Hubbry Logo
Neighbor joiningNeighbor joiningMain
Open search
Neighbor joining
Community hub
Neighbor joining
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Neighbor joining
Neighbor joining
from Wikipedia

In bioinformatics, neighbor joining is a bottom-up (agglomerative) clustering method for the creation of phylogenetic trees, created by Naruya Saitou and Masatoshi Nei in 1987.[1] Usually based on DNA or protein sequence data, the algorithm requires knowledge of the distance between each pair of taxa (e.g., species or sequences) to create the phylogenetic tree.[2]

The algorithm

[edit]
Starting with a star tree (A), the Q matrix is calculated and used to choose a pair of nodes for joining, in this case f and g. These are joined to a newly created node, u, as shown in (B). The part of the tree shown as solid lines is now fixed and will not be changed in subsequent joining steps. The distances from node u to the nodes a-e are computed from equation (3). This process is then repeated, using a matrix of just the distances between the nodes, a,b,c,d,e, and u, and a Q matrix derived from it. In this case u and e are joined to the newly created v, as shown in (C). Two more iterations lead first to (D), and then to (E), at which point the algorithm is done, as the tree is fully resolved.

Neighbor joining takes a distance matrix, which specifies the distance between each pair of taxa, as input. The algorithm starts with a completely unresolved tree, whose topology corresponds to that of a star network, and iterates over the following steps, until the tree is completely resolved, and all branch lengths are known:

  1. Based on the current distance matrix, calculate a matrix (defined below).
  2. Find the pair of distinct taxa i and j (i.e. with ) for which is smallest. Make a new node that joins the taxa i and j, and connect the new node to the central node. For example, in part (B) of the figure at right, node u is created to join f and g.
  3. Calculate the distance from each of the taxa in the pair to this new node.
  4. Calculate the distance from each of the taxa outside of this pair to the new node.
  5. Start the algorithm again, replacing the pair of joined neighbors with the new node and using the distances calculated in the previous step.

The Q-matrix

[edit]

Based on a distance matrix relating the taxa, calculate the x matrix as follows:

where is the distance between taxa and .

Distance from the pair members to the new node

[edit]

For each of the taxa in the pair being joined, use the following formula to calculate the distance to the new node:

and:

Taxa and are the paired taxa and is the newly created node. The branches joining and and and , and their lengths, and are part of the tree which is gradually being created; they neither affect nor are affected by later neighbor-joining steps.

Distance of the other taxa from the new node

[edit]

For each taxon not considered in the previous step, we calculate the distance to the new node as follows:

where is the new node, is the node which we want to calculate the distance to and and are the members of the pair just joined.

Complexity

[edit]

Neighbor joining on a set of taxa requires iterations. At each step one has to build and search a matrix. Initially the matrix is size , then the next step it is , etc. Implementing this in a straightforward way leads to an algorithm with a time complexity of ;[3] implementations exist which use heuristics to do much better than this on average.[4]

Example

[edit]
Neighbor joining with 5 taxa. In this case 2 neighbor joining steps give a tree with fully resolved topology. The branches of the resulting tree are labeled with their lengths.

Let us assume that we have five taxa and the following distance matrix :

a b c d e
a 0 5 9 9 8
b 5 0 10 10 9
c 9 10 0 8 7
d 9 10 8 0 3
e 8 9 7 3 0

First step

[edit]

First joining

[edit]

We calculate the values by equation (1). For example:

We obtain the following values for the matrix (the diagonal elements of the matrix are not used and are omitted here):

a b c d e
a −50 −38 −34 −34
b −50 −38 −34 −34
c −38 −38 −40 −40
d −34 −34 −40 −48
e −34 −34 −40 −48

In the example above, . This is the smallest value of , so we join elements and .

First branch length estimation

[edit]

Let denote the new node. By equation (2), above, the branches joining and to then have lengths:

First distance matrix update

[edit]

We then proceed to update the initial distance matrix into a new distance matrix (see below), reduced in size by one row and one column because of the joining of with into their neighbor . Using equation (3) above, we compute the distance from to each of the other nodes besides and . In this case, we obtain:

The resulting distance matrix is:

u c d e
u 0 7 7 6
c 7 0 8 7
d 7 8 0 3
e 6 7 3 0

Bold values in correspond to the newly calculated distances, whereas italicized values are not affected by the matrix update as they correspond to distances between elements not involved in the first joining of taxa.

Second step

[edit]

Second joining

[edit]

The corresponding matrix is:

u c d e
u −28 −24 −24
c −28 −24 −24
d −24 −24 −28
e −24 −24 −28

We may choose either to join and , or to join and ; both pairs have the minimal value of , and either choice leads to the same result. For concreteness, let us join and and call the new node .

Second branch length estimation

[edit]

The lengths of the branches joining and to can be calculated:

The joining of the elements and the branch length calculation help drawing the neighbor joining tree as shown in the figure.

Second distance matrix update

[edit]

The updated distance matrix for the remaining 3 nodes, , , and , is now computed:

v d e
v 0 4 3
d 4 0 3
e 3 3 0

Final step

[edit]

The tree topology is fully resolved at this point. However, for clarity, we can calculate the matrix. For example:

v d e
v −10 −10
d −10 −10
e −10 −10

For concreteness, let us join and and call the last node . The lengths of the three remaining branches can be calculated:

The neighbor joining tree is now complete, as shown in the figure.

Conclusion: additive distances

[edit]

This example represents an idealized case: note that if we move from any taxon to any other along the branches of the tree, and sum the lengths of the branches traversed, the result is equal to the distance between those taxa in the input distance matrix. For example, going from to we have . A distance matrix whose distances agree in this way with some tree is said to be 'additive', a property which is rare in practice. Nonetheless it is important to note that, given an additive distance matrix as input, neighbor joining is guaranteed to find the tree whose distances between taxa agree with it.

Neighbor joining as minimum evolution

[edit]

Neighbor joining may be viewed as a greedy heuristic for the balanced minimum evolution[5] (BME) criterion. For each topology, BME defines the tree length (sum of branch lengths) to be a particular weighted sum of the distances in the distance matrix, with the weights depending on the topology. The BME optimal topology is the one which minimizes this tree length. NJ at each step greedily joins that pair of taxa which will give the greatest decrease in the estimated tree length. This procedure does not guarantee to find the optimum for the BME criterion, although it often does and is usually quite close.[5]

Advantages and disadvantages

[edit]

The main virtue of NJ is that it is fast[6]: 466  as compared to least squares, maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods.[6] This makes it practical for analyzing large data sets (hundreds or thousands of taxa) and for bootstrapping, for which purposes other means of analysis (e.g. maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood) may be computationally prohibitive.

Neighbor joining has the property that if the input distance matrix is correct, then the output tree will be correct. Furthermore, the correctness of the output tree topology is guaranteed as long as the distance matrix is 'nearly additive', specifically if each entry in the distance matrix differs from the true distance by less than half of the shortest branch length in the tree.[7] In practice the distance matrix rarely satisfies this condition, but neighbor joining often constructs the correct tree topology anyway.[8] The correctness of neighbor joining for nearly additive distance matrices implies that it is statistically consistent under many models of evolution; given data of sufficient length, neighbor joining will reconstruct the true tree with high probability. Compared with UPGMA and WPGMA, neighbor joining has the advantage that it does not assume all lineages evolve at the same rate (molecular clock hypothesis).

Nevertheless, neighbor joining has been largely superseded by phylogenetic methods that do not rely on distance measures and offer superior accuracy under most conditions.[citation needed] Neighbor joining has the undesirable feature that it often assigns negative lengths to some of the branches.

Implementations and variants

[edit]

There are many programs available implementing neighbor joining. Among implementations of canonical NJ (i.e. using the classical NJ optimisation criteria, therefore giving the same results), RapidNJ (started 2003, major update in 2011, still updated in 2023)[9] and NINJA (started 2009, last update 2013)[10] are considered state-of-the-art. They have typical run times proportional to approximately the square of the number of taxa.

Variants that deviate from canonical include:

  • BIONJ (1997)[11] and Weighbor (2000),[12] improving on the accuracy by making use of the fact that the shorter distances in the distance matrix are generally better known than the longer distances. The two methods have been extended to run on incomplete distance matrices.[13]
  • "Fast NJ" remembers the best node and is O(n^2) always; "relax NJ" performs a hill-climbing search and retains the worst-case complexity of O(n^3). Rapid NJ is faster than plain relaxed NJ.[14]
  • FastME is an implementation of the closely related balanced minimum evolution (BME) method (see § Neighbor joining as minimum evolution). It is about as fast as and more accurate than NJ. It starts with a rough tree then improves it using a set of topological moves such as Nearest Neighbor Interchanges (NNI).[15] FastTree is a related method. It works on sequence "profiles" instead of a matrix. It starts with an approximately NJ tree, rearranges it into BME, then rearranges it into approximate maximum-likelihood.[16]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Neighbor joining is a distance-based, agglomerative clustering for reconstructing unrooted phylogenetic trees from a matrix of pairwise evolutionary distances between operational taxonomic units (OTUs), such as species or sequences. Introduced by Naruya Saitou and in , the method iteratively identifies and joins pairs of OTUs that minimize the total estimated branch length of the tree at each step, beginning with a star-like and proceeding until a single tree is formed. The algorithm operates by transforming the into a rate-corrected matrix using a criterion (often denoted as ) that accounts for the number of remaining taxa, selecting the pair with the minimum Q value for joining, and then updating the matrix with new distances to the joined node. Branch lengths are estimated for each join to reflect evolutionary , allowing for unequal rates across lineages without assuming a strict . This process is computationally efficient, with a of O(n³) for n taxa, making it suitable for moderately large datasets. Neighbor joining has become one of the most widely used methods in due to its balance of speed, simplicity, and accuracy under additive models, where distances approximate path lengths on the true . It outperforms earlier methods like in simulations by better handling unequal evolutionary rates and has been cited over 75,000 times as of 2025. However, as a greedy , it may not always recover the globally optimal and can be sensitive to errors in highly divergent data. Despite these limitations, variants and optimizations, such as neural network-enhanced approaches like NeuralNJ, continue to extend its applicability to large-scale genomic analyses as of 2025.

