Genetic material is transferred in a non-reproductive manner across species more frequently than commonly thought, particularly in the bacteria kingdom. On one hand, extant genomes are thus more properly considered as a fusion product of both reproductive and non-reproductive genetic transfers. This has motivated researchers to adopt phylogenetic networks to study genome evolution. On the other hand, a gene's evolution is usually tree-like and has been studied for over half a century. Accordingly, the relationships between phylogenetic trees and networks are the basis for the reconstruction and verification of phylogenetic networks. One important problem in verifying a network model is determining whether or not certain existing phylogenetic trees are displayed in a phylogenetic network. This problem is formally called the tree containment problem. It is NP-complete even for binary phylogenetic networks.
We design an exponential time but efficient method for determining whether or not a phylogenetic tree is displayed in an arbitrary phylogenetic network. It is developed on the basis of the so-called reticulation-visible property of phylogenetic networks.
A C-program is available for download on http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/∼matzlx/tcp_package
[email protected]
Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,072,282
of 23,035,022 outputs
Outputs from Bioinformatics
#2,156
of 3,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,336
of 338,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioinformatics
#55
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,035,022 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 338,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
