Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28763439›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

Rearrangement moves on rooted phylogenetic networks.

Philippe Gambette, Leo van Iersel, Mark Jones, Manuel Lafond, Fabio Pardi, Celine Scornavacca

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Finding maximum common contractions between phylogenetic networks.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Exploring spaces of semi-directed level-1 networks.Journal of mathematical biology · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Philippe GambetteLaboratoire d'Informatique Gaspard-Monge (LIGM), Université Paris-Est, CNRS, ENPC, ESIEE Paris, UPEM, F-77454, Marne-la-Vallée, France.
Leo van IerselDelft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Delft University of Technology, Postbus 5031, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands.
Mark JonesDelft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Delft University of Technology, Postbus 5031, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands.
Manuel LafondDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Ottawa, K1N 6N5 Ottawa, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5305-7372
Fabio PardiLaboratoire d'Informatique, de Robotique et de Microélectronique de Montpellier (LIRMM), Université de Montpellier, CNRS, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8084-1464
Celine ScornavaccaInstitut de Biologie Computationnelle (IBC), 34095 Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phylogenetic tree reconstruction is usually done by local search heuristics that explore the space of the possible tree topologies via simple rearrangements of their structure. Tree rearrangement heuristics have been used in combination with practically all optimization criteria in use, from maximum likelihood and parsimony to distance-based principles, and in a Bayesian context. Their basic components are rearrangement moves that specify all possible ways of generating alternative phylogenies from a given one, and whose fundamental property is to be able to transform, by repeated application, any phylogeny into any other phylogeny. Despite their long tradition in tree-based phylogenetics, very little research has gone into studying similar rearrangement operations for phylogenetic network-that is, phylogenies explicitly representing scenarios that include reticulate events such as hybridization, horizontal gene transfer, population admixture, and recombination. To fill this gap, we propose "horizontal" moves that ensure that every network of a certain complexity can be reached from any other network of the same complexity, and "vertical" moves that ensure reachability between networks of different complexities. When applied to phylogenetic trees, our horizontal moves-named rNNI and rSPR-reduce to the best-known moves on rooted phylogenetic trees, nearest-neighbor interchange and rooted subtree pruning and regrafting. Besides a number of reachability results-separating the contributions of horizontal and vertical moves-we prove that rNNI moves are local versions of rSPR moves, and provide bounds on the sizes of the rNNI neighborhoods. The paper focuses on the most biologically meaningful versions of phylogenetic networks, where edges are oriented and reticulation events clearly identified. Moreover, our rearrangement moves are robust to the fact that networks with higher complexity usually allow a better fit with the data. Our goal is to provide a solid basis for practical phylogenetic network reconstruction.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticPhylogenyAnimalsComputational BiologyGene RearrangementHominidaeHumans

Identifiers

PMID28763439
PMCPMC5557604

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.