What If I Don't Have a Tree: Split Decomposition and Related Models
互联网
- Abstract
- Table of Contents
- Materials
- Figures
- Literature Cited
Abstract
A set of aligned character sequences or a matrix of evolutionary distances often contains a number of different and sometimes conflicting phylogenetic signals, and thus does not always support a unique tree. The method of split decomposition addresses this problem. For ideal data, this method gives rise to a phylogenetic tree, whereas less ideal data are represented by a tree?like network that may indicate evidence of different and conflicting phylogenies. The SplitsTree program, described here, implements this approach and can be used to compute and visualize phylogenetic networks called splits graphs. It also implements a number of distance transformations, the computation of parsimony splits, spectral analysis and bootstrapping.
Table of Contents
- Basic Protocol 1: Using SplitsTree Interactively
- Alternate Protocol 1: Using the Command‐Line Version of SplitsTree
- Support Protocol 1: Obtaining SplitsTree
- Guidelines for Understanding Results
- Commentary
- Figures
Materials
Basic Protocol 1: Using SplitsTree Interactively
Necessary Resources
Alternate Protocol 1: Using the Command‐Line Version of SplitsTree
Necessary Resources
|
Figures
-
Figure 6.7.1 Example of an input file in NEXUS format. Usually, an input file will contain either a characters or distances block, but not both. View Image -
Figure 6.7.2 A depiction of the input format used by SplitsTree. Here, square brackets (e.g., [NO]) indicate optional statements and vertical lines (e.g., {LOWER|UPPER|BOTH} ) indicate alternative choices. Note that the FORMAT is not case‐sensitive, unless the RESPECTCASE label is present in the FORMAT command of the CHARACTERS block, in which case the program will distinguish between upper‐ and lowercase characters in the input matrix. View Image -
Figure 6.7.3 The menus provided by SplitsTree. View Image -
Figure 6.7.4 Splits graphs are displayed in the main window. In this graph, a strong split groups M. fascicularis and M. mulatta together, whereas a second split, incompatible with the first, groups M. fascicularis , Lemur catta , and Samimiri sciureus together, against the rest. Notice the Fit value of 85.3 in the lower lefthand corner (see ). This graph was obtained from the data in Figure , using split decomposition applied to the first position of each codon. View Image -
Figure 6.7.5 (A ) Taxa listed on the left are “active” and included in all computations. All taxa listed on the right are “hidden.” Clicking on a list item will move it to the other list. (B ) Specific sites in aligned character sequences can be excluded from consideration; for example, here the sites 1, 99, and 200‐500 will be ignored. Additionally, one can specify which codon positions (with which offset) are to be considered. View Image
Videos
Literature Cited
Literature Cited | |
Bandelt, H.‐J. and Dress, A.W.M. 1992a. A canonical decomposition theory for metrics on a finite set. Adv. Math. 92:47‐105. | |
Bandelt, H.‐J. and Dress, A.W.M. 1992b. Split decomposition: A new and useful approach to phylogenetic analysis of a distance data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1:242‐252. | |
Bandelt, H.‐J. and Dress, A.W.M. 1993. A relational approach to split decomposition. In Information and Classification: Concepts, Methods and Applications. (O. Opitz, B. Lausen, and R. Klar, eds.) Heidelberg, Germany. | |
Buneman, P. 1971. The recovery of trees from measures of dissimilarity. In Mathematics and the Archeological and Historical Sciences (F.R. Hodson, D.G. Kendall, and P. Tautu, eds.) pp. 387‐395. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. | |
Dress, A.W.M., Huson, D.H., and Moulton, V. 1996. Analyzing and visualizing sequence and distance data using SplitsTree. Discrete Appl. Math. 71:95‐109 | |
Hendy, M.D. and Penny, D. 1993. Spectral analysis of phylogenetic data. J. Classif. 10:5‐24. | |
Huson, D.H. 1998. SplitsTree: A program for analyzing and visualizing evolutionary data. Bioinformatics 14:68‐73. | |
Jukes, T.H. and Cantor, C.R. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In Mammalian Protein Metabolism (H.N. Munro, ed.) p. 21‐132. Academic Press, London. | |
Kimura, M. 1981. Estimation of evolutionary distances between homologous nucleotide sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 78:454‐458. | |
Lockhart, P.J., Steel, M.A., Hendy, M., and Penny, D. 1994. Recovering the correct tree under a more realistic model of evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:605‐612. | |
Maddison, D.R., Swofford, D.L., and Maddison, W.P. 1997. NEXUS: An extensible file format for systematic information. Syst. Biol. 46:590‐621. | |
Steel, M.A. 1994. Recovering a tree from the leaf colorations it generates under a markov model. Appl. Math. Lett. 7:19‐24. | |
Key References | |
Bandelt and Dress, 1992a,b, 1993., See above. | |
The theory of split decomposition and related methods was introduced by Hans‐Jürgen Bandelt and Andreas Dress. | |
Internet Resources | |
http://www‐ab.informatik.uni‐tuebingen.de/software/splits/welcome_en.html | |
This Web site contains additional information on SplitsTree, has links to Web servers running the program, and provides downloads of the different versions of the program. |