系统发育足迹分析工具的经验比较

M. Blanchette, Samson Kwong, M. Tompa
{"title":"系统发育足迹分析工具的经验比较","authors":"M. Blanchette, Samson Kwong, M. Tompa","doi":"10.1109/BIBE.2003.1188931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Phylogenetic footprinting is an increasingly popular comparative genomics method for detecting regulatory elements in DNA sequences. With the profusion of possible methods to use for phylogenetic footprinting, the biologist needs some guidance to choose the most appropriate tool. We present methods for comparing tools on phylogenetic footprinting data. More specifically, we discuss two different classes of comparative experiments: those on simulated data and those on real orthologous promoter regions. We then report the results of a series of such empirical comparisons. The tools compared are the alignment-based methods using ClustalW and Dialign, and the motif-finding programs MEME and FootPrinter. Our results show that methods taking the species' phylogenetic relationships into consideration obtain better accuracy.","PeriodicalId":178814,"journal":{"name":"Third IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering, 2003. Proceedings.","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An empirical comparison of tools for phylogenetic footprinting\",\"authors\":\"M. Blanchette, Samson Kwong, M. Tompa\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/BIBE.2003.1188931\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Phylogenetic footprinting is an increasingly popular comparative genomics method for detecting regulatory elements in DNA sequences. With the profusion of possible methods to use for phylogenetic footprinting, the biologist needs some guidance to choose the most appropriate tool. We present methods for comparing tools on phylogenetic footprinting data. More specifically, we discuss two different classes of comparative experiments: those on simulated data and those on real orthologous promoter regions. We then report the results of a series of such empirical comparisons. The tools compared are the alignment-based methods using ClustalW and Dialign, and the motif-finding programs MEME and FootPrinter. Our results show that methods taking the species' phylogenetic relationships into consideration obtain better accuracy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Third IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering, 2003. Proceedings.\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Third IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering, 2003. Proceedings.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2003.1188931\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Third IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering, 2003. Proceedings.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2003.1188931","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

系统发育足迹是一种越来越流行的比较基因组学方法,用于检测DNA序列中的调控元件。随着系统发育足迹可能使用的方法的丰富,生物学家需要一些指导来选择最合适的工具。我们提出了系统发育足迹数据比较工具的方法。更具体地说,我们讨论了两种不同的比较实验:模拟数据的实验和真实同源启动子区域的实验。然后,我们报告了一系列这样的经验比较的结果。比较的工具是使用ClustalW和Dialign的基于对齐的方法,以及motif查找程序MEME和FootPrinter。我们的结果表明,考虑物种系统发育关系的方法获得了更好的准确性。
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
An empirical comparison of tools for phylogenetic footprinting
Phylogenetic footprinting is an increasingly popular comparative genomics method for detecting regulatory elements in DNA sequences. With the profusion of possible methods to use for phylogenetic footprinting, the biologist needs some guidance to choose the most appropriate tool. We present methods for comparing tools on phylogenetic footprinting data. More specifically, we discuss two different classes of comparative experiments: those on simulated data and those on real orthologous promoter regions. We then report the results of a series of such empirical comparisons. The tools compared are the alignment-based methods using ClustalW and Dialign, and the motif-finding programs MEME and FootPrinter. Our results show that methods taking the species' phylogenetic relationships into consideration obtain better accuracy.
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
GenoMosaic: on-demand multiple genome comparison and comparative annotation Respiratory gating for MRI and MRS in rodents DHC: a density-based hierarchical clustering method for time series gene expression data Evolving bubbles for prostate surface detection from TRUS images A repulsive clustering algorithm for gene expression data
×
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