Skip to main content

A Compressed Format for Collections of Phylogenetic Trees and Improved Consensus Performance

  • Conference paper
Algorithms in Bioinformatics (WABI 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNBI,volume 3692))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Phylogenetic tree searching algorithms often produce thousands of trees which biologists save in Newick format in order to perform further analysis. Unfortunately, Newick is neither space efficient, nor conducive to post-tree analysis such as consensus. We propose a new format for storing phylogenetic trees that significantly reduces storage requirements while continuing to allow the trees to be used as input to post-tree analysis. We implemented mechanisms to read and write such data from and to files, and also implemented a consensus algorithm that is faster by an order of magnitude than standard phylogenetic analysis tools. We demonstrate our results on a collection of data files produced from both maximum parsimony tree searches and Bayesian methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, E.N.: Consensus techniques and the comparison of taxonomic trees. Systematic Zoology 21, 390–397 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amenta, N., St. John, K., Clarke, F.: A linear-time majority tree algorithm. In: Benson, G., Page, R.D.M. (eds.) WABI 2003. LNCS (LNBI), vol. 2812, pp. 216–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger-Wolf, T.Y.: Online consensus and agreement of phylogenetic trees. In: Jonassen, I., Kim, J. (eds.) WABI 2004. LNCS, vol. 3240, pp. 350–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Bryant, D.: A classification of consensus methods for phylogenetics. In: Janowitz, M., Lapointe, F.J., McMorris, F., Mirkin, B., Roberts, F. (eds.) Bioconsensus. DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science. DIMACS-AMS (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Day, W.H.E.: Optimal algorithms for comparing trees with labeled leaves. Journal of Classification 2(1), 7–28 (1985)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Felsenstein, J.: The newick tree format (1986), http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip/newicktree.html

  7. Felsenstein, J.: Inferring Phylogenies. Sinauer Associates, Inc. (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goloboff, P.A., Farris, J.S., Nixon, K.C.: TNT (Tree analysis using new technology) (BETA) ver. 1.0. Published by the authors, Tucumán, Argentina (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Goto, E., Soma, T., Inade, N., Ida, T., Idesawa, M., Hiraki, K., Suzuki, M., Shimizu, K., Philpov, B.: Design of a lisp machine - flats. In: LFP 1982: Proceedings of the 1982 ACM Symposium on LISP and functional programming, pp. 208–215 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hillis, D.M., Moritz, C., Mable, B.K.: Molecular Sytematics, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Huelsenbeck, J.P., Ronquist, F.: MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 17, 754–755 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaufmann, M., Manolios, P., Moore, J.S.: Computer-Aided Reasoning: An Approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Margush, T., McMorris, F.R.: Consensus n-trees. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 43(2), 239–244 (1981)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Nakhleh, L., Miranker, D., Barbancon, F., Piel, W.H., Donoghue, M.J.: Requirements of phylogenetic databases. In: Proceedings of the Third IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE 2003), pp. 141–148. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Seward, J.: bzip2 (2002), http://sources.redhat.com/bzip2/

  16. Sokal, R.R., Rohlf, F.J.: Taxonomic Congruence in the Leptopodomorpha Re-Examined. Systematic Zoology 30(3), 309–325 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Steele, G.L.: Common Lisp the Language, 2nd edn., ch. 22.1.4. Digital Press (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Swofford, D.L.: PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and Other Methods) 4.0 Beta. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Williams, T., Berger-Wolf, T., Moret, B., Roshan, U., Warnow, T.: The relationship between maximum parsimony score and phylogenetic tree topologies. Personal Communication

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ziv, J., Lempel, A.: A universal algorithm for sequential data compression. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 23, 337–342 (1977)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Boyer, R.S., Hunt, W.A., Nelesen, S.M. (2005). A Compressed Format for Collections of Phylogenetic Trees and Improved Consensus Performance. In: Casadio, R., Myers, G. (eds) Algorithms in Bioinformatics. WABI 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3692. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11557067_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11557067_29

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29008-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31812-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics