Skip to main content
BMC Bioinformatics logoLink to BMC Bioinformatics
. 2007 May 21;8:163. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-8-163

AT excursion: a new approach to predict replication origins in viral genomes by locating AT-rich regions

David SH Chew 1,✉, Ming-Ying Leung 2, Kwok Pui Choi 1,3
PMCID: PMC1904460  PMID: 17517140

Abstract

Background

Replication origins are considered important sites for understanding the molecular mechanisms involved in DNA replication. Many computational methods have been developed for predicting their locations in archaeal, bacterial and eukaryotic genomes. However, a prediction method designed for a particular kind of genomes might not work well for another. In this paper, we propose the AT excursion method, which is a score-based approach, to quantify local AT abundance in genomic sequences and use the identified high scoring segments for predicting replication origins. This method has the advantages of requiring no preset window size and having rigorous criteria to evaluate statistical significance of high scoring segments.

Results

We have evaluated the AT excursion method by checking its predictions against known replication origins in herpesviruses and comparing its performance with an existing base weighted score method (BWS1). Out of 43 known origins, 39 are predicted by either one or the other method and 26 origins are predicted by both. The excursion method identifies six origins not predicted by BWS1, showing that the AT excursion method is a valuable complement to BWS1. We have also applied the AT excursion method to two other families of double stranded DNA viruses, the poxviruses and iridoviruses, of which very few replication origins are documented in the public domain. The prediction results are made available as supplementary materials at [1]. Preliminary investigation shows that the proposed method works well on some larger genomes too.

Conclusion

The AT excursion method will be a useful computational tool for identifying replication origins in a variety of genomic sequences.

Background

Recent advances in biotechnology have rendered sequencing a complete genome routine. With the increasing availability of DNA sequences, computational methods to predict likely locations of important functional sites before experimental search are highly valuable because the computational predictions can often help design finely tuned experiments to find these functional sites in shorter time with less labor and fewer resources. Replication origins, which are places on the DNA molecules where replication processes are initiated, are considered important sites for understanding the molecular mechanisms involved in DNA replication. For some viruses with double stranded DNA (dsDNA) genomes in particular, detailed knowledge of their replication processes have had significant impact in developing effective strategies to control the growth and spread of viruses (see, for example, [2]).

A number of computational methods have been developed for predicting replication origins in bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic genomes. All these algorithms exploit certain characteristic sequence features found around the replication origins. For example, Lobry [3] employs the GC skew plot to predict replication origins and terminus in bacterial genomes. The skew (G-C)/(G+C), where G and C respectively stand for the percentages of guanine and cytosine bases in a sliding window, switches polarity in the vicinity of the replication origin and terminus, with the leading strand manifesting a positive skew. Salzberg et al. [4] predict the replication origins for a number of bacterial and archaeal genomes by identifying some 7-mers and/or 8-mers whose orientation is preferentially skewed around the replication origins. Zhang and Zhang [5] use the Z-curve method successfully to identify several replication origins in bacterial and archaeal genomes. The Z-curve of any given DNA sequence is a three-dimensional curve which uniquely represents the sequence so that unusual sequence compositional features, such as those around a replication origin, can sometimes be visually recognized. Mackiewicz et al. [6] propose three methods, based on DNA asymmetry, the distribution of DnaA boxes and dnaA gene location, were applied to identify the putative replication origins in 112 bacterial chromosomes. They find that DNA asymmetry is the most universal method of putative oriC identification and better prediction can be achieved when the method is applied together with others.

For eukaryotic DNA, Breier et al. [7] develop the Oriscan algorithm to predict replication origins in the S. cerevisiae genome by searching for sequences similar to a training set of 26 known yeast origins pinpointed by site-directed mutagenesis. Oriscan uses both the origin recognition complex binding site and its flanking regions to identify candidates, and then ranks potential origins by their likelihood of activity. More recently, wavelet based multi-scale analysis of DNA strand asymmetries have also been developed [8,9] for detecting mammalian DNA replication origins.

