1 | <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"> |
---|
2 | <HTML> |
---|
3 | <HEAD> |
---|
4 | <TITLE>penny</TITLE> |
---|
5 | <META NAME="description" CONTENT="penny"> |
---|
6 | <META NAME="keywords" CONTENT="penny"> |
---|
7 | <META NAME="resource-type" CONTENT="document"> |
---|
8 | <META NAME="distribution" CONTENT="global"> |
---|
9 | <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> |
---|
10 | </HEAD> |
---|
11 | <BODY BGCOLOR="#ccffff"> |
---|
12 | <DIV ALIGN=RIGHT> |
---|
13 | version 3.6 |
---|
14 | </DIV> |
---|
15 | <P> |
---|
16 | <DIV ALIGN=CENTER> |
---|
17 | <H1>PENNY - Branch and bound to find<BR>all most parsimonious trees</H1> |
---|
18 | </DIV> |
---|
19 | <P> |
---|
20 | © Copyright 1986-2002 by the University of |
---|
21 | Washington. Written by Joseph Felsenstein. Permission is granted to copy |
---|
22 | this document provided that no fee is charged for it and that this copyright |
---|
23 | notice is not removed. |
---|
24 | <P> |
---|
25 | PENNY is a program that will find all of the most parsimonious trees |
---|
26 | implied by your data. It does so not by examining all possible trees, |
---|
27 | but by using the more sophisticated "branch and bound" algorithm, a |
---|
28 | standard computer science search strategy first applied to |
---|
29 | phylogenetic inference by Hendy and Penny (1982). (J. S. Farris |
---|
30 | [personal communication, 1975] had also suggested that this strategy, |
---|
31 | which is well-known in computer science, might |
---|
32 | be applied to phylogenies, but he did not publish this suggestion). |
---|
33 | <P> |
---|
34 | There is, however, a price to be paid for the certainty that one has |
---|
35 | found all members of the set of most parsimonious trees. The problem of |
---|
36 | finding these has been shown (Graham and Foulds, 1982; Day, 1983) to be |
---|
37 | NP-complete, which is equivalent to saying that there is no |
---|
38 | fast algorithm that is guaranteed to solve the problem in all cases |
---|
39 | (for a discussion of NP-completeness, see the Scientific American |
---|
40 | article by Lewis and Papadimitriou, 1978). The result is that this |
---|
41 | program, despite its algorithmic sophistication, is VERY SLOW. |
---|
42 | <P> |
---|
43 | The program should be slower than the other tree-building programs |
---|
44 | in the package, but useable up to about ten species. Above this it will |
---|
45 | bog down rapidly, but exactly when depends on the data and on how much |
---|
46 | computer time you have (it may be more effective in the hands of someone |
---|
47 | who can let a microcomputer grind all night than for someone who |
---|
48 | has the "benefit" of paying for time on the campus mainframe computer). IT |
---|
49 | IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO GET A FEEL FOR HOW LONG THE PROGRAM |
---|
50 | WILL TAKE ON YOUR DATA. This can be done by running it on subsets |
---|
51 | of the species, increasing the number of species in the run until you |
---|
52 | either are able to treat the full data set or know that the program |
---|
53 | will take unacceptably long on it. (Making a plot of the logarithm of run |
---|
54 | time against species number may help to project run times). |
---|
55 | <P> |
---|
56 | <H2>The Algorithm</H2> |
---|
57 | <P> |
---|
58 | The search strategy used by PENNY starts by making a tree consisting of the |
---|
59 | first two species (the first three if the tree is to be unrooted). Then |
---|
60 | it tries to add the next species in all possible places (there are three |
---|
61 | of these). For each of the resulting trees it evaluates the number of |
---|
62 | steps. It adds the next species to each of these, again in all |
---|
63 | possible spaces. If this process would continue it would simply |
---|
64 | generate all possible trees, of which there are a very large number even |
---|
65 | when the number of species is moderate (34,459,425 with 10 species). Actually |
---|
66 | it does not do this, because the trees are generated in a |
---|
67 | particular order and some of them are never generated. |
---|
68 | <P> |
---|
69 | Actually the order in which trees are generated is not quite as |
---|
70 | implied above, but is a "depth-first search". This |
---|
71 | means that first one adds the third species in the first possible |
---|
72 | place, then the fourth species in its first possible place, then |
---|
73 | the fifth and so on until the first possible tree has been produced. Its |
---|
74 | number of steps is evaluated. Then one "backtracks" by trying the |
---|
75 | alternative placements of the last species. When these are exhausted |
---|
76 | one tries the next placement of the next-to-last species. The |
---|
77 | order of placement in a depth-first search is like this for a |
---|
78 | four-species case (parentheses enclose monophyletic groups): |
---|
79 | <P> |
---|
80 | Make tree of first two species (A,B)<BR> |
---|
81 |   Add C in first place ((A,B),C)<BR> |
---|
82 |     Add D in first place (((A,D),B),C)<BR> |
---|
83 |     Add D in second place ((A,(B,D)),C)<BR> |
---|
84 |     Add D in third place (((A,B),D),C)<BR> |
---|
85 |     Add D in fourth place ((A,B),(C,D))<BR> |
---|
86 |     Add D in fifth place (((A,B),C),D)<BR> |
---|
87 |   Add C in second place: ((A,C),B)<BR> |
---|
88 |     Add D in first place (((A,D),C),B)<BR> |
---|
89 |     Add D in second place ((A,(C,D)),B)<BR> |
---|
90 |     Add D in third place (((A,C),D),B)<BR> |
---|
91 |     Add D in fourth place ((A,C),(B,D))<BR> |
---|
92 |     Add D in fifth place (((A,C),B),D)<BR> |
---|
93 |   Add C in third place (A,(B,C))<BR> |
---|
94 |     Add D in first place ((A,D),(B,C))<BR> |
---|
95 |     Add D in second place (A,((B,D),C))<BR> |
---|
96 |     Add D in third place (A,(B,(C,D)))<BR> |
---|
97 |     Add D in fourth place (A,((B,C),D))<BR> |
---|
98 |     Add D in fifth place ((A,(B,C)),D)<BR> |
---|
99 | <P> |
---|
100 | Among these fifteen trees you will find all of the four-species |
---|
101 | rooted bifurcating trees, each exactly once (the parentheses each enclose |
---|
102 | a monophyletic group). As displayed above, the backtracking |
---|
103 | depth-first search algorithm is just another way of producing all |
---|
104 | possible trees one at a time. The branch and bound algorithm |
---|
105 | consists of this with one change. As each tree is constructed, |
---|
106 | including the partial trees such as (A,(B,C)), its number of steps |
---|
107 | is evaluated. In addition a prediction is made as to how many |
---|
108 | steps will be added, at a minimum, as further species are added. |
---|
109 | <P> |
---|
110 | This is done by counting how many binary characters which are invariant in the |
---|
111 | data up the species most recently added will ultimately show variation when |
---|
112 | further species |
---|
113 | are added. Thus if 20 characters vary among species A, B, and C and their |
---|
114 | root, and if tree ((A,C),B) requires 24 steps, then if there are 8 more |
---|
115 | characters which will be seen to vary when species D is added, we can |
---|
116 | immediately say that no matter how we add D, the resulting tree can have no less |
---|
117 | than 24 + 8 = 32 steps. The point of all this is that if a previously-found |
---|
118 | tree such as ((A,B),(C,D)) required only 30 steps, then we know that |
---|
119 | there is no point in even trying to add D to ((A,C),B). We have |
---|
120 | computed the bound that enables us to cut off a whole line of inquiry |
---|
121 | (in this case five trees) and avoid going down that particular branch |
---|
122 | any farther. |
---|
123 | <P> |
---|
124 | The branch-and-bound algorithm thus allows us to find all most parsimonious |
---|
125 | trees without generating all possible trees. How much of a saving this |
---|
126 | is depends strongly on the data. For very clean (nearly "Hennigian") |
---|
127 | data, it saves much time, but on very messy data it will still take |
---|
128 | a very long time. |
---|
129 | <P> |
