BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Kristina Wicke

Kristina Wicke contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Populations and Evolutionmath.CODiscrete Mathematics

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Classes of Explicit Phylogenetic Networks and their Biological and Mathematical Significance

The evolutionary relationships among organisms have traditionally been represented using rooted phylogenetic trees. However, due to reticulate processes such as hybridization or lateral gene transfer, evolution cannot always be adequately represented by a phylogenetic tree, and rooted phylogenetic networks that describe such complex processes have been introduced as a generalization of rooted phylogenetic trees. In fact, estimating rooted phylogenetic networks from genomic sequence data and analyzing their structural properties is one of the most important tasks in contemporary phylogenetics. Over the last two decades, several subclasses of rooted phylogenetic networks (characterized by certain structural constraints) have been introduced in the literature, either to model specific biological phenomena or to enable tractable mathematical and computational analyses. In the present manuscript, we provide a thorough review of these network classes, as well as provide a biological interpretation of the structural constraints underlying these networks where possible. In addition, we discuss how imposing structural constraints on the network topology can be used to address the scalability and identifiability challenges faced in the estimation of phylogenetic networks from empirical data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Effects of discordance between species and gene trees on phylogenetic diversity conservation

Phylogenetic diversity indices such as the Fair Proportion (FP) index are frequently discussed as prioritization criteria in biodiversity conservation. They rank species according to their contribution to overall diversity by taking into account the unique and shared evolutionary history of each species as indicated by its placement in an underlying phylogenetic tree. Traditionally, phylogenetic trees were inferred from single genes and the resulting gene trees were assumed to be a valid estimate for the species tree, i.e., the "true" evolutionary history of the species under consideration. However, nowadays it is common to sequence whole genomes of hundreds or thousands of genes, and it is often the case that conflicting genealogical histories exist in different genes throughout the genome, resulting in discordance between individual gene trees and the species tree. Here, we analyze the effects of gene and species tree discordance on prioritization decisions based on the FP index. In particular, we consider the ranking order of taxa induced by (i) the FP index on a species tree, and (ii) the expected FP index across all gene tree histories associated with the species tree. On one hand, we show that for particular tree shapes, the two rankings always coincide. On the other hand, we show that for all leaf numbers greater than or equal to five, there exist species trees for which the two rankings differ. Finally, we illustrate the variability in the rankings obtained from the FP index across different gene tree and species tree estimates for an empirical multilocus mammal data set.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

How far is my network from being edge-based? Proximity measures for edge-basedness of unrooted phylogenetic networks

Phylogenetic networks which are, as opposed to trees, suitable to describe processes like hybridization and horizontal gene transfer, play a substantial role in evolutionary research. However, while non-treelike events need to be taken into account, they are relatively rare, which implies that biologically relevant networks are often assumed to be similar to trees in the sense that they can be obtained by taking a tree and adding some additional edges. This observation led to the concept of so-called tree-based networks, which recently gained substantial interest in the literature. Unfortunately, though, identifying such networks in the unrooted case is an NP-complete problem. Therefore, classes of networks for which tree-basedness can be guaranteed are of the utmost interest. The most prominent such class is formed by so-called edge-based networks, which have a close relationship to generalized series-parallel graphs known from graph theory. They can be identified in linear time and are in some regards biologically more plausible than general tree-based networks. While concerning the latter proximity measures for general networks have already been introduced, such measures are not yet available for edge-basedness. This means that for an arbitrary unrooted network, the "distance" to the nearest edge-based network could so far not be determined. The present manuscript fills this gap by introducing two classes of proximity measures for edge-basedness, one based on the given network itself and one based on its so-called leaf shrink graph (LS graph). Both classes contain four different proximity measures, whose similarities and differences we study subsequently.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Combinatorial views on persistent characters in phylogenetics

The so-called binary perfect phylogeny with persistent characters has recently been thoroughly studied in computational biology as it is less restrictive than the well known binary perfect phylogeny. Here, we focus on the notion of (binary) persistent characters, i.e. characters that can be realized on a phylogenetic tree by at most one $0 \rightarrow 1$ transition followed by at most one $1 \rightarrow 0$ transition in the tree, and analyze these characters under different aspects. First, we illustrate the connection between persistent characters and Maximum Parsimony, where we characterize persistent characters in terms of the first phase of the famous Fitch algorithm. Afterwards we focus on the number of persistent characters for a given phylogenetic tree. We show that this number solely depends on the balance of the tree. To be precise, we develop a formula for counting the number of persistent characters for a given phylogenetic tree based on an index of tree balance, namely the Sackin index. Lastly, we consider the question of how many (carefully chosen) binary characters together with their persistence status are needed to uniquely determine a phylogenetic tree and provide an upper bound for the number of characters needed.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Non-binary universal tree-based networks

A tree-based network $N$ on $X$ is called universal if every phylogenetic tree on $X$ is a base tree for $N$. Recently, binary universal tree-based networks have attracted great attention in the literature and their existence has been analyzed in various studies. In this note, we extend the analysis to non-binary networks and show that there exist both a rooted and an unrooted non-binary universal tree-based network with $n$ leaves for all positive integers $n$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the minimum value of the Colless index and the bifurcating trees that achieve it

Measures of tree balance play an important role in the analysis of phylogenetic trees. One of the oldest and most popular indices in this regard is the Colless index for rooted bifurcating trees, introduced by Colless (1982). While many of its statistical properties under different probabilistic models for phylogenetic trees have already been established, little is known about its minimum value and the trees that achieve it. In this manuscript, we fill this gap in the literature. To begin with, we derive both recursive and closed expressions for the minimum Colless index of a tree with $n$ leaves. Surprisingly, these expressions show a connection between the minimum Colless index and the so-called Blancmange curve, a fractal curve. We then fully characterize the tree shapes that achieve this minimum value and we introduce both an algorithm to generate them and a recurrence to count them. After focusing on two extremal classes of trees with minimum Colless index (the maximally balanced trees and the greedy from the bottom trees), we conclude by showing that all trees with minimum Colless index also have minimum Sackin index, another popular balance index.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Unrooted non-binary tree-based phylogenetic networks

Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees allowing for the representation of non-treelike evolutionary events such as hybridization. Typically, such networks have been analyzed based on their `level', i.e. based on the complexity of their 2-edge-connected components. However, recently the question of how `treelike' a phylogenetic network is has become the center of attention in various studies. This led to the introduction of \emph{tree-based networks}, i.e. networks that can be constructed from a phylogenetic tree, called the \emph{base tree}, by adding additional edges. While the concept of tree-basedness was originally introduced for rooted phylogenetic networks, it has recently also been considered for unrooted networks. In the present study, we compare and contrast findings obtained for unrooted \emph{binary} tree-based networks to unrooted \emph{non-binary} networks. In particular, while it is known that up to level 4 all unrooted binary networks are tree-based, we show that in the case of non-binary networks, this result only holds up to level 3.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access