Nonbinary Tree-Based Phylogenetic Networks

Clustering systems of phylogenetic networks

Rooted acyclic graphs appear naturally when the phylogenetic relationship of a set X of taxa involves not only speciations but also recombination, horizontal transfer, or hybridization that cannot be captured by trees. A variety of classes of such networks have been discussed in the literature, including phylogenetic, level-1, tree-child, tree-based, galled tree, regular, or normal networks as models of different types of evolutionary processes. Clusters arise in models of phylogeny as the sets [Formula: see text] of descendant taxa of a vertex v. The clustering system [Formula: see text] comprising the clusters of a network N conveys key information on N itself. In the special case of rooted phylogenetic trees, T is uniquely determined by its clustering system [Formula: see text]. Although this is no longer true for networks in general, it is of interest to relate properties of N and [Formula: see text]. Here, we systematically investigate the relationships of several well-studied classes of networks and their clustering systems. The main results are correspondences of classes of networks and clustering systems of the following form: If N is a network of type [Formula: see text], then [Formula: see text] satisfies [Formula: see text], and conversely if [Formula: see text] is a clustering system satisfying [Formula: see text] then there is network N of type [Formula: see text] such that [Formula: see text].This, in turn, allows us to investigate the mutual dependencies between the distinct types of networks in much detail.

Forest-Based Networks

In evolutionary studies, it is common to use phylogenetic trees to represent the evolutionary history of a set of species. However, in case the transfer of genes or other genetic information between the species or their ancestors has occurred in the past, a tree may not provide a complete picture of their history. In such cases, tree-based phylogenetic networks can provide a useful, more refined representation of the species’ evolution. Such a network is essentially a phylogenetic tree with some arcs added between the tree’s edges so as to represent reticulate events such as gene transfer, hybridization and recombination. Even so, this model does not permit the direct representation of evolutionary scenarios where reticulate events have taken place between different subfamilies or lineages of species. To represent such scenarios, in this paper we introduce the notion of a forest-based network, that is, a collection of leaf-disjoint phylogenetic trees on a set of species with arcs added between the edges of distinct trees within the collection. Forest-based networks include the recently introduced class of overlaid species forests which can be used to model introgression. As we shall see, even though the definition of forest-based networks is closely related to that of tree-based networks, they lead to new mathematical theory which complements that of tree-based networks. As well as studying the relationship of forest-based networks with other classes of phylogenetic networks, such as tree-child networks and universal tree-based networks, we present some characterizations of some special classes of forest-based networks. We expect that our results will be useful for developing new models and algorithms to understand reticulate evolution, such as introgression and gene transfer between species.

Maximum Covering Subtrees for Phylogenetic Networks

Tree-based phylogenetic networks, which may be roughly defined as leaf-labeled networks built by adding arcs only between the original tree edges, have elegant properties for modeling evolutionary histories. We answer an open question of Francis, Semple, and Steel about the complexity of determining how far a phylogenetic network is from being tree-based, including non-binary phylogenetic networks. We show that finding a phylogenetic tree covering the maximum number of nodes in a phylogenetic network can be computed in polynomial time via an encoding into a minimum-cost flow problem.

Normalising phylogenetic networks

Rooted phylogenetic networks provide a way to describe species' relationships when evolution departs from the simple model of a tree. However, networks inferred from genomic data can be highly tangled, making it difficult to discern the main reticulation signals present. In this paper, we describe a natural way to transform any rooted phylogenetic network into a simpler canonical network, which has desirable mathematical and computational properties, and is based only on the 'visible' vertices in the original network. The method has been implemented and we demonstrate its application to some examples.

Classes of tree-based networks

Recently, so-called tree-based phylogenetic networks have attracted considerable attention. These networks can be constructed from a phylogenetic tree, called the base tree, by adding additional edges. The primary aim of this study is to provide sufficient criteria for tree-basedness by reducing phylogenetic networks to related graph structures. Even though it is generally known that determining whether a network is tree-based is an NP-complete problem, one of these criteria, namely edge-basedness, can be verified in linear time. Surprisingly, the class of edge-based networks is closely related to a well-known family of graphs, namely, the class of generalized series-parallel graphs, and we explore this relationship in full detail. Additionally, we introduce further classes of tree-based networks and analyze their relationships.

Generation of Level- k LGT Networks

Phylogenetic networks provide a mathematical model to represent the evolution of a set of species where, apart from speciation, reticulate evolutionary events have to be taken into account. Among these events, lateral gene transfers need special consideration due to the asymmetry in the roles of the species involved in such an event. To take into account this asymmetry, LGT networks were introduced. Contrarily to the case of phylogenetic trees, the combinatorial structure of phylogenetic networks is much less known and difficult to describe. One of the approaches in the literature is to classify them according to their level and find generators of the given level that can be used to recursively generate all networks. In this paper, we adapt the concept of generators to the case of LGT networks. We show how these generators, classified by their level, give rise to simple LGT networks of the specified level, and how any LGT network can be obtained from these simple networks, that act as building blocks of the generic structure. The stochastic models of evolution of phylogenetic networks are also much less studied than those for phylogenetic trees. In this setting, we introduce a novel two-parameter model that generates LGT networks. Finally, we present some computer simulations using this model in order to investigate the complexity of the generated networks, depending on the parameters of the model.

Compression of Phylogenetic Networks and Algorithm for the Tree Containment Problem

Rooted phylogenetic networks are rooted acyclic digraphs. They are used to model complex evolution where hybridization, recombination, and other reticulation events play a role. A rigorous definition of network compression is introduced on the basis of recent studies of relationships between cluster, tree, and rooted phylogenetic networks. The concept reveals new connections between well-studied network classes, including tree-child networks and reticulation-visible networks. It also enables us to define a new class of networks for which the cluster containment problem is solvable in linear time.

Tree-based networks: characterisations, metrics, and support trees

Phylogenetic networks generalise phylogenetic trees and allow for the accurate representation of the evolutionary history of a set of present-day species whose past includes reticulate events such as hybridisation and lateral gene transfer. One way to obtain such a network is by starting with a (rooted) phylogenetic tree T, called a base tree, and adding arcs between arcs of T. The class of phylogenetic networks that can be obtained in this way is called tree-based networks and includes the prominent classes of tree-child and reticulation-visible networks. Initially defined for binary phylogenetic networks, tree-based networks naturally extend to arbitrary phylogenetic networks. In this paper, we generalise recent tree-based characterisations and associated proximity measures for binary phylogenetic networks to arbitrary phylogenetic networks. These characterisations are in terms of matchings in bipartite graphs, path partitions, and antichains. Some of the generalisations are straightforward to establish using the original approach, while others require a very different approach. Furthermore, for an arbitrary tree-based network N, we characterise the support trees of N, that is, the tree-based embeddings of N. We use this characterisation to give an explicit formula for the number of support trees of N when N is binary. This formula is written in terms of the components of a bipartite graph.