19 Jun 2012 19:21
Re: error during installation
Leon Timmermans <l.m.timmermans <at> students.uu.nl>
2012-06-19 17:21:47 GMT
2012-06-19 17:21:47 GMT
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Du, Peng <du <at> ibio.jp> wrote: > As to the Clustalw problem, it turned out that, I didn't install it in > the first place, I am very sorry for the stupid mistake. It is alright > now. But, as to dpAlign, I compared the alignment of non coding > regions of two species with dpAlign (in an Intel x86 but much slower > machine where dpAlign is good) and Clustalw respectively and checked > the output, I found that, each with default parameters, the alignments > by dpAlign were better than that by Clustalw, and there was a > tremendous difference in the outputs in terms of A<=>G, C<=>T, AG<=>CT > substitutional rate and divergence by Tamura-Nei Model between the two > alignments. The values are much smaller with dpAlign. Since I am a > newbie, I don't quite understand why there was such a difference. Is > it might because of the Clustalw is designed for multiple alignment or > the default parameters are not appropriate? > > I am now investigating other tools available in the main distribution > of BioPerl, but I have no idea whether there is a good substitution > of dpAlign in context of non coding region alignment. ClustalW uses a heuristic algorithm, it cannot produce a solution that is guaranteed to be optimal. dpAlign uses the Miller-Myers algorithm (a variant on Needleman-Wunch), that does make such guarantees. It should be slower but may produce a better alignment. Leon _______________________________________________ Bioperl-l mailing list Bioperl-l <at> lists.open-bio.org http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/bioperl-l
RSS Feed