arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2407.02634q-bio.PE
收藏

多物种溯祖模型下简约法的不一致性

Inconsistency of parsimony under the multispecies coalescent

Daniel Rickert, Wai-Tong Louis Fan, Matthew Hahn

AI总结:

本研究提出计算基因树期望内部枝长的新方法,证明多物种溯祖模型下拼接简约法在无根5物种时一致,但在有根5+及无根6+物种时存在统计不一致区域,表明其并非普遍可靠。

摘要:

虽然已知在某些进化模型下,由于高水平的同塑性,简约法可能在统计上不一致,但多物种溯祖模型(MSC)下简约法的一致性研究较少。先前的研究表明,在无限位点突变模型下,对于有根的四物种情况,拼接简约法(应用于拼接比对序列的简约法)在MSC下是一致的;另一方面,其他工作也确立了无根六物种情况下拼接简约法的不一致性。这些看似矛盾的结果表明,对于超过5个物种的树、所有无根树或两者的某种组合,拼接简约法可能无法保持一致。在此,我们提出一种计算MSC下基因树期望内部枝长的方法。该方法使我们能够确定物种树参数空间中,对于不同数量的物种(有根或无根树),拼接简约法失效的区域。我们利用这一新方法证明,虽然简约法在无根五物种情况下成功,但在有根5+物种和无根6+物种情况下,拼接简约法存在统计不一致的区域。因此,我们的结果表明,在MSC下简约法通常并不可靠。

英文摘要:

While it is known that parsimony can be statistically inconsistent under certain models of evolution due to high levels of homoplasy, the consistency of parsimony under the multispecies coalescent (MSC) is less well studied. Previous studies have shown the consistency of concatenated parsimony (parsimony applied to concatenated alignments) under the MSC for the rooted 4-taxa case under an infinite-sites model of mutation; on the other hand, other work has also established the inconsistency of concatenated parsimony for the unrooted 6-taxa case. These seemingly contradictory results suggest that concatenated parsimony may fail to be consistent for trees with more than 5 taxa, for all unrooted trees, or for some combination of the two. Here, we present a technique for computing the expected internal branch lengths of gene trees under the MSC. This technique allows us to determine the regions of the parameter space of the species tree under which concatenated parsimony fails for different numbers of taxa, for rooted or unrooted trees. We use our new approach to demonstrate that while parsimony succeeds in the unrooted 5-taxa case, there are regions of statistical inconsistency for concatenated parsimony for rooted 5+-taxa cases and unrooted 6+-taxa cases. Our results therefore suggest that parsimony is not generally dependable under the MSC.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