Locating a tree in a phylogenetic network

Authors:
Leo van Iersel;Charles Semple;Mike Steel
Affiliations:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand;Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand;Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand
Venue:
Information Processing Letters
Year:
2010

Citing 3
Cited 1

Seeing the trees and their branches in the network is hard

Theoretical Computer Science
A distance metric for a class of tree-sibling phylogenetic networks

Bioinformatics
Comparison of Tree-Child Phylogenetic Networks

IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (TCBB)

Fishing for minimum evolution trees with Neighbor-Nets

Information Processing Letters

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.89

Visualization

Abstract

Phylogenetic trees and networks are leaf-labelled graphs that are used to describe evolutionary histories of species. The Tree Containment problem asks whether a given phylogenetic tree is embedded in a given phylogenetic network. Given a phylogenetic network and a cluster of species, the Cluster Containment problem asks whether the given cluster is a cluster of some phylogenetic tree embedded in the network. Both problems are known to be NP-complete in general. In this article, we consider the restriction of these problems to several well-studied classes of phylogenetic networks. We show that Tree Containment is polynomial-time solvable for normal networks, for binary tree-child networks, and for level-k networks. On the other hand, we show that, even for tree-sibling, time-consistent, regular networks, both Tree Containment and Cluster Containment remain NP-complete.