Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.64898/2026.06.29.734822

Quantifying Asymmetric Coevolutionary Dynamics using Normalized Phylogenetic Costs

Abstract

AO_SCPLOWBSTRACTC_SCPLOWCoevolutionary studies aim to characterize associations, such as virus-host relationships, by using phylogenetic distances to quantify the topological concordance between the phylogenies of interacting taxa. However, phylogenetic distances cannot capture asymmetrical relationships that arise from differences in sampling, evolutionary rates, or characterizations between datasets. Furthermore, a lack of accurate normalization complicates the interpretation and validation of coevolutionary analyses. To address these limitations, we employed the Asymmetric Cluster Affinity and Cluster Support costs as a general framework to quantify coevolutionary patterns across multiple biological scales. We benchmarked the precision of these costs by reanalyzing a curated dataset documenting interspecies transmission frequencies across nineteen virus-host phylogenies. Our results corroborate prior findings showing that all virus families under study can cross species boundaries; however, the asymmetric costs provide a more granular representation, demonstrating that the frequency of such events varies significantly across families. We then applied the Asymmetric Cluster Support cost to quantify preferential gene segment pairings within the Bluetongue virus genome. This analysis revealed a close phylogenetic association between the outer capsid proteins VP2 and VP5, likely reflecting shared selective pressures due to their critical roles in cell entry and exit. In contrast, gene segments encoding nonstructural proteins exhibited discordant evolutionary histories relative to other segments. Finally, we demonstrated that the Asymmetric Cluster Support cost can detect coevolutionary dynamics in swine influenza A virus, identifying novel gene pairings indicative of major viral reassortment events. Overall, our approach demonstrates that normalized asymmetric phylogenetic costs accurately capture complex biological relationships and provide a robust framework for quantifying fine-scale coevolutionary dynamics in rapidly evolving pathogens.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Wagle, S., Markin, A., Sherman, T. J., Mayo, C., Dunham, T. J., Brelsfoard, C., Cohnstaedt, L. W., Wilson, W. C., Anderson, T. K., Eulenstein, O.. 2026-07-03. Quantifying Asymmetric Coevolutionary Dynamics using Normalized Phylogenetic Costs. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.29.734822

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

deepTools4: Faster, Scalable, and Modernized Genomic Data Analysis

The deepTools suite is widely used for quality control, summarization, and visualization of high-throughput sequencing data. However, as genomic datasets grow in scale and depth, existing tools often become computational bottlenecks. We present deepTools4, a modernized framework designed for high performance, scalability, and enhanced usability, while maintaining seamless integration with the Galaxy platform. Core functionality has been rewritten and thoroughly benchmarked, achieving substantial computational speed-ups. Visualization tools have been modernized to provide more intuitive, high-quality graphical outputs. In addition, our testing framework has been expanded to facilitate continuous development and ensure robustness. We demonstrate the utility of deepTools4 across diverse epigenomics and transcriptomics datasets, highlighting its ability to summarize genome-wide signals, apply a wide range of common normalization methods, and visualize enrichment patterns. The enhanced deepTools4 framework delivers a faster, more scalable solution for reproducible genome-wide analysis and interpretation across many sequencing modalities. Availability: https://github.com/deeptools/deepTools/

bioinformatics↗

Reproducibility and cross-dataset concordance of drug-induced transcriptional responses

Drug-perturbation transcriptomic resources are expanding, but the reproducibility and cross-source consistency of the responses they measure remain critical to their use. We compared six resources using independent replicates, matched-drug analyses, and response decomposition. High agreement in treated expression did not translate into equally repeatable drug-induced changes. Cross-source response concordance was generally limited, including under matched cell and treatment conditions, although some comparisons retained drug-specific information. In Tahoe, a control-expression-only baseline left substantial drug-specific variation unresolved. Measured drug main effects - the average responses across cell lines - provided information for predicting cell-specific interactions, with this relationship retained in a cross-plate validation. Exploratory analyses of structure, target, and external-response representations identified modest signals in selected pipelines. Together, these analyses characterize the reliability and transferability of current perturbation resources and identify prediction of drug main effects as a key bottleneck in the framework examined, motivating shared reference measurements and better recovery of drug-specific responses.

bioinformatics↗

Propensity-Adjusted AUC under Nuisance-Model Misspecification

Propensity adjustment compares medical-image detector scores within groups with similar measured properties, such as stain or focus. We examine its sensitivity to the nuisance model that forms those groups. Under Gaussian latent-index assumptions and exact linear-index strata, a closed-form correlation gives an exact boundary for adjusted AUC to fall below one half. Quadrature matches 36 simulation cells within 0.008. Inflation and attenuation relative to correct adjustment are empirical findings, not general ordering results. An overlap screen and a self-stratified control introduced for this study miss 140 of 141 simulated cells with absolute error above 0.05: checking the fitted propensity cannot certify completeness of the adjustment set. On real pathology corpora, logistic and boosted-tree models using the same 16 features disagree. Among splits where both pass both checks, mean adjusted-AUC gaps are 0.057 on acid-fast bacilli (AFB), 0.048 on Kaggle, and 0.049 on PCam, over three, five, and three splits respectively. These gaps measure model sensitivity; neither estimate is known to be correct. A controlled colour shift moves adjusted AUC relative to model-specific references in the predicted direction in 78 of 80 label-dependent cells. Broader balance and label-fit diagnostics favour trees without certifying their adjusted AUC. We recommend reporting sensitivity across nuisance models alongside these diagnostics. Reversal relative to known truth occurs in constructed stress tests; its frequency in practice remains unknown.

bioinformatics↗