Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods

Autores
Goloboff, Pablo Augusto
Año de publicación
2014
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Three different types of data sets, for which the uniquely most parsimonious tree can be known exactly but is hard to find with heuristic tree search methods, are studied. Tree searches are complicated more by the shape of the tree landscape (i.e. the distribution of homoplasy on different trees) than by the sheer abundance of homoplasy or character conflict. Data sets of Type 1 are those constructed by Radel et al. (2013). Data sets of Type 2 present a very rugged landscape, with narrow peaks and valleys, but relatively low amounts of homoplasy. For such a tree landscape, subjecting the trees to TBR and saving suboptimal trees produces much better results when the sequence of clipping for the tree branches is randomized instead of fixed. An unexpected finding for data sets of Types 1 and 2 is that starting a search from a random tree instead of a random addition sequence Wagner tree may increase the probability that the search finds the most parsimonious tree; a small artificial example where these probabilities can be calculated exactly is presented. Data sets of Type 3, the most difficult data sets studied here, comprise only congruent characters, and a single island with only one most parsimonious tree. Even if there is a single island, missing entries create a very flat landscape which is difficult to traverse with tree search algorithms because the number of equally parsimonious trees that need to be saved and swapped to effectively move around the plateaus is too large. Minor modifications of the parameters of tree drifting, ratchet, and sectorial searches allow travelling around these plateaus much more efficiently than saving and swapping large numbers of equally parsimonious trees with TBR. For these data sets, two new related criteria for selecting taxon addition sequences in Wagner trees (the “selected” and “informative” addition sequences) produce much better results than the standard random or closest addition sequences. These new methods for Wagner trees and for moving around plateaus can be useful when analyzing phylogenomic data sets formed by concatenation of genes with uneven taxon representation (“sparse” supermatrices), which are likely to present a tree landscape with extensive plateaus.
Fil: Goloboff, Pablo Augusto. Fundación Miguel Lillo; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; Argentina
Materia
Phylogeny
Tree Searches
Parsimony
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/7262

id CONICETDig_e9c07b1073dbc0a988171aa2229d0270
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/7262
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methodsGoloboff, Pablo AugustoPhylogenyTree SearchesParsimonyhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Three different types of data sets, for which the uniquely most parsimonious tree can be known exactly but is hard to find with heuristic tree search methods, are studied. Tree searches are complicated more by the shape of the tree landscape (i.e. the distribution of homoplasy on different trees) than by the sheer abundance of homoplasy or character conflict. Data sets of Type 1 are those constructed by Radel et al. (2013). Data sets of Type 2 present a very rugged landscape, with narrow peaks and valleys, but relatively low amounts of homoplasy. For such a tree landscape, subjecting the trees to TBR and saving suboptimal trees produces much better results when the sequence of clipping for the tree branches is randomized instead of fixed. An unexpected finding for data sets of Types 1 and 2 is that starting a search from a random tree instead of a random addition sequence Wagner tree may increase the probability that the search finds the most parsimonious tree; a small artificial example where these probabilities can be calculated exactly is presented. Data sets of Type 3, the most difficult data sets studied here, comprise only congruent characters, and a single island with only one most parsimonious tree. Even if there is a single island, missing entries create a very flat landscape which is difficult to traverse with tree search algorithms because the number of equally parsimonious trees that need to be saved and swapped to effectively move around the plateaus is too large. Minor modifications of the parameters of tree drifting, ratchet, and sectorial searches allow travelling around these plateaus much more efficiently than saving and swapping large numbers of equally parsimonious trees with TBR. For these data sets, two new related criteria for selecting taxon addition sequences in Wagner trees (the “selected” and “informative” addition sequences) produce much better results than the standard random or closest addition sequences. These new methods for Wagner trees and for moving around plateaus can be useful when analyzing phylogenomic data sets formed by concatenation of genes with uneven taxon representation (“sparse” supermatrices), which are likely to present a tree landscape with extensive plateaus.Fil: Goloboff, Pablo Augusto. Fundación Miguel Lillo; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; ArgentinaElsevier2014-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/7262Goloboff, Pablo Augusto; Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods; Elsevier; Molecular Phylogenetics And Evolution; 79; 6-2014; 118-1311055-7903enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1055790314002218info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.06.008info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:25:37Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/7262instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:25:38.202CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
title Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
spellingShingle Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
Goloboff, Pablo Augusto
Phylogeny
Tree Searches