---|
130 | The algorithm in the program differs from the one outlined here |
---|
131 | in some essential details: it investigates possibilities in the |
---|
132 | order of their apparent promise. This applies to the order of addition |
---|
133 | of species, and to the places where they are added to the tree. After |
---|
134 | the first two-species tree is constructed, the program tries adding |
---|
135 | each of the remaining species in turn, each in the best possible place it |
---|
136 | can find. Whichever of those species adds (at a minimum) the most |
---|
137 | additional steps is taken to be the one to be added next to the tree. When |
---|
138 | it is added, it is added in turn to places which cause the fewest |
---|
139 | additional steps to be added. This sounds a bit complex, but it is done |
---|
140 | with the intention of eliminating regions of the search of all possible |
---|
141 | trees as soon as possible, and lowering the bound on tree length as quickly |
---|
142 | as possible. |
---|
143 | <P> |
---|
144 | The program keeps a list of all the most parsimonious |
---|
145 | trees found so far. Whenever |
---|
146 | it finds one that has fewer steps than |
---|
147 | these, it clears out the list and |
---|
148 | restarts the list with that tree. In the process the bound tightens and |
---|
149 | fewer possibilities need be investigated. At the end the list contains |
---|
150 | all the shortest trees. These are then printed out. It should be |
---|
151 | mentioned that the program CLIQUE for finding all largest cliques |
---|
152 | also works by branch-and-bound. Both problems are NP-complete but for |
---|
153 | some reason CLIQUE runs far faster. Although their worst-case behavior |
---|
154 | is bad for both programs, those worst cases occur far more frequently |
---|
155 | in parsimony problems than in compatibility problems. |
---|
156 | <P> |
---|
157 | <H2>Controlling Run Times</H2> |
---|
158 | <P> |
---|
159 | Among the quantities available to be set at the |
---|
160 | beginning of a run of PENNY, two (howoften and howmany) are of particular |
---|
161 | importance. As PENNY goes along it will keep count of how many |
---|
162 | trees it has examined. Suppose that howoften is 100 and howmany is 1000, |
---|
163 | the default settings. Every time 100 trees have been examined, PENNY |
---|
164 | will print out a line saying how many multiples of 100 trees have now been |
---|
165 | examined, how many steps the most parsimonious tree found so far has, |
---|
166 | how many trees of with that number of steps have been found, and a very |
---|
167 | rough estimate of what fraction of all trees have been looked at so far. |
---|
168 | <P> |
---|
169 | When the number of these multiples printed out reaches the number howmany |
---|
170 | (say 1000), the whole algorithm aborts and prints out that it has not |
---|
171 | found all most parsimonious trees, but prints out what is has got so far |
---|
172 | anyway. These trees need not be any of the most parsimonious trees: they are |
---|
173 | simply the most parsimonious ones found so far. By setting the product |
---|
174 | (howoften times howmany) large you can make |
---|
175 | the algorithm less likely to abort, but then you risk getting bogged |
---|
176 | down in a gigantic computation. You should adjust these constants so that |
---|
177 | the program cannot go beyond examining the number of trees you are reasonably |
---|
178 | willing to wait for. In their initial setting the program will |
---|
179 | abort after looking at 100,000 trees. Obviously you may want to adjust |
---|
180 | howoften in order to get more or fewer lines of intermediate notice of how |
---|
181 | many trees have been looked at so far. Of course, in small cases you may |
---|
182 | never even reach the first multiple of howoften and nothing will be printed out |
---|
183 | except some headings and then the final trees. |
---|
184 | <P> |
---|
185 | The indication of the approximate percentage of trees searched so far will |
---|
186 | be helpful in judging how much farther you would have to go to get the full |
---|
187 | search. Actually, since that fraction is the fraction of the set of all |
---|
188 | possible trees searched or ruled out so far, and since the search becomes |
---|
189 | progressively more efficient, the approximate fraction printed out will |
---|
190 | usually be an underestimate of how far along the program is, sometimes a |
---|
191 | serious underestimate. |
---|
192 | <P> |
---|
193 | A constant that affects the result is |
---|
194 | "maxtrees", which controls the |
---|
195 | maximum number of trees that can be stored. Thus if |
---|
196 | "maxtrees" is 25, and 32 most parsimonious trees are found, |
---|
197 | only the first 25 of these are stored and printed out. If "maxtrees" |
---|
198 | is increased, the program does not run any slower but requires a little |
---|
199 | more intermediate storage space. I recommend that |
---|
200 | "maxtrees" be kept as large as you can, provided you are willing to |
---|
201 | look at an output with that many trees on it! Initially, |
---|
202 | "maxtrees" is set to 100 in the distribution copy. |
---|
203 | <P> |
---|
204 | <H2>Methods and Options</H2> |
---|
205 | <P> |
---|
206 | The counting of the length of trees is done by an algorithm nearly |
---|
207 | identical to the corresponding algorithms in MIX, and thus the remainder |
---|
208 | of this document will be nearly identical to the MIX document. MIX |
---|
209 | is a general parsimony program which carries out the Wagner and |
---|
210 | Camin-Sokal parsimony methods in mixture, where each character can have |
---|
211 | its method specified. The program defaults to carrying out Wagner |
---|
212 | parsimony. |
---|
213 | <P> |
---|
214 | The Camin-Sokal parsimony method explains the data by assuming that |
---|
215 | changes 0 --> 1 are allowed but not changes 1 --> 0. Wagner parsimony |
---|
216 | allows both kinds of changes. (This under the assumption that 0 is the |
---|
217 | ancestral state, though the program allows reassignment of the ancestral |
---|
218 | state, in which case we must reverse the state numbers 0 and 1 |
---|
219 | throughout this discussion). The criterion is to find the tree which |
---|
220 | requires the minimum number of changes. The Camin-Sokal method is due |
---|
221 | to Camin and Sokal (1965) and the Wagner method to Eck and Dayhoff |
---|
222 | (1966) and to Kluge and Farris (1969). |
---|
223 | <P> |
---|
224 | Here are the assumptions of these two methods: |
---|
225 | <P> |
---|
226 | <OL> |
---|
227 | <LI>Ancestral states are known (Camin-Sokal) or unknown (Wagner). |
---|
228 | <LI>Different characters evolve independently. |
---|
229 | <LI>Different lineages evolve independently. |
---|
230 | <LI>Changes 0 --> 1 are much more probable than changes 1 --> 0 |
---|
231 | (Camin-Sokal) or equally probable (Wagner). |
---|
232 | <LI>Both of these kinds of changes are a priori improbable over the |
---|
233 | evolutionary time spans involved in the differentiation of the |
---|
234 | group in question. |
---|
235 | <LI>Other kinds of evolutionary event such as retention of polymorphism |
---|
236 | are far less probable than 0 --> 1 changes. |
---|
237 | <LI>Rates of evolution in different lineages are sufficiently low that |
---|
238 | two changes in a long segment of the tree are far less probable |
---|
239 | than one change in a short segment. |
---|
240 | </OL> |
---|
241 | <P> |
---|
242 | That these are the assumptions of parsimony methods has been documented |
---|
243 | in a series of papers of mine: (1973a, 1978b, 1979, 1981b, |
---|
244 | 1983b, 1988b). For an opposing view arguing that the parsimony methods |
---|
245 | make no substantive |
---|
246 | assumptions such as these, see the papers by Farris (1983) and Sober (1983a, |
---|
247 | 1983b), but also read the exchange between Felsenstein and Sober (1986). |
---|
248 | <P> |
---|
249 | The input for PENNY is the standard input for discrete characters |
