Treetrimmer: a method for phylogenetic dataset size reduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With rapid advances in genome sequencing and bioinformatics, it is now possible to generate phylogenetic trees containing thousands of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) from a wide range of organisms. However, use of rigorous tree-building methods on such large datasets is prohibitive and manual 'pruning' of sequence alignments is time consuming and raises concerns over reproducibility. There is a need for bioinformatic tools with which to objectively carry out such pruning procedures. FINDINGS: Here we present 'TreeTrimmer', a bioinformatics procedure that removes unnecessary redundancy in large phylogenetic datasets, alleviating the size effect on more rigorous downstream analyses. The method identifies and removes user-defined 'redundant' sequences, e.g., orthologous sequences from closely related organisms and 'recently' evolved lineage-specific paralogs. Representative OTUs are retained for more rigorous re-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: TreeTrimmer reduces the OTU density of phylogenetic trees without sacrificing taxonomic diversity while retaining the original tree topology, thereby speeding up downstream computer-intensive analyses, e.g., Bayesian and maximum likelihood tree reconstructions, in a reproducible fashion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.012 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".