Das Leibniz-Institut zur Analyse des Biodiversitätswandels

ist ein Forschungsmuseum der Leibniz Gemeinschaft

Link zur Leibnizgemeinschaft

Forschung › Publikationen › ZFMK-Publikationsverzeichnis › Pitfalls of the site-concordance factor

Pitfalls of the site-concordance factor

DruckversionSend by email
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Vollständiger Titel: 
Pitfalls of the site-concordance factor (sCF) as measure of phylogenetic branch support
ZFMK-Autorinnen / ZFMK-Autoren: 
Juliane Romahn, Dr. Karen Meusemann, Dr. Patrick Kück
Org. Einordnung: 
Algorithmen-Entwicklung, Direktionsstab
Publiziert in: 
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
Publikationstyp: 
Zeitschriftenaufsatz
Keywords: 
Phylogenetics, Branch Support, Tree Reliability, Site-Concordance Measure, Maximum Parsimony
Bibliographische Angaben: 
Kück, P., Romahn, J., Meusemann, K. (2022): Pitfalls of the site-concordance factor (sCF) as measure of phylogenetic branch support. - NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics. Accepted.Ro
Abstract: 

Confidence measures of branch reliability play an important role in phylogenetics as these measures allow to identify trees or parts of a tree that are well supported by the data and thus adequate to serve as basis for evolutionary inference of biological systems. Unreliable branch relationships in phylogenetic analyses are of concern because of their potential to represent incorrect relationships of interest among more reliable branch relationships. The site-concordance factor implemented in the IQ-TREE package is a recently introduced heuristic solution to the problem of identifying unreliable branch relationships on the basis of quartets. We test the performance of the site-concordance measure with simple examples based on simulated data and designed to study its behaviour in branch support estimates related to different degrees of branch length heterogeneities among a ten sequence tree. Our results show that in particular in cases of relationships with heterogeneous branch lengths site-concordance measures may be misleading. We therefore argue that the maximum parsimony optimality criterion currently used by the site- concordance measure may sometimes be poorly suited to evaluate branch support and that the scores reported by the site-concordance factor should not be considered as reliable.