On Determining if Tree-based Networks Contain Fixed Trees

Bridging Between Deviation Indices for Non-Tree-Based Phylogenetic Networks

Phylogenetic networks are a useful model that can represent reticulate evolution and complex biological data. In recent years, mathematical and computational aspects of tree-based networks have been well studied. However, not all phylogenetic networks are tree-based, so it is meaningful to consider how close a given network is to being tree-based; Francis-Steel-Semple (2018) proposed several different indices to measure the degree of deviation of a phylogenetic network from being tree-based. One is the minimum number of leaves that need to be added to convert a given network to tree-based, and another is the number of vertices that are not included in the largest subtree covering its leaf-set. Both values are zero if and only if the network is tree-based. Both deviation indices can be computed efficiently, but the relationship between the above two is unknown, as each has been studied using different approaches. In this study, we derive a tight inequality for the values of the two measures and also give a characterisation of phylogenetic networks such that they coincide. This characterisation yields a new efficient algorithm for the Maximum Covering Subtree Problem based on the maximal zig-zag trail decomposition.

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.

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.

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.

Tree-Based Unrooted Phylogenetic Networks

Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees that are used to represent non-tree-like evolutionary histories that arise in organisms such as plants and bacteria, or uncertainty in evolutionary histories. An unrooted phylogenetic network on a non-empty, finite set X of taxa, or network, is a connected, simple graph in which every vertex has degree 1 or 3 and whose leaf set is X. It is called a phylogenetic tree if the underlying graph is a tree. In this paper we consider properties of tree-based networks, that is, networks that can be constructed by adding edges into a phylogenetic tree. We show that although they have some properties in common with their rooted analogues which have recently drawn much attention in the literature, they have some striking differences in terms of both their structural and computational properties. We expect that our results could eventually have applications to, for example, detecting horizontal gene transfer or hybridization which are important factors in the evolution of many organisms.