Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 21;70(2):268–282. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syaa058

Table 5.

Tree error rates under high fragmentation for the best placement-based method and two MSA-ML methods. We show FN rates (top) and FP rates (bottom); We show results for the three most accurate methods: the best placement-based pipeline (UPP(R)-pplacer), the best MSA-ML method (UPP(R)-RAxML), and a standard MSA-ML method (PASTA-RAxML). Each condition has 50% full-length sequences and 50% fragmentary sequences with an average 25% length. The best results for each model condition (within 1%) are shown in boldface. The error rates are averaged over 20 replicates for the simulated datasets.

Method 1000M1 1000M2 1000M3 1000M4 RNASim RNASim2 16S.M 23S.M
FN Rate:
PASTA-RAXML 0.765 0.616 0.355 0.164 0.436 0.362 0.409 0.321
UPP(R)-RAXML 0.370 0.304 0.237 0.167 0.377 0.338 0.340 0.363
UPP(R)-pplacer 0.488 0.437 0.380 0.320 0.507 0.477 0.496 0.458
FP Rate:
PASTA-RAXML 0.766 0.618 0.359 0.184 0.436 0.362 0.723 0.585
UPP(R)-RAXML 0.372 0.307 0.241 0.187 0.377 0.338 0.690 0.611
UPP(R)-pplacer 0.370 0.307 0.234 0.170 0.397 0.362 0.712 0.613