ArticleSystematic biology2024
The Influence of the Number of Tree Searches on Maximum Likelihood Inference in Phylogenomics.
Article in Systematic biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Complex Interplay between Evolutionary Flexibility and Diversification in a Family of Spiders.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Phylogenetic inference under the balanced minimum evolution criterion via semidefinite programming.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Treeline Provides a Unified Strategy for Optimising Phylogenetic Trees Under Alternative Criteria.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Identification and Transcriptome Resource of the MiteCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Integrative Inference of Spatially Resolved Cell Lineage Trees using LineageMap.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Accelerating Maximum Likelihood Phylogenetic Inference via Early Stopping to Evade (Over-)optimization.Systematic biology · 2025Article
- Identification of a deep-branching lineage of algae using environmental plastid genomes.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic inference is widely used in phylogenomics. As heuristic searches most likely find suboptimal trees, it is recommended to conduct multiple (e.g., 10) tree searches in phylogenetic analyses. However, beyond its positive role, how and to what extent multiple tree searches aid ML phylogenetic inference remains poorly explored. Here, we found that a random starting tree was not as effective as the BioNJ and parsimony starting trees in inferring the ML gene tree and that RAxML-NG and PhyML were less sensitive to different starting trees than IQ-TREE. We then examined the effect of the number of tree searches on ML tree inference with IQ-TREE and RAxML-NG, by running 100 tree searches on 19,414 gene alignments from 15 animal, plant, and fungal phylogenomic datasets. We found that the number of tree searches substantially impacted the recovery of the best-of-100 ML gene tree topology among 100 searches for a given ML program. In addition, all of the concatenation-based trees were topologically identical if the number of tree searches was ≥10. Quartet-based ASTRAL trees inferred from 1 to 80 tree searches differed topologically from those inferred from 100 tree searches for 6/15 phylogenomic datasets. Finally, our simulations showed that gene alignments with lower difficulty scores had a higher chance of finding the best-of-100 gene tree topology and were more likely to yield the correct trees.
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.