arXiv++ Combinatorics

A directed phylogenetic network is tree-child if every non-leaf vertex has a child that is not a reticulation. As a class of directed phylogenetic networks, tree-child networks are very useful from a computational perspective. For example, several computationally difficult problems in phylogenetics become tractable when restricted to tree-child networks. At the same time, the class itself is rich enough to contain quite complex networks. Furthermore, checking whether a directed network is tree-child can be done in polynomial time. In this paper, we seek a class of undirected phylogenetic networks that is rich and computationally useful in a similar way to the class tree-child directed networks. A natural class to consider for this role is the class of tree-child-orientable networks which contains all those undirected phylogenetic networks whose edges can be oriented to create a tree-child network. However, we show here that recognizing such networks is NP-hard, even for binary networks, and as such this class is inappropriate for this role. Towards finding a class of undirected networks that fills a similar role to directed tree-child networks, we propose new classes called $q$-cuttable networks, for any integer $q\geq 1$. We show that these classes have many of the desirable properties, similar to tree-child networks in the rooted case, including being recognizable in polynomial time, for all $q\geq 1$. Towards showing the computational usefulness of the class, we show that the NP-hard problem Tree Containment is polynomial-time solvable when restricted to $q$-cuttable networks with $q\geq 3$.

Ordered leaf attachment, Phylo2Vec, and HOP are three recently introduced vector representations for rooted phylogenetic trees where the representation is determined by an ordering of the underlying leaf set X. Comparing the vectors of two rooted phylogenetic X-trees T and T' for a fixed ordering on X leads to polynomial-time computable measure for the dissimilarity of T and T', albeit dependent on the choice of the leaf ordering. For each of ordered leaf attachment, Phylo2Vec, and HOP, we compare this measure with the rooted subtree prune and regraft distance (rSPR), the hybrid number, and the temporal tree-child hybrid number of T and T'. Although there is no direct relationship between rSPR and any of the three vector-based measures, we show that, when minimized over all orderings, the hybrid number is equivalent to HOP, and an upper bound on the other two. Moreover, when minimized over all orderings induced by common cherry-picking sequences of T and T', the temporal tree-child hybrid number of T and T' is equivalent to each of the three vector-based measures.

Agreement forests continue to play a central role in the comparison of phylogenetic trees since their introduction more than 25 years ago. More specifically, they are used to characterise several distances that are based on tree rearrangement operations and related quantifiers of dissimilarity between phylogenetic trees. In addition, the concept of agreement forests continues to underlie most advancements in the development of algorithms that exactly compute the aforementioned measures. In this paper, we introduce agreement digraphs, a concept that generalises agreement forests for two phylogenetic trees to two phylogenetic networks. Analogous to the way in which agreement forests compute the subtree prune and regraft distance between two phylogenetic trees but inherently more complex, we then use agreement digraphs to bound the subnet prune and regraft distance between two tree-child networks from above and below and show that our bounds are tight.

Rooted phylogenetic networks are used by biologists to infer and represent complex evolutionary relationships between species that cannot be accurately explained by a phylogenetic tree. Tree-child networks are a particular class of rooted phylogenetic networks that has been extensively investigated in recent years. In this paper, we give a novel characterisation of a tree-child network $\mathcal{R}$ in terms of cherry-picking sequences that are sequences on the leaves of $\mathcal{R}$ and reduce it to a single vertex by repeatedly applying one of two reductions to its leaves. We show that our characterisation extends to unrooted tree-child networks which are mostly unexplored in the literature and, in turn, also offers a new approach to settling the computational complexity of deciding if an unrooted phylogenetic network can be oriented as a rooted tree-child network.

