Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics

Details Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics

2008-08-27

arxiv.org/abs/0808.3609v2

Biology

Quantitative Biology

Populations and Evolution

Scientific paper

Tuffley and Steel (1997) proved that Maximum Likelihood and Maximum Parsimony methods in phylogenetics are equivalent for sequences of characters under a simple symmetric model of substitution with no common mechanism. This result has been widely cited ever since. We show that small changes to the model assumptions suffice to make the two methods inequivalent. In particular, we analyze the case of bounded substitution probabilities as well as the molecular clock assumption. We show that in these cases, even under no common mechanism, Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood might make conflicting choices. We also show that if there is an upper bound on the substitution probabilities which is `sufficiently small', every Maximum Likelihood tree is also a Maximum Parsimony tree (but not vice versa).

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-528020