Closed mtholder closed 9 years ago
the second figure from is https://github.com/OpenTreeOfLife/treemachine/tree/test-refactor/test-synth/ranksforextras
tree1: (((A,B),C),D); tree2: ((A,B),((E,F),C)); tree3: ((((A,E),B),F),C);
For the second figure (not the first, i think). I believe that in the first figure, tree1 = tree1, and tree2 = tree3.
When I draw this out, I agree with Mark about n9 == n17, i.e. mrca(tree3,(A,E,B)) and mrca(tree1,(A,B)) should be the same node.
This should be alleviated with deleting the trees and re-adding them. We know that tree order matters in input and deleting and re inputting is the way around that. This is default for many of the analyses (discussed by Cody and Jonathan the other day). The commands for that are java blahblah pgdelind graphdblocation sourcename then you add again and should be mapped to both of the lica nodes. Joseph can perhaps answer more on IRC
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Karen Cranston notifications@github.com wrote:
When I draw this out, I agree with Mark about n9 == n17, i.e. mrca(tree3,(A,E,B)) and mrca(tree1,(A,B)) should be the same node.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/OpenTreeOfLife/treemachine/issues/161#issuecomment-72915102 .
calling pgdelind and addnewick to remap seems to help:
thanks for the help.
no need to respond to this if it makes sense to you. I can look through the code. Just thought I'd post it because I found it surprising. There is a new test (and I refactored the test harness some to put the output of tests in the testtag dir). That is pushed to https://github.com/OpenTreeOfLife/treemachine/tree/test-refactor
The new test is
ranksforextras
and its tree1 and tree3 are identical to the tree1 and tree2 for thenontrivialaugmenting
test. I just added a new tree in between them that disagrees about the placement of the "extra" taxaE
andF
. The test passes (it prefers tree2 to tree3), which is great. But I was surprised that innontrivialaugmenting
trees 1 and 2 share a lot of nodes:but in
ranksforextras
tree3 is using nodes that are out on their own, and not traversed by tree1 (note tree to color mapping is not consistent):updated tree2 was mislabeled