A normal network is uniquely determined by the set of phylogenetic trees that it displays. Given a set $\mathcal{P}$ of rooted binary phylogenetic trees, this paper presents a polynomial-time algorithm that reconstructs the unique binary normal network whose set of displayed binary trees is $\mathcal{P}$, if such a network exists. Additionally, we show that any two rooted phylogenetic trees can be displayed by a normal network and show that this result does not extend to more than two trees. This is in contrast to tree-child networks where it has been previously shown that any collection of rooted phylogenetic trees can be displayed by a tree-child network. Lastly, we introduce a type of cherry-picking sequence that characterises when a collection $\mathcal{P}$ of rooted phylogenetic trees can be displayed by a normal network and, further, characterise the minimum number of reticulations needed over all normal networks that display $\mathcal{P}$. We then exploit these sequences to show that, for all $n\ge 3$, there exist two rooted binary phylogenetic trees on $n$ leaves that can be displayed by a tree-child network with a single reticulation, but cannot be displayed by a normal network with less than $n-2$ reticulations.

In comparison to phylogenetic trees, phylogenetic networks are more suitable to represent complex evolutionary histories of species whose past includes reticulation such as hybridisation or lateral gene transfer. However, the reconstruction of phylogenetic networks remains challenging and computationally expensive due to their intricate structural properties. For example, the small parsimony problem that is solvable in polynomial time for phylogenetic trees, becomes NP-hard on phylogenetic networks under softwired and parental parsimony, even for a single binary character and structurally constrained networks. To calculate the parsimony score of a phylogenetic network $N$, these two parsimony notions consider different exponential-size sets of phylogenetic trees that can be extracted from $N$ and infer the minimum parsimony score over all trees in the set. In this paper, we ask: What is the maximum difference between the parsimony score of any phylogenetic tree that is contained in the set of considered trees and a phylogenetic tree whose parsimony score equates to the parsimony score of $N$? Given a gap-free sequence alignment of multi-state characters and a rooted binary level-$k$ phylogenetic network, we use the novel concept of an informative blob to show that this difference is bounded by $k+1$ times the softwired parsimony score of $N$. In particular, the difference is independent of the alignment length and the number of character states. We show that an analogous bound can be obtained for the softwired parsimony score of semi-directed networks, while under parental parsimony on the other hand, such a bound does not hold.

In evolutionary biology, phylogenetic trees are commonly inferred from a set of characters (partitions) of a collection of biological entities (e.g., species or individuals in a population). Such characters naturally arise from molecular sequences or morphological data. Interestingly, it has been known for some time that any binary phylogenetic tree can be (convexly) defined by a set of at most four characters, and that there are binary phylogenetic trees for which three characters are not enough. Thus, it is of interest to characterise those phylogenetic trees that are defined by a set of at most three characters. In this paper, we provide such a characterisation, in particular proving that a binary phylogenetic tree $T$ is defined by a set of at most three characters precisely if $T$ has no internal subtree isomorphic to a certain tree.

Semi-directed phylogenetic networks have recently emerged as a class of phylogenetic networks sitting between rooted (directed) and unrooted (undirected) phylogenetic networks as they contain both directed as well as undirected edges. While the spaces of rooted phylogenetic networks and unrooted phylogenetic networks have been analyzed in recent years and various rearrangement moves to traverse these spaces have been introduced, the results do not immediately carry over to semi-directed phylogenetic networks. Here, we propose a simple rearrangement move for semi-directed phylogenetic networks, called cut edge transfer (CET), and show that the space of semi-directed level-$1$ networks with precisely $k$ reticulations is connected under CET. This level-$1$ space is currently the predominantly used search space for most algorithms that reconstruct semi-directed phylogenetic networks. Hence, every semi-directed level-$1$ network with a fixed number of reticulations and leaf set can be reached from any other such network by a sequence of CETs. By introducing two additional moves, CET$^+$ and CET$^-$, that allow for the addition or deletion of reticulations, we then establish connectedness for the space of all semi-directed phylogenetic networks on a fixed leaf set. As a byproduct of our results for semi-directed phylogenetic networks, we also show that the space of rooted level-$1$ networks with a fixed number of reticulations and leaf set is connected under CET, when translated into the rooted setting.

