264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17918032)
21. Explosions and hot spots in supertree methods.
Day WH; McMorris FR; Wilkinson M
J Theor Biol; 2008 Jul; 253(2):345-8. PubMed ID: 18472112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Assessment of the accuracy of matrix representation with parsimony analysis supertree construction.
Bininda-Emonds OR; Sanderson MJ
Syst Biol; 2001 Aug; 50(4):565-79. PubMed ID: 12116654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Imputing supertrees and supernetworks from quartets.
Holland B; Conner G; Huber K; Moulton V
Syst Biol; 2007 Feb; 56(1):57-67. PubMed ID: 17366137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Robustness of topological supertree methods for reconciling dense incompatible data.
Willson SJ
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2009; 6(1):62-75. PubMed ID: 19179699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Polynomial supertree methods revisited.
Brinkmeyer M; Griebel T; Böcker S
Adv Bioinformatics; 2011; 2011():524182. PubMed ID: 22229028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. COSPEDTree: COuplet Supertree by Equivalence Partitioning of Taxa Set and DAG Formation.
Bhattacharyya S; Mukherjee J
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2015; 12(3):590-603. PubMed ID: 26357270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Trees of trees: an approach to comparing multiple alternative phylogenies.
Nye TM
Syst Biol; 2008 Oct; 57(5):785-94. PubMed ID: 18853364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Trees from trees: construction of phylogenetic supertrees using clann.
Creevey CJ; McInerney JO
Methods Mol Biol; 2009; 537():139-61. PubMed ID: 19378143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Assessing clustering results with reference taxonomies.
Valiente G
Genome Inform; 2006; 17(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 17503386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Split-based computation of majority-rule supertrees.
Kupczok A
BMC Evol Biol; 2011 Jul; 11():205. PubMed ID: 21752249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Quartet MaxCut: a fast algorithm for amalgamating quartet trees.
Snir S; Rao S
Mol Phylogenet Evol; 2012 Jan; 62(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 21762785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A supertree pipeline for summarizing phylogenetic and taxonomic information for millions of species.
Redelings BD; Holder MT
PeerJ; 2017; 5():e3058. PubMed ID: 28265520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. EPoS: a modular software framework for phylogenetic analysis.
Griebel T; Brinkmeyer M; Böcker S
Bioinformatics; 2008 Oct; 24(20):2399-400. PubMed ID: 18632748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Building supertrees: an empirical assessment using the grass family (Poaceae).
Salamin N; Hodkinson TR; Savolainen V
Syst Biol; 2002 Feb; 51(1):136-50. PubMed ID: 11943096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. TurboTree: a fast algorithm for minimal trees.
Penny D; Hendy MD
Comput Appl Biosci; 1987 Sep; 3(3):183-7. PubMed ID: 3453227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A likelihood look at the supermatrix-supertree controversy.
Ren F; Tanaka H; Yang Z
Gene; 2009 Jul; 441(1-2):119-25. PubMed ID: 18502054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Axiomatic opportunities and obstacles for inferring a species tree from gene trees.
Steel M; Velasco JD
Syst Biol; 2014 Sep; 63(5):772-8. PubMed ID: 24951558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Using max cut to enhance rooted trees consistency.
Snir S; Rao S
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2006; 3(4):323-33. PubMed ID: 17085842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Conditioned genome reconstruction: how to avoid choosing the conditioning genome.
Spencer M; Bryant D; Susko E
Syst Biol; 2007 Feb; 56(1):25-43. PubMed ID: 17366135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Factors influencing phylogenetic inference: a case study using the mammalian carnivores.
Bininda-Emonds OR
Mol Phylogenet Evol; 2000 Jul; 16(1):113-26. PubMed ID: 10877944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
