CSIRO Publishing blank image blank image blank image blank imageBooksblank image blank image blank image blank imageJournalsblank image blank image blank image blank imageAbout Usblank image blank image blank image blank imageShopping Cartblank image blank image blank image You are here: Journals > Australian Systematic Botany   
Australian Systematic Botany
Journal Banner
  Taxonomy, Biogeography & Evolution of Plants
 
blank image Search
 
blank image blank image
blank image
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Structure
Contacts
Content
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
LAS Johnson Review Series
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Scope
Submit Article
Author Instructions
Open Access
Awards and Prizes
For Referees
Referee Guidelines
Review an Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

blue arrow e-Alerts
blank image
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

red arrow Connect with us
blank image
facebook twitter LinkedIn

red arrow Best Student Paper
blank image
The Best Student Paper published in 2013 has been awarded to Andre Messina.

 

Article     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 19(6)

L. A. S. JOHNSON REVIEW No. 8. Multiple sequence alignment for phylogenetic purposes

David A. Morrison

Department of Parasitology (SWEPAR), National Veterinary Institute and Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 751 89 Uppsala, Sweden. Email: David.Morrison@bvf.slu.se
 
 Full Text
 PDF (971 KB)
 Export Citation
 Print
  


Abstract

I have addressed the biological rather than bioinformatics aspects of molecular sequence alignment by covering a series of topics that have been under-valued, particularly within the context of phylogenetic analysis. First, phylogenetic analysis is only one of the many objectives of sequence alignment, and the most appropriate multiple alignment may not be the same for all of these purposes. Phylogenetic alignment thus occupies a specific place within a broader context. Second, homology assessment plays an intricate role in phylogenetic analysis, with sequence alignment consisting of primary homology assessment and tree building being secondary homology assessment. The objective of phylogenetic alignment thus distinguishes it from other sorts of alignment. Third, I summarise what is known about the serious limitations of using phenetic similarity as a criterion for automated multiple alignment, and provide an overview of what is currently being done to improve these computerised procedures. This synthesises information that is apparently not widely known among phylogeneticists. Fourth, I then consider the recent development of automated procedures for combining alignment and tree building, thus integrating primary and secondary homology assessment. Finally, I outline various strategies for increasing the biological content of sequence alignment procedures, which consists of taking into account known evolutionary processes when making alignment decisions. These procedures can be objective and repeatable, and can involve computerised algorithms to automate much of the work. Perhaps the most important suggestion is that alignment should be seen as a process where new sequences are added to a pre-existing alignment that has been manually curated by the biologist.

   
    
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2015