Phylogenetic networks are a special type of graph which generalize phylogenetic trees and that are used to model non-treelike evolutionary processes such as recombination and hybridization. In this paper, we consider {\em unrooted} phylogenetic networks, i.e. simple, connected graphs $\mathcal{N}=(V,E)$ with leaf set $X$, for $X$ some set of species, in which every internal vertex in $\mathcal{N}$ has degree three. One approach used to construct such phylogenetic networks is to take as input a collection $\mathcal{P}$ of phylogenetic trees and to look for a network $\mathcal{N}$ that contains each tree in $\mathcal{P}$ and that minimizes the quantity $r(\mathcal{N}) = |E|-(|V|-1)$ over all such networks. Such a network always exists, and the quantity $r(\mathcal{N})$ for an optimal network $\mathcal{N}$ is called the hybrid number of $\mathcal{P}$. In this paper, we give a new characterization for the hybrid number in case $\mathcal{P}$ consists of two trees. This characterization is given in terms of a cherry picking sequence for the two trees, although to prove that our characterization holds we need to define the sequence more generally for two forests. Cherry picking sequences have been intensively studied for collections of rooted phylogenetic trees, but our new sequences are the first variant of this concept that can be applied in the unrooted setting. Since the hybrid number of two trees is equal to the well-known tree bisection and reconnection distance between the two trees, our new characterization also provides an alternative way to understand this important tree distance.

In the context of reconstructing phylogenetic networks from a collection of phylogenetic trees, several characterisations and subsequently algorithms have been established to reconstruct a phylogenetic network that collectively embeds all trees in the input in some minimum way. For many instances however, the resulting network also embeds additional phylogenetic trees that are not part of the input. However, little is known about these inferred trees. In this paper, we explore the relationships among all phylogenetic trees that are embedded in a given phylogenetic network. First, we investigate some combinatorial properties of the collection P of all rooted binary phylogenetic trees that are embedded in a rooted binary phylogenetic network N. To this end, we associated a particular graph G, which we call rSPR graph, with the elements in P and show that, if |P|=2^k, where k is the number of vertices with in-degree two in N, then G has a Hamiltonian cycle. Second, by exploiting rSPR graphs and properties of hypercubes, we turn to the well-studied class of rooted binary level-1 networks and give necessary and sufficient conditions for when a set of rooted binary phylogenetic trees can be embedded in a level-1 network without inferring any additional trees. Lastly, we show how these conditions translate into a polynomial-time algorithm to reconstruct such a network if it exists.

We describe a kernel of size 9k-8 for the NP-hard problem of computing the Tree Bisection and Reconnect (TBR) distance k between two unrooted binary phylogenetic trees. We achieve this by extending the existing portfolio of reduction rules with three novel new reduction rules. Two of the rules are based on the idea of topologically transforming the trees in a distance-preserving way in order to guarantee execution of earlier reduction rules. The third rule extends the local neighbourhood approach introduced in (Kelk and Linz, Annals of Combinatorics 24(3), 2020) to more global structures, allowing new situations to be identified when deletion of a leaf definitely reduces the TBR distance by one. The bound on the kernel size is tight up to an additive term. Our results also apply to the equivalent problem of computing a Maximum Agreement Forest (MAF) between two unrooted binary phylogenetic trees. We anticipate that our results will be more widely applicable for computing agreement-forest based dissimilarity measures.

