宏基因组数据基因预测程序的比较

Non Yok, G. Rosen
{"title":"宏基因组数据基因预测程序的比较","authors":"Non Yok, G. Rosen","doi":"10.1109/BIBE.2010.58","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This manuscript presents the most rigorous benchmarking of gene annotation algorithms for metagenomic datasets to date. We compare three different programs: GeneMark, MetaGeneAnnotator (MGA) and Orphelia. The comparisons are based on their performances over simulated fragments from hundred species of diverse lineages. We defined three different types of fragments: one type from the intra-coding region and the other types are from the gene edges. The general observation was that performances of all these programs improve as we increase the length of the fragment. On the other hand, intra-coding fragments of our data show a low annotation error in all of the programs if compared to the genes edges.","PeriodicalId":330904,"journal":{"name":"2010 IEEE International Conference on BioInformatics and BioEngineering","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Gene Prediction Programs for Metagenomic Data\",\"authors\":\"Non Yok, G. Rosen\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/BIBE.2010.58\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This manuscript presents the most rigorous benchmarking of gene annotation algorithms for metagenomic datasets to date. We compare three different programs: GeneMark, MetaGeneAnnotator (MGA) and Orphelia. The comparisons are based on their performances over simulated fragments from hundred species of diverse lineages. We defined three different types of fragments: one type from the intra-coding region and the other types are from the gene edges. The general observation was that performances of all these programs improve as we increase the length of the fragment. On the other hand, intra-coding fragments of our data show a low annotation error in all of the programs if compared to the genes edges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":330904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2010 IEEE International Conference on BioInformatics and BioEngineering\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2010 IEEE International Conference on BioInformatics and BioEngineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2010.58\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2010 IEEE International Conference on BioInformatics and BioEngineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2010.58","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这份手稿提出了迄今为止最严格的基因注释算法对宏基因组数据集的基准。我们比较了三种不同的程序:GeneMark, MetaGeneAnnotator (MGA)和Orphelia。这些比较是基于它们在来自数百个不同谱系的物种的模拟片段上的表现。我们定义了三种不同类型的片段:一种类型来自编码区内,另一种类型来自基因边缘。总的观察结果是,随着片段长度的增加,所有这些程序的性能都有所提高。另一方面,与基因边缘相比,我们的数据的编码片段在所有程序中显示出较低的注释错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of Gene Prediction Programs for Metagenomic Data
This manuscript presents the most rigorous benchmarking of gene annotation algorithms for metagenomic datasets to date. We compare three different programs: GeneMark, MetaGeneAnnotator (MGA) and Orphelia. The comparisons are based on their performances over simulated fragments from hundred species of diverse lineages. We defined three different types of fragments: one type from the intra-coding region and the other types are from the gene edges. The general observation was that performances of all these programs improve as we increase the length of the fragment. On the other hand, intra-coding fragments of our data show a low annotation error in all of the programs if compared to the genes edges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Assessment of the Binding Characteristics of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Glycoprotein120 and Host Cluster of Differentiation4 Using Digital Signal Processing Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Image Differences and Clinical Features Quantification and Analysis of Combination Drug Synergy in High-Throughput Transcriptome Studies Gene Set Analysis with Covariates A Comparative Study of a Novel AE-nLMS Filter and Two Traditional Filters in Predicting Respiration Induced Motion of the Tumor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1