Advertisement

Bulletin of Mathematical Biology

, Volume 80, Issue 9, pp 2338–2348 | Cite as

When is a Phylogenetic Network Simply an Amalgamation of Two Trees?

  • Charles SempleEmail author
  • Jack Simpson
Original Article

Abstract

Phylogenetic networks generalise phylogenetic (evolutionary) trees by allowing for the representation of reticulation (non-treelike) events. The structure of such networks is often viewed by the phylogenetic trees they embed. In this paper, we determine when a phylogenetic network \({\mathcal {N}}\) has two phylogenetic tree embeddings which collectively contain all of the edges of \({\mathcal {N}}\). This determination leads to a polynomial-time algorithm for recognising such networks and an unexpected characterisation of the class of reticulation-visible networks.

Keywords

Phylogenetic networks Reticulation-visible networks Stack-free networks Tree-based networks 

Mathematics Subject Classification

05C85 92D15 

References

  1. Bordewich M, Semple C (2007) Computing the hybridization number of two phylogenetic trees is fixed-parameter tractable. IEEE ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 4:458–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bordewich M, Semple C (2016) Reticulation-visible networks. Adv Appl Math 78:114–141MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bordewich M, Semple C (2018) A universal tree-based network with the minimum number of reticulations. Discrete Appl Math.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2018.05.010 Google Scholar
  4. Cardona G, Rossello F, Valiente G (2009) Comparison of tree-child phylogenetic networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 6:552–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cordue P, Linz S, Semple C (2014) Phylogenetic networks that display a tree twice. Bull Math Biol 76:2664–2679MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Dagan T, Martin WF (2006) The tree of one percent. Genome Biol 7:118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Doolittle WF, Bapteste E (2007) Pattern pluralism and the tree of life hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:2043–2049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Francis AR, Steel M (2015) Which phylogenetic networks are merely trees with additional arcs? Syst Biol 64:768–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Francis A, Semple C, Steel M (2018) New characterisations of tree-based networks and proximity measures. Adv Appl Math 93:93–107MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Gambette P, van Iersel L, Kelk S, Pardi F, Scornavacca C (2016) Do branch lengths help locate a tree in a phylogenetic network? Bull Math Biol 78:1773–1795MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunawan ADM, DasGupta B, Zhang L (2017) A decomposition theorem and two algorithms for reticulation-visible networks. Inf Comput 252:161–175MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Hayamizu H (2016) On the existence of infinitely many universal tree-based networks. J Theor Biol 396:204–206MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Hein J (1990) Reconstructing evolution of sequences subject to recombination using parsimony. Math Biosci 98:185–200MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Jetten L, van Iersel L (2018) Nonbinary tree-based phylogenetic networks. IEEE ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 15:205–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kanj I, Nakhleh L, Than C, Xia G (2008) Seeing the trees and their branches in the network is hard. Theor Comput Sci 401:153–164MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Nakhleh L, Jin G, Zhao F, Mellor-Crummey J (2005) Reconstructing phylogenetic networks using maximum parsimony. In: IEEE computational systems bioinformatics conference, pp 93–102Google Scholar
  17. Semple C (2016) Phylogenetic networks with every embedded phylogenetic tree a base trees. Bull Math Biol 78:132–137MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Semple C (2017) Size of a phylogenetic network. Discrete Appl Math 217:362–367MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Song Y, Hein J (2003) Parsimonious reconstruction of sequence evolution and haplotype blocks: finding the minimum number of recombination events. In: Benson G, Page R (eds) Algorithms in bioinformatics (WABI), Lecture notes in bioinformatics, vol 2812, pp 287–302Google Scholar
  20. van Iersel L, Semple C, Steel M (2010) Locating a tree in a phylogenetic network. Inf Process Lett 110:1037–1043MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. van Iersel L, Kelk S, Lekić N, Whidden C, Zeh N (2016) Hybridization number on three rooted binary trees is EPT. SIAM J Discrete Math 30:1607–1631MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhang L (2016) On tree-based phylogenetic networks. J Comput Biol 23:553–565MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Mathematical Biology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations