Who is Who in Phylogenetic Networks

Publications related to 'uniqueness'   Order by:   Type | Year

Only And Or     related to:

Associated keywords

branch-length characterization circular-split-system coalescent compressed-network distinguishability duplication explicit-network from-clusters from-distances from-network from-rooted-trees from-splits from-subnetworks from-tri-LGT-nets from-trinets from-triplets from-unrooted-trees galled-tree identifiability lateral-gene-transfer level-k-phylogenetic-network LGT-network likelihood loss normal-network NP-complete phylogenetic-network phylogeny polynomial population-genetics Program-Hybrid-coal Program-Hybrid-Lambda Program-PhyloNet reconstruction reticulation-visible-network semidirected-network software split-network statistical-model time-consistent-network tree-child-network uniqueness valid-network weak-hierarchy

Article (Journal)

1 Leo van Iersel, Steven Kelk and Matthias Mnich. Uniqueness, intractability and exact algorithms: reflections on level-k phylogenetic networks. In JBCB, Vol. 7(4):597-623, 2009. Keywords: explicit network, from triplets, galled tree, level k phylogenetic network, NP complete, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.2932v2.         2 Philippe Gambette and Katharina Huber. On Encodings of Phylogenetic Networks of Bounded Level. In JOMB, Vol. 65(1):157-180, 2012. Keywords: characterization, explicit network, from clusters, from rooted trees, from triplets, galled tree, identifiability, level k phylogenetic network, phylogenetic network, uniqueness, weak hierarchy. Note: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00609130/en/.         Toggle abstract "Phylogenetic networks have now joined phylogenetic trees in the center of phylogenetics research. Like phylogenetic trees, such networks canonically induce collections of phylogenetic trees, clusters, and triplets, respectively. Thus it is not surprising that many network approaches aim to reconstruct a phylogenetic network from such collections. Related to the well-studied perfect phylogeny problem, the following question is of fundamental importance in this context: When does one of the above collections encode (i. e. uniquely describe) the network that induces it? For the large class of level-1 (phylogenetic) networks we characterize those level-1 networks for which an encoding in terms of one (or equivalently all) of the above collections exists. In addition, we show that three known distance measures for comparing phylogenetic networks are in fact metrics on the resulting subclass and give the diameter for two of them. Finally, we investigate the related concept of indistinguishability and also show that many properties enjoyed by level-1 networks are not satisfied by networks of higher level. © 2011 Springer-Verlag." 3 Katharina Huber and Vincent Moulton. Encoding and Constructing 1-Nested Phylogenetic Networks with Trinets. In ALG, Vol. 66(3):714-738, 2013. Keywords: explicit network, from subnetworks, from trinets, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.0728.         Toggle abstract "Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees that are used in biology to represent reticulate or non-treelike evolution. Recently, several algorithms have been developed which aim to construct phylogenetic networks from biological data using triplets, i.e. binary phylogenetic trees on 3-element subsets of a given set of species. However, a fundamental problem with this approach is that the triplets displayed by a phylogenetic network do not necessarily uniquely determine or encode the network. Here we propose an alternative approach to encoding and constructing phylogenetic networks, which uses phylogenetic networks on 3-element subsets of a set, or trinets, rather than triplets. More specifically, we show that for a special, well-studied type of phylogenetic network called a 1-nested network, the trinets displayed by a 1-nested network always encode the network. We also present an efficient algorithm for deciding whether a dense set of trinets (i.e. one that contains a trinet on every 3-element subset of a set) can be displayed by a 1-nested network or not and, if so, constructs that network. In addition, we discuss some potential new directions that this new approach opens up for constructing and comparing phylogenetic networks. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC." 4 Pawel Górecki. H-trees: a model of evolutionary scenario with horizontal gene transfer. In Fundamenta Informaticae, Vol. 103:105-128, 2010. Keywords: duplication, lateral gene transfer, loss, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, uniqueness.         5 Katharina Huber, Leo van Iersel, Vincent Moulton and Taoyang Wu. How much information is needed to infer reticulate evolutionary histories? In Systematic Biology, Vol. 64(1):102-111, 2015. Keywords: explicit network, from network, from rooted trees, from subnetworks, from trinets, identifiability, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu076.         6 Philippe Gambette, Katharina Huber and Steven Kelk. On the challenge of reconstructing level-1 phylogenetic networks from triplets and clusters. In JOMB, Vol. 74(7):1729-1751, 2017. Keywords: from clusters, from triplets, galled tree, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00285-016-1068-3.         