TNT, a free program for phylogenetic analysis

The main features of the phylogeny program TNT are discussed. Windows versions have a menu interface, while Macintosh and Linux versions are command‐driven. The program can analyze data sets with discrete (additive, non‐additive, step‐matrix) as well as continuous characters (evaluated with Farris optimization). Effective analysis of large data sets can be carried out in reasonable times, and a number of methods to help identifying wildcard taxa in the case of ambiguous data sets are implemented. A variety of methods for diagnosing trees and exploring character evolution is available in TNT, and publication‐quality tree‐diagrams can be saved as metafiles. Through the use of a number of native commands and a simple but powerful scripting language, TNT allows the user an enormous flexibility in phylogenetic analyses or simulations.

[1]  J. Farris,et al.  Support Weighting , 2001 .

[2]  David Sankoff,et al.  Locating the vertices of a steiner tree in an arbitrary metric space , 1975, Math. Program..

[3]  P. Goloboff.  METHODS FOR FASTER PARSIMONY ANALYSIS , 1996 .

[4]  W. Fitch,et al.  Phylogeny determination using dynamically weighted parsimony method. , 1990, Methods in enzymology.

[5]  J. Farris.  THE RETENTION INDEX AND THE RESCALED CONSISTENCY INDEX , 1989, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[6]  Diego Pol,et al.  Semi‐strict supertrees , 2002, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[7]  J. Farris.  On Comparing the Shapes of Taxonomic Trees , 1973 .

[8]  R. Meier,et al.  Software Review , 2005 .

[9]  D. Sankoff,et al.  Locating the vertices of a Steiner tree in arbitrary space , 1975 .

[10]  P. Goloboff.  Analyzing Large Data Sets in Reasonable Times: Solutions for Composite Optima , 1999, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[11]  C. Bult,et al.  TESTING SIGNIFICANCE OF INCONGRUENCE , 1994 .

[12]  Jonathan A. Coddington,et al.  PROBLEMS WITH ZERO‐LENGTH BRANCHES , 1994 .

[13]  J. Farris.  Methods for Computing Wagner Trees , 1970 .

[14]  J. Farris,et al.  Methods for Quick Consensus Estimation , 2001 .

[15]  Kevin C. Nixon,et al.  The limits of conventional cladistic analysis , 2006 .

[16]  P. Goloboff.  ESTIMATING CHARACTER WEIGHTS DURING TREE SEARCH , 1993, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[17]  Bengt Oxelman,et al.  Improvements to resampling measures of group support , 2003 .

[18]  W. Fitch.  Toward Defining the Course of Evolution: Minimum Change for a Specific Tree Topology , 1971 .

[19]  K. Nixon,et al.  The Parsimony Ratchet, a New Method for Rapid Parsimony Analysis , 1999, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[20]  Pablo A Goloboff,et al.  On divide-and-conquer strategies for parsimony analysis of large data sets: Rec-I-DCM3 versus TNT. , 2007, Systematic biology.

[21]  D. Robinson,et al.  Comparison of phylogenetic trees , 1981 .

[22]  Pablo A. Goloboff,et al.  Self-Weighted Optimization: Tree Searches and Character State Reconstructions under Implied Transformation Costs , 1997 .

[23]  Pablo A. Goloboff,et al.  Calculating SPR distances between trees , 2008, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[24]  M. Sanderson,et al.  Phylogenetic supermatrix analysis of GenBank sequences from 2228 papilionoid legumes. , 2006, Systematic biology.

[25]  Ward C. Wheeler,et al.  Parsimony overcomes statistical inconsistency with the addition of more data from the same gene , 2005, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.

[26]  J. Farris.  A Successive Approximations Approach to Character Weighting , 1969 .

[27]  P. Goloboff,et al.  Continuous characters analyzed as such , 2006 .

[28]  G. Giribet,et al.  TNT: Tree Analysis Using New Technology , 2005 .

[29]  J. Farris,et al.  PARSIMONY JACKKNIFING OUTPERFORMS NEIGHBOR‐JOINING , 1996, Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society.