It is important to note that a prediction method designed for one kind of genomes may not necessarily work well on others because the differences in DNA replication mechanisms in different organisms naturally lead to differences in sequence features around their replication origins. One would not expect that the prediction methods designed for bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic genomes can be applied directly to viral genomes and produce accurate results. Indeed, when we attempted to use the above algorithms on some herpesviruses genomes with known replication origins like those listed in Table 5 of [10], a variety of difficulties were encountered. For instance, no clear cut switches of polarity were observed in the GC skew plot. No definitive peaks can be visually identified from the Z-curves as potential replication origins of the viruses. When we mined for DnaA boxes [6] in the herpesviruses, just one cluster of DnaA boxes was observed, but it is not near to any known replication origins. Information about origin recognition complex binding sites for herpesvirus genomes, needed for applying Oriscan, are not readily available. While the method based on oligomers skew [4] is designed to work for genomes with single replication origins, the herpesviruses and many other dsDNA viruses contain multiple replication origins in their genomes.

Computational prediction of replication origins, based on the observation of a high concentration of palindromes around the origins, for dsDNA viral genomes was first attempted by Masse et al. [11] on the human cytomegalovirus. Leung et al. [10] formalize the procedure by laying down the mathematical foundation to justify the use of scan statistics for identifying statistically significant palindrome clusters. The location of such palindrome clusters are then taken to be the likely locations of replication origins in herpesviruses. Viewing the scan statistics approach as equivalent to counting the palindromes in sliding windows, Chew et al. [12] offer two more refined schemes of quantifying palindrome concentration to improve the sensitivity of the prediction. One of these schemes, namely the base weighted scheme (BWS1), which scores each palindrome according to how rarely it is expected to occur in a nucleotide sequence generated randomly as a first order Markov chain, is found to be the most sensitive for the herpesviruses.

Because of the lack of strong family-wide sequence similarities around the origins, the above prediction methods designed for relatively large and complex dsDNA viruses like the herpesviruses with over 100,000 base pairs in the genomes are based on various sequence statistics rather than the actual nucleotide sequences around replication origins.

Herpesviruses utilize two different types of replication origins during lytic and latent infections. For each type of origins, the count and locations in the genome vary from one kind of herpesvirus to another. Most herpesviruses have one to two copies of latent and lytic origins. It has been documented in various studies (e.g. [11,13,14]) that the nucleotide sequences around the replication origins are specific to the individual viruses. Yet the presence of clusters of direct or inverted repetitive sequences, including palindromes, is quite common in both types of origins in many members of the herpesvirus family (see [12] and references therein).

Lin et al [15] have observed that in some herpesvirus genomes, the nucleotide sequences around replication origins are richer in A and T bases. This is not surprising because DNA replication typically requires the binding of an assembly of enzymes (e.g., helicases) to locally unwind the DNA helical structure, and pull apart the two complementary strands (see Chapter 1 in [16,17]). Higher AT content around the origins makes the two complementary DNA strands bond less strongly to each other. This facilitates the two strands to be pulled apart and initiate the replication process. Indeed, Segurado et al. [18] have used a sliding window approach to find "islands" within the Schizosaccharomyces pombe genome that have high AT content. They measure base composition using sliding windows of different sizes and find that AT content of windows in regions containing replication origins are significantly higher than those that do not.

Chew et al. [12] have also reported using sliding windows of AT percentages on herpesviruses. Using windows with top AT percentages they are able to predict 65% of replication origins in their dataset. Moreover, this method has successfully identified four origins not predicted by BWS1, suggesting that the AT percentages may be a useful sequence feature to be incorporated into the set of replication origin prediction tools for dsDNA viruses. This motivates us to seek a means to better quantify the AT content variation in genome sequences. We find that the general score based excursion approach first proposed by Karlin and Altschul in [19] fits our purpose very well when it is applied appropriately to quantify local AT abundance. The excursion approach has the advantages of not requiring a preset sliding window size and having rigorous criteria to evaluate statistical significance of high scoring segments [20-22].

There are three main objectives in this paper. First, we shall develop the AT excursion method as a possible alternative to existing approaches for replication origin prediction in DNA sequences. Second, we shall assess the performance of AT excursion in comparison with the prediction results of BWS1 on a data set of currently known origins of the herpesviruses. The herpes family is chosen as it is one of the bigger families of viruses with known replication origins so that the performance of our prediction method can be assessed. Our results demonstrate that the AT excursion method not only can compare with but can also complement the BWS1 predictions very well. Having established that AT excursion method is a credible prediction tool, our third objective is to use it for predicting likely replication origin locations for two other families of dsDNA viruses, namely the poxviruses and iridoviruses of which very few replication origins are documented in the public domain. To demonstrate the generality of the AT excursion approach, we also apply it to several larger genomes.

