skip to main content
10.1145/1854776.1854800acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Exact ILP solutions for phylogenetic minimum flip problems

Published:02 August 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

In computational phylogenetics, the problem of constructing a consensus tree or supertree of a given set of rooted input trees can be formalized in different ways. We consider the Minimum Flip Consensus Tree and Minimum Flip Supertree problem, where input trees are transformed into a 0/1/?-matrix, such that each row represents a taxon, and each column represents a subtree membership. For the consensus tree problem, all input trees contain the same set of taxa, and no ?-entries occur. For the supertree problem, the input trees may contain different subsets of the taxa, and unrepresented taxa are coded with ?-entries. In both cases, the goal is to find a perfect phylogeny for the input matrix requiring a minimum number of 0/1-flips, i.e., matrix entry corrections. Both optimization problems are NP-hard.

We present the first efficient Integer Linear Programming (ILP) formulations for both problems, using three distinct characterizations of a perfect phylogeny. Although these three formulations seem to differ considerably at first glance, we show that they are in fact polytope-wise equivalent. Introducing a novel column generation scheme, it turns out that the simplest, purely combinatorial formulation is the most efficient one in practice. Using our framework, it is possible to find exact solutions for instances with ~100 taxa.

References

  1. S. Böcker, Q. B. A. Bui, and A. Truss. An improved fixed-parameter algorithm for minimum-flip consensus trees. In Proc. of International Workshop on Parameterized and Exact Computation (IWPEC 2008), volume 5018 of Lect. Notes Comput. Sc., pages 43--54. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. D. Chen, L. Diao, O. Eulenstein, D. Fernández-Baca, and M. J. Sanderson. Flipping: A supertree construction method. In Bioconsensus, volume 61 of DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, pages 135--160. American Mathematical Society, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. Chen, O. Eulenstein, D. Fernández-Baca, and J. G. Burleigh. Improved heuristics for minimum-flip supertree construction. Evol. Bioinform. Online, 2:391--400, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. D. Chen, O. Eulenstein, D. Fernández-Baca, and M. Sanderson. Supertrees by flipping. In Proc. of Conference on Computing and Combinatorics (COCOON 2002), volume 2387 of Lect. Notes Comput. Sc., pages 391--400. Springer, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. Chen, O. Eulenstein, D. Fernández-Baca, and M. Sanderson. Minimum-flip supertrees: complexity and algorithms. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinform., 3(2):165--173, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. W. Day, D. Johnson, and D. Sankoff. The computational complexity of inferring rooted phylogenies by parsimony. Math. Biosci., 81:33--42, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. G. Estabrook, C. Johnson, and F. McMorris. An idealized concept of the true cladistic character. Math. Bioscience, 23:263--272, 1975.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. O. Eulenstein, D. Chen, J. G. Burleigh, D. Fernández-Baca, and M. J. Sanderson. Performance of flip supertree construction with a heuristic algorithm. Syst. Biol., 53(2):299--308, Apr 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. D. Gusfield. Efficient algorithms for inferring evolutionary trees. Networks, 21:19--28, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. S. Kannan, T. Warnow, and S. Yooseph. Computing the local consensus of trees. SIAM J. Comput., 27(6):1695--1724, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. C. Komusiewicz and J. Uhlmann. A cubic-vertex kernel for flip consensus tree. In Proc. of Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2008), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, pages 280--291, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. G. L. Nemhauser and L. A. Wolsey. Integer and Combinatorial Optimization. Discrete Mathematics and Optimization. Wiley-Interscience, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. P. Ng and N. C. Wormald. Reconstruction of rooted trees from subtrees. Discrete Appl. Math., 69(1--2):19--31, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. A. Ragan. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 1(1):53--58, Mar 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. C. Semple and M. Steel. A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Appl. Math., 105(1--3):147--158, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exact ILP solutions for phylogenetic minimum flip problems

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              BCB '10: Proceedings of the First ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
              August 2010
              705 pages
              ISBN:9781450304382
              DOI:10.1145/1854776

              Copyright © 2010 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 2 August 2010

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader