The generalized Robinson-Foulds metric

The Robinson-Foulds (RF) metric is arguably the most widely used measure of phylogenetic tree similarity, despite its well-known shortcomings: For example, moving a single taxon in a tree can result in a tree that has maximum distance to the original one; but the two trees are identical if we remove the single taxon. To this end, we propose a natural extension of the RF metric that does not simply count identical clades but instead, also takes similar clades into consideration. In contrast to previous approaches, our model requires the matching between clades to respect the structure of the two trees, a property that the classical RF metric exhibits, too. We show that computing this generalized RF metric is, unfortunately, NP-hard. We then present a simple Integer Linear Program for its computation, and evaluate it by an all-against-all comparison of 100 trees from a benchmark data set. We find that matchings that respect the tree structure differ significantly from those that do not, underlining the importance of this natural condition.Comment: Peer-reviewed and presented as part of the 13th Workshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics (WABI2013

Inferring Species Trees from Incongruent Multi-Copy Gene Trees Using the Robinson-Foulds Distance

We present a new method for inferring species trees from multi-copy gene trees. Our method is based on a generalization of the Robinson-Foulds (RF) distance to multi-labeled trees (mul-trees), i.e., gene trees in which multiple leaves can have the same label. Unlike most previous phylogenetic methods using gene trees, this method does not assume that gene tree incongruence is caused by a single, specific biological process, such as gene duplication and loss, deep coalescence, or lateral gene transfer. We prove that it is NP-hard to compute the RF distance between two mul-trees, but it is easy to calculate the generalized RF distance between a mul-tree and a singly-labeled tree. Motivated by this observation, we formulate the RF supertree problem for mul-trees (MulRF), which takes a collection of mul-trees and constructs a species tree that minimizes the total RF distance from the input mul-trees. We present a fast heuristic algorithm for the MulRF supertree problem. Simulation experiments demonstrate that the MulRF method produces more accurate species trees than gene tree parsimony methods when incongruence is caused by gene tree error, duplications and losses, and/or lateral gene transfer. Furthermore, the MulRF heuristic runs quickly on data sets containing hundreds of trees with up to a hundred taxa.Comment: 16 pages, 11 figure

On unrooted and root-uncertain variants of several well-known phylogenetic network problems

The hybridization number problem requires us to embed a set of binary rooted phylogenetic trees into a binary rooted phylogenetic network such that the number of nodes with indegree two is minimized. However, from a biological point of view accurately inferring the root location in a phylogenetic tree is notoriously difficult and poor root placement can artificially inflate the hybridization number. To this end we study a number of relaxed variants of this problem. We start by showing that the fundamental problem of determining whether an \emph{unrooted} phylogenetic network displays (i.e. embeds) an \emph{unrooted} phylogenetic tree, is NP-hard. On the positive side we show that this problem is FPT in reticulation number. In the rooted case the corresponding FPT result is trivial, but here we require more subtle argumentation. Next we show that the hybridization number problem for unrooted networks (when given two unrooted trees) is equivalent to the problem of computing the Tree Bisection and Reconnect (TBR) distance of the two unrooted trees. In the third part of the paper we consider the "root uncertain" variant of hybridization number. Here we are free to choose the root location in each of a set of unrooted input trees such that the hybridization number of the resulting rooted trees is minimized. On the negative side we show that this problem is APX-hard. On the positive side, we show that the problem is FPT in the hybridization number, via kernelization, for any number of input trees.Comment: 28 pages, 8 Figure

Cophenetic metrics for phylogenetic trees, after Sokal and Rohlf

Phylogenetic 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. In this paper we define a family of cophenetic metrics that compare phylogenetic trees on a same set of taxa by encoding them by means of their vectors of cophenetic values of pairs of taxa and depths of single taxa, and then computing the $L^p$ norm of the difference of the corresponding vectors. Then, 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.Comment: The "authors' cut" of a paper published in BMC Bioinformatics 14:3 (2013). 46 page