---|
250 | programs, described above in the documentation file for the |
---|
251 | discrete-characters programs. States "?", "P", and "B" are allowed. |
---|
252 | <P> |
---|
253 | Most of the options are selected using a menu: |
---|
254 | <P> |
---|
255 | <TABLE><TR><TD BGCOLOR=white> |
---|
256 | <PRE> |
---|
257 | |
---|
258 | Penny algorithm, version 3.6a3 |
---|
259 | branch-and-bound to find all most parsimonious trees |
---|
260 | |
---|
261 | Settings for this run: |
---|
262 | X Use Mixed method? No |
---|
263 | P Parsimony method? Wagner |
---|
264 | F How often to report, in trees: 100 |
---|
265 | H How many groups of 100 trees: 1000 |
---|
266 | O Outgroup root? No, use as outgroup species 1 |
---|
267 | S Branch and bound is simple? Yes |
---|
268 | T Use Threshold parsimony? No, use ordinary parsimony |
---|
269 | A Use ancestral states in input file? No |
---|
270 | W Sites weighted? No |
---|
271 | M Analyze multiple data sets? No |
---|
272 | 0 Terminal type (IBM PC, ANSI, none)? (none) |
---|
273 | 1 Print out the data at start of run No |
---|
274 | 2 Print indications of progress of run Yes |
---|
275 | 3 Print out tree Yes |
---|
276 | 4 Print out steps in each character No |
---|
277 | 5 Print states at all nodes of tree No |
---|
278 | 6 Write out trees onto tree file? Yes |
---|
279 | |
---|
280 | Are these settings correct? (type Y or the letter for one to change) |
---|
281 | </PRE> |
---|
282 | </TD></TR></TABLE> |
---|
283 | <P> |
---|
284 | The options X, O, T, A, and M are the usual Mixed Methods, Outgroup, |
---|
285 | Threshold, Ancestral |
---|
286 | States, and Multiple Data Sets options. They are described in the Main |
---|
287 | documentation file and in the Discrete Characters Programs documentation |
---|
288 | file. The O option is only acted upon if the final tree is unrooted. |
---|
289 | <P> |
---|
290 | The option P toggles between the Camin-Sokal parsimony criterion |
---|
291 | and the Wagner parsimony criterion. Options F and H reset the |
---|
292 | variables howoften (F) and howmany (H). The user is prompted for the new |
---|
293 | values. By setting these larger the program will report its progress less |
---|
294 | often (howoften) and will run longer (howmany times howoften). These values |
---|
295 | default to 100 and 1000 which |
---|
296 | guarantees a search of 100,000 trees, but these can be changed. Note that |
---|
297 | option F in this program is not the Factors option available in some of |
---|
298 | the other programs in this section of the package. |
---|
299 | <P> |
---|
300 | The A (Ancestral states) option works in the usual way, described in the |
---|
301 | Discrete Characters Programs documentation file. If |
---|
302 | the A option is not used, then the program will assume 0 as the |
---|
303 | ancestral state for those characters following the Camin-Sokal method, |
---|
304 | and will assume that the ancestral state is unknown for those characters |
---|
305 | following Wagner parsimony. If any characters have unknown ancestral |
---|
306 | states, and if the resulting tree is rooted (even by outgroup), |
---|
307 | a table will be printed out |
---|
308 | showing the best guesses of which are the ancestral states in each |
---|
309 | character. |
---|
310 | <P> |
---|
311 | The S (Simple) option alters a step in PENNY which reconsiders the |
---|
312 | order in which species are added to the tree. Normally the decision as to |
---|
313 | what species to add to the tree next is made as the first tree is being |
---|
314 | constructed; that ordering of species is not altered subsequently. The |
---|
315 | S option causes it to be continually reconsidered. This will probably |
---|
316 | result in a substantial increase in run time, but on some data sets of |
---|
317 | intermediate messiness it may help. It is included in case it might prove |
---|
318 | of use on some data sets. |
---|
319 | <P> |
---|
320 | The F (Factors) |
---|
321 | option is not available in this program, as it would have no effect on |
