title: Concatenated alignments and the case of the disappearing tree.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Analyzed individually, gene trees for a given taxon set tend to harbour incongruent or conflicting signals. One popular approach to deal with this circumstance is to use concatenated data. But especially in prokaryotes, where lateral gene transfer (LGT) is a natural mechanism of generating genetic diversity, there are open questions as to whether concatenation amplifies or averages phylogenetic signals residing in individual genes. Here we investigate concatenations of prokaryotic and eukaryotic datasets to investigate possible sources of incongruence in phylogenetic trees and to examine the level of overlap between individual and concatenated alignments.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We analyzed prokaryotic datasets comprising 248 invidual gene trees from 315 genomes at three taxonomic depths spanning gammaproteobacteria, proteobacteria, and prokaryotes (bacteria plus archaea), and eukaryotic datasets comprising 279 invidual gene trees from 85 genomes at two taxonomic depths: across plants-animals-fungi and within fungi. Consistent with previous findings, the branches in trees made from concatenated alignments are, in general, not supported by any of their underlying individual gene trees, even though the concatenation trees tend to possess high bootstrap proportions values. For the prokaryote data, this observation is independent of phylogenetic depth and sequence conservation. The eukaryotic data show much better agreement between concatenation and single gene trees. LGT frequencies in trees were estimated using established methods. Sequence length in individual alignments, but not sequence divergence, was found to correlate with the generation of branches that correspond to the concatenated tree.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The weak correspondence of concatenation trees with single gene trees gives rise to the question where the phylogenetic signal in concatenated trees is coming from. The eukaryote data reveals a better correspondence between individual and concatenation trees than the prokaryote data. The question of whether the lack of correspondence between individual genes and the concatenation tree in the prokaryotic data is due to LGT or phylogenetic artefacts remains unanswered. If LGT is the cause of incongruence between concatenation and individual trees, we would have expected to see greater degrees of incongruence for more divergent prokaryotic data sets, which was not observed, although estimated rates of LGT suggest that LGT is responsible for at least some of the observed incongruence.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Molecular Evolution, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. thorsten.thiergart@hhu.de.
authors.forename: Thorsten
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Thiergart
authors.affiliation: Genomic Microbiology Group, Institute of Microbiology, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany. glandan@ifam.uni-kiel.de.
authors.forename: Giddy
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Landan
authors.affiliation: Institute of Molecular Evolution, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. W.Martin@uni-duesseldorf.de.
authors.forename: William F
authors.initials: WF
authors.lastname: Martin
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001105:Archaea / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics; D001419:Bacteria / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics; D017124:Conserved Sequence / Q000235:genetics; D019143:Evolution, Molecular; D005658:Fungi / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics; D022761:Gene Transfer, Horizontal; D016678:Genome; D010802:Phylogeny; D010944:Plants / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics