Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41848969›Full record

ArticleBulletin of mathematical biology2026

Counting Spinal Phylogenetic Networks.

Andrew Francis, Michael Hendriksen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bulletin of mathematical biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Andrew FrancisUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Michael HendriksenUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. m.hendriksen@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6127-8987

Funding

Australian Research Council DP260102678
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phylogenetic networks are an important way to represent evolutionary histories that involve reticulate processes such as hybridisation or horizontal gene transfer, yet fundamental questions such as how many networks there are that satisfy certain properties are very difficult. A new way to encode a large class of networks, using "expanding covers", may provide a way to approach such problems. Expanding covers encode a large class of phylogenetic networks, called labellable networks. This class does not include all networks, but does include many familiar classes, including orchard, normal, tree-child and tree-sibling networks. As expanding covers are a combinatorial structure, it is possible that they can be used as a tool for counting such classes for a fixed number of leaves and reticulations, for which, in many cases, a closed formula has not yet been found. More recently, a new class of networks was introduced, called spinal networks, which are analogous to caterpillar trees for phylogenetic trees and can be fully described using covers. In the present article, we describe a method for counting networks that are both spinal and belong to some more familiar class, with the hope that these form a base case from which to attack the more general classes.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticPhylogenyAnimalsEvolution, MolecularGene Transfer, HorizontalMathematical ConceptsEnumerationExpanding coversPhylogenetic networks

Identifiers

PMID41848969
PMCPMC12999826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.