Paper detail

Polyhedral geometry of Phylogenetic Rogue Taxa

It is well known among phylogeneticists that adding an extra taxon (e.g. species) to a data set can alter the structure of the optimal phylogenetic tree in surprising ways. However, little is known about this "rogue taxon" effect. In this paper we characterize the behavior of balanced minimum evolution (BME) phylogenetics on data sets of this type using tools from polyhedral geometry. First we show that for any distance matrix there exist distances to a "rogue taxon" such that the BME-optimal tree for the data set with the new taxon does not contain any nontrivial splits (bipartitions) of the optimal tree for the original data. Second, we prove a theorem which restricts the topology of BME-optimal trees for data sets of this type, thus showing that a rogue taxon cannot have an arbitrary effect on the optimal tree. Third, we construct polyhedral cones computationally which give complete answers for BME rogue taxon behavior when our original data fits a tree on four, five, and six taxa. We use these cones to derive sufficient conditions for rogue taxon behavior for four taxa, and to understand the frequency of the rogue taxon effect via simulation.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.