Quartet-mapping, a generalization of the likelihood-mapping procedure.

Likelihood-mapping (LM) was suggested as a method of displaying the phylogenetic content of an alignment. However, statistical properties of the method have not been studied. Here we analyze the special case of a four-species tree generated under a range of evolution models and compare the results with those of a natural extension of the likelihood-mapping approach, geometry-mapping (GM), which is based on the method of statistical geometry in sequence space. The methods are compared in their abilities to indicate the correct topology. The performance of both methods in detecting the star topology is especially explored. Our results show that LM tends to reject a star tree more often than GM. When assumptions about the evolutionary model of the maximum-likelihood reconstruction are not matched by the true process of evolution, then LM shows a tendency to favor one tree, whereas GM correctly detects the star tree except for very short outer branch lengths with a statistical significance of >0.95 for all models. LM, on the other hand, reconstructs the correct bifurcating tree with a probability of >0.95 for most branch length combinations even under models with varying substitution rates. The parameter domain for which GM recovers the true tree is much smaller. When the exterior branch lengths are larger than a (analytically derived) threshold value depending on the tree shape (rather than the evolutionary model), GM reconstructs a star tree rather than the true tree. We suggest a combined approach of LM and GM for the evaluation of starlike trees. This approach offers the possibility of testing for significant positive interior branch lengths without extensive statistical and computational efforts.

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

[2]  W. Li,et al.  A statistical test of phylogenies estimated from sequence data. , 1989, Molecular biology and evolution.

[3]  G A Churchill,et al.  Sample size for a phylogenetic inference. , 1992, Molecular biology and evolution.

[4]  Simon Whelan,et al.  Distributions of statistics used for the comparison of models of sequence evolution in phylogenetics , 1999 .

[5]  Arndt von Haeseler,et al.  PERFORMANCE OF THE MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD, NEIGHBOR JOINING, AND MAXIMUM PARSIMONY METHODS WHEN SEQUENCE SITES ARE NOT INDEPENDENT , 1995 .

[6]  H Kishino,et al.  Appropriate likelihood ratio tests and marginal distributions for evolutionary tree models with constraints on parameters. , 2000, Molecular biology and evolution.

[7]  Arnold G. Kluge,et al.  A Numerical Approach to Phylogenetic Systematics , 1970 .

[8]  H. Munro,et al.  Mammalian protein metabolism , 1964 .

[9]  E. Tillier,et al.  Neighbor Joining and Maximum Likelihood with RNA Sequences: Addressing the Interdependence of Sites , 1995 .

[10]  T. Jukes.  CHAPTER 24 – Evolution of Protein Molecules , 1969 .

[11]  M. Nei,et al.  A Simple Method for Estimating and Testing Minimum-Evolution Trees , 1992 .

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

[13]  Arndt von Haeseler,et al.  Proceedings of the Trinational Workshop on Molecular Evolution , 1998 .

[14]  B. Rannala,et al.  Bayesian phylogenetic inference using DNA sequences: a Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method. , 1997, Molecular biology and evolution.

[15]  K. Strimmer,et al.  Likelihood-mapping: a simple method to visualize phylogenetic content of a sequence alignment. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  T. Sitnikova,et al.  Bootstrap method of interior-branch test for phylogenetic trees. , 1996, Molecular biology and evolution.

[17]  K. Strimmer,et al.  Quartet Puzzling: A Quartet Maximum-Likelihood Method for Reconstructing Tree Topologies , 1996 .

[18]  M. Eigen,et al.  Statistical geometry in sequence space: a method of quantitative comparative sequence analysis. , 1988, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  J. Huelsenbeck.  The robustness of two phylogenetic methods: four-taxon simulations reveal a slight superiority of maximum likelihood over neighbor joining. , 1995, Molecular biology and evolution.

[20]  K. Strimmer,et al.  Bayesian Probabilities and Quartet Puzzling , 1997 .

[21]  J. Stephens,et al.  Methods for computing the standard errors of branching points in an evolutionary tree and their application to molecular data from humans and apes. , 1985, Molecular biology and evolution.

[22]  P. Lewis,et al.  Success of maximum likelihood phylogeny inference in the four-taxon case. , 1995, Molecular biology and evolution.