---|
322 | the result even if that information were provided in the input file. |
---|
323 | <P> |
---|
324 | The final output is standard: a set of trees, which |
---|
325 | will be printed as rooted or unrooted |
---|
326 | depending on which is appropriate, and if the user elects to see them, |
---|
327 | tables of the number of changes |
---|
328 | of state required in each character. If the Wagner option is in force for a |
---|
329 | character, it may not be possible to unambiguously locate the places on |
---|
330 | the tree where the changes occur, as there may be multiple possibilities. A |
---|
331 | table is available to be printed out after each tree, showing for each branch |
---|
332 | whether |
---|
333 | there are known to be changes in the branch, and what the states are inferred |
---|
334 | to have been at the top end of the branch. If the inferred state is a "?" |
---|
335 | there will be multiple equally-parsimonious assignments of states; the user |
---|
336 | must work these out for themselves by hand. |
---|
337 | <P> |
---|
338 | If the Camin-Sokal parsimony method (option C or S) |
---|
339 | is invoked and the A option is also used, then the program will |
---|
340 | infer, for any character whose ancestral state is unknown ("?") whether the |
---|
341 | ancestral state 0 or 1 will give the fewest state changes. If these are |
---|
342 | tied, then it may not be possible for the program to infer the |
---|
343 | state in the internal nodes, and these will all be printed as ".". If this |
---|
344 | has happened and you want to know more about the states at the internal |
---|
345 | nodes, you will find helpful to use MOVE to display the tree and examine |
---|
346 | its interior states, as the algorithm in MOVE shows all that can be known |
---|
347 | in this case about the interior states, including where there is and is not |
---|
348 | amibiguity. The algorithm in PENNY gives up more easily on displaying these |
---|
349 | states. |
---|
350 | <P> |
---|
351 | If the A option is not used, then the program will assume 0 as the |
---|
352 | ancestral state for those characters following the Camin-Sokal method, |
---|
353 | and will assume that the ancestral state is unknown for those characters |
---|
354 | following Wagner parsimony. If any characters have unknown ancestral |
---|
355 | states, and if the resulting tree is rooted (even by outgroup), |
---|
356 | a table will be printed out |
---|
357 | showing the best guesses of which are the ancestral states in each |
---|
358 | character. You will find it useful to understand the difference between |
---|
359 | the Camin-Sokal parsimony criterion with unknown ancestral state and the Wagner |
---|
360 | parsimony criterion. |
---|
361 | <P> |
---|
362 | At the beginning of the program are a series of constants, |
---|
363 | which can be changed to help adapt the program to different computer systems. |
---|
364 | Two are the initial values of howmany and howoften, |
---|
365 | constants "often" and "many". Constant "maxtrees" |
---|
366 | is the maximum number of tied trees that will be stored. |
---|
367 | <P> |
---|
368 | <HR> |
---|
369 | <P> |
---|
370 | <H3>TEST DATA SET</H3> |
---|
371 | <P> |
---|
372 | <TABLE><TR><TD BGCOLOR=white> |
---|
373 | <PRE> |
---|
374 | 7 6 |
---|
375 | Alpha1 110110 |
---|
376 | Alpha2 110110 |
---|
377 | Beta1 110000 |
---|
378 | Beta2 110000 |
---|
379 | Gamma1 100110 |
---|
380 | Delta 001001 |
---|
381 | Epsilon 001110 |
---|
382 | </PRE> |
---|
383 | </TD></TR></TABLE> |
---|
384 | <P> |
---|
385 | <HR> |
---|
386 | <P> |
---|
387 | <H3>TEST SET OUTPUT (with all numerical options turned on)</H3> |
---|
388 | <P> |
---|
389 | <TABLE><TR><TD BGCOLOR=white> |
---|
390 | <PRE> |
---|
391 | |
---|
392 | Penny algorithm, version 3.6a3 |
---|
393 | branch-and-bound to find all most parsimonious trees |
---|
394 | |
---|
395 | 7 species, 6 characters |
---|
396 | Wagner parsimony method |
---|
397 | |
---|
398 | |
---|