In the study of rooted phylogenetic networks, analyzing the set of rooted phylogenetic trees that are embedded in such a network is a recurring task. From an algorithmic viewpoint, this analysis almost always requires an exhaustive search of a particular multiset $S$ of rooted phylogenetic trees that are embedded in a rooted phylogenetic network $\mathcal{N}$. Since the size of $S$ is exponential in the number of reticulations of $\mathcal{N}$, it is consequently of interest to keep this number as small as possible but without loosing any element of $S$. In this paper, we take a first step towards this goal by introducing the notion of a non-essential arc of $\mathcal{N}$, which is an arc whose deletion from $\mathcal{N}$ results in a rooted phylogenetic network $\mathcal{N}'$ such that the sets of rooted phylogenetic trees that are embedded in $\mathcal{N}$ and $\mathcal{N}'$ are the same. We investigate the popular class of tree-child networks and characterize which arcs are non-essential. This characterization is based on a family of directed graphs. Using this novel characterization, we show that identifying and deleting all non-essential arcs in a tree-child network takes time that is cubic in the number of leaves of the network. Moreover, we show that deciding if a given arc of an arbitrary phylogenetic network is non-essential is $Π_2^P$-complete.

We give a counterexample to the conjecture of Martin and Thatte that two balanced rooted binary leaf-labelled trees on $n$ leaves have a maximum agreement subtree (MAST) of size at least $n^{\frac{1}{2}}$. In particular, we show that for any $c>0$, there exist two balanced rooted binary leaf-labelled trees on $n$ leaves such that any MAST for these two trees has size less than $c n^{\frac{1}{2}}$. We also improve the lower bound of the size of such a MAST to $n^{\frac{1}{6}}$.

While every rooted binary phylogenetic tree is determined by its set of displayed rooted triples, such a result does not hold for an arbitrary rooted binary phylogenetic network. In particular, there exist two non-isomorphic rooted binary temporal normal networks that display the same set of rooted triples. Moreover, without any structural constraint on the rooted phylogenetic networks under consideration, similarly negative results have also been established for binets and trinets which are rooted subnetworks on two and three leaves, respectively. Hence, in general, piecing together a rooted phylogenetic network from such a set of small building blocks appears insurmountable. In contrast to these results, in this paper, we show that a rooted binary normal network is determined by its sets of displayed caterpillars (particular type of subtrees) on three and four leaves. The proof is constructive and realises a polynomial-time algorithm that takes the sets of caterpillars on three and four leaves displayed by a rooted binary normal network and, up to isomorphism, reconstructs this network.

Phylogenetic networks are a generalization of phylogenetic trees to leaf-labeled directed acyclic graphs that represent ancestral relationships between species whose past includes non-tree-like events such as hybridization and horizontal gene transfer. Indeed, each phylogenetic network embeds a collection of phylogenetic trees. Referring to the collection of trees that a given phylogenetic network $N$ embeds as the display set of $N$, several questions in the context of the display set of $N$ have recently been analyzed. For example, the widely studied Tree-Containment problem asks if a given phylogenetic tree is contained in the display set of a given network. The focus of this paper are two questions that naturally arise in comparing the display sets of two phylogenetic networks. First, we analyze the problem of deciding if the display sets of two phylogenetic networks have a tree in common. Surprisingly, this problem turns out to be NP-complete even for two temporal normal networks. Second, we investigate the question of whether or not the display sets of two phylogenetic networks are equal. While we recently showed that this problem is polynomial-time solvable for a normal and a tree-child network, it is computationally hard in the general case. In establishing hardness, we show that the problem is contained in the second level of the polynomial-time hierarchy. Specifically, it is $Π_2^P$-complete. Along the way, we show that two other problems are also $Π_2^P$-complete, one of which being a generalization of Tree-Containment.

Phylogenetic trees canonically arise as embeddings of phylogenetic networks. We recently showed that the problem of deciding if two phylogenetic networks embed the same sets of phylogenetic trees is computationally hard, \blue{in particular, we showed it to be $Π^P_2$-complete}. In this paper, we establish a polynomial-time algorithm for this decision problem if the initial two networks consists of a normal network and a tree-child network. The running time of the algorithm is quadratic in the size of the leaf sets.

