A recent editorial in Journal of Molecular Evolution highlights opportunities and challenges facing molecular evolution in the era of next-generation sequencing. Abundant sequence data should allow more-complex models to be fit at higher confidence, making phylogenetic inference more reliable and improving our understanding of evolution at the molecular level. However, concern that approaches based on multiple sequence alignment may be computationally infeasible for large datasets is driving the development of so-called alignment-free methods for sequence comparison and phylogenetic inference. The recent editorial characterized these approaches as model-free, not based on the concept of homology, and lacking in biological intuition. We argue here that alignment-free methods have not abandoned models or homology, and can be biologically intuitive.
Domazet-Lošo M, Haubold B (2011) Alignment-free detection of local similarity among viral and bacterial genomes. Bioinformatics 27:1466–1472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall BK (ed) (1994) Homology: the hierarchical basis of comparative biology. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
Mar JC, Harlow TJ, Ragan MA (2005) Bayesian and maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses of protein sequence data under relative branch-length differences and model violation. BMC Evol Biol 5:8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posada D (2013) Phylogenetic models of molecular evolution: next-generation data, fit, and performance. J Mol Evol. doi:10.1007/s00239-013-9566-z
Reinert G, Chew D, Sun F, Waterman MS (2009) Alignment-free sequence comparison (I): statistics and power. J Comput Biol 16:1615–1634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sboner A, Mu XJ, Greenbaum D, Auerbach RK, Gerstein MB (2011) The real cost of sequencing: higher than you think! Genome Biol 12:125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wan L, Reinert G, Sun F, Waterman MS (2010) Alignment-free sequence comparison (II): theoretical power of comparison statistics. J Comput Biol 17:1467–1490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar