ArticleBMC bioinformatics2017
DTL reconciliation repair.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2017. 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.
- Microbial diversity and functional potential of the Halobates melleus (Heteroptera: Gerridae) microbiome from the Red Sea coastline.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Discovery of novel RNA viruses through analysis of fungi-associated next-generation sequencing data.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Phylogenetic reconciliation.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Maximum parsimony reconciliation in the DTLOR model.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Cospeciation of coronavirus and paramyxovirus with their bat hosts in the same geographical areas.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Reconstruction of time-consistent species trees.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2020Article
- An efficient exact algorithm for computing all pairwise distances between reconciliations in the duplication-transfer-loss model.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Hierarchical clustering of maximum parsimony reconciliations.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Tree shape-based approaches for the comparative study of cophylogeny.Ecology and evolution · 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
backgroundMaximum parsimony phylogenetic tree reconciliation is an important technique for reconstructing the evolutionary histories of hosts and parasites, genes and species, and other interdependent pairs. Since the problem of finding temporally feasible maximum parsimony reconciliations is NP-complete, current methods use either exact algorithms with exponential worst-case running time or heuristics that do not guarantee optimal solutions.
resultsWe offer an efficient new approach that begins with a potentially infeasible maximum parsimony reconciliation and iteratively "repairs" it until it becomes temporally feasible.
conclusionsIn a non-trivial number of cases, this approach finds solutions that are better than those found by the widely-used Jane heuristic.
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.