Motivation: Developing methods for computing phylogenetic networks from biological data is an important problem posed by molecular evolution and much work is currently being undertaken in this area. Although promising approaches exist, there are no tools available that biologists could easily and routinely use to compute rooted phylogenetic networks on real datasets containing tens or hundreds of taxa. Biologists are interested in clades, i.e. groups of monophyletic taxa, and these are usually represented by clusters in a rooted phylogenetic tree. The problem of computing an optimal rooted phylogenetic network from a set of clusters, is hard, in general. Indeed, even the problem of just determining whether a given network contains a given cluster is hard. Hence, some researchers have focused on topologically restricted classes of networks, such as galled trees and level-k networks, that are more tractable, but have the practical draw-back that a given set of clusters will usually not possess such a representation.Results: In this article, we argue that galled networks (a generalization of galled trees) provide a good trade-off between level of generality and tractability. Any set of clusters can be represented by some galled network and the question whether a cluster is contained in such a network is easy to solve. Although the computation of an optimal galled network involves successively solving instances of two different NP-complete problems, in practice our algorithm solves this problem exactly on large datasets containing hundreds of taxa and many reticulations in seconds, as illustrated by a dataset containing 279 prokaryotes.Availability: We provide a fast, robust and easy-to-use implementation of this work in version 2.0 of our tree-handling software Dendroscope, freely available from http://www.dendroscope.org.Contact: huson@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de

Phylogenetic networks were introduced to describe evolution in the presence of exchanges of genetic material between coexisting species or individuals. Split networks in particular were introduced as a special kind of abstract network to visualize conflicts between phylogenetic trees which may correspond to such exchanges. More recently, methods were designed to reconstruct explicit phylogenetic networks (whose vertices can be interpreted as biological events) from triplet data.In this article, we link abstract and explicit networks through their combinatorial properties, by introducing the unrooted analogue of level-k networks. In particular, we give an equivalence theorem between circular split systems and unrooted level-1 networks. We also show how to adapt to quartets some existing results on triplets, in order to reconstruct unrooted level-k phylogenetic networks. These results give an interesting perspective on the combinatorics of phylogenetic networks and also raise algorithmic and combinatorial questions.

International audienceA fundamental problem in the study of phylogenetic networks is to determine whether or not a given phylogenetic network contains a given phylogenetic tree. We develop a quadratic-time algorithm for this problem for binary nearly-stable phylogenetic networks. We also show that the number of reticulations in a reticulation visible or nearly stable phylogenetic network is bounded from above by a function linear in the number of taxa

Phylogenetic networks have now joined phylogenetic trees in the center of phylogenetics research. Like phylogenetic trees, such networks canonically induce collections of phylogenetic trees, clusters, and triplets, respectively. Thus it is not surprising that many network approaches aim to reconstruct a phylogenetic network from such collections. Related to the well-studied perfect phylogeny problem, the following question is of fundamental importance in this context: When does one of the above collections encode (i.e. uniquely describe) the network that induces it? For the large class of level-1 (phylogenetic) networks we characterize those level-1 networks for which an encoding in terms of one (or equivalently all) of the above collections exists. In addition, we show that three known distance measures for comparing phylogenetic networks are in fact metrics on the resulting subclass and give the diameter for two of them. Finally, we investigate the related concept of indistinguishability and also show that many properties enjoyed by level-1 networks are not satisfied by networks of higher level.

Phylogenetic tree reconstruction is usually done by local search heuristics that explore the space of the possible tree topologies via simple rearrangements of their structure. Tree rearrangement heuristics have been used in combination with practically all optimization criteria in use, from maximum likelihood and parsimony to distance-based principles, and in a Bayesian context. Their basic components are rearrangement moves that specify all possible ways of generating alternative phylogenies from a given one, and whose fundamental property is to be able to transform, by repeated application, any phylogeny into any other phylogeny. Despite their long tradition in tree-based phylogenetics, very little research has gone into studying similar rearrangement operations for phylogenetic network—that is, phylogenies explicitly representing scenarios that include reticulate events such as hybridization, horizontal gene transfer, population admixture, and recombination. To fill this gap, we propose “horizontal” moves that ensure that every network of a certain complexity can be reached from any other network of the same complexity, and “vertical” moves that ensure reachability between networks of different complexities. When applied to phylogenetic trees, our horizontal moves—named rNNI and rSPR—reduce to the best-known moves on rooted phylogenetic trees, nearest-neighbor interchange and rooted subtree pruning and regrafting. Besides a number of reachability results—separating the contributions of horizontal and vertical moves—we prove that rNNI moves are local versions of rSPR moves, and provide bounds on the sizes of the rNNI neighborhoods. The paper focuses on the most biologically meaningful versions of phylogenetic networks, where edges are oriented and reticulation events clearly identified. Moreover, our rearrangement moves are robust to the fact that networks with higher complexity usually allow a better fit with the data. Our goal is to provide a solid basis for practical phylogenetic network reconstruction.

Abstract. Evolution is usually described as a phylogenetic tree, but due to some exchange of genetic material, it can be represented as a phylogenetic network which has an underlying tree structure. The notion of level was recently introduced as a parameter on realistic kinds of phylogenetic networks to express their complexity and tree-likeness. We study the structure of level-k networks, and how they can be decomposed into level-k generators. We also provide a polynomial time algorithm which takes as input the set of level-k generators and builds the set of level-(k+1) generators. Finally, with a simulation study, we evaluate the proportion of level-k phylogenetic networks among networks generated according to the coalescent model with recombination.

Clust&See provides the ability to apply three different, recently developed graph clustering algorithms to networks and to visualize: (i) the obtained partition as a quotient graph in which nodes correspond to clusters and (ii) the obtained clusters as their corresponding subnetworks. Importantly, tools for investigating the relationships between clusters and vertices as well as their organization within the whole graph are supplied.

Summary. Tag clouds have gained popularity over the internet to provide a quick overview of the content of a website or a text. We introduce a new visualisation which displays more information: the tree cloud. Like a word cloud, it shows the most frequent words of the text, where the size reflects the frequency, but the words are arranged on a tree to reflect their semantic proximity according to the text. Such tree clouds help identify the main topics of a document, and even be used for text analysis. We also provide methods to evaluate the quality of the obtained tree cloud, and some key steps of its construction. Our algorithms are implemented in the free software TreeCloud available at http://www.treecloud.org.