The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrating Ambiguously Aligned Regions of DNA Sequences in Phylogenetic Analyses Without Violating Positional Homology
Abstract
Phylogenetic analyses of non-protein-coding nucleotide sequences such as ribosomal RNA genes, internal transcribed spacers, and introns are often impeded by regions of the alignments that are ambiguously aligned. These regions are characterized by the presence of gaps and their uncertain positions, no matter which optimization criteria are used. This problem is particularly acute in large-scale phylogenetic studies and when aligning highly diverged sequences. Accommodating these regions, where positional homology is likely to be violated, in phylogenetic analyses has been dealt with very differently by molecular systematists and evolutionists, ranging from the total exclusion of these regions to the inclusion of every position regardless of ambiguity in the alignment. We present a new method that allows the inclusion of ambiguously aligned regions without violating homology. In this three-step procedure, first homologous regions of the alignment containing ambiguously aligned sequences are delimited. Second, each ambiguously aligned region is unequivocally coded as a new character, replacing its respective ambiguous region. Third, each of the coded characters is subjected to a specific step matrix to account for the differential number of changes (summing substitutions and indels) needed to transform one sequence to another. The optimal number of steps included in the step matrix is the one derived from the pairwise alignment with the greatest similarity and the least number of steps. In addition to potentially enhancing phylogenetic resolution and support, by integrating previously nonaccessible characters without violating positional homology, this new approach can improve branch length estimations when using parsimony.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Needleman, S. B., & Wunsch, C. D. (1970) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4 · Cited by 11,288
Cited by
Alignment Uncertainty and Genomic Analysis
Wong, K. M., Suchard, M. A., & Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1151532 · Cited by 411
Nagy, L. G., Kocsubé, S., Csanádi, Z., Kovács, G. M., Petkovits, T., Vágvölgyi, C., & Papp, T. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049794 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Lutzoni, F., Wagner, P., Reeb, V., & Zoller, S.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-12-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 628-651
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2119997450
- Cited by
- 351
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Integrating Ambiguously Aligned Regions of DNA Sequences in Phylogenetic Analyses Without Violating Positional Homology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/106351500750049743
- The paper
- Lutzoni, F., Wagner, P., Reeb, V., & Zoller, S. (2000). Integrating Ambiguously Aligned Regions of DNA Sequences in Phylogenetic Analyses Without Violating Positional Homology. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1080/106351500750049743
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.