Encyclopedia of Metagenomics

Living Edition
| Editors: Karen E. Nelson

MRL and SuperFine MRL, New Supertree Methods

  • Tandy Warnow
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6418-1_713-1

Synonyms

Introduction

The estimation of evolutionary trees is one of the basic challenges in biology (Felsenstein 2003), but current methods have great difficulties with large datasets – often due to computational issues. For example, methods like maximum likelihood (ML) and maximum parsimony (MP) are highly accurate techniques when they can be properly run, but both are NP-hard (a technical term that has the consequence that exact algorithms are not likely to be found except through exhaustive search techniques). As a result, ML and MP analyses on large datasets either cannot be run at all, or take a very long time to run, or return poor results. Since most accounts of the number of species suggest that the Tree of Life itself will involve many millions of species, truly large-scale phylogenetic estimation is beyond the reach of current methods. Instead, an...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Baum BR. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon. 1992;41:3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bininda-Emonds O, editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2004.Google Scholar
  3. Felsenstein J. Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates; 2003.Google Scholar
  4. Nguyen N, Mirarab S, Warnow T. MRL and SuperFine+MRL: new supertree methods. Algoritm Mol Biol. 2012;7:3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Price M, Dehal P, Arkin A. FastTree 2 – approximately maximum likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e9490.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ragan MA. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 1992;1:53–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Snir S, Rao S. Quartet MaxCut: a fast algorithm for amalgamating quartet trees. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2012;62:1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Stamatakis A. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics. 2006;22:2688–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Swenson MS, Suri R, Linder CR, et al. An experimental study of Quartets MaxCut and other supertree methods. Algoritm Mol Biol. 2011;6:7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Swenson M, Suri R, Linder CR, et al. SuperFine: fast and accurate supertree estimation. Syst Biol. 2012;61:214–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Swofford DL. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4. Sinauer Associates. 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencesThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA