Abstract
There are many ways to combine rooted phylogenetic trees with overlapping leaf sets into a single “supertree”. The most widely used method is MRP (matrix representation with parsimony analysis), but other direct methods have been developed recently. However, all these methods utilize typically only the discrete topology of the input trees and ignore other information that might be available. Based, for example, on fossil data or molecular dating techniques, this information includes whether one particular divergence event occurred earlier or later than another, and actual time estimates for divergence events. The ability to include such information in supertree construction could allow for more accurate dating of certain species divergences. This is a topical problem in recent biological literature. In this chapter, we describe a way to incorporate divergence time information in a fast and exact supertree algorithm that extends the classic Build algorithm. The approach is somewhat flexible in that it allows any combination of relative and/or absolute divergence times. In addition to this extension, the last section of this chapter consists of applications of Build to problems in phylogenetics that are, in general, computationally challenging.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aho, A. V., Sagiv, Y., Szymanski, T. G., and Ullman, J. D. 1981. Inferring a tree from lowest common ancestors with an application to the optimization of relational expressions. Siam Journal on Computing 10:405–421.
Barthélemy, J.-P. and Guénoche, A. 1991. Trees and Proximity Representations. John Wiley and Sons, United Kingdom.
Baum, B. R. 1992. Combining trees as a way of combining datasets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon 41:3–10.
Benham, C., Kannan, S., Paterson, M., and Warnow, T. 1995. Hen ’s teeth and whale ’s feet: generalized characters and their compatibility. Journal of Computational Biology 2:515–525.
Bininda-Emonds, O. R. P. and Bryant H. N. 1998. Properties of matrix representation with parsimony analyses. Systematic Biology 47:497–508.
Bodlaender, H. L., Fellows, M. R., and Warnow, T. J. 1992. Two strikes against perfect phylogeny. In Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 623, pp. 273–283. SpringerVerlag, Berlin.
Bryant, D. and Steel, M. 1995. Extension operations on sets of leaf-labelled trees. Advances in Applied Mathematics 16:425--453.
Constantinescu, M. and Sankoff, D. 1995. An efficient algorithm for supertrees. Journal of Classification 12:101–112.
Farach, M., Kannan, S., and Warnow, T. 1995. A robust model for finding optimal evolutionary trees. Algorithmica 13:155–179.
Golumbic, M. C. 1980. Algorithmic Graph Theory and Perfect Graphs. Academic Press, New York.
Henzinger, M. R., King, V., and Warnow, T. 1999. Constructing a tree from homeomorphic subtrees, with applications to computational evolutionary biology. Algorithmica, 24:1–13.
McMorris, F. R., Warnow, T. J., and Wimer, T. 1994. Triangulating vertex-colored graphs. Siam Journal on Discrete Mathematics 7:296–306.
Ng, M. P. and Wormald, N. C. 1996. Reconstruction of rooted trees from subtrees. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 69:19–31.
Page, R. D. M. 2002. Modified mincut supertrees. In R. Guigó and D. Gusfield (eds), Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics Wabi2002, pp. 537–552, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Peer, I., Shamir, R., and Sharan, R. 2000. Incomplete directed perfect phylogeny. In D. Sankoff (ed.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Symposium on Combinatorial Pattern Matching Cpm, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1848:143–153. Springer, New York.
Piaggio-Talice, R., Burleigh, J. G., and Eulenstein, E. 2004. Quartet supertrees. In O. R. P. Bininda-Emonds (ed). Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life, pp. 173–191. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Ragan, M. A. 1992. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 1:53–58.
Semple, C. 2003. Reconstructing minimal rooted trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 127:489–503.
Semple, C. and Steel, M. 2000. A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 105:147–158.
Semple, C. and Steel, M. 2002. Tree reconstruction from multi-state characters. Advances in Applied Mathematics 28:169–184.
Semple, C. and Steel, M. 2003. Phylogenetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Steel, M. 1992. The complexity of reconstructing trees from qualitative characters and subtrees. Journal of Classification 9:91–116.
Strimmer, K. and Von Haeseler, A. 1996. Quartet puzzling: a quartet maximum-likelihood method for reconstructing tree topologies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 13:964–969.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bryant, D., Semple, C., Steel, M. (2004). Supertree Methods for Ancestral Divergence Dates and other Applications. In: Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P. (eds) Phylogenetic Supertrees. Computational Biology, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2330-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2330-9_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-2329-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2330-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive