ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2012
Genome-wide comparative analysis of phylogenetic trees: the prokaryotic forest of life.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- 'Candidatus Pseudomonas auctus' sp. nov. JDE115 isolated from nodules on soybean (Glycines max).PloS one · 2025Article
- Should Networks Supplant Tree Building?Microorganisms · 2020Review
- Updating the genomic taxonomy and epidemiology of Campylobacter hyointestinalis.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Intraclonal genome diversity of the major Pseudomonas aeruginosa clones C and PA14.Environmental microbiology reports · 2016Article
- Review
- Modularized evolution in archaeal methanogens phylogenetic forest.Genome biology and evolution · 2014Article
- The origins of cellular life.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2014Review
- Seeing the Tree of Life behind the phylogenetic forest.BMC biology · 2013Article
- Evolution of microbes and viruses: a paradigm shift in evolutionary biology?Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide comparison of phylogenetic trees is becoming an increasingly common approach in evolutionary genomics, and a variety of approaches for such comparison have been developed. In this article, we present several methods for comparative analysis of large numbers of phylogenetic trees. To compare phylogenetic trees taking into account the bootstrap support for each internal branch, the Boot-Split Distance (BSD) method is introduced as an extension of the previously developed Split Distance method for tree comparison. The BSD method implements the straightforward idea that comparison of phylogenetic trees can be made more robust by treating tree splits differentially depending on the bootstrap support. Approaches are also introduced for detecting tree-like and net-like evolutionary trends in the phylogenetic Forest of Life (FOL), i.e., the entirety of the phylogenetic trees for conserved genes of prokaryotes. The principal method employed for this purpose includes mapping quartets of species onto trees to calculate the support of each quartet topology and so to quantify the tree and net contributions to the distances between species. We describe the application of these methods to analyze the FOL and the results obtained with these methods. These results support the concept of the Tree of Life (TOL) as a central evolutionary trend in the FOL as opposed to the traditional view of the TOL as a "species tree."
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.