Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29513196›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2017

Phylogeny analysis from gene-order data with massive duplications.

Lingxi Zhou, Yu Lin, Bing Feng, Jieyi Zhao, Jijun Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 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

5 authors.

Lingxi ZhouDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, 29208, South Carolina, USA.
Yu LinResearch School of Computer Science, Australian National University, Canberra, 2601, ACT, Australia.
Bing FengDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, 29208, South Carolina, USA.
Jieyi ZhaoUniversity of Texas School of Biomedical Informatics at Houston, Houston, 77030, Texas, USA.
Jijun TangSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300072, China. jtang@cse.sc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGene order changes, under rearrangements, insertions, deletions and duplications, have been used as a new type of data source for phylogenetic reconstruction. Because these changes are rare compared to sequence mutations, they allow the inference of phylogeny further back in evolutionary time. There exist many computational methods for the reconstruction of gene-order phylogenies, including widely used maximum parsimonious methods and maximum likelihood methods. However, both methods face challenges in handling large genomes with many duplicated genes, especially in the presence of whole genome duplication.

methodsIn this paper, we present three simple yet powerful methods based on maximum-likelihood (ML) approaches that encode multiplicities of both gene adjacency and gene content information for phylogenetic reconstruction.

resultsExtensive experiments on simulated data sets show that our new method achieves the most accurate phylogenies compared to existing approaches. We also evaluate our method on real whole-genome data from eleven mammals. The package is publicly accessible at http://www.geneorder.org .

conclusionsOur new encoding schemes successfully incorporate the multiplicity information of gene adjacencies and gene content into an ML framework, and show promising results in reconstruct phylogenies for whole-genome data in the presence of massive duplications.

Indexed as

Gene DuplicationGene OrderPhylogenyLikelihood FunctionsMaximum likelihoodPhylogeny reconstructionVariable length binary encodingWhole genome duplication

Identifiers

PMID29513196
PMCPMC5657036

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.