ArticleAlgorithms for molecular biology : AMB2025
The path-label reconciliation (PLR) dissimilarity measure for gene trees.
Article in Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we investigate the problem of comparing gene trees reconciled with the same species tree using a novel semi-metric, called the Path-Label Reconciliation (PLR) dissimilarity measure. This approach not only quantifies differences in the topology of reconciled gene trees, but also considers discrepancies in predicted ancestral gene-species maps and speciation/duplication events, offering a refinement of existing metrics such as Robinson-Foulds (RF) and their labeled extensions LRF and ELRF. A tunable parameter OUR CONTRIBUTIONS: We show that PLR can be computed in linear time and that it is a semi-metric. We also discuss the diameters of reconciled gene tree measures, which are important in practice for normalization, and provide initial bounds on PLR, LRF, and ELRF. To validate PLR, we simulate reconciliations and perform comparisons with LRF and ELRF. The results show that PLR provides a more evenly distributed range of distances, making it less susceptible to overestimating differences in the presence of small topological changes, while at the same time being computationally efficient. We also apply our measure to evaluate the set of possible rootings of gene trees against a gold standard, and demonstrate that our measure is better at distinguishing one best gene tree among multiple candidates. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the theoretical diameter is rarely reached in practice. The PLR measure advances phylogenetic reconciliation by combining theoretical rigor with practical applicability. Future research will refine its mathematical properties, explore its performance on different types of trees, and integrate it with existing bioinformatics tools for large-scale evolutionary analyses. The implementation of the PLR distance is available in the open-source PyPI package parle: https://pypi.org/project/parle/ .
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.