Literature DB >> 35987645

Treewidth-based algorithms for the small parsimony problem on networks.

Celine Scornavacca1, Mathias Weller2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Phylogenetic reconstruction is one of the paramount challenges of contemporary bioinformatics. A subtask of existing tree reconstruction algorithms is modeled by the SMALL PARSIMONY problem: given a tree T and an assignment of character-states to its leaves, assign states to the internal nodes of T such as to minimize the parsimony score, that is, the number of edges of T connecting nodes with different states. While this problem is polynomial-time solvable on trees, the matter is more complicated if T contains reticulate events such as hybridizations or recombinations, i.e. when T is a network. Indeed, three different versions of the parsimony score on networks have been proposed and each of them is NP-hard to decide. Existing parameterized algorithms focus on combining the number c of possible character-states with the number of reticulate events (per biconnected component).
RESULTS: We consider the parameter treewidth t of the underlying undirected graph of the input network, presenting dynamic programming algorithms for (slight generalizations of) all three versions of the parsimony problem on size-n networks running in times [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text], respectively. Our algorithms use a formulation of the treewidth that may facilitate formalizing treewidth-based dynamic programming algorithms on phylogenetic networks for other problems.
CONCLUSIONS: Our algorithms allow the computation of the three popular parsimony scores, modeling the evolutionary development of a (multistate) character on a given phylogenetic network of low treewidth. Our results subsume and improve previously known algorithm for all three variants. While our results rely on being given a "good" tree-decomposition of the input, encouraging theoretical results as well as practical implementations producing them are publicly available. We present a reformulation of tree decompositions in terms of "agreeing trees" on the same set of nodes. As this formulation may come more natural to researchers and engineers developing algorithms for phylogenetic networks, we hope to render exploiting the input network's treewidth as parameter more accessible to this audience.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dynamic programming; Parameterized complexity; Parsimony; Phylogenetic networks; Phylogenetics; Treewidth

Year:  2022        PMID: 35987645      PMCID: PMC9392953          DOI: 10.1186/s13015-022-00216-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol        ISSN: 1748-7188            Impact factor:   1.721


  14 in total

1.  Reconstructing phylogenetic networks using maximum parsimony.

Authors:  Luay Nakhleh; Guohua Jin; Fengmei Zhao; John Mellor-Crummey
Journal:  Proc IEEE Comput Syst Bioinform Conf       Date:  2005

2.  Inferring phylogenetic networks by the maximum parsimony criterion: a case study.

Authors:  Guohua Jin; Luay Nakhleh; Sagi Snir; Tamir Tuller
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 16.240

3.  On the quirks of maximum parsimony and likelihood on phylogenetic networks.

Authors:  Christopher Bryant; Mareike Fischer; Simone Linz; Charles Semple
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 2.691

4.  Exactly computing the parsimony scores on phylogenetic networks using dynamic programming.

Authors:  Lavanya Kannan; Ward C Wheeler
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 1.479

5.  Maximum likelihood of phylogenetic networks.

Authors:  Guohua Jin; Luay Nakhleh; Sagi Snir; Tamir Tuller
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-08-23       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  On the inference of complex phylogenetic networks by Markov Chain Monte-Carlo.

Authors:  Charles-Elie Rabier; Vincent Berry; Marnus Stoltz; João D Santos; Wensheng Wang; Jean-Christophe Glaszmann; Fabio Pardi; Celine Scornavacca
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 4.475

7.  Maximum Parsimony on Phylogenetic networks.

Authors:  Lavanya Kannan; Ward C Wheeler
Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 1.405

8.  In the light of deep coalescence: revisiting trees within networks.

Authors:  Jiafan Zhu; Yun Yu; Luay Nakhleh
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Bayesian inference of phylogenetic networks from bi-allelic genetic markers.

Authors:  Jiafan Zhu; Dingqiao Wen; Yun Yu; Heidi M Meudt; Luay Nakhleh
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Finding a most parsimonious or likely tree in a network with respect to an alignment.

Authors:  Steven Kelk; Fabio Pardi; Celine Scornavacca; Leo van Iersel
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2018-08-19       Impact factor: 2.259

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.