Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
Contradictory Results

A Critical Review on the Use of Support Values in Tree Viewers and Bioinformatics Toolkits

Lucas Czech, Jaime Huerta-Cepas, Alexandros Stamatakis
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/035360
Lucas Czech
1Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, Schloss-Wolfsbrunnenweg 35, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: alexandros.stamatakis@h-its.org
Jaime Huerta-Cepas
2Structural and Computational Biology Unit, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Meyerhofstrasse 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexandros Stamatakis
1Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, Schloss-Wolfsbrunnenweg 35, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
3Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Theoretical Informatics, Am Fasanengarten 5, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Phylogenetic trees are routinely visualized to present and interpret the evolutionary relationships of species. Virtually all empirical evolutionary data studies contain a visualization of the inferred tree with support values. Ambiguous semantics in tree file formats can lead to erroneous tree visualizations and therefore to incorrect interpretations of phylogenetic analyses.

Here, we discuss problems that can and do arise when displaying branch support values on trees after re-rooting. Branch support values are typically stored as node labels in the widely-used Newick tree format. However, support values are attributes of branches. Storing them as node labels can yield errors when re-rooting trees. This depends on the mostly implicit semantics that tools deploy to interpret node labels. We reviewed 10 tree viewers and 7 bioinformatics toolkits that can re-root trees. We found that 12 out of 17 of these tools did not permit users choosing the semantics of node labels. Thus, unaware users might get incorrect results when rooting trees produced by common phylogenetic inference programs. We illustrate such an incorrect mapping through several test cases and real examples taken from the literature. This review has led to improvements and workarounds in 5 of the tested tools. We suggest tools should provide an option that explicitly forces users to define the semantics of branch support values.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted September 07, 2016.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Critical Review on the Use of Support Values in Tree Viewers and Bioinformatics Toolkits
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
A Critical Review on the Use of Support Values in Tree Viewers and Bioinformatics Toolkits
Lucas Czech, Jaime Huerta-Cepas, Alexandros Stamatakis
bioRxiv 035360; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/035360
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
A Critical Review on the Use of Support Values in Tree Viewers and Bioinformatics Toolkits
Lucas Czech, Jaime Huerta-Cepas, Alexandros Stamatakis
bioRxiv 035360; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/035360

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Evolutionary Biology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4235)
  • Biochemistry (9136)
  • Bioengineering (6784)
  • Bioinformatics (24001)
  • Biophysics (12129)
  • Cancer Biology (9534)
  • Cell Biology (13778)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7636)
  • Ecology (11702)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15513)
  • Genetics (10644)
  • Genomics (14326)
  • Immunology (9483)
  • Microbiology (22840)
  • Molecular Biology (9090)
  • Neuroscience (48995)
  • Paleontology (355)
  • Pathology (1482)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2570)
  • Physiology (3846)
  • Plant Biology (8331)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1471)
  • Synthetic Biology (2296)
  • Systems Biology (6192)
  • Zoology (1301)