Gabriel Cardona

Comparison of Tree-Child Phylogenetic Networks

Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees that allow for the representation of nontreelike evolutionary events, like recombination, hybridization, or lateral gene transfer. While much progress has been made to find practical algorithms for reconstructing a phylogenetic network from a set of sequences, all attempts to endorse a class of phylogenetic networks (strictly extending the class of phylogenetic trees) with a well-founded distance measure have, to the best of our knowledge and with the only exception of the bipartition distance on regular networks, failed so far. In this paper, we present and study a new meaningful class of phylogenetic networks, called tree-child phylogenetic networks, and we provide an injective representation of these networks as multisets of vectors of natural numbers, their path multiplicity vectors. We then use this representation to define a distance on this class that extends the well-known Robinson-Foulds distance for phylogenetic trees and to give an alignment method for pairs of networks in this class. Simple polynomial algorithms for reconstructing a tree-child phylogenetic network from its path multiplicity vectors, for computing the distance between two tree-child phylogenetic networks and for aligning a pair of tree-child phylogenetic networks, are provided. They have been implemented as a Perl package and a Java applet, which can be found at http://bioinfo.uib.es/~recerca/phylonetworks/mudistance/.

A distance metric for a class of tree-sibling phylogenetic networks

Motivation: The presence of reticulate evolutionary events in phylogenies turn phylogenetic trees into phylogenetic networks. These events imply in particular that there may exist multiple evolutionary paths from a non-extant species to an extant one, and this multiplicity makes the comparison of phylogenetic networks much more difficult than the comparison of phylogenetic trees. In fact, all attempts to define a sound distance measure on the class of all phylogenetic networks have failed so far. Thus, the only practical solutions have been either the use of rough estimates of similarity (based on comparison of the trees embedded in the networks), or narrowing the class of phylogenetic networks to a certain class where such a distance is known and can be efficiently computed. The first approach has the problem that one may identify two networks as equivalent, when they are not; the second one has the drawback that there may not exist algorithms to reconstruct such networks from biological sequences. Results: We present in this article a distance measure on the class of semi-binary tree-sibling time consistent phylogenetic networks, which generalize tree-child time consistent phylogenetic networks, and thus also galled-trees. The practical interest of this distance measure is 2-fold: it can be computed in polynomial time by means of simple algorithms, and there also exist polynomial-time algorithms for reconstructing networks of this class from DNA sequence data. Availability: The Perl package Bio::PhyloNetwork, included in the BioPerl bundle, implements many algorithms on phylogenetic networks, including the computation of the distance presented in this article. Contact: gabriel.cardona@uib.es Supplementary information: Some counterexamples, proofs of the results not included in this article, and some computational experiments are available at Bioinformatics online.

Extended Newick: it is time for a standard representation of phylogenetic networks

BackgroundPhylogenetic trees resulting from molecular phylogenetic analysis are available in Newick format from specialized databases but when it comes to phylogenetic networks, which provide an explicit representation of reticulate evolutionary events such as recombination, hybridization or lateral gene transfer, the lack of a standard format for their representation has hindered the publication of explicit phylogenetic networks in the specialized literature and their incorporation in specialized databases. Two different proposals to represent phylogenetic networks exist: as a single Newick string (where each hybrid node is splitted once for each parent) or as a set of Newick strings (one for each hybrid node plus another one for the phylogenetic network).ResultsThe standard we advocate as extended Newick format describes a whole phylogenetic network with k hybrid nodes as a single Newick string with k repeated nodes, and this representation is unique once the phylogenetic network is drawn or the ordering among children nodes is fixed. The extended Newick format facilitates phylogenetic data sharing and exchange, and also allows for the practical use of phylogenetic networks in computer programs and scripts. This standard has been recently agreed upon by a number of computational biologists, is already supported by several phylogenetic tools, and avoids the different drawbacks of using an a priori unknown number of Newick strings without any additional mark-up to represent a phylogenetic network.ConclusionThe adoption of the extended Newick format as a standard for the representation of phylogenetic network is an important step towards the publication of explicit phylogenetic networks in peer-reviewed journals and their incorporation in a future database of published phylogenetic networks.

Metrics for Phylogenetic Networks I: Generalizations of the Robinson-Foulds Metric

The assessment of phylogenetic network reconstruction methods requires the ability to compare phylogenetic networks. This is the first in a series of papers devoted to the analysis and comparison of metrics for tree-child time-consistent phylogenetic networks on the same set of taxa. In this paper, we study three metrics that have already been introduced in the literature: the Robinson-Foulds distance, the tripartition distance, and the mu-distance. They generalize to networks the classical Robinson-Foulds or partition distance for phylogenetic trees. We analyze the behavior of these metrics by studying their least and largest values and when they achieve them. As a by-product of this study, we obtain tight bounds on the size of a tree-child time-consistent phylogenetic network.

