2022
DOI: 10.1109/tcbb.2021.3105922
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Polynomial-Time Algorithm for Minimizing the Deep Coalescence Cost for Level-1 Species Networks

Abstract: Phylogenetic analyses commonly assume that the species history can be represented as a tree. However, in the presence of hybridization, the species history is more accurately captured as a network. Despite several advances in modeling phylogenetic networks, there is no known polynomial-time algorithm for parsimoniously reconciling gene trees with species networks while accounting for incomplete lineage sorting. To address this issue, we present a polynomial-time algorithm for the case of level-1 networks, in w… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Work towards characterizing and understanding the identifiability of level-1 networks (Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016; Solis-Lemus et al 2020; Gross et al 2021; Allman et al 2022) has led to many reticulate inference methods assuming an underlying level-1 network (Huber et al 2010; Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016; Allman et al 2019; LeMay et al 2021). These methods have surged in popularity recently, largely due to their computational tractability and—for SNaQ (Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016) and NANUQ (Allman et al 2019)— their ability to account for discordance both from gene flow and incomplete lineage sorting.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Work towards characterizing and understanding the identifiability of level-1 networks (Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016; Solis-Lemus et al 2020; Gross et al 2021; Allman et al 2022) has led to many reticulate inference methods assuming an underlying level-1 network (Huber et al 2010; Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016; Allman et al 2019; LeMay et al 2021). These methods have surged in popularity recently, largely due to their computational tractability and—for SNaQ (Solís-Lemus and Ané 2016) and NANUQ (Allman et al 2019)— their ability to account for discordance both from gene flow and incomplete lineage sorting.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This quantity can be calculated from the known embedding of the gene tree within the network. It is of interest because inference methods may attempt to use this number of extra lineages as a criterion to infer the embedding of gene trees within a species tree or species network (Yu et al, 2013; LeMay et al, 2022; Wawerka et al, 2022).…”
Section: Gene Tree Simulatormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Let G and S be any given binary tree and binary network, respectively, and let s : G → S be an embedding. The Incomplete Linear Sorting (ILS) event is an edge e ∈ G entering a pipe t ∈ S provided that at least two edges enter t (see [9]). The locus of an ILS event is the pipe t. The ILS-cost over a pipe t ∈ S entered by k t ≥ 1 edges from G is defined as c t = c•(k t -1), where c is the cost of a single ILS plus the costs of all duplications and all losses in t. The ILS-cost over S is defined as ∑ t∈S↓ c t plus the costs of all duplications and all losses in S, where t runs over pipes t ∈ S entered by at least one edge from G; the latter is denoted as t ∈ S↓.…”
Section: Ils-minimum Embedding Of a Tree Into A Network And Theoremmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [9], a construction algorithm was suggested for a minimum (with respect to ILS events only) embedding of a tree into a network of level 1. Additionally, in [9] (section "Conclusion"), a method was outlined to generalize that algorithm to the case of a network of any level k. Our algorithm uses the idea from [9] combined with ideas of the algorithm of Theorem 1.…”
Section: Ils-minimum Embedding Of a Tree Into A Network And Theoremmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation