Abstract
Supertree methods are used to construct a large tree over a large set of taxa, from a set of small trees over overlapping subsets of the complete taxa set. Since accurate reconstruction methods are currently limited to a maximum of few dozens of taxa, the use of a supertree method in order to construct the tree of life is inevitable.
Supertree methods are broadly divided according to the input trees: When the input trees are unrooted, the basic reconstruction unit is a quartet tree. In this case, the basic decision problem of whether there exists a tree that agrees with all quartets is NP-complete. On the other hand, when the input trees are rooted, the basic reconstruction unit is a rooted triplet, and the above decision problem has a polynomial time algorithm. However, when there is no tree which agrees with all triplets, it would be desirable to find the tree that agrees with the maximum number of triplets. However, this optimization problem was shown to be NP-hard. Current heuristic approaches perform mincut on a graph representing the triplets inconsistency and return a tree that is guaranteed to satisfy some required properties.
In this work we present a different heuristic approach that guarantees the properties provided by the current methods and give experimental evidence that it significantly outperforms currently used methods. This method is based on divide and conquer where we use a semi-definite programming approach in the divide step.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arora, S., Rao, S., Vazirani, U.: Expander flows, geometric embeddings and graph partitioning. In: Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (2004)
Aho, A.V., Sagiv, Y., Szymanski, T.G., Ullman, J.D.: Inferring a tree from lowest common ancestors with an application to the optimization of relational expressions. SIAM Journal of Computing 10(3), 405–421 (1981)
Baum, B.R.: Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference. Taxon 41, 3–10 (1992)
Ben-Dor, A., Chor, B., Graur, D., Ophir, R., Pelleg, D.: Constructing phylogenies from quarbcgoptets: Elucidation of eutherian superordinal relationships. Jour. of Comput. Biology 5(3), 377–390 (1998)
Bryant, D.J., Steel, M.A.: Extension operations on sets of leaf-labelled trees. Advances in Applied Mathematics 16(4), 425–453 (2000)
Cardillo, M., Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Boakes, E., Purvis, A.: A species-level phylogenetic supertree of marsupials. Journal of Zoology 264(1), 11–31 (2004)
Chen, D., Eulenstein, O., Fernandez-Baca, D., Sanderson, M.: Supertrees by flipping. In: Ibarra, O.H., Zhang, L. (eds.) COCOON 2002. LNCS, vol. 2387, p. 391. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Chor, B., Tuller, T.: Maximum likelihood of evolutionary trees is hard. In: RECOMB (2005)
Eulenstein, O., Chen, D., Burleigh, J.G., Fernandez-Baca, D., Sanderson, M.J.: Performance of flip supertrees with a heuristic algorithm. Systematic Biology 53(2), 299–308 (2004)
Felsenstein, J.: Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. J. Mol. Evol. 17, 368–376 (1981)
Foulds, L.R., Graham, R.L.: The steiner problem in phylogeny is NP-complete. Advances in Applied Mathematics 3, 43–49 (1982)
Fitch, W.M.: A non-sequential method for constructing trees and hierarchical classifications. Journal of Molecular Evolution 18(1), 30–37 (1981)
Fiduccia, C.M., Mattheyses, R.M.: A linear time heuristic for improving network partitions. In: Design Automation Conference, pp. 175–181 (1982)
Goemans, M.X., Williamson, D.P.: Improved approximation algorithms for maximum cut and satisfiability problems using semidefinite programming. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 42(6), 1115–1145 (1995)
Henzinger, M.R., King, V., Warnow, T.: Constructing a tree from homeomorphic subtrees, with applications to computational evolutionary biology. In: SODA, pp. 333–340 (1996)
Kernighan, B.W., Lin, S.: An ecient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs. The Bell System Technical Journal 29(2), 291–307 (1970)
Moran, S., Snir, S.: Convex recoloring of strings and trees: Definitions, hardness results and algorithms. submitted (2004)
Page, R.D.M.: Modified mincut supertrees. In: Guigó, R., Gusfield, D. (eds.) WABI 2002. LNCS, vol. 2452, p. 537. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Piel, W., Sanderson, M., Donoghue, M., Walsh, M.: Treebase, http://www.treebase.org
Ragan, M.A.: Matrix representation in reconstructing phylogenetic-relationships among the eukaryotes. Biosystems 28, 47–55 (1992)
Robinson, D.R., Foulds, L.R.: Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Mathematical Biosciences 53, 131–147 (1981)
Steel, M., Dress, A., Boker, S.: Simple but fundamental limitations on supertree and consensus tree methods. Systematic Biology 49, 363–368 (2000)
Saitou, N., Nei, M.: The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4 (1987)
Semple, C., Steel, M.: A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 103, 147–158 (2000)
Steel, M.: The complexity of reconstructing trees from qualitative characters and subtress. Journal of Classification 9(1), 91–116 (1992)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Moran, S., Rao, S., Snir, S. (2005). Using Semi-definite Programming to Enhance Supertree Resolvability. In: Casadio, R., Myers, G. (eds) Algorithms in Bioinformatics. WABI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3692. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11557067_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11557067_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29008-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31812-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)