Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 3–16 | Cite as

Inching toward reality: An improved likelihood model of sequence evolution

  • Jeffrey L. Thorne
  • Hirohisa Kishino
  • Joseph Felsenstein
Article

Summary

Our previous evolutionary model is generalized to permit approximate treatment of multiple-base insertions and deletions as well as regional heterogeneity of substitution rates. Parameter estimation and alignment procedures that incorporate these generalizations are developed. Simulations are used to assess the accuracy of the parameter estimation procedure and an example of an inferred alignment is included.

Key words

Alignment Maximum likelihood procedure Dynamic programming Evolutionary model Insertion-deletion model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allison L, Yee CN (1990) Minimum message length and the comparison of macromolecules. Bull Math Biol 52:431–453Google Scholar
  2. Bishop MJ, Thompson EA (1986) Maximum likelihood alignment of DNA sequences. J Mol Biol 190:159–165Google Scholar
  3. Feller W (1968) An introduction to probability theory and its applications, vol 1, ed 3. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 264–269Google Scholar
  4. Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17:368–376Google Scholar
  5. Felsenstein J (1989) PHYLIP-phylogeny inference package (version 3.2). Cladistics 5:164–166Google Scholar
  6. Fitch WM, Smith TF (1983) Optimal sequence alignments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 80:1382–1386Google Scholar
  7. Gotoh O (1982) An improved algorithm for matching biological sequences. J Mol Biol 162:705–708Google Scholar
  8. Hasegawa M, Kishino H, Yano T (1985) Dating of the humanape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 22:160–174Google Scholar
  9. Hein J (1990) A unified approach to alignment and phylogenies. In: Doolittle RF (ed) Methods in enzymology, vol 183. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 626–645Google Scholar
  10. Kendall M, Stuart A (1973) The advanced theory of statistics, vol 2, ed 3. Charles Griffen, London, pp 45–46Google Scholar
  11. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 16:111–120Google Scholar
  12. Lim P-O, Sears BB (1989) 16s rRNA sequence indicates that plant-pathogenic mycoplasmalike organisms are evolutionarily distinct from animal mycoplasmas. J Bacteriol 171:5901–5906Google Scholar
  13. Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comput J 7:308–313Google Scholar
  14. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT (1988) Numerical recipes in C. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 305–309Google Scholar
  15. Smith TF, Waterman MS, Fitch WM (1981) Comparative biosequence metrics. J Mol Evol 18:38–46Google Scholar
  16. Thorne JL, Kishino H, Felsenstein J (1991) An evolutionary model for maximum likelihood alignment of DNA sequences. J Mol Evol 33:114–124Google Scholar
  17. Weisburg WG, Hatch TP, Woese CR (1986) Eubacterial origin of Chlamydiae. J Bacteriol 167:570–574Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey L. Thorne
    • 1
  • Hirohisa Kishino
    • 1
  • Joseph Felsenstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Genetics SK-50University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Plant Breeding and BiometryCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Ocean Research InstituteUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations