Back

Towards a Unified Exact Solution of Rearrangement Small Parsimony for Natural Genomes

Bohnenkaemper, L.; Frolova, D.

2026-06-28 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.06.23.733974 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Phylogenetic reconstruction is a fundamental problem in comparative genomics. As a theoretical problem in rearrangement studies, this has been modelled as the Small Parsimony Problem (SPP), in which ancestral genome structures have to be determined minimizing the number of rearrangement events occurring throughout the phylogeny. This problem is of significant interest in microbial and cancer genomics, due to the prevalence and clinical importance of rearrangement events. Genome structures in this problem are expressed as sequences of markers, which are themselves oriented sequence features (such as genes) that abstract from non-structural variations. Recent research has focused on the problem under the natural genomes model, in which arbitrary variations in copy number of markers are allowed. Natural genomes are often studied under the DCJ-indel model, a model which has already been successfully applied to plasmid data. There also exist ILP solutions to a variant of the Small Parsimony Problem under the DCJ-indel model. However, these solutions are limited in their applicability, as they make some critical simplifications for tractability purposes: ancestral marker frequencies and precomputed putative ancestral adjancencies, with their predicted likelihoods, are assumed as input. This creates multiple problems from both a theoretical and practical perspective. Firstly, this simplification means that not the full state space is searched for a solution, but rather only the subset of genomes with the precomputed putative adjacencies, meaning an optimal solution to the exact SPP is not guaranteed. Secondly, marker frequencies are given externally, without any theoretical guarantees. Thirdly, the method used to precompute adjacencies relies on gene trees, which requires the use of genes as markers, when gene annotation is often unreliable, especially in regions with a lot of rearrangement. Additionally, this restricts the applicability of the approach to sets of genomes that are both divergent and large enough to be able to produce informative gene trees. This is, for example, rarely the case for plasmids, where nucleotide mutations are rarer than rearrangements and genomes are small. Hence, we revisit the problem to solve the exact SPP by introducing a cost to indel operations, which allows us to compute ranges of marker frequencies and derive theoretical results, that allow us to reduce the solution space that the ILP searches without sacrificing optimality. We show that this makes the problem tractable for the case of small and recently related genomes, first on simulated genomes, and then on a set of pathogenic plasmids which represent a realistic use case for the method.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Computational Biology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
2
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
8.1%
3
BMC Bioinformatics
457 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
8.1%
4
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 3%
8.1%
5
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
8.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 5%
6.9%
7
Systematic Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.0%
8
Algorithms for Molecular Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
9
Genome Research
468 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.5%
10
Molecular Biology and Evolution
542 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.2%
11
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.8%
12
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 44%
1.8%
13
Genome Biology and Evolution
338 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
14
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
242 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
15
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
16
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.4%
17
Cell Systems
201 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
18
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.2%
19
Bioinformatics Advances
203 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
20
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.9%
21
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
22
IEEE Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
23
BMC Evolutionary Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%