Parsimony
title_short Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
title_full Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
title_fullStr Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
title_full_unstemmed Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
title_sort Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Goloboff, Pablo Augusto
author Goloboff, Pablo Augusto
author_facet Goloboff, Pablo Augusto
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Phylogeny
Tree Searches
Parsimony
topic Phylogeny
Tree Searches
Parsimony
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Three different types of data sets, for which the uniquely most parsimonious tree can be known exactly but is hard to find with heuristic tree search methods, are studied. Tree searches are complicated more by the shape of the tree landscape (i.e. the distribution of homoplasy on different trees) than by the sheer abundance of homoplasy or character conflict. Data sets of Type 1 are those constructed by Radel et al. (2013). Data sets of Type 2 present a very rugged landscape, with narrow peaks and valleys, but relatively low amounts of homoplasy. For such a tree landscape, subjecting the trees to TBR and saving suboptimal trees produces much better results when the sequence of clipping for the tree branches is randomized instead of fixed. An unexpected finding for data sets of Types 1 and 2 is that starting a search from a random tree instead of a random addition sequence Wagner tree may increase the probability that the search finds the most parsimonious tree; a small artificial example where these probabilities can be calculated exactly is presented. Data sets of Type 3, the most difficult data sets studied here, comprise only congruent characters, and a single island with only one most parsimonious tree. Even if there is a single island, missing entries create a very flat landscape which is difficult to traverse with tree search algorithms because the number of equally parsimonious trees that need to be saved and swapped to effectively move around the plateaus is too large. Minor modifications of the parameters of tree drifting, ratchet, and sectorial searches allow travelling around these plateaus much more efficiently than saving and swapping large numbers of equally parsimonious trees with TBR. For these data sets, two new related criteria for selecting taxon addition sequences in Wagner trees (the “selected” and “informative” addition sequences) produce much better results than the standard random or closest addition sequences. These new methods for Wagner trees and for moving around plateaus can be useful when analyzing phylogenomic data sets formed by concatenation of genes with uneven taxon representation (“sparse” supermatrices), which are likely to present a tree landscape with extensive plateaus.
Fil: Goloboff, Pablo Augusto. Fundación Miguel Lillo; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; Argentina
description Three different types of data sets, for which the uniquely most parsimonious tree can be known exactly but is hard to find with heuristic tree search methods, are studied. Tree searches are complicated more by the shape of the tree landscape (i.e. the distribution of homoplasy on different trees) than by the sheer abundance of homoplasy or character conflict. Data sets of Type 1 are those constructed by Radel et al. (2013). Data sets of Type 2 present a very rugged landscape, with narrow peaks and valleys, but relatively low amounts of homoplasy. For such a tree landscape, subjecting the trees to TBR and saving suboptimal trees produces much better results when the sequence of clipping for the tree branches is randomized instead of fixed. An unexpected finding for data sets of Types 1 and 2 is that starting a search from a random tree instead of a random addition sequence Wagner tree may increase the probability that the search finds the most parsimonious tree; a small artificial example where these probabilities can be calculated exactly is presented. Data sets of Type 3, the most difficult data sets studied here, comprise only congruent characters, and a single island with only one most parsimonious tree. Even if there is a single island, missing entries create a very flat landscape which is difficult to traverse with tree search algorithms because the number of equally parsimonious trees that need to be saved and swapped to effectively move around the plateaus is too large. Minor modifications of the parameters of tree drifting, ratchet, and sectorial searches allow travelling around these plateaus much more efficiently than saving and swapping large numbers of equally parsimonious trees with TBR. For these data sets, two new related criteria for selecting taxon addition sequences in Wagner trees (the “selected” and “informative” addition sequences) produce much better results than the standard random or closest addition sequences. These new methods for Wagner trees and for moving around plateaus can be useful when analyzing phylogenomic data sets formed by concatenation of genes with uneven taxon representation (“sparse” supermatrices), which are likely to present a tree landscape with extensive plateaus.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-06
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7262
Goloboff, Pablo Augusto; Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods; Elsevier; Molecular Phylogenetics And Evolution; 79; 6-2014; 118-131
1055-7903
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7262
identifier_str_mv Goloboff, Pablo Augusto; Hide and vanish: data sets where the most parsimonious tree is known but hard to find, and their implications for tree search methods; Elsevier; Molecular Phylogenetics And Evolution; 79; 6-2014; 118-131
1055-7903
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1055790314002218
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.06.008
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844614255294283776
score 13.070432