Cargando…

Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM

BACKGROUND: Previous studies show various results obtained from different motif finders for an identical dataset. This is largely due to the fact that these tools use different strategies and possess unique features for discovering the motifs. Hence, using multiple tools and methods has been suggest...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tran, Ngoc Tam L., Huang, Chun-Hsi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6299673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12575-018-0088-3
_version_ 1783381536739950592
author Tran, Ngoc Tam L.
Huang, Chun-Hsi
author_facet Tran, Ngoc Tam L.
Huang, Chun-Hsi
author_sort Tran, Ngoc Tam L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Previous studies show various results obtained from different motif finders for an identical dataset. This is largely due to the fact that these tools use different strategies and possess unique features for discovering the motifs. Hence, using multiple tools and methods has been suggested because the motifs commonly reported by them are more likely to be biologically significant. RESULTS: The common significant motifs from multiple tools can be obtained by using MOTIFSIM tool. In this work, we evaluated the performance of MOTIFSIM in three aspects. First, we compared the pair-wise comparison technique of MOTIFSIM with the un-gapped Smith-Waterman algorithm and four common distance metrics: average Kullback-Leibler, average log-likelihood ratio, Chi-Square distance, and Pearson Correlation Coefficient. Second, we compared the performance of MOTIFSIM with RSAT Matrix-clustering tool for motif clustering. Lastly, we evaluated the performances of nineteen motif finders and the reliability of MOTIFSIM for identifying the common significant motifs from multiple tools. CONCLUSIONS: The pair-wise comparison results reveal that MOTIFSIM attains better performance than the un-gapped Smith-Waterman algorithm and four distance metrics. The clustering results also demonstrate that MOTIFSIM achieves similar or even better performance than RSAT Matrix-clustering. Furthermore, the findings indicate if the motif detection does not require a special tool for detecting a specific type of motif then using multiple motif finders and combining with MOTIFSIM for obtaining the common significant motifs, it improved the results for DNA motif detection. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12575-018-0088-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6299673
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62996732018-12-20 Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM Tran, Ngoc Tam L. Huang, Chun-Hsi Biol Proced Online Research BACKGROUND: Previous studies show various results obtained from different motif finders for an identical dataset. This is largely due to the fact that these tools use different strategies and possess unique features for discovering the motifs. Hence, using multiple tools and methods has been suggested because the motifs commonly reported by them are more likely to be biologically significant. RESULTS: The common significant motifs from multiple tools can be obtained by using MOTIFSIM tool. In this work, we evaluated the performance of MOTIFSIM in three aspects. First, we compared the pair-wise comparison technique of MOTIFSIM with the un-gapped Smith-Waterman algorithm and four common distance metrics: average Kullback-Leibler, average log-likelihood ratio, Chi-Square distance, and Pearson Correlation Coefficient. Second, we compared the performance of MOTIFSIM with RSAT Matrix-clustering tool for motif clustering. Lastly, we evaluated the performances of nineteen motif finders and the reliability of MOTIFSIM for identifying the common significant motifs from multiple tools. CONCLUSIONS: The pair-wise comparison results reveal that MOTIFSIM attains better performance than the un-gapped Smith-Waterman algorithm and four distance metrics. The clustering results also demonstrate that MOTIFSIM achieves similar or even better performance than RSAT Matrix-clustering. Furthermore, the findings indicate if the motif detection does not require a special tool for detecting a specific type of motif then using multiple motif finders and combining with MOTIFSIM for obtaining the common significant motifs, it improved the results for DNA motif detection. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12575-018-0088-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6299673/ /pubmed/30574025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12575-018-0088-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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
Tran, Ngoc Tam L.
Huang, Chun-Hsi
Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title_full Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title_fullStr Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title_full_unstemmed Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title_short Performance evaluation for MOTIFSIM
title_sort performance evaluation for motifsim
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6299673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30574025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12575-018-0088-3
work_keys_str_mv AT tranngoctaml performanceevaluationformotifsim
AT huangchunhsi performanceevaluationformotifsim