Table 5.
Bait analysis. (A) We divided baited fragments into three subsets: (I) Unilaterally baited fragments, (II) bilaterally baited fragments, where at least one bait is shifted towards the fragment center and (III) bilaterally baited fragments, where neither of the two baits is shifted. (B) To compare unilaterally to bilaterally baited fragments, we combined the counts for BFC1 and BFC2 fragments and the counts for fragments with shifted (II) and unshifted (III) baits. (C) For the unilaterally baited fragments, we determined the numbers of 5′ and 3′ baits. (D) To compare bilaterally baited fragments with shifted baits to those where neither bait is shifted, we combined the counts for fragments of BFC1 and BFC2
| A: Uni- and bilaterally baited fragments with and without shifted baits | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BFC0 | BFC1 | BFC2 | Total | |||||
| I. | 72 | (1%) | 3102 | (48%) | 3214 | (44%) | 6388 | (29%) |
| II. | 4536 | (57%) | 2787 | (43%) | 3125 | (42%) | 10 448 | (48%) |
| III. | 3325 | (42%) | 601 | (9%) | 1038 | (14%) | 4964 | (23%) |
| Total | 7933 | 6490 | 7377 | 21 800 | ||||
| B: Unilaterally vs. bilaterally baited fragments | ||||||||
| BFC0 | BFC12 | Total | ||||||
| I. | 72 | (1%) | 6316 | (46%) | 6388 | (29%) | ||
| II,III. | 7861 | (99%) | 7551 | (54%) | 15 412 | (71%) | ||
| Total | 7933 | 13 867 | 21 800 | |||||
| C: Unilateral separated by 5′ and 3′ | ||||||||
| 5′ bait | 3′ bait | Total | ||||||
| BFC0 | 36 | 36 | 72 | |||||
| BFC1 | 3091 | 11 | 3102 | |||||
| BFC2 | 12 | 3202 | 3214 | |||||
| Total | 3139 | 3249 | 6388 | |||||
| D: Bilaterally baited fragments: shifted vs. unshifted | ||||||||
| BFC0 | BFC12 | Total | ||||||
| II. | 4536 | (58%) | 5912 | (78%) | 10 448 | (68%) | ||
| III. | 3325 | (42%) | 1639 | (22%) | 4964 | (32%) | ||
| Total | 7861 | 7551 | 15 412 | |||||