Overview

Definition and purpose

Neighbor joining (NJ) is a heuristic for constructing unrooted phylogenetic s from a matrix of pairwise evolutionary distances between taxa. Developed as an iterative clustering method, it seeks to identify pairs of taxa that are most closely related at each step, ultimately producing a that approximates the minimum total branch , in accordance with the minimum criterion. The primary purpose of NJ is to infer evolutionary relationships among taxa when the input distances are additive or nearly additive, meaning they can be represented as path lengths on an underlying without assuming a constant rate of ( ). This makes NJ particularly suitable for datasets where evolutionary rates vary across lineages, allowing for the reconstruction of accurate topologies even under heterogeneous substitution rates. In contrast to character-based approaches like maximum parsimony, which optimize s by minimizing changes in discrete sequence characters, NJ operates on summarized distance metrics, offering computational efficiency for larger datasets while prioritizing overall length minimization over site-specific optimizations. In an NJ tree, the observed taxa serve as the leaves, representing extant species or sequences, while internal nodes depict hypothetical ancestral nodes that connect these leaves through a series of bifurcations. The algorithm outputs an unrooted binary tree topology, where edges are assigned estimated lengths corresponding to the inferred evolutionary distances between connected nodes; the input distance matrix typically derives from alignments of molecular sequences, such as DNA or proteins, converted via models like Jukes-Cantor. This structure facilitates downstream analyses, including rooting the tree or evaluating evolutionary hypotheses, without presupposing a specific root or ultrametric constraints.

Historical development

The neighbor-joining (NJ) method was introduced in 1987 by Naruya Saitou and Masatoshi Nei as a distance-based approach for reconstructing unrooted phylogenetic trees from evolutionary distance data. The method starts with a star-like tree and iteratively clusters operational taxonomic units (OTUs) by selecting pairs that minimize the total branch length of the resulting tree, providing both topology and branch lengths efficiently. This innovation addressed key limitations of prior distance methods, such as unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA), which assumes a constant molecular clock and thus performs poorly under uneven evolutionary rates across lineages. In contrast, NJ relaxes the clock assumption, allowing for variable rates and yielding more accurate unrooted topologies in simulations compared to UPGMA and other clustering algorithms like Farris's and Li's methods. Subsequent analyses recognized NJ as an approximation to the minimum evolution (ME) criterion, which seeks the tree topology minimizing total branch length estimated from distances, though NJ computes this heuristically without evaluating all topologies. The method's efficiency and balance of speed and accuracy facilitated its integration into early phylogenetic software, notably the package developed by Joseph Felsenstein starting in the 1980s, where the NEIGHBOR program implemented NJ for unrooted tree construction without clock assumptions. By the 1990s, as computational resources expanded and molecular sequence data proliferated, NJ saw widespread adoption for analyzing larger datasets, with simulations confirming its robustness for moderate-sized phylogenies under various evolutionary models. However, critiques highlighted sensitivities to rate variation and distance estimation errors, prompting refinements such as weighted variants to improve accuracy on heterogeneous data. Key developments in the included variants like bio-neighbor joining (BIONJ) in , which incorporated a simple evolutionary model to adjust branch length estimates and enhance performance over standard NJ on simulated datasets with rate heterogeneity. These refinements addressed observed inconsistencies in NJ's pair selection under certain conditions, leading to more reliable trees without substantially increasing computational demands. Despite the rise of model-based methods like maximum likelihood in the same era, which offer greater statistical rigor, NJ retained popularity for its polynomial-time complexity (O(n^3)) and suitability for exploratory analyses on large-scale data. As of the , NJ remains a cornerstone in , valued for its speed in initial tree building and integration into pipelines for or as a starting point for more complex inferences, even as alternatives like maximum likelihood dominate for precision. Its original formulation has garnered over 75,000 citations as of 2025, underscoring enduring impact across fields from to .

