ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2015
Exploring the space of gene/species reconciliations with transfers.
Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A complete theoretical framework for inferring horizontal gene transfers using partial order sets.PloS one · 2023Article
- A Linear Time Solution to the Labeled Robinson-Foulds Distance Problem.Systematic biology · 2022Article
- Gene tree species tree reconciliation with gene conversion.Journal of mathematical biology · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reconciliations between gene and species trees have important applications in the study of genome evolution (e.g. sequence orthology prediction or quantification of transfer events). While numerous methods have been proposed to infer them, little has been done to study the underlying reconciliation space. In this paper, we characterise the reconciliation space for two evolutionary models: the [Formula: see text] (duplication, loss and transfer) model and a variant of it-the no-[Formula: see text] model-which does not allow [Formula: see text] events (a transfer immediately followed by a loss). We provide formulae to compute the size of the corresponding spaces and define a set of transformation operators sufficient to explore the entire reconciliation space. We also define a distance between two reconciliations as the minimal number of operations needed to transform one into the other and prove that this distance is easily computable in the no-[Formula: see text] model. Computing this distance in the [Formula: see text] model is more difficult and it is an open question whether it is NP-hard or not. This work constitutes an important step toward reconciliation space characterisation and reconciliation comparison, needed to better assess the performance of reconciliation inference methods through simulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25502987What 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.