The evolutionary relationships between species are typically represented in the biological literature by rooted phylogenetic trees. However, a tree fails to capture ancestral reticulate processes, such as the formation of hybrid species or lateral gene transfer events between lineages, and so the history of life is more accurately described by a rooted phylogenetic network. Nevertheless, phylogenetic networks may be complex and difficult to interpret, so biologists sometimes prefer a tree that summarises the central tree-like trend of evolution. In this paper, we formally investigate methods for transforming an arbitrary phylogenetic network into a tree (on the same set of leaves) and ask which ones (if any) satisfy a simple consistency condition. This consistency condition states that if we add additional species into a phylogenetic network (without otherwise changing this original network) then transforming this enlarged network into a rooted phylogenetic tree induces the same tree on the original set of species as transforming the original network. We show that the LSA (lowest stable ancestor) tree method satisfies this consistency property, whereas several other commonly used methods (and a new one we introduce) do not. We also briefly consider transformations that convert arbitrary phylogenetic networks to another simpler class, namely normal networks.

15 pages, 6 figures