MAMMLE: A Framework for Phylogeny Estimation Based on Multiobjective Application-aware Multiple Sequence Alignment and Maximum Likelihood Ensemble.

Motivation: Phylogenetic trees are often inferred from a multiple sequence alignment (MSA) where the tree accuracy is heavily impacted by the nature of estimated alignment. Carefully equipping an MSA tool with multiple application-aware objectives positively impacts its capability to yield better trees. Results: We introduce Multiobjective Application-aware Multiple Sequence Alignment and Maximum Likelihood Ensemble (MAMMLE), a framework for inferring better phylogenetic trees from unaligned sequences by hybridizing two MSA tools [i.e., Multiple Sequence Comparison by Log-Expectation (MUSCLE) and Multiple Alignment using Fast Fourier Transform (MAFFT)] with multiobjective optimization strategy and leveraging multiple maximum likelihood hypotheses. In our experiments, MAMMLE exhibits 5.57% (4.77%) median improvement (deterioration) over MUSCLE on 50.34% (37.41%) of instances.

PASTA with many application-aware optimization criteria for alignment based phylogeny inference.

Multiple sequence alignment (MSA) is a prerequisite for several analyses in bioinformatics, such as, phylogeny estimation, protein structure prediction, etc. PASTA (Practical Alignments using SATé and TrAnsitivity) is a state-of-the-art method for computing MSAs, well-known for its accuracy and scalability. It iteratively co-estimates both MSA and maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic tree. It attempts to exploit the close association between the accuracy of an MSA and the corresponding tree while finding the output through multiple iterations from both directions. Currently, PASTA uses the ML score as its optimization criterion which is a good score in phylogeny estimation but cannot be proven as a necessary and sufficient criterion to produce an accurate phylogenetic tree. Therefore, the integration of multiple application-aware objectives into PASTA, which are carefully chosen considering their better association to the tree accuracy, may potentially have a profound positive impact on its performance. This paper has employed four application-aware objectives alongside ML score to develop a multi-objective (MO) framework, namely, PMAO that leverages PASTA to generate a bunch of high-quality solutions that are considered equivalent in the context of conflicting objectives under consideration. our experimental analysis on a popular biological benchmark reveals that the tree-space generated by PMAO contains significantly better trees than stand-alone PASTA. To help the domain experts further in choosing the most appropriate tree from the PMAO output (containing a relatively large set of high-quality solutions), we have added an additional component within the PMAO framework that is capable of generating a smaller set of high-quality solutions. Finally, we have attempted to obtain a single high-quality solution without using any external evidences and have found that summarizing the few solutions detected through the above component can serve this purpose to some extent.

Multiobjective Formulation of Multiple Sequence Alignment for Phylogeny Inference.

Multiple sequence alignment (MSA) is a preliminary task for estimating phylogenies. It is used for homology inference among the sequences of a set of species. Generally, the MSA task is handled as a single-objective optimization process. The alignments computed under one criterion may be different from the alignments generated by other criteria, inferring discordant homologies and thus leading to different hypothesized evolutionary histories relating the sequences. The multiobjective (MO) formulation of MSA has recently been advocated by several researchers, to address this issue. An MO approach independently optimizes multiple (often conflicting) objective functions at the same time and outputs a set of competitive alignments. However, no conceptual or experimental rational from a real-world application perspective has been reported so far for any MO formulation of MSA. This article work investigates the impact of MO formulation in the context of an important scientific problem, namely, phylogeny estimation. Employing popular evolutionary MO algorithms, we show that: 1) trees inferred based on alignments produced by the existing MSA methods used in practice are substantially worse in quality than the trees inferred based on the alignment's output by an MO algorithm and 2) even high-quality alignments (according to popular measures available in the literature) may fail to achieve acceptable accuracy in generating phylogenetic trees. Thus, we essentially ask the following natural question: "can a phylogeny-aware (i.e., application-aware) metric guide in selecting appropriate MO formulations to ensure better phylogeny estimation?" Here, we report a carefully designed extensive experimental study that positively answers this question.