Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31203388›Full record

ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2019

Co-divergence and tree topology.

T Calamoneri, A Monti, B Sinaimeri

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

T CalamoneriComputer Science Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
A MontiComputer Science Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
B SinaimeriINRIA Grenoble Rhône-Alpes, Grenoble, France. blerina.sinaimeri@inria.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-9797-7592

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In reconstructing the common evolutionary history of hosts and parasites, the current method of choice is the phylogenetic tree reconciliation. In this model, we are given a host tree H, a parasite tree P, and a function [Formula: see text] mapping the leaves of P to the leaves of H and the goal is to find, under some biologically motivated constraints, a reconciliation, that is a function from the vertices of P to the vertices of H that respects [Formula: see text] and allows the identification of biological events such as co-speciation, duplication and host switch. The maximum co-divergence problem consists in finding the maximum number of co-speciations in a reconciliation. This problem is NP-hard for arbitrary phylogenetic trees and no approximation algorithm is known. In this paper we consider the influence of tree topology on the maximum co-divergence problem. In particular we focus on a particular tree structure, namely caterpillar, and show that-in this case-the heuristics that are mostly used in the literature provide solutions that can be arbitrarily far from the optimal value. Then, we prove that finding the max co-divergence is equivalent to compute the maximum length of a subsequence with certain properties of a given permutation. This equivalence leads to two consequences: (1) it shows that we can compute efficiently in polynomial time the optimal time-feasible reconciliation and (2) it can be used to understand how much the tree topology influences the value of the maximum number of co-speciations.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsEvolution, MolecularModels, GeneticPhylogenyAnimalsComputational BiologyHumansCaterpillarsCo-phylogenyReconciliations

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.