In 2001 Allen and Steel showed that, if subtree and chain reduction rules have been applied to two unrooted phylogenetic trees, the reduced trees will have at most 28k taxa where k is the TBR (Tree Bisection and Reconnection) distance between the two trees. Here we reanalyse Allen and Steel's kernelization algorithm and prove that the reduced instances will in fact have at most 15k-9 taxa. Moreover we show, by describing a family of instances which have exactly 15k-9 taxa after reduction, that this new bound is tight. These instances also have no common clusters, showing that a third commonly-encountered reduction rule, the cluster reduction, cannot further reduce the size of the kernel in the worst case. To achieve these results we introduce and use "unrooted generators" which are analogues of rooted structures that have appeared earlier in the phylogenetic networks literature. Using similar argumentation we show that, for the minimum hybridization problem on two rooted trees, 9k-2 is a tight bound (when subtree and chain reduction rules have been applied) and 9k-4 is a tight bound (when, additionally, the cluster reduction has been applied) on the number of taxa, where k is the hybridization number of the two trees.

Phylogenetic networks are rooted directed acyclic graphs that represent evolutionary relationships between species whose past includes reticulation events such as hybridisation and horizontal gene transfer. To search the space of phylogenetic networks, the popular tree rearrangement operation rooted subtree prune and regraft (rSPR) was recently generalised to phylogenetic networks. This new operation - called subnet prune and regraft (SNPR) - induces a metric on the space of all phylogenetic networks as well as on several widely-used network classes. In this paper, we investigate several problems that arise in the context of computing the SNPR-distance. For a phylogenetic tree $T$ and a phylogenetic network $N$, we show how this distance can be computed by considering the set of trees that are embedded in $N$ and then use this result to characterise the SNPR-distance between $T$ and $N$ in terms of agreement forests. Furthermore, we analyse properties of shortest SNPR-sequences between two phylogenetic networks $N$ and $N'$, and answer the question whether or not any of the classes of tree-child, reticulation-visible, or tree-based networks isometrically embeds into the class of all phylogenetic networks under SNPR.

Throughout the last decade, we have seen much progress towards characterising and computing the minimum hybridisation number for a set P of rooted phylogenetic trees. Roughly speaking, this minimum quantifies the number of hybridisation events needed to explain a set of phylogenetic trees by simultaneously embedding them into a phylogenetic network. From a mathematical viewpoint, the notion of agreement forests is the underpinning concept for almost all results that are related to calculating the minimum hybridisation number for when |P|=2. However, despite various attempts, characterising this number in terms of agreement forests for |P|>2 remains elusive. In this paper, we characterise the minimum hybridisation number for when P is of arbitrary size and consists of not necessarily binary trees. Building on our previous work on cherry-picking sequences, we first establish a new characterisation to compute the minimum hybridisation number in the space of tree-child networks. Subsequently, we show how this characterisation extends to the space of all rooted phylogenetic networks. Moreover, we establish a particular hardness result that gives new insight into some of the limitations of agreement forests.

We show that the problem of computing the hybridization number of two rooted binary phylogenetic trees on the same set of taxa X has a constant factor polynomial-time approximation if and only if the problem of computing a minimum-size feedback vertex set in a directed graph (DFVS) has a constant factor polynomial-time approximation. The latter problem, which asks for a minimum number of vertices to be removed from a directed graph to transform it into a directed acyclic graph, is one of the problems in Karp's seminal 1972 list of 21 NP-complete problems. However, despite considerable attention from the combinatorial optimization community it remains to this day unknown whether a constant factor polynomial-time approximation exists for DFVS. Our result thus places the (in)approximability of hybridization number in a much broader complexity context, and as a consequence we obtain that hybridization number inherits inapproximability results from the problem Vertex Cover. On the positive side, we use results from the DFVS literature to give an O(log r log log r) approximation for hybridization number, where r is the value of an optimal solution to the hybridization number problem.