Linear-Time Algorithms for Some Phylogenetic Tree Completion Problems Under Robinson-Foulds Distance

  • Mukul S. BansalEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11183)


We consider two fundamental computational problems that arise when comparing phylogenetic trees, rooted or unrooted, with non-identical leaf sets. The first problem arises when comparing two trees where the leaf set of one tree is a proper subset of the other. The second problem arises when the two trees to be compared have only partially overlapping leaf sets. The traditional approach to handling these problems is to first restrict the two trees to their common leaf set. An alternative approach that has shown promise is to first complete the trees by adding missing leaves, so that the resulting trees have identical leaf sets. This requires the computation of an optimal completion that minimizes the distance between the two resulting trees over all possible completions.

We provide optimal linear-time algorithms for both completion problems under the widely-used Robinson-Foulds (RF) distance measure. Our algorithm for the first problem improves the time complexity of the current fastest algorithm from quadratic (in the size of the two trees) to linear. No algorithms have yet been proposed for the more general second problem where both trees have missing leaves. We advance the study of this general problem by proposing a biologically meaningful restricted version of the general problem and providing optimal linear-time algorithms for the restricted version. Our experimental results on biological data sets suggest that using completion-based RF distances can result in different evolutionary inferences compared to traditional RF distances.



This work was supported in part by NSF awards IIS 1553421 and MCB 1616514 to MSB.


  1. 1.
    Akanni, W.A., Wilkinson, M., Creevey, C.J., Foster, P.G., Pisani, D.: Implementing and testing Bayesian and maximum-likelihood supertree methods in phylogenetics. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2(8), 140436 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amir, A., Keselman, D.: Maximum agreement subtree in a set of evolutionary trees: metrics and efficient algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 26(6), 1656–1669 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bansal, M.S., Burleigh, J.G., Eulenstein, O., Fernández-Baca, D.: Robinson-foulds supertrees. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 5(1), 18 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beck, R., Bininda-Emonds, O., Cardillo, M., Liu, F.-G., Purvis, A.: A higher-level MRP supertree of placental mammals. BMC Evol. Biol. 6(1), 93 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bender, M.A., Farach-Colton, M., Pemmasani, G., Skiena, S., Sumazin, P.: Lowest common ancestors in trees and directed acyclic graphs. J. Algorithms 57(2), 75–94 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cardillo, M., Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Boakes, E., Purvis, A.: A species-level phylogenetic supertree of marsupials. J. Zool. 264, 11–31 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cardona, G., Llabrés, M., Rosselló, F., Valiente, G.: Nodal distances for rooted phylogenetic trees. J. Math. Biol. 61(2), 253–276 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carter, J., Wegman, M.N.: Universal classes of hash functions. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 18(2), 143–154 (1979)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chaudhary, R., Burleigh, J.G., Fernandez-Baca, D.: Fast local search for unrooted robinson-foulds supertrees. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform. (TCBB) 9(4), 1004–1013 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, D., Burleigh, J.G., Bansal, M.S., Fernández-Baca, D.: Phylofinder: an intelligent search engine for phylogenetic tree databases. BMC Evol. Biol. 8(1), 90 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Christensen, S., Molloy, E.K., Vachaspati, P., Warnow, T.: Optimal completion of incomplete gene trees in polynomial time using OCTAL. In: Schwartz, R., Reinert, K. (eds.) 17th International Workshop on Algorithms in Bioinformatics (WABI 2017), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 88, pp. 27:1–27:14. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cotton, J.A., Wilkinson, M., Steel, M.: Majority-rule supertrees. Syst. Biol. 56(3), 445–452 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Critchlow, D.E., Pearl, D.K., Qian, C., Faith, D.: The triples distance for rooted bifurcating phylogenetic trees. Syst. Biol. 45(3), 323–334 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Vienne, D.M., Giraud, T., Martin, O.C.: A congruence index for testing topological similarity between trees. Bioinformatics 23(23), 3119–3124 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dietzfelbinger, M., Karlin, A., Mehlhorn, K., Meyer auf der Heide, F., Rohnert, H., Tarjan, R.E.: Dynamic perfect hashing: upper and lower bounds. SIAM J. Comput. 23(4), 738–761 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dong, J., Fernandez-Baca, D.: Properties of majority-rule supertrees. Syst. Biol. 58(3), 360–367 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dong, J., Fernández-Baca, D., McMorris, F.: Constructing majority-rule supertrees. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 5(1), 2 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dong, J., Fernández-Baca, D., McMorris, F., Powers, R.C.: An axiomatic study of majority-rule (+ ) and associated consensus functions on hierarchies. Discret. Appl. Math. 159(17), 2038–2044 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Estabrook, G.F., McMorris, F.R., Meacham, C.A.: Comparison of undirected phylogenetic trees based on subtrees of four evolutionary units. Syst. Zool. 34(2), 193–200 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Felsenstein, J.: Inferring Phylogenies. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Finden, C.R., Gordon, A.D.: Obtaining common pruned trees. J. Classif. 2(1), 255–276 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kupczok, A.: Split-based computation of majority-rule supertrees. BMC Evol. Biol. 11(1), 205 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kupczok, A., Haeseler, A.V., Klaere, S.: An exact algorithm for the geodesic distance between phylogenetic trees. J. Comput. Biol. 15(6), 577–591 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin, H.T., Burleigh, J.G., Eulenstein, O.: Triplet supertree heuristics for the tree of life. BMC Bioinform. 10(1), S8 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McMahon, M.M., Deepak, A., Fernndez-Baca, D., Boss, D., Sanderson, M.J.: STBase: one million species trees for comparative biology. PLOS ONE 10(2), 1–17 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Piel, W.H., Donoghue, M., Sanderson, M., Netherlands, L.: TreeBASE: a database of phylogenetic information. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop of Species 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robinson, D., Foulds, L.: Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53(1), 131–147 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vachaspati, P., Warnow, T.: FastRFS: fast and accurate robinson-foulds supertrees using constrained exact optimization. Bioinformatics 33(5), 631–639 (2017)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang, J.T., Shan, H., Shasha, D., Piel, W.H.: Fast structural search in phylogenetic databases. Evol. Bioinform. 1, 37–46 (2005). 2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Waterman, M., Smith, T.: On the similarity of dendrograms. J. Theor. Biol. 73(4), 789–800 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Whidden, C., Zeh, N., Beiko, R.G.: Supertrees based on the subtree prune-and-regraft distance. Syst. Biol. 63(4), 566–581 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wojciechowski, M., Sanderson, M., Steele, K., Liston, A.: Molecular phylogeny of the “temperate herbaceous tribes” of papilionoid legumes: a supertree approach. In: Herendeen, P., Bruneau, A. (eds.) Advances in Legume Systematics, vol. 9, pp. 277–298. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (2000)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wu, Y.: A practical method for exact computation of subtree prune and regraft distance. Bioinformatics 25(2), 190–196 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yoshida, R., Fukumizu, K., Vogiatzis, C.: Multilocus phylogenetic analysis with gene tree clustering. Ann. Oper. Res. (2017).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Engineering and Institute for Systems GenomicsUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations