Cited by 1,883Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFractal and DNA sequence analysisRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

Progressive sequence alignment as a prerequisitetto correct phylogenetic trees

Feng, Da-Fei, Doolittle, Russell F.·1987·Journal of Molecular Evolution

Abstract

A progressive alignment method is described that utilizes the Needleman and Wunsch pairwise alignment algorithm iteratively to achieve the multiple alignment of a set of protein sequences and to construct an evolutionary tree depicting their relationship. The sequences are assumed a priori to share a common ancestor, and the trees are constructed from difference matrices derived directly from the multiple alignment. The thrust of the method involves putting more trust in the comparison of recently diverged sequences than in those evolved in the distant past. In particular, this rule is followed: "once a gap, always a gap." The method has been applied to three sets of protein sequences: 7 superoxide dismutases, 11 globins, and 9 tyrosine kinase-like sequences. Multiple alignments and phylogenetic trees for these sets of sequences were determined and compared with trees derived by conventional pairwise treatments. In several instances, the progressive method led to trees that appeared to be more in line with biological expectations than were trees obtained by more commonly used methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02603120

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Progressive Cactus incorporates a progressive alignment strategy that changes the runtime to scale linearly with the number of genomes.

    “we present fundamental changes to the Cactus process that incorporate a progressive alignment strategy15, which changes the runtime of the alignment to scale linearly with the number of genomes.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feng, D.-F., & Doolittle, R. F.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Journal of Molecular Evolution
Published
1987-08
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
351-360
ISSN
  • 0022-2844 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1432
OpenAlex
W1969153299
Cited by
1,883
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 28
FWCI
17.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Molecular Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM 34434)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fractal and DNA sequence analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
multiple sequence alignment, phylogenetic tree construction, Needleman-Wunsch algorithm, protein sequences, superoxide dismutase, globin, gap penalties, sequence divergence
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Biological Evolution, Hemoglobins, Humans, Methods, Phylogeny, Protein-Tyrosine Kinases, Proteins, Superoxide Dismutase

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review