IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0152656.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximum Parsimony and the Skewness Test: A Simulation Study of the Limits of Applicability

Author

Listed:
  • Jussi Määttä
  • Teemu Roos

Abstract

The maximum parsimony (MP) method for inferring phylogenies is widely used, but little is known about its limitations in non-asymptotic situations. This study employs large-scale computations with simulated phylogenetic data to estimate the probability that MP succeeds in finding the true phylogeny for up to twelve taxa and 256 characters. The set of candidate phylogenies are taken to be unrooted binary trees; for each simulated data set, the tree lengths of all (2n − 5)!! candidates are computed to evaluate quantities related to the performance of MP, such as the probability of finding the true phylogeny, the probability that the tree with the shortest length is unique, the probability that the true phylogeny has the shortest tree length, and the expected inverse of the number of trees sharing the shortest length. The tree length distributions are also used to evaluate and extend the skewness test of Hillis for distinguishing between random and phylogenetic data. The results indicate, for example, that the critical point after which MP achieves a success probability of at least 0.9 is roughly around 128 characters. The skewness test is found to perform well on simulated data and the study extends its scope to up to twelve taxa.

Suggested Citation

  • Jussi Määttä & Teemu Roos, 2016. "Maximum Parsimony and the Skewness Test: A Simulation Study of the Limits of Applicability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0152656
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152656
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152656
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152656&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0152656?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bryan Kolaczkowski & Joseph W. Thornton, 2004. "Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous," Nature, Nature, vol. 431(7011), pages 980-984, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. April M Wright & David M Hillis, 2014. "Bayesian Analysis Using a Simple Likelihood Model Outperforms Parsimony for Estimation of Phylogeny from Discrete Morphological Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-6, October.
    2. Hung D Nguyen & Maki Yoshihama & Naoya Kenmochi, 2005. "New Maximum Likelihood Estimators for Eukaryotic Intron Evolution," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(7), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Johannes Bergsten & Kelly B Miller, 2007. "Phylogeny of Diving Beetles Reveals a Coevolutionary Arms Race between the Sexes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(6), pages 1-6, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0152656. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.