Algorithm

Q-matrix computation

The neighbor-joining algorithm initiates its iterative process with an m×mm \times m symmetric distance matrix DD, where DijD_{ij} denotes the estimated evolutionary distance between operational taxonomic units (OTUs) or taxa ii and jj, typically derived from sequence alignments or other molecular data, with Dii=0D_{ii} = 0 for all ii, and mm is the current number of active nodes (initially nn). The core of this initial step involves computing the Q-matrix, a transformed distance measure that guides pair selection. For each pair of distinct taxa ii and jj, the entry QijQ_{ij} is calculated as Qij=(m2)Dijki,jDikki,jDjk,Q_{ij} = (m-2) D_{ij} - \sum_{k \neq i,j} D_{ik} - \sum_{k \neq i,j} D_{jk}, where the sums range over all m2m-2 remaining active taxa kk. This formula, introduced by Saitou and Nei, effectively reweights the pairwise distances by subtracting the cumulative distances from ii and jj to the rest of the taxon set, scaled by the factor m2m-2 to normalize for the current number of active nodes. The purpose of the Q-matrix is to adjust the raw distances in DD such that the selected pair minimizes an approximation of the total branch length in the emerging , aligning with the minimum evolution principle. By penalizing pairs where ii or jj exhibit high cumulative distances to other —often a signature of long external branches—the Q-matrix helps counteract distortions in distance estimates that could arise from uneven evolutionary rates. Negative values of QijQ_{ij} particularly signal pairs where the observed DijD_{ij} may be underestimated relative to the broader taxon connections, highlighting candidates less prone to artifacts like long-branch attraction. Computation of the full Q-matrix occurs once per of , beginning with the initial set of nn taxa and repeating as the number of active nodes decreases. For each with mm current nodes, evaluating all (m2)\binom{m}{2} pairs requires summing the row totals of the for each node, which can be precomputed in O(m)O(m) time per row, leading to an overall O(m2)O(m^2) for filling the Q-matrix. This step dominates the per-iteration cost but remains efficient compared to exhaustive tree searches. In interpretation, the entry QijQ_{ij} represents the estimated increase in total tree length upon joining ii and jj as neighbors; thus, the pair yielding the smallest (most negative) QijQ_{ij} is prioritized, as it contributes the least to the overall branch length sum and is least likely to reflect systematic biases from long branches misleadingly pulling distant taxa together. This selection criterion ensures the algorithm progressively builds an unrooted topology that approximates the additive distance structure while avoiding common pitfalls in distance-based .

Pair selection and joining

In each of the neighbor-joining algorithm, the pair of taxa (i, j) that minimizes the value of Q_{ij} from the Q-matrix is selected for joining. This selection criterion identifies taxa that are likely to be immediate neighbors in the , prioritizing pairs with the smallest net divergence adjusted for the overall branch lengths in the current set of active taxa. Once selected, the pair (i, j) is joined by creating a new internal node u, which represents their common . Taxa i and j are removed from the active set of taxa, and the new node u is added to this set in their place. The branches connecting i and j to u are established, with their lengths estimated separately to reflect the evolutionary distances. The tree is constructed iteratively through this process, with each joining step building subtrees that grow outward from the initial taxa. The algorithm continues until only two nodes remain in the active set. These two are then connected directly by an edge whose length is in the current matrix, completing the unrooted . For an initial set of n taxa, this requires n-2 joining steps. If multiple pairs exhibit the same minimal Q_{ij} value, one is chosen arbitrarily to proceed with the joining. Some implementations may apply additional criteria, such as selecting the pair with the least variance in distances to other taxa, to resolve ties deterministically, though the original method does not specify such refinements.

Branch length estimation

In the neighbor-joining algorithm, once a pair of taxa ii and jj is selected for joining into a new internal node uu, branch lengths are estimated for the edges connecting ii to uu (denoted LiuL_{iu}) and jj to uu (denoted LjuL_{ju}). These estimates are computed using the current , ensuring that the path distance from ii to jj via uu exactly matches the observed distance DijD_{ij}, i.e., Liu+Lju=DijL_{iu} + L_{ju} = D_{ij}. This step assumes the distances are additive, meaning they reflect true path lengths along an underlying without distortions from evolutionary rate variations or other inconsistencies. The specific formulas for the branch lengths are derived as least-squares estimates under the assumption that ii and jj are true neighbors in the , with the remaining taxa represented as a composite "Z". Let mm be the current number of taxa in the matrix, and let the sums be over the m2m-2 remaining taxa ki,jk \neq i, j: Liu=12(Dij+1m2ki,j(DikDjk))L_{iu} = \frac{1}{2} \left( D_{ij} + \frac{1}{m-2} \sum_{k \neq i,j} (D_{ik} - D_{jk}) \right)
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.