399 | Name Characters |
---|
400 | ---- ---------- |
---|
401 | |
---|
402 | Alpha1 11011 0 |
---|
403 | Alpha2 11011 0 |
---|
404 | Beta1 11000 0 |
---|
405 | Beta2 11000 0 |
---|
406 | Gamma1 10011 0 |
---|
407 | Delta 00100 1 |
---|
408 | Epsilon 00111 0 |
---|
409 | |
---|
410 | |
---|
411 | |
---|
412 | requires a total of 8.000 |
---|
413 | |
---|
414 | 3 trees in all found |
---|
415 | |
---|
416 | |
---|
417 | |
---|
418 | |
---|
419 | +-----------------Alpha1 |
---|
420 | ! |
---|
421 | ! +--------Alpha2 |
---|
422 | --1 ! |
---|
423 | ! +-----4 +--Epsilon |
---|
424 | ! ! ! +--6 |
---|
425 | ! ! +--5 +--Delta |
---|
426 | +--2 ! |
---|
427 | ! +-----Gamma1 |
---|
428 | ! |
---|
429 | ! +--Beta2 |
---|
430 | +-----------3 |
---|
431 | +--Beta1 |
---|
432 | |
---|
433 | remember: this is an unrooted tree! |
---|
434 | |
---|
435 | |
---|
436 | steps in each character: |
---|
437 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
---|
438 | *----------------------------------------- |
---|
439 | 0! 1 1 1 2 2 1 |
---|
440 | |
---|
441 | From To Any Steps? State at upper node |
---|
442 | ( . means same as in the node below it on tree) |
---|
443 | |
---|
444 | 1 11011 0 |
---|
445 | 1 Alpha1 no ..... . |
---|
446 | 1 2 no ..... . |
---|
447 | 2 4 no ..... . |
---|
448 | 4 Alpha2 no ..... . |
---|
449 | 4 5 yes .0... . |
---|
450 | 5 6 yes 0.1.. . |
---|
451 | 6 Epsilon no ..... . |
---|
452 | 6 Delta yes ...00 1 |
---|
453 | 5 Gamma1 no ..... . |
---|
454 | 2 3 yes ...00 . |
---|
455 | 3 Beta2 no ..... . |
---|
456 | 3 Beta1 no ..... . |
---|
457 | |
---|
458 | |
---|
459 | |
---|
460 | |
---|
461 | +-----------------Alpha1 |
---|
462 | ! |
---|
463 | --1 +--------------Alpha2 |
---|
464 | ! ! |
---|
465 | ! ! +--Epsilon |
---|
466 | +--2 +--6 |
---|
467 | ! +-----5 +--Delta |
---|
468 | ! ! ! |
---|
469 | +--4 +-----Gamma1 |
---|
470 | ! |
---|
471 | ! +--Beta2 |
---|
472 | +--------3 |
---|
473 | +--Beta1 |
---|
474 | |
---|
475 | remember: this is an unrooted tree! |
---|
476 | |
---|
477 | |
---|
478 | steps in each character: |
---|
479 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
---|
480 | *----------------------------------------- |
---|
481 | 0! 1 1 1 2 2 1 |
---|
482 | |
---|
483 | From To Any Steps? State at upper node |
---|
484 | ( . means same as in the node below it on tree) |
---|
485 | |
---|
486 | 1 11011 0 |
---|
487 | 1 Alpha1 no ..... . |
---|
488 | 1 2 no ..... . |
---|
489 | 2 Alpha2 no ..... . |
---|
490 | 2 4 no ..... . |
---|
491 | 4 5 yes .0... . |
---|
492 | 5 6 yes 0.1.. . |
---|
493 | 6 Epsilon no ..... . |
---|
494 | 6 Delta yes ...00 1 |
---|
495 | 5 Gamma1 no ..... . |
---|
496 | 4 3 yes ...00 . |
---|
497 | 3 Beta2 no ..... . |
---|
498 | 3 Beta1 no ..... . |
---|
499 | |
---|
500 | |
---|
501 | |
---|
502 | |
---|
503 | +-----------------Alpha1 |
---|
504 | ! |
---|
505 | ! +-----Alpha2 |
---|
506 | --1 +--------2 |
---|
507 | ! ! ! +--Beta2 |
---|
508 | ! ! +--3 |
---|
509 | +--4 +--Beta1 |
---|
510 | ! |
---|
511 | ! +--Epsilon |
---|
512 | ! +--6 |
---|
513 | +--------5 +--Delta |
---|
514 | ! |
---|
515 | +-----Gamma1 |
---|
516 | |
---|
517 | remember: this is an unrooted tree! |
---|
518 | |
---|
519 | |
---|
520 | steps in each character: |
---|
521 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
---|
522 | *----------------------------------------- |
---|
523 | 0! 1 1 1 2 2 1 |
---|
524 | |
---|
525 | From To Any Steps? State at upper node |
---|
526 | ( . means same as in the node below it on tree) |
---|
527 | |
---|
528 | 1 11011 0 |
---|
529 | 1 Alpha1 no ..... . |
---|
530 | 1 4 no ..... . |
---|
531 | 4 2 no ..... . |
---|
532 | 2 Alpha2 no ..... . |
---|
533 | 2 3 yes ...00 . |
---|
534 | 3 Beta2 no ..... . |
---|
535 | 3 Beta1 no ..... . |
---|
536 | 4 5 yes .0... . |
---|
537 | 5 6 yes 0.1.. . |
---|
538 | 6 Epsilon no ..... . |
---|
539 | 6 Delta yes ...00 1 |
---|
540 | 5 Gamma1 no ..... . |
---|
541 | |
---|
542 | </PRE> |
---|
543 | </TD></TR></TABLE> |
---|
544 | </BODY> |
---|
545 | </HTML> |
---|