Methods

We adopt the score-based excursion approach [19] to identify segments of a genome having high AT concentration. This, in turn, forms the basis of our proposed method to predict replication origins for the herpesviruses. Table 1 presents the viruses to be analyzed. The data set comprises all complete genome sequences of the herpesvirus family downloaded from GenBank at the NCBI web site in March 2006. For each virus, we list its abbreviation, accession number, sequence length, and AT percentages.

Table 1.

The list of herpesviruses to be analyzed.

Virus Abbrev. Accession Length AT%
Alcelaphine herpesvirus 1 alhv1 NC_002531 130608 53
Ateline herpesvirus 3 athv3 NC_001987 108409 63
Bovine herpesvirus 1 bohv1 NC_001847 135301 28
Bovine herpesvirus 4 bohv4 NC_002665 108873 59
Bovine herpesvirus 5 bohv5 NC_005261 138390 25
Callitrichine herpesvirus 3 calhv3 NC_004367 149696 51
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 cehv1 NC_004812 156789 26
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 2 cehv2 NC_006560 150715 24
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 8 cehv8 NC_006150 221454 51
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 9 cehv7 NC_002686 124138 59
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 15 cehv15 NC_006146 171096 38
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 16 cehv16 NC_007653 156487 24
Cercopithecine herpesvirus 17 mmrv NC_003401 133719 47
Equid herpesvirus 1 ehv1 NC_001491 150224 44
Equid herpesvirus 2 ehv2 NC_001650 184427 43
Equid herpesvirus 4 ehv4 NC_001844 145597 50
Gallid herpesvirus 1 gahv1 NC_006623 148687 52
Gallid herpesvirus 2 gahv2 NC_002229 174077 56
Gallid herpesvirus 3 gahv3 NC_002577 164270 46
Human herpesvirus 1 hsv1 NC_001806 152261 32
Human herpesvirus 2 hsv2 NC_001798 154746 30
Human herpesvirus 3 vzv NC_001348 124884 54
Human herpesvirus 4 ebv NC_007605 171823 41
Human herpesvirus 5 (AD169) hcmv NC_001347 230287 43
Human herpesvirus 5 (Merlin) hcmv-m NC_006273 235645 42
Human herpesvirus 6 hhv6 NC_001664 159321 58
Human herpesvirus 6B hhv6b NC_000898 162114 58
Human herpesvirus 7 hhv7 NC_001716 153080 63
Human herpesvirus 8 hhv8 NC_003409 137508 47
Ictalurid herpesvirus 1 ichv1 NC_001493 134226 43
Meleagrid herpesvirus 1 mehv1 NC_002641 159160 52
Murid herpesvirus 1 mcmv NC_004065 230278 41
Murid herpesvirus 2 rcmv NC_002512 230138 39
Murid herpesvirus 4 muhv4 NC_001826 119450 53
Macaca fuscata rhadinovirus mfrv NC_007016 131217 48
Ostreid herpesvirus 1 oshv1 NC_005881 207439 61
Ovine herpesvirus 2 ohv2 NC_007646 135135 47
Pongine herpesvirus 4 ccmv NC_003521 241087 38
Psittacid herpesvirus 1 pshv1 NC_005264 163025 39
Saimiriine herpesvirus 2 sahv2 NC_001350 112930 65
Suid herpesvirus 1 shv1 NC_006151 143461 26
Tupaiid herpesvirus 1 thv NC_002794 195859 34

Score-based sequence analysis

Score-based sequence analysis is a powerful and yet flexible tool to identify segments of a biological (DNA, RNA or amino acids) sequence containing high concentration of residues of interest according to the users' objectives. One assigns high positive scores to residues of interest, high negative scores to contrasting residues and low or zero scores for the rest. Using various score schemes, Karlin and his collaborators applied this approach with success to gene finding, identification of transmembrane protein segments, and DNA-binding domains. For details and other applications, see, for example, [20-22] and the references therein.

