Majority-Rule Consensus of Phylogenetic Trees Obtained by Maximum-Likelihood Analysis

The maximum-likelihood (ML) approach is a powerful tool for reconstructing molecular phylogenies. In conjunction with the Kishino-Hasegawa test, it allows direct comparison of alternative evolutionary hypotheses. A commonly occurring outcome is that several trees are not significantly different from the ML tree, and thus there is residual uncertainty about the correct tree topology. We present a new method for producing a majority-rule consensus tree that is based on those trees that are not significantly less likely than the ML tree. Five types of consensus trees are considered. These differ in the weighting schemes that are employed. Apart from incorporating the topologies of alternative trees, some of the weighting schemes also make use of the differences between the log likelihood estimate of the ML tree and those of the other trees and the standard errors of those differences. The new approach is used to analyze the phylogenetic relationship of psbA proteins from four free-living photosynthetic prokaryotes and a chloroplast from green plants. We conclude that the most promising weighting scheme involves exponential weighting of differences between the log likelihood estimate of the ML tree and those of the other trees standardized by the standard errors of the differences. A consensus tree that is based on this weighting scheme is referred to as a standardized, exponentially weighted consensus tree. The new approach is a valuable alternative to existing treeevaluating methods, because it integrates phylogenetic information from the ML tree with that of trees that do not differ significantly from the ML tree.

[1]  M. Hasegawa,et al.  Phylogeny and Classification of Hominoidea as Inferred from DNA Sequence Data , 1984 .

[2]  J. Felsenstein CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON PHYLOGENIES: AN APPROACH USING THE BOOTSTRAP , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[3]  M. Bishop,et al.  Evolutionary trees from nucleic acid and protein sequences , 1985, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[4]  N. Pace,et al.  The relationship of a prochlorophyte Prochlorothrix hollandicato green chloroplasts , 1989, Nature.

[5]  Masami Hasegawa,et al.  CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON THE MAXIMUM‐LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATE OF THE HOMINOID TREE FROM MITOCHONDRIAL‐DNA SEQUENCES , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  What, if anything, is Prochloron? , 1989, Nature.

[7]  G. Casella,et al.  Statistical Inference , 2003, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[8]  R. Crozier,et al.  Molecular information on bowerbird phylogeny and the evolution of exaggerated male characteristics , 1993 .

[9]  Z. Yang,et al.  Maximum-likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. , 1993, Molecular biology and evolution.

[10]  Hideo Matsuda,et al.  fastDNAmL: a tool for construction of phylogenetic trees of DNA sequences using maximum likelihood , 1994, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[11]  Masami Hasegawa,et al.  Accuracies of the simple methods for estimating the bootstrap probability of a maximum-likelihood tree , 1994 .

[12]  D. Penny,et al.  Use of spectral analysis to test hypotheses on the origin of pinnipeds. , 1995, Molecular biology and evolution.

[13]  J. Felsenstein,et al.  A Hidden Markov Model approach to variation among sites in rate of evolution. , 1996, Molecular biology and evolution.

[14]  J. Adachi,et al.  MOLPHY version 2.3 : programs for molecular phylogenetics based on maximum likelihood , 1996 .

[15]  C. Robert The Bayesian choice : a decision-theoretic motivation , 1996 .

[16]  S. Kumar,et al.  Patterns of nucleotide substitution in mitochondrial protein coding genes of vertebrates. , 1996, Genetics.

[17]  J. Hsu Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods , 1996 .

[18]  S. Easteal,et al.  The partition matrix: exploring variable phylogenetic signals along nucleotide sequence alignments. , 1997, Molecular biology and evolution.