Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28172542›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2017

State aggregation for fast likelihood computations in molecular evolution.

Iakov I Davydov, Marc Robinson-Rechavi, Nicolas Salamin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Iakov I DavydovDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Biophore, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Marc Robinson-RechaviDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Biophore, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Nicolas SalaminDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Biophore, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Codon models are widely used to identify the signature of selection at the molecular level and to test for changes in selective pressure during the evolution of genes encoding proteins. The large size of the state space of the Markov processes used to model codon evolution makes it difficult to use these models with large biological datasets. We propose here to use state aggregation to reduce the state space of codon models and, thus, improve the computational performance of likelihood estimation on these models. Results: We show that this heuristic speeds up the computations of the M0 and branch-site models up to 6.8 times. We also show through simulations that state aggregation does not introduce a detectable bias. We analyzed a real dataset and show that aggregation provides highly correlated predictions compared to the full likelihood computations. Finally, state aggregation is a very general approach and can be applied to any continuous-time Markov process-based model with large state space, such as amino acid and coevolution models. We therefore discuss different ways to apply state aggregation to Markov models used in phylogenetics. Availability and Implementation: The heuristic is implemented in the godon package (https://bitbucket.org/Davydov/godon) and in a version of FastCodeML (https://gitlab.isb-sib.ch/phylo/fastcodeml). Contact: nicolas.salamin@unil.ch Supplementary Information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularModels, GeneticSoftwareAlgorithmsComputational BiologyMarkov ChainsProbabilitySensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID28172542
PMCPMC5408795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.