Skip Navigation

Systematic Biology 2005 54(1):146-157; doi:10.1080/10635150590905984
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ané, C.
Right arrow Articles by Sanderson, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Ané, C.
Right arrow Articles by Sanderson, M. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2005 Society of Systematic Biologists

Missing the Forest for the Trees: Phylogenetic Compression and Its Implications for Inferring Complex Evolutionary Histories

Cécile Ané1,2 and Michael J. Sanderson1

1 Section of Evolution and Ecology, University of California Davis, California 95616, USA E-mail: mjsanderson{at}ucdavis.edu (M.J.S.)

Edited by Mike Steel: Assiciate Editor


  Abstract

Phylogenetic tree reconstruction is difficult in the presence of lateral gene transfer and other processes generating conflicting signals. We develop a new approach to this problem using ideas borrowed from algorithmic information theory. It selects the hypothesis that simultaneously minimizes the descriptive complexity of the tree(s) plus the data when encoded using those tree(s). In practice this is the hypothesis that can compress the data the most. We show not only that phylogenetic compression is an efficient method for encoding most phylogenetic data sets and is more efficient than compression schemes designed for single sequences, but also that it provides a clear information theoretic rule for determining when a collection of conflicting trees is a better explanation of the data than a single tree. By casting the parsimony problem in this more general framework, we also conclude that the so-called total-evidence tree—the tree constructed from all the data simultaneously—is not always the most economical explanation of the data.

Keywords: Compression; information; Kolmogorov complexity; phylogenetics; total evidence

Received April 2, 2004; Revised May 27, 2004; Accepted July 10, 2004

2 Current address: Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Medical Science Center, 1300 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706, USA; E-mail: ane{at}cs.wisc.edu


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Syst BiolHome page
D. A. Baum
Species as Ranked Taxa
Syst Biol, May 19, 2009; (2009) syp011v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Syst BiolHome page
D. Chen, G. J. Burleigh, and D. Fernandez-Baca
Spectral Partitioning of Phylogenetic Data Sets Based on Compatibility
Syst Biol, August 1, 2007; 56(4): 623 - 632.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.