHLF, F J (1981), “Taxonomic Congruence in the Leptopodomorpha Re-examined,”Systematic Zoology, 30, 309–325

    Google Scholar 

  • STINEBRICKNER, R (1984), “s-Consensus Trees and Indices,”Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 46, 923–935

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, University of St Andrews, North Haugh, KY16 9SS, St Andrews, Scotland

    AD Gordon

Authors
  1. AD Gordon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gordon, A. Consensus supertrees: The synthesis of rooted trees containing overlapping sets of labeled leaves. Journal of Classification 3, 335–348 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01894195

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01894195

Keywords

Search

Navigation