Cargando…
Ambivalent covariance models
BACKGROUND: Evolutionary variations let us define a set of similar nucleic acid sequences as a family if these different molecules execute a common function. Capturing their sequence variation by using e. g. position specific scoring matrices significantly improves sensitivity of detection tools. Me...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26017195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-015-0569-1 |
_version_ | 1782381457474322432 |
---|---|
author | Janssen, Stefan Giegerich, Robert |
author_facet | Janssen, Stefan Giegerich, Robert |
author_sort | Janssen, Stefan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Evolutionary variations let us define a set of similar nucleic acid sequences as a family if these different molecules execute a common function. Capturing their sequence variation by using e. g. position specific scoring matrices significantly improves sensitivity of detection tools. Members of a functional (non‐coding) RNA family are affected by these variations not only on the sequence, but also on the structural level. For example, some transfer‐RNAs exhibit a fifth helix in addition to the typical cloverleaf structure. Current covariance models – the unrivaled homology search approach for structured RNA – do not benefit from structural variation within a family, but rather penalize it. This leads to artificial subdivision of families and loss of information in the Rfam database. RESULTS: We propose an extension to the fundamental architecture of covariance models to allow for several, compatible consensus structures. The resulting models are called ambivalent covariance models. Evaluation on several Rfam families shows that coalescence of structural variation within a family by using ambivalent consensus models is superior to subdividing the family into multiple classical covariance models. CONCLUSION: A prototype and source code is available at http://bibiserv.cebitec.uni‐bielefeld.de/acms. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12859-015-0569-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4504443 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45044432015-07-17 Ambivalent covariance models Janssen, Stefan Giegerich, Robert BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Evolutionary variations let us define a set of similar nucleic acid sequences as a family if these different molecules execute a common function. Capturing their sequence variation by using e. g. position specific scoring matrices significantly improves sensitivity of detection tools. Members of a functional (non‐coding) RNA family are affected by these variations not only on the sequence, but also on the structural level. For example, some transfer‐RNAs exhibit a fifth helix in addition to the typical cloverleaf structure. Current covariance models – the unrivaled homology search approach for structured RNA – do not benefit from structural variation within a family, but rather penalize it. This leads to artificial subdivision of families and loss of information in the Rfam database. RESULTS: We propose an extension to the fundamental architecture of covariance models to allow for several, compatible consensus structures. The resulting models are called ambivalent covariance models. Evaluation on several Rfam families shows that coalescence of structural variation within a family by using ambivalent consensus models is superior to subdividing the family into multiple classical covariance models. CONCLUSION: A prototype and source code is available at http://bibiserv.cebitec.uni‐bielefeld.de/acms. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12859-015-0569-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-05-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4504443/ /pubmed/26017195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-015-0569-1 Text en © Janssen and Giegerich; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Janssen, Stefan Giegerich, Robert Ambivalent covariance models |
title | Ambivalent covariance models |
title_full | Ambivalent covariance models |
title_fullStr | Ambivalent covariance models |
title_full_unstemmed | Ambivalent covariance models |
title_short | Ambivalent covariance models |
title_sort | ambivalent covariance models |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504443/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26017195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-015-0569-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT janssenstefan ambivalentcovariancemodels AT giegerichrobert ambivalentcovariancemodels |