Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32692823›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2021

Phylogeny Estimation Given Sequence Length Heterogeneity.

Vladimir Smirnov, Tandy Warnow

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Recent progress on methods for estimating and updating large phylogenies.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Automated Phylogenetic Analysis Using Best Reciprocal BLAST.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Vladimir SmirnovDepartment of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
Tandy WarnowDepartment of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phylogeny estimation is a major step in many biological studies, and has many well known challenges. With the dropping cost of sequencing technologies, biologists now have increasingly large datasets available for use in phylogeny estimation. Here we address the challenge of estimating a tree given large datasets with a combination of full-length sequences and fragmentary sequences, which can arise due to a variety of reasons, including sample collection, sequencing technologies, and analytical pipelines. We compare two basic approaches: (1) computing an alignment on the full dataset and then computing a maximum likelihood tree on the alignment, or (2) constructing an alignment and tree on the full length sequences and then using phylogenetic placement to add the remaining sequences (which will generally be fragmentary) into the tree. We explore these two approaches on a range of simulated datasets, each with 1000 sequences and varying in rates of evolution, and two biological datasets. Our study shows some striking performance differences between methods, especially when there is substantial sequence length heterogeneity and high rates of evolution. We find in particular that using UPP to align sequences and RAxML to compute a tree on the alignment provides the best accuracy, substantially outperforming trees computed using phylogenetic placement methods. We also find that FastTree has poor accuracy on alignments containing fragmentary sequences. Overall, our study provides insights into the literature comparing different methods and pipelines for phylogenetic estimation, and suggests directions for future method development. [Phylogeny estimation, sequence length heterogeneity, phylogenetic placement.].

Indexed as

AlgorithmsPhylogenySequence AlignmentSequence Analysis

Identifiers

PMID32692823
PMCPMC7875441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.