155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19538973)
1. Maximum parsimony on subsets of taxa.
Fischer M; Thatte BD
J Theor Biol; 2009 Sep; 260(2):290-3. PubMed ID: 19538973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On the Accuracy of Ancestral Sequence Reconstruction for Ultrametric Trees with Parsimony.
Herbst L; Fischer M
Bull Math Biol; 2018 Apr; 80(4):864-879. PubMed ID: 29476399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Ancestral state estimation and taxon sampling density.
Salisbury BA; Kim J
Syst Biol; 2001 Aug; 50(4):557-64. PubMed ID: 12116653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The systematic component of phylogenetic error as a function of taxonomic sampling under parsimony.
Debry RW
Syst Biol; 2005 Jun; 54(3):432-40. PubMed ID: 16012109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Inferring ancestral sequences in taxon-rich phylogenies.
Gascuel O; Steel M
Math Biosci; 2010 Oct; 227(2):125-35. PubMed ID: 20627110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Ancestral sequence alignment under optimal conditions.
Hudek AK; Brown DG
BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 Nov; 6():273. PubMed ID: 16293191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ancestral Sequence Reconstruction with Maximum Parsimony.
Herbst L; Fischer M
Bull Math Biol; 2017 Dec; 79(12):2865-2886. PubMed ID: 28993971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reconstructing evolutionary graphs: 3D parsimony.
Lake JA
Mol Biol Evol; 2008 Aug; 25(8):1677-82. PubMed ID: 18492661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Predicting the ancestral character changes in a tree is typically easier than predicting the root state.
Gascuel O; Steel M
Syst Biol; 2014 May; 63(3):421-35. PubMed ID: 24562915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bayesian estimation of ancestral character states on phylogenies.
Pagel M; Meade A; Barker D
Syst Biol; 2004 Oct; 53(5):673-84. PubMed ID: 15545248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Foundations of the new phylogenetics].
Pavlinov IIa
Zh Obshch Biol; 2004; 65(4):334-66. PubMed ID: 15490579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The information content of a character under a Markov model of evolution.
Shpak M; Churchill GA
Mol Phylogenet Evol; 2000 Nov; 17(2):231-43. PubMed ID: 11083937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Distances that perfectly mislead.
Huson DH; Steel M
Syst Biol; 2004 Apr; 53(2):327-32. PubMed ID: 15205056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Distinguishing terminal monophyletic groups from reticulate taxa: performance of phenetic, tree-based, and network procedures.
Reeves PA; Richards CM
Syst Biol; 2007 Apr; 56(2):302-20. PubMed ID: 17464885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Analyzing the fitch method for reconstructing ancestral states on ultrametric phylogenetic trees.
Zhang L; Shen J; Yang J; Li G
Bull Math Biol; 2010 Oct; 72(7):1760-82. PubMed ID: 20087670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Inferring phylogenetic networks by the maximum parsimony criterion: a case study.
Jin G; Nakhleh L; Snir S; Tuller T
Mol Biol Evol; 2007 Jan; 24(1):324-37. PubMed ID: 17068107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. More genes or more taxa? The relative contribution of gene number and taxon number to phylogenetic accuracy.
Rokas A; Carroll SB
Mol Biol Evol; 2005 May; 22(5):1337-44. PubMed ID: 15746014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reconstructing phylogeny by quadratically approximated maximum likelihood.
Woodhams MD; Hendy MD
Bioinformatics; 2004 Aug; 20 Suppl 1():i348-54. PubMed ID: 15262819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Bayesian hypothesis testing of four-taxon topologies using molecular sequence data.
Sinsheimer JS; Lake JA; Little RJ
Biometrics; 1996 Mar; 52(1):193-210. PubMed ID: 8934592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Sequence length bounds for resolving a deep phylogenetic divergence.
Fischer M; Steel M
J Theor Biol; 2009 Jan; 256(2):247-52. PubMed ID: 18955066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
