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

Online Phylogenetics using Parsimony Produces Slightly Better Trees and is Dramatically More Efficient for Large SARS-CoV-2 Phylogenies than de novo and Maximum-Likelihood Approaches

View ORCID ProfileBryan Thornlow, Alexander Kramer, Cheng Ye, View ORCID ProfileNicola De Maio, Jakob McBroome, Angie S. Hinrichs, Robert Lanfear, Yatish Turakhia, Russell Corbett-Detig
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.02.471004
Bryan Thornlow
1Department of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
2Genomics Institute, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bryan Thornlow
  • For correspondence: [email protected] [email protected]
Alexander Kramer
1Department of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
2Genomics Institute, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cheng Ye
3Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, San Diego; San Diego, CA 92093, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicola De Maio
4European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus; Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nicola De Maio
Jakob McBroome
1Department of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
2Genomics Institute, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Angie S. Hinrichs
2Genomics Institute, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Lanfear
5Department of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, Australian National University; Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yatish Turakhia
3Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, San Diego; San Diego, CA 92093, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Russell Corbett-Detig
1Department of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
2Genomics Institute, University of California, Santa Cruz; Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected] [email protected]
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Phylogenetics has been foundational to SARS-CoV-2 research and public health policy, assisting in genomic surveillance, contact tracing, and assessing emergence and spread of new variants. However, phylogenetic analyses of SARS-CoV-2 have often relied on tools designed for de novo phylogenetic inference, in which all data are collected before any analysis is performed and the phylogeny is inferred once from scratch. SARS-CoV-2 datasets do not fit this mould. There are currently over 10 million sequenced SARS-CoV-2 genomes in online databases, with tens of thousands of new genomes added every day. Continuous data collection, combined with the public health relevance of SARS-CoV-2, invites an “online” approach to phylogenetics, in which new samples are added to existing phylogenetic trees every day. The extremely dense sampling of SARS-CoV-2 genomes also invites a comparison between likelihood and parsimony approaches to phylogenetic inference. Maximum likelihood (ML) methods are more accurate when there are multiple changes at a single site on a single branch, but this accuracy comes at a large computational cost, and the dense sampling of SARS-CoV-2 genomes means that these instances will be extremely rare because each internal branch is expected to be extremely short. Therefore, it may be that approaches based on maximum parsimony (MP) are sufficiently accurate for reconstructing phylogenies of SARS-CoV-2, and their simplicity means that they can be applied to much larger datasets. Here, we evaluate the performance of de novo and online phylogenetic approaches, and ML and MP frameworks, for inferring large and dense SARS-CoV-2 phylogenies. Overall, we find that online phylogenetics produces similar phylogenetic trees to de novo analyses for SARS-CoV-2, and that MP optimizations produce more accurate SARS-CoV-2 phylogenies than do ML optimizations. Since MP is thousands of times faster than presently available implementations of ML and online phylogenetics is faster than de novo, we therefore propose that, in the context of comprehensive genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2, MP online phylogenetics approaches should be favored.

Competing Interest Statement

Robert Lanfear works as an advisor to GISAID. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

  • Added Alexander Kramer as co-first author, significantly revised figures and text

  • https://github.com/bpt26/parsimony/

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-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 18, 2022.
Download PDF
Data/Code
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.
Online Phylogenetics using Parsimony Produces Slightly Better Trees and is Dramatically More Efficient for Large SARS-CoV-2 Phylogenies than de novo and Maximum-Likelihood Approaches
(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
Online Phylogenetics using Parsimony Produces Slightly Better Trees and is Dramatically More Efficient for Large SARS-CoV-2 Phylogenies than de novo and Maximum-Likelihood Approaches
Bryan Thornlow, Alexander Kramer, Cheng Ye, Nicola De Maio, Jakob McBroome, Angie S. Hinrichs, Robert Lanfear, Yatish Turakhia, Russell Corbett-Detig
bioRxiv 2021.12.02.471004; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.02.471004
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Online Phylogenetics using Parsimony Produces Slightly Better Trees and is Dramatically More Efficient for Large SARS-CoV-2 Phylogenies than de novo and Maximum-Likelihood Approaches
Bryan Thornlow, Alexander Kramer, Cheng Ye, Nicola De Maio, Jakob McBroome, Angie S. Hinrichs, Robert Lanfear, Yatish Turakhia, Russell Corbett-Detig
bioRxiv 2021.12.02.471004; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.02.471004

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

  • Bioinformatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (6038)
  • Biochemistry (13742)
  • Bioengineering (10475)
  • Bioinformatics (33266)
  • Biophysics (17156)
  • Cancer Biology (14223)
  • Cell Biology (20184)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (10898)
  • Ecology (16064)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (20384)
  • Genetics (13432)
  • Genomics (18676)
  • Immunology (13801)
  • Microbiology (32252)
  • Molecular Biology (13408)
  • Neuroscience (70229)
  • Paleontology (528)
  • Pathology (2200)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (3749)
  • Physiology (5894)
  • Plant Biology (12040)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1817)
  • Synthetic Biology (3374)
  • Systems Biology (8183)
  • Zoology (1846)