7 Philippe Gambette, Katharina Huber and Guillaume Scholz. Uprooted Phylogenetic Networks. In BMB, Vol. 79(9):2022-2048, 2017. Keywords: circular split system, explicit network, from splits, galled tree, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, polynomial, reconstruction, split network, uniqueness. Note: http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.08387.         8 Magnus Bordewich and Charles Semple. Determining phylogenetic networks from inter-taxa distances. In JOMB, Vol. 73(2):283-303, 2016. Keywords: from distances, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, reticulation-visible network, time consistent network, tree-child network, uniqueness. Note: http://132.181.26.35/~c.semple/papers/BS15b.pdf.         9 Sha Zhu and James H. Degnan. Displayed Trees Do Not Determine Distinguishability Under the Network Multispecies Coalescent. In SB, Vol. 66(2):283-298, 2017. Keywords: branch length, coalescent, explicit network, from network, likelihood, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, Program Hybrid-coal, Program Hybrid-Lambda, Program PhyloNet, software, uniqueness. Note: presentation available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLYGTfEZG7g.         10 Gabriel Cardona and Joan Carles Pons. Reconstruction of LGT networks from tri-LGT-nets. In JOMB, Vol. 75(6-7):1669-1692, 2017. Keywords: explicit network, from subnetworks, from tri-LGT-nets, LGT network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1171-0.         11 Magnus Bordewich, Charles Semple and Nihan Tokac. Constructing tree-child networks from distance matrices. In Algorithmica, Vol. 80(8):2240-2259, 2018. Keywords: compressed network, explicit network, from distances, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, polynomial, reconstruction, tree-child network, uniqueness. Note: http://www.math.canterbury.ac.nz/~c.semple/papers/BSN17.pdf.         12 Leo van Iersel and Vincent Moulton. Leaf-reconstructibility of phylogenetic networks. In SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, Vol. 32(3):2047-2066, 2018. Keywords: explicit network, from network, level k phylogenetic network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.08982.         13 Andrew R. Francis and Vincent Moulton. Identifiability of tree-child phylogenetic networks under a probabilistic recombination-mutation model of evolution. In JTB, Vol. 446:160-167, 2018. Keywords: explicit network, from unrooted trees, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, tree-child network, uniqueness. Note: https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.04223.         14 Magnus Bordewich, Katharina Huber, Vincent Moulton and Charles Semple. Recovering normal networks from shortest inter-taxa distance information. In JOMB, Vol. 77(3):571-594, 2018. Keywords: explicit network, from distances, normal network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, polynomial, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: http://www.math.canterbury.ac.nz/~c.semple/papers/BHMS18.pdf.         15 Elizabeth Gross and Colby Long. Distinguishing Phylogenetic Networks. In SIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and Geometry, Vol. 2(1):72-93, 2018. Keywords: distinguishability, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, semidirected network, statistical model, uniqueness. Note: https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03060.         16 Yukihiro Murakami, Leo van Iersel, Remie Janssen, Mark Jones and Vincent Moulton. Reconstructing Tree-Child Networks from Reticulate-Edge-Deleted Subnetworks. In BMB, Vol. 81:3823-3863, 2019. Keywords: from subnetworks, level k phylogenetic network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, tree-child network, uniqueness, valid network. Note: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-019-00641-w.         17 Leo van Iersel, Vincent Moulton and Yukihiro Murakami. Reconstructibility of unrooted level-k phylogenetic networks from distances. In AAM, Vol. 120(102075):1-30, 2020. Keywords: from distances, galled tree, level k phylogenetic network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aam.2020.102075.         18 Péter L. Erdös, Leo van Iersel and Mark Jones. Not all phylogenetic networks are leaf-reconstructible. In JOMB, Vol. 79(5):1623-1638, 2019. Keywords: from subnetworks, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-019-01405-9.         19 Simone Linz and Charles Semple. Caterpillars on three and four leaves are sufficient to reconstruct binary normal networks. In JOMB, 2020. Keywords: explicit network, from rooted trees, from triplets, normal network, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, reconstruction, uniqueness. Note: https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.00483, to appear.

PhdThesis

20 Guillaume Scholz. New algorithms and mathematical tools for phylogenetics beyond trees. PhD thesis, University of East Anglia, 2018. Keywords: circular split system, explicit network, explicit network, from splits, galled tree, phylogenetic network, phylogeny, polynomial, reconstruction, split network, uniqueness. Note: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/66952.

Misc

21 Elizabeth Gross, Leo van Iersel, Remie Janssen, Mark Jones, Colby Long and Yukihiro Murakami. Distinguishing level-1 phylogenetic networks on the basis of data generated by Markov processes. 2020. Keywords: characterization, distinguishability, explicit network, galled tree, phylogenetic network, population genetics, semidirected network, statistical model, uniqueness. Note: https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.08782.