Cargando…

ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods

Among the criteria to evaluate the performance of a phylogenetic method, robustness to model violation is of particular practical importance as complete a priori knowledge of evolutionary processes is typically unavailable. For studies of robustness in phylogenetic inference, a utility to add well-d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh, Gesell, Tanja, von Haeseler, Arndt
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3258038/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21940641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr220
_version_ 1782221224774991872
author Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh
Gesell, Tanja
von Haeseler, Arndt
author_facet Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh
Gesell, Tanja
von Haeseler, Arndt
author_sort Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh
collection PubMed
description Among the criteria to evaluate the performance of a phylogenetic method, robustness to model violation is of particular practical importance as complete a priori knowledge of evolutionary processes is typically unavailable. For studies of robustness in phylogenetic inference, a utility to add well-defined model violations to the simulated data would be helpful. We therefore introduce ImOSM, a tool to imbed intermittent evolution as model violation into an alignment. Intermittent evolution refers to extra substitutions occurring randomly on branches of a tree, thus changing alignment site patterns. This means that the extra substitutions are placed on the tree after the typical process of sequence evolution is completed. We then study the robustness of widely used phylogenetic methods: maximum likelihood (ML), maximum parsimony (MP), and a distance-based method (BIONJ) to various scenarios of model violation. Violation of rates across sites (RaS) heterogeneity and simultaneous violation of RaS and the transition/transversion ratio on two nonadjacent external branches hinder all the methods recovery of the true topology for a four-taxon tree. For an eight-taxon balanced tree, the violations cause each of the three methods to infer a different topology. Both ML and MP fail, whereas BIONJ, which calculates the distances based on the ML estimated parameters, reconstructs the true tree. Finally, we report that a test of model homogeneity and goodness of fit tests have enough power to detect such model violations. The outcome of the tests can help to actually gain confidence in the inferred trees. Therefore, we recommend using these tests in practical phylogenetic analyses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3258038
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32580382012-01-17 ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh Gesell, Tanja von Haeseler, Arndt Mol Biol Evol Research Articles Among the criteria to evaluate the performance of a phylogenetic method, robustness to model violation is of particular practical importance as complete a priori knowledge of evolutionary processes is typically unavailable. For studies of robustness in phylogenetic inference, a utility to add well-defined model violations to the simulated data would be helpful. We therefore introduce ImOSM, a tool to imbed intermittent evolution as model violation into an alignment. Intermittent evolution refers to extra substitutions occurring randomly on branches of a tree, thus changing alignment site patterns. This means that the extra substitutions are placed on the tree after the typical process of sequence evolution is completed. We then study the robustness of widely used phylogenetic methods: maximum likelihood (ML), maximum parsimony (MP), and a distance-based method (BIONJ) to various scenarios of model violation. Violation of rates across sites (RaS) heterogeneity and simultaneous violation of RaS and the transition/transversion ratio on two nonadjacent external branches hinder all the methods recovery of the true topology for a four-taxon tree. For an eight-taxon balanced tree, the violations cause each of the three methods to infer a different topology. Both ML and MP fail, whereas BIONJ, which calculates the distances based on the ML estimated parameters, reconstructs the true tree. Finally, we report that a test of model homogeneity and goodness of fit tests have enough power to detect such model violations. The outcome of the tests can help to actually gain confidence in the inferred trees. Therefore, we recommend using these tests in practical phylogenetic analyses. Oxford University Press 2012-02 2011-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC3258038/ /pubmed/21940641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr220 Text en © The Author(s) 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Thi Nguyen, Minh Anh
Gesell, Tanja
von Haeseler, Arndt
ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title_full ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title_fullStr ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title_full_unstemmed ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title_short ImOSM: Intermittent Evolution and Robustness of Phylogenetic Methods
title_sort imosm: intermittent evolution and robustness of phylogenetic methods
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3258038/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21940641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr220
work_keys_str_mv AT thinguyenminhanh imosmintermittentevolutionandrobustnessofphylogeneticmethods
AT geselltanja imosmintermittentevolutionandrobustnessofphylogeneticmethods
AT vonhaeselerarndt imosmintermittentevolutionandrobustnessofphylogeneticmethods