Our interest in this paper is to identify segments of genomic sequences with high AT content. Towards this end, we label bases C or G as "strongly bonding" base S; and bases A or T as "weakly bonding" base W. Under this label, S bases (i.e., C or G) are given a score of s and W bases (i.e., A or T) a score of w. The scores s and w will be specified below. We next model the genomic sequence as a realization of a sequence of independent and identically distributed random variables, X1, X2, ..., Xn (where n is the genome length), taking values in {s, w}. If the ith base is labeled as W, Xi is given a score w otherwise Xi = s. We let p := P(Xi = s) and P (Xi = w) = 1 - p (denoted by q). The parameter p is naturally estimated by the CG percentage in the genome. An additional constraint needed to be imposed on the choice of s and w is that the expected score per base μ = ps + qw has to be negative. This condition prevents favoring long segments to be high scoring segments. A moment's reflection shows that we can always standardize one of the scores to be 1. Here we let w = 1 and choose s to be a negative integer (integer-value choice due to a technical reason as pointed out after equation (3)) so that the expected score per base, μ = ps + qw is close to the value of -0.5 (where we adopt Karlin's choice of expected value as in [21]). In other words, w := 1 and

s:=⌊μ−qwp⌋, MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGZbWCcqGG6aGocqGH9aqpdaGbdaqaamaalaaabaacciGae8hVd0MaeyOeI0IaemyCaeNaem4DaChabaGaemiCaahaaaGaayj84laawUp+aiabcYcaSaaa@3D1A@

where μ = -0.5 and ⌊·⌋ denotes the integer floor function.

Excursions and their values

We next compute the cumulative scores and seek to identify segments of the genome that have significantly high scores. As we are only interested in segments with positive additive scores, we reset our cumulative scores to zero whenever it becomes negative.

The excursion scores Ei's are defined recursively as

E0 = 0, Ei = max{Ei-1 + Xi, 0}, for 1 ≤ i ≤ n.

Using this recursive definition, we are able to construct "excursions" for each of the genomes. An excursion starts at a point i where Ei is zero and ends at j > i where Ej is the very next zero. The score then stays at zero until it first becomes positive again for the start of the next excursion. The value of an excursion is defined to be the peak score during the course of that particular excursion.

Distribution of the Maximal Aggregate Score

For each value of x, the maximal aggregate score

Mn=max⁡1≤k≤nEk MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGnbqtdaWgaaWcbaGaemOBa4gabeaakiabg2da9maaxababaGagiyBa0MaeiyyaeMaeiiEaGhaleaacqaIXaqmcqGHKjYOcqWGRbWAcqGHKjYOcqWGUbGBaeqaaOGaemyrau0aaSbaaSqaaiabdUgaRbqabaaaaa@3E95@

satisfies

P(Mn>ln⁡nλ∗+x)≈1−exp⁡{−K∗e−λ*x}, MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGqbaudaqadaqaaiabd2eannaaBaaaleaacqWGUbGBaeqaaOGaeyOpa4ZaaSaaaeaacyGGSbaBcqGGUbGBcqWGUbGBaeaaiiGacqWF7oaBdGaGKYbaaSqajaiPbGaGKIGaaiad0HSFxiIkaaaaaOGaey4kaSIaemiEaGhacaGLOaGaayzkaaGaeyisISRaeGymaeJaeyOeI0IagiyzauMaeiiEaGNaeiiCaaNaei4EaSNaeyOeI0Iaem4saS0aaWbaaSqabeaacWaDK63fIOcaaOGaemyzau2aaWbaaSqabeaacqGHsislcqWF7oaBdaahaaadbeqaaiadaYUGQaGkaaWccqWG4baEaaGccqGG9bqFcqGGSaalaaa@5979@

where λ* is the unique positive solution to the equation E(eλX1) MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGfbqrdaqadaqaaiabdwgaLnaaCaaaleqabaacciGae83UdWMaemiwaG1aaSbaaWqaaiabigdaXaqabaaaaaGccaGLOaGaayzkaaaaaa@34E3@ = peλs + qeλw = 1 and K* is a parameter given by an explicit series expansion (See [23]).

When X is an integer-valued variable of span δ, we have a simpler expression for K* ([23]):

exp