↓ Skip to main content

Robust Estimation of Evolutionary Distances with Information Theory

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Biology and Evolution, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Robust Estimation of Evolutionary Distances with Information Theory
Published in
Molecular Biology and Evolution, February 2016
DOI 10.1093/molbev/msw019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Minh Duc Cao, Lloyd Allison, Trevor I. Dix, Mikael Bodén

Abstract

Methods for measuring genetic distances in phylogenetics are known to be sensitive to the evolutionary model assumed. However, there is a lack of established methodology to accommodate the trade-off between incorporating sufficient biological reality and avoiding model over-fitting. In addition, as traditional methods measure distances based on the observed number of substitutions, their tend to under-estimate distances between diverged sequences due to backward and parallel substitutions. Various techniques were proposed to correct this, but they lack the robustness against sequences that are distantly related and of unequal base frequencies. In this article, we present a novel genetic distance estimate based on information theory that overcomes the above two hurdles. Instead of examining the observed number of substitutions, this method estimates genetic distances using Shannon's mutual information. This naturally provides an effective framework for balancing model complexity and goodness of fit. Our distance estimate is shown to be approximately linear to elapsed time and hence is less sensitive to the divergence of sequence data and compositional biased sequences. Using extensive simulation data, we show that our method i.) consistently reconstructs more accurate phylogeny topologies than existing methods, ii.) is robust in extreme conditions such as diverged phylogenies, unequal base frequencies data and heterogeneous mutation patterns, and iii.) scales well with large phylogenies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Switzerland 1 4%
Canada 1 4%
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 21 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 28%
Researcher 6 24%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 28%
Computer Science 2 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Unknown 2 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 August 2016.
All research outputs
#2,422,751
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Biology and Evolution
#1,409
of 4,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,721
of 298,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Biology and Evolution
#47
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,937 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,745 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.