Open Access
| Issue |
BIO Web Conf.
Volume 232, 2026
2026 16th International Conference on Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics (ICBBB 2026)
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Article Number | 01003 | |
| Number of page(s) | 14 | |
| Section | Bioinformatics Algorithms and Advanced Omics Data Analysis | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202623201003 | |
| Published online | 24 April 2026 | |
- M.S. Lee, A. Palei, Morphological phylogenetics in the genomic age, Current Biology 25, R922 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- O. Rieppel, Morphology and phylogeny, Journal of the History of Biology 53, 217 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- A. Khastan, L. Hooshyar, A computational method to analyze the similarity of biological sequences under uncertainty, Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems 16, 33 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- P. Forster, L. Forster, C. Renfrew, M. Forster, Phylogenetic network analysis of sars-cov-2 genomes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 9241 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- L. Hooshyar, M. Hernández-Jiménez, A. Khastan, M. Vasighi, An efficient and accurate approach to identify similarities between biological sequences using pair amino acid composition and physicochemical properties, Soft Computing 28, 9341 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- N. Tahiri, M. Willems, V. Makarenkov, A new fast method for inferring multiple consensus trees using k-medoids, BMC evolutionary biology 18, 1 (2018). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- D. Bryant, A classification of consensus methods for phylogenetics, DIMACS series in discrete mathematics and theoretical computer science 61, 163 (2003). [Google Scholar]
- M. Wilkinson, J.L. Thorley, Efficiency of strict consensus trees, Systematic Biology 50, 610 (2001). [Google Scholar]
- M. Wilkinson, Ma jority-rule reduced consensus trees and their use in bootstrapping., Molecular Biology and evolution 13, 437 (1996). [Google Scholar]
- J. Jansson, C. Shen, W.K. Sung, Improved algorithms for constructing consensus trees, Journal of the ACM (JACM) 63, 1 (2016). [Google Scholar]
- M.H.R. Sifat, N. Tahiri, A new algorithm for building comprehensive consensus tree, in Graphs and more Complex structures for Learning and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 38th Annual AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2024) [Google Scholar]
- A. Hulot, J. Chiquet, F. Jaffrézic, G. Rigaill, Fast tree aggregation for consensus hierarchical clustering, BMC bioinformatics 21, 120 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- M.R. Smith, Using information theory to detect rogue taxa and improve consensus trees, Systematic Biology 71, 1088 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- R.N. McArthur, A.N. Zehmakan, M.A. Charleston, Y. Lin, G. Huttley, Spectral cluster supertree: fast and statistically robust merging of rooted phylogenetic trees, Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 11, 1432495 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- W.A. Akanni, M. Wilkinson, C.J. Creevey, P.G. Foster, D. Pisani, Implementing and testing bayesian and maximum-likelihood supertree methods in phylogenetics, Royal Society open science 2, 140436 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- M.D. Karcher, C. Zhang, F.A. Matsen IV, Variational supertrees for bayesian phylogenetics, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 86, 114 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- J.R. Ribeiro, A. Ferrari, Phylogenetic analysis of the belostoma plebejum group sensu nieser (insecta, hemiptera, belostomatidae): the effect of adding continuous characters on its accuracy, Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny 81, 1 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- T.P. Ruschel, F.M. Bianchi, L.A. Campos, G.S. Carvalho, Total evidence analysis elucidates the tangled systematic scenario within fidicinini (hemiptera: Auchen-orrhyncha, cicadidae), Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny 81, 35 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- M. Wilkinson, J.A. Cotton, J.L. Thorley, The information content of trees and their matrix representations, Systematic Biology 53, 989 (2004). [Google Scholar]
- J. Jansson, W.K. Sung, S.A. Tabatabaee, Y. Yang, A Faster Algorithm for Constructing the Frequency Difference Consensus Tree, in 41st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2024) (Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024), pp. 43–1 [Google Scholar]
- S.R. Alam, M.M. Mahmud, M.S. Rahman, A Heuristic for Maximum Greedy Consensus Tree Problem, in 2022 12th International Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (ICECE) (IEEE, 2022), pp. 128–131 [Google Scholar]
- E. Mossel, M. Steel, Majority rule has transition ratio 4 on yule trees under a 2-state symmetric model, Journal of theoretical biology 360, 315 (2014). [Google Scholar]
- V. Nikkhah, S.M. Babamir, S.S. Arab, Estimating bifurcating consensus phylogenetic trees using evolutionary imperialist competitive algorithm, Current Bioinformatics 14, 728 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- J.H. Degnan, N.A. Rosenberg, Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees, PLoS genetics 2, e68 (2006). [Google Scholar]
- J.H. Degnan, M. DeGiorgio, D. Bryant, N.A. Rosenberg, Properties of consensus methods for inferring species trees from gene trees, Systematic Biology 58, 35 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- D.L. Swofford, P.J. Waddell, J.P. Huelsenbeck, P.G. Foster, P.O. Lewis, J.S. Rogers, Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods, Systematic biology 50, 525 (2001). [Google Scholar]
- N. Tahiri, B. Fichet, V. Makarenkov, Building alternative consensus trees and supertrees using k-means and robinson and foulds distance, Bioinformatics 38, 3367 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- P. Gambette, A. Guénoche, Bootstrap clustering for graph partitioning, RAIRO-Operations Research-Recherche Opérationnelle 45, 339 (2011). [Google Scholar]
- N. Aguse, Y. Qi, M. El-Kebir, Summarizing the solution space in tumor phylogeny inference by multiple consensus trees, Bioinformatics 35, i408 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- M. Ester, H.P. Kriegel, J. Sander, X. Xu et al., A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise, in kdd (1996), Vol. 96, pp. 226–231 [Google Scholar]
- M. Fuchs, W. Höpken, in Applied Data Science in Tourism: Interdisciplinary Approaches, Methodologies, and Applications (Springer, 2022), pp. 129–149 [Google Scholar]
- D.F. Robinson, L.R. Foulds, Comparison of phylogenetic trees, Mathematical biosciences 53, 131 (1981). [Google Scholar]
- F. Critchley, B. Fichet, in Classification and dissimilarity analysis (Springer, 1994), pp. 5–65 [Google Scholar]
- W.H. Day, Optimal algorithms for comparing trees with labeled leaves, Journal of classification 2, 7 (1985). [Google Scholar]
- H.P. Kriegel, E. Schubert, A. Zimek, The (black) art of runtime evaluation: Are we comparing algorithms or implementations?, Knowledge and Information Systems 52, 341 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- E. Schubert, J. Sander, M. Ester, H.P. Kriegel, X. Xu, Dbscan revisited, revisited: why and how you should (still) use dbscan, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 42, 1 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- R.K. Thauer, A.K. Kaster, H. Seedorf, W. Buckel, R. Hedderich, Methanogenic archaea: ecologically relevant differences in energy conservation, Nature Reviews Microbiology 6, 579 (2008). [Google Scholar]
- K. Katoh, J. Rozewicki, K.D. Yamada, Mafft online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization, Briefings in bioinformatics 20, 1160 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- A. Criscuolo, S. Gribaldo, Bmge (block mapping and gathering with entropy): a new software for selection of phylogenetic informative regions from multiple sequence alignments, BMC evolutionary biology 10, 1 (2010). [Google Scholar]
- M. Torres, J.O.d. Silva, Parallel solution based on collective communication operations for phylogenetic bootstrapping in PhyML 3.0, in Brazilian Symposium on Bioinformatics (Springer, 2018), pp. 133–145 [Google Scholar]
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.