Optimization strategies for fast detection of positive selection on phylogenetic trees.

Bioinformatics

Swiss National Supercomputing Centre, Scientific Computing Group, Lugano, Switzerland, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Safety & Security Department, Vienna, Austria, Vital-IT Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland, Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, Scientific Computing Group and Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Theoretical Informatics, Karlsruhe, Germany Swiss National Supercomputing Centre, Scientific Computing Group, Lugano, Switzerland, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Safety & Security Department, Vienna, Austria, Vital-IT Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland, Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies, Scientific Computing Group and Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Theoretical Informatics, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Published: April 2014

Motivation: The detection of positive selection is widely used to study gene and genome evolution, but its application remains limited by the high computational cost of existing implementations. We present a series of computational optimizations for more efficient estimation of the likelihood function on large-scale phylogenetic problems. We illustrate our approach using the branch-site model of codon evolution.

Results: We introduce novel optimization techniques that substantially outperform both CodeML from the PAML package and our previously optimized sequential version SlimCodeML. These techniques can also be applied to other likelihood-based phylogeny software. Our implementation scales well for large numbers of codons and/or species. It can therefore analyse substantially larger datasets than CodeML. We evaluated FastCodeML on different platforms and measured average sequential speedups of FastCodeML (single-threaded) versus CodeML of up to 5.8, average speedups of FastCodeML (multi-threaded) versus CodeML on a single node (shared memory) of up to 36.9 for 12 CPU cores, and average speedups of the distributed FastCodeML versus CodeML of up to 170.9 on eight nodes (96 CPU cores in total).

Availability And Implementation: ftp://ftp.vital-it.ch/tools/FastCodeML/ CONTACT: selectome@unil.ch or nicolas.salamin@unil.ch.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3982156PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt760DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

versus codeml
12
detection positive
8
positive selection
8
speedups fastcodeml
8
average speedups
8
cpu cores
8
codeml
5
optimization strategies
4
strategies fast
4
fast detection
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!