ArticleBioinformatics advances2025
Performance assessment of phylogenetic inference tools using PhyloSmew.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: The performance of phylogenetic inference tools is commonly evaluated using simulated as well as empirical sequence data alignments. An open question is how representative these alignments are with respect to those, commonly analyzed by users. Using the RAxMLGrove database, it is now possible to simulate DNA and amino acid sequences based on more than 70 000 representative RAxML and RAxML-NG tree inferences on empirical datasets conducted on the RAxML web servers. This allows to assess the phylogenetic tree inference accuracy of various inference tools based on more realistic and representative simulated alignments. Results: To automate this process, we implement PhyloSmew, a tool for benchmarking phylogenetic inference tools. We use it to simulate ∼20 000 multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) based on representative empirical trees (in terms of signal strength) from RAxMLGrove. We subsequently analyze 5000 empirical MSAs from the TreeBASE database, to assess the inference accuracy of FastTree2, IQ-TREE2, and RAxML-NG. We find that on quantifiably difficult-to-analyze MSAs, all three tree inference tools perform poorly. Hence, the faster FastTree2 tool, constitutes a viable alternative to infer trees on difficult MSAs. We also find that there are substantial differences between accuracy results on simulated versus empirical data. Availability and implementation: The data underlying this article are available at https://github.com/angtft/PhyloSmew, https://cme.h-its.org/exelixis/material/accuracy-study/data.tar.gz.
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.