Tripartitions do not always discriminate phylogenetic networks
Abstract
Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees that allow for the representation of non-treelike evolutionary events, like recombination, hybridization, or lateral gene transfer. In a recent series of papers devoted to the study of reconstructibility of phylogenetic networks, Moret, Nakhleh, Warnow and collaborators introduced the so-called {tripartition metric for phylogenetic networks. In this paper we show that, in fact, this tripartition metric does not satisfy the separation axiom of distances (zero distance means isomorphism, or, in a more relaxed version, zero distance means indistinguishability in some specific sense) in any of the subclasses of phylogenetic networks where it is claimed to do so. We also present a subclass of phylogenetic networks whose members can be singled out by means of their sets of tripartitions (or even clusters), and hence where the latter can be used to define a meaningful metric.
Cite
@article{arxiv.0707.2376,
title = {Tripartitions do not always discriminate phylogenetic networks},
author = {Gabriel Cardona and Francesc Rossello and Gabriel Valiente},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:0707.2376},
year = {2007}
}
Comments
26 pages, 9 figures