IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/injdan/v12y2020i3p190-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of hierarchical clustering methods for binary data from molecular markers

Author

Listed:
  • Emmanouil D. Pratsinakis
  • Symela Ntoanidou
  • Alexios Polidoros
  • Christos Dordas
  • Panagiotis Madesis
  • Ilias Eleftherohorinos
  • George Menexes

Abstract

Data from molecular markers used for constructing dendrograms, which are based on genetic distances between different plant species, are encoded as binary data. For dendrograms' construction, the most commonly used linkage method is the UPGMA in combination with the squared Euclidean distance. It seems that in this scientific field, this is the 'golden standard' clustering method. In this study, a review is presented on clustering methods used with binary data. Furthermore, an evaluation of the linkage methods and the corresponding appropriate distances (comparison of 163 clustering methods) is attempted using binary data resulted from molecular markers applied to five populations of the wild mustard Sinapis arvensis species. The validation of the various cluster solutions was tested using external criteria. The results showed that the 'golden standard' is not a 'panacea' for dendrogram construction, based on binary data derived from molecular markers. Thirty seven other hierarchical clustering methods could be used.

Suggested Citation

  • Emmanouil D. Pratsinakis & Symela Ntoanidou & Alexios Polidoros & Christos Dordas & Panagiotis Madesis & Ilias Eleftherohorinos & George Menexes, 2020. "Comparison of hierarchical clustering methods for binary data from molecular markers," International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(3), pages 190-212.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:injdan:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:190-212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=108036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:injdan:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:190-212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=282 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.