Looking for trees in the forest: Summary tree from posterior samples

Citations of this article
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.


Background: Bayesian phylogenetic analysis generates a set of trees which are often condensed into a single tree representing the whole set. Many methods exist for selecting a representative topology for a set of unrooted trees, few exist for assigning branch lengths to a fixed topology, and even fewer for simultaneously setting the topology and branch lengths. However, there is very little research into locating a good representative for a set of rooted time trees like the ones obtained from a BEAST analysis. Results: We empirically compare new and known methods for generating a summary tree. Some new methods are motivated by mathematical constructions such as tree metrics, while the rest employ tree concepts which work well in practice. These use more of the posterior than existing methods, which discard information not directly mapped to the chosen topology. Using results from a large number of simulations we assess the quality of a summary tree, measuring (a) how well it explains the sequence data under the model and (b) how close it is to the "truth", i.e to the tree used to generate the sequences. Conclusions: Our simulations indicate that no single method is "best". Methods producing good divergence time estimates have poor branch lengths and lower model fit, and vice versa. Using the results presented here, a user can choose the appropriate method based on the purpose of the summary tree. © 2013 Heled and Bouckaert; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.




Heled, J., & Bouckaert, R. R. (2013). Looking for trees in the forest: Summary tree from posterior samples. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-221

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free