# Import Beast tree
**URL:** https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086
**Category:** General
**Created:** [May 4, 2022, 2:37pm UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086 "2022-05-04T14:37:01Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@kelianP](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/kelianP)
#### Post date: [May 4, 2022, 2:37pm UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/1 "2022-05-04T14:37:01Z")
Hello,
Thanks to augur import it is now possible to import BEAST MCC trees. You must certainly know that BEAST is a very powerful tool and therefore an input of interest for nextstrain.
However, there is currently little documentation on this subject.
So, do you know whether it is better to import a discrete BEAST tree in order to trace phylogeography?
Thanks in advance!
---
### Author:  [@corneliusroemer](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/corneliusroemer)
#### Post date: [May 4, 2022, 5:11pm UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/2 "2022-05-04T17:11:12Z")
I’m not quite sure what the choices are: discrete BEAST tree, or? Maybe @james can help?
---
### Author:  [@james](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/james)
#### Post date: [May 4, 2022, 11:59pm UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/3 "2022-05-04T23:59:32Z")
Hey @kelianP – happy to help any debug specific errors you have with `augur import beast`. The question of discrete vs continuous phylogeographic models is dependent on your data, and perhaps the BEAST forums / tutorials would be a better place for this.
---
### Author:  [@kelianP](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/kelianP)
#### Post date: [May 5, 2022, 8:42am UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/4 "2022-05-05T08:42:43Z")
Hey @james , @corneliusroemer thanks for your reply - In fact, I would like to build a continuous phylogeographic model for my data. However, even though my metadata seems to be correct and thus the phylogenetic tree too, I am not getting satisfactory results.
I was asking the previous question because most of the pathogens already submitted seem to be represented by discrete models. I guess these models were chosen by the maintainers, and not because this could be a limitation of Nextstrain?
---
### Author:  [@james](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/james)
#### Post date: [May 6, 2022, 4:53am UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/5 "2022-05-06T04:53:13Z")
Nextstrain’s bioinformatics toolkit (“augur”) cannot reconstruct continuous phylogeography, but BEAST can!
---
### Author:  [@kelianP](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/u/kelianP)
#### Post date: [June 13, 2022, 11:17am UTC](https://nextstrain.discourse.group/t/import-beast-tree/1086/6 "2022-06-13T11:17:00Z")
To bring an update. I’ve started from a continuous phylogeography reconstructed by BEAST (using augur import beast) and after discretizing it, I can finally have a correct visualisation under auspice.
Thanks for your answers !