Tripartitions do not always discriminate phylogenetic networks

Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees that allow for the representation of non-treelike evolutionary events, like recombination, hybridization, or lateral gene transfer. In a recent series of papers devoted to the study of reconstructibility of phylogenetic networks, Moret, Nakhleh, Warnow and collaborators introduced the so-called tripartition metric for phylogenetic networks. In this paper we show that, in fact, this tripartition metric does not satisfy the separation axiom of distances (zero distance means isomorphism, or, in a more relaxed version, zero distance means indistinguishability in some specific sense) in any of the subclasses of phylogenetic networks where it is claimed to do so. We also present a subclass of phylogenetic networks whose members can be singled out by means of their sets of tripartitions (or even clusters), and hence where the latter can be used to define a meaningful metric.

Metrics for Phylogenetic Networks II: Nodal and Triplets Metrics

The assessment of phylogenetic network reconstruction methods requires the ability to compare phylogenetic networks. This is the second in a series of papers devoted to the analysis and comparison of metrics for tree-child time consistent phylogenetic networks on the same set of taxa. In this paper, we generalize to phylogenetic networks two metrics that have already been introduced in the literature for phylogenetic trees: the nodal distance and the triplets distance. We prove that they are metrics on any class of tree-child time consistent phylogenetic networks on the same set of taxa, as well as some basic properties for them. To prove these results, we introduce a reduction/expansion procedure that can be used not only to establish properties of tree-child time consistent phylogenetic networks by induction, but also to generate all tree-child time consistent phylogenetic networks with a given number of leaves.

Cophenetic metrics for phylogenetic trees, after Sokal and Rohlf

BackgroundPhylogenetic tree comparison metrics are an important tool in the study of evolution, and hence the definition of such metrics is an interesting problem in phylogenetics. In a paper in Taxon fifty years ago, Sokal and Rohlf proposed to measure quantitatively the difference between a pair of phylogenetic trees by first encoding them by means of their half-matrices of cophenetic values, and then comparing these matrices. This idea has been used several times since then to define dissimilarity measures between phylogenetic trees but, to our knowledge, no proper metric on weighted phylogenetic trees with nested taxa based on this idea has been formally defined and studied yet. Actually, the cophenetic values of pairs of different taxa alone are not enough to single out phylogenetic trees with weighted arcs or nested taxa.ResultsFor every (rooted) phylogenetic tree T, let its cophenetic vectorφ(T) consist of all pairs of cophenetic values between pairs of taxa in T and all depths of taxa in T. It turns out that these cophenetic vectors single out weighted phylogenetic trees with nested taxa. We then define a family of cophenetic metrics dφ,p by comparing these cophenetic vectors by means of Lp norms, and we study, either analytically or numerically, some of their basic properties: neighbors, diameter, distribution, and their rank correlation with each other and with other metrics.ConclusionsThe cophenetic metrics can be safely used on weighted phylogenetic trees with nested taxa and no restriction on degrees, and they can be computed in O(n2) time, where n stands for the number of taxa. The metrics dφ,1 and dφ,2 have positive skewed distributions, and they show a low rank correlation with the Robinson-Foulds metric and the nodal metrics, and a very high correlation with each other and with the splitted nodal metrics. The diameter of dφ,p, for p⩾1, is in O(n(p+2)/p), and thus for low p they are more discriminative, having a wider range of values.

On Nakhleh's Metric for Reduced Phylogenetic Networks

We prove that Nakhlehs metric for reduced phylogenetic networks is also a metric on the classes of tree-child phylogenetic networks, semibinary tree-sibling time consistent phylogenetic networks, and multilabeled phylogenetic trees. We also prove that it separates distinguishable phylogenetic networks. In this way, it becomes the strongest dissimilarity measure for phylogenetic networks available so far. Furthermore, we propose a generalization of that metric that separates arbitrary phylogenetic networks.

Nodal distances for rooted phylogenetic trees

Dissimilarity measures for (possibly weighted) phylogenetic trees based on the comparison of their vectors of path lengths between pairs of taxa, have been present in the systematics literature since the early seventies. For rooted phylogenetic trees, however, these vectors can only separate non-weighted binary trees, and therefore these dissimilarity measures are metrics only on this class of rooted phylogenetic trees. In this paper we overcome this problem, by splitting in a suitable way each path length between two taxa into two lengths. We prove that the resulting splitted path lengths matrices single out arbitrary rooted phylogenetic trees with nested taxa and arcs weighted in the set of positive real numbers. This allows the definition of metrics on this general class of rooted phylogenetic trees by comparing these matrices through metrics in spaces