Improving the Additive Tree Representation of a Dissimilarity Matrix Using Reticulations

  • Vladimir Makarenkov
  • Pierre Legendre
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)


This paper addresses the problem of approximating a dissimilarity matrix by means of a reticulogram. A reticulogram represents an evolutionary structure in which the objects may be related in a non-unique way to a common ancestor. Dendrograms and additive (phylogenetic) trees are particular cases of reticulograms. The reticulogram is obtained by adding edges (reticulations) to an additive tree, gradually improving the approximation of the dissimilarity matrix. We constructed a reticulogram representing the evolution of 12 primates. The reticulogram not only improved the data approximation provided by the phylogenetic tree, but also depicted the homoplasy contained in the data, which cannot be expressed bv a tree topology. The algorithm for reconstructing reticulograms is part of the T-Rex software package, available at URL <>.


Edge Length World Monkey Lateral Gene Transfer Dissimilarity Matrix Reticulate Evolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. BANDELT, H.– J. (1995): Combination of Data in Phylogenetic Analysis. Plant Systematics and Evolution Supplementum, 9, 355–361Google Scholar
  2. BANDELT, H.-J. and DRESS A.W.M. (1989): Weak Hierarchies Associated with Similarity Measures - An Additive Clustering Technique. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 51, 133–166Google Scholar
  3. BANDELT, H.-J. and DRESS A.W.M. (1992): Split Decomposition: A New and Useful Approach to Phylogenetic Analysis of Distance Data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 1, 242–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. HAYASAKA, K., GOJOBORI, T., and HORAI, S. (1988): Molecular phylogeny and evolution of primate mitochondrial DNA. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 5, 626–644Google Scholar
  5. KLAUER, K.C. and CARROLL, J.D. (1989): A Mathematical Programming Approach for Fitting General Graphs. Journal of Classification, 6, 247–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. MAKARENKOV, V. and LECLERC, B. (1999): An Algorithm for the Fitting of a Tree Metric According to a Weighted Least– Squares Criterion. Journal of Classification, 16, 3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. MAKARENKOV, V. and LEGENDRE, P. (2000): General Network Representation of a Dissimilarity Matrix: Adding Reticulations to an Additive Tree. Journal of Classification (submitted)Google Scholar
  8. MARGULIS, L. (1981): Symbiosis in Cell Evolution, San Francisco, CA: W. H. FreemanGoogle Scholar
  9. ORTH, B. (1988): Representing Similarities by Distance Graphs: Monotonie Network Analysis (MONA). In: H. H. Bock (Ed.), Classification and related methods of data analysis, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 489–494Google Scholar
  10. SAITOU, N. and NEI, M. (1987): The Neighbor-Joining Method: A New Method for Reconstructing Phylogenetic Trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 406–425Google Scholar
  11. SONEA, S. and PANISSET, M. (1976): Pour une nouvelle bactériologie. Revue Canadienne de Biologie, 35, 103–167Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir Makarenkov
    • 1
    • 2
  • Pierre Legendre
    • 3
  1. 1.Département de sciences biologiquesUniversité de MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Institute of Control SciencesMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Département de sciences biologiquesUniversité de MontréalMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations