Current strategic limitations of phylogenetic tools badly impact the inference of an evolutionary tree

Abstract

For drawing an evolutionary relationship among several protein sequences, the phylogenetic tree is usually constructed through maximum likelihood-based algorithms. To improve the accuracy of these methodologies, many parameters like bootstrap methods, correlation coefficient and residue-substitution models are presumably over-ranked to derive biologically credible relationships. Although the accuracy of protein sequence alignment and the substitution matrix are preliminary constraints to define the biological accuracy of the overlapped sequences/residues, the alignment is not iteratively optimized through the statistical testing of residue-substitution models. The study majorly highlights the potential pitfalls that significantly affect the accuracy of an evolutionary protocol. It emphasizes the need for a more accurate scrutiny of the entire phylogenetic methodology. The need of iterative optimizations is illustrated to construct a biologically credible and not mathematically optimal tree for a sequence dataset.