suprefine, a new supertree method shel swenson september 17th 2009

SupreFine, a new supertree method

Shel SwensonSeptember 17th 2009

Tree of Life challenges:Tree of Life challenges: - millions of species- millions of species - lots of missing data- lots of missing data

Reconstructing the Tree of Life

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Two possible approaches: - Combined Analysis - Supertree Methods

Two competing approaches

gene 1 gene 2 . . . gene k

. . . Combined AnalysisS

peci

es

Combined Analysis Methods

gene 1S1S2S3

S4

S7

S8

TCTAATGGAA

GCTAAGGGAA TCTAAGGGAA TCTAACGGAA TCTAATGGAC

TATAACGGAA

gene 3TATTGATACA

TCTTGATACC

TAGTGATGCA

CATTCATACC

TAGTGATGCA

S1

S3

S4

S7

S8

gene 2GGTAACCCTCGCTAAACCTC

GGTGACCATC

GCTAAACCTC

S4

S5

S6

S7

Combined Analysis gene 1

S1S2S3

S4

S5

S6

S7

S8

gene 2gene 3 TCTAATGGAA

GCTAAGGGAA TCTAAGGGAA TCTAACGGAA

TCTAATGGAC

TATAACGGAA

GGTAACCCTCGCTAAACCTC

GGTGACCATC

GCTAAACCTC

TATTGATACA

TCTTGATACC

TAGTGATGCA

CATTCATACC

TAGTGATGCA

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

. . .

Analyzeseparately

SupertreeMethod

Two competing approaches


. . . Combined AnalysisS

peci

es

Why use supertree methods?

• Missing data• Large dataset sizes• Incompatible data types (e.g., morphological features, biomolecular sequences, gene orders, even distances based upon biochemistry)

• Unavailable sequence data (only trees)

Many Supertree Methods

• MRP• weighted MRP• Min-Cut• Modified Min-Cut• Semi-strict Supertree

• MRF• MRD• QILI

• SDM• Q-imputation• PhySIC• Majority-Rule Supertrees

• Maximum Likelihood Supertrees

• and many more ...

Matrix Representation with Parsimony(Most commonly used and most accurate)

Today’s Outline

• Supertree and combined analysis methods• Why we need better supertree methods• SuperFine: a new supertree method that is fast and more accurate than other supertree methods– Strict Consensus Merger (SCM)– Resolving polytomies– Performance of SuperFine (compared to MRP and combined anaylses)

– applications and future work


. . .

Taxa

Previous Simulation Studies

2. Generate sequence

data

1. Generate Model Tree

4. ConstructSource Trees

. . .

3. Select Subsets

5. Apply SupertreeMethod

6. Compare to Model Tree

What does lead to missing data?

• Evolution (gain and loss of genes)

• Dataset selection

• Limited resources (time, money, etc.)

My Simulation Study1. Generate model trees (100-1000 taxa)2. Simulate gene gain and loss and generate

sequences3. Simulate techniques for gene and taxon selection

• Clade-based datasets• Scaffold dataset

4. Generate source trees and a combined dataset5. Apply supertree and combined analysis methods6. Compare each estimated tree to the model tree,

and record topological error

Experimental Parameters

• Number of taxa in model tree: 100, 500, and 1000– Generate 5, 15 and 25 clade-based datasets, respectively

• Scaffold density: 20%, 50%, 75%, and 100%

• Six super-methods: – Combined analysis using ML and MP– MRP on ML and MP source trees– Weighted MRP on ML and MP source trees(MRP = Matrix Representation with Parsimony)

A

B

C

F

D E A

B

D

F

C

E

Quantifying Topological Error

True Tree Estimated Tree

• False positive (FP): An edge in the estimated tree not in the true tree

• False negative (FN): An edge in the true tree missing from the estimated tree

Comparison of MRP-ML and CA-ML(False Negative Rate)



Scaffold Density (%)

We still need supertree methods!

Combined analysis cannot be used for:– Datasets that are very large

– Incompatible data types

– Unavailable sequence data

Outline

• Supertree and combined analysis methods• Why we need better supertree methods• SuperFine: a new supertree method that is fast and more accurate than other supertree methods– Strict Consensus Merger (SCM)– Resolving polytomies– Performance of SuperFine (compared to MRP and combined anaylses)

– applications and future work

Methods that Led to SuperFine

• The Strict Consensus Merger (SCM) (Huson et al. 1999)

• Quartet MaxCut (QMC)(Snir and Rao

2008)

Strict Consensus Merger (SCM)

a b

c d

e

fg

a b

cdh

i j

e

fg

hi j

a b

c

d

a b

c

d

e

fg

a b

c

dh

i j

Theorem

Let S be a collection of source trees and T be a SCM tree on S.

Then for every s in S, ∑(T|L(s)) ∑(s), where T|L(s) is the induced subtree of T on the leafset of s.

Intuition for the Theorem

a b

c d

e

fg

a b

cdh

i j

e

fg

hi j

a b

c

d

a b

c

d

e

fg

a b

c

dh

i j

Performance of SCM

• Low false positive (FP) rate(Estimated supertree has few false edges)

• High false negative (FN) rate(Estimated supertree is missing many true edges)

Methods that Led to SuperFine

• The Strict Consensus Merger (SCM) (Huson et al. 1999)

• Quartet MaxCut (QMC)(Snir and Rao

2008)

Quartet MaxCut (QMC) QMC is a heuristic for the following optimization problem:

Given a collection Q of quartet trees, find a supertree T, with leaf set L(T) = qQ L(q), that displays the maximum number of quartet trees in Q.1

2

3

4

5 6

7

1 5

42

1

24

5

• 12|34, 23|45, 34|56, 45|67 are compatible quartet trees with supertree

• Adding the quartet 17|23 creates an incompatible set of quartet trees. An “optimal” supertree would be the same as above, because it agrees with 4 out of 5 quartet trees.

Maximizing # of Quartet Trees Displayed

1

2

3

4

5 6

72

3 5

4

1 3

424

5 7

6

3 5

64

QMC as a Supertree Method

• Step 1: Encode source trees as a set of quartets

• Step 2: Apply QMC

Idea behind SuperFine

• First, construct a supertree with low false positives using SCM The Strict Consensus Merger

• Then, refine the tree to reduce false negatives by resolving each polytomy using QMC Quartet Max Cut

Resolving a single polytomy, v

• Step 1: Encode each source tree as a collection of quartet trees on {1,2,...,d}, where d=degree(v)

• Step 2: Apply Quartet MaxCut (Snir and Rao) to the collection of quartet trees, to produce a tree t on leafset {1,2,...,d}

• Step 3: Replace the star tree at v by tree t

Why?

Back to Our Examplee

fg

a b

c

dh

i j

a bc e

hi j

d fg

1 2 3

4 5 6

a b

c d

e

fg

a b

cdh

i j

1 1

1 4

1

65

1 1

142

3 3

Where We Use the Theorem

e

fg

a b

c

dh

i j

For every s in S, ∑(T|L(s)) ∑(s)

4

1

65

1

42 3

a b

c d

e

fg

a b

cdh

i j

Step 1: Encode each source tree as a collection of

quartet trees on {1,2,...,d}

1

2 3

4

1 4

56

a b

c d

e

fg

a b

cdh

i j

4

1

65

1

42 3

Step 2: Apply Quartet MaxCut (QMC) to the collection of

quartet trees

1

2 3

4

1 4

56QMC

1

2 3

4

6

5

Replace polytomy using tree from QMC

1

2 3

4

6

5

a bc e

hi j

d fg

e

fg

a b

c

dh

i jh

dg

fi

j

a

bc

e

False Negative Rate




False Positive Rate






Running TimeSuperFine vs. MRP



MRP 8-12 sec.SuperFine 2-3 sec.



Scaffold Density (%) Scaffold Density (%)Scaffold Density (%)

Observations

• SuperFine is much more accurate than MRP, with comparable performance only when the scaffold density is 100%

• SuperFine is almost as accurate as CA-ML

• SuperFine is extremely fast

Future Work• Exploring algorithm design space for Superfine

– Different quartet encodings– Not using SCM in Step 1– Parallel version– Post-processing step to minimize Sum-of-FN to source trees

• Using Superfine to enable phylogeny estimation– without an alignment– on many marker combined datasets

• Using Superfine in conjunction with divide-and-conquer methods to create more accurate phylogenetic methods

• Exploration of impact of source tree collections (in particular the scaffold) on supertree analyses

• Revisiting specific biological supertrees

suprefine, a new supertree method shel swenson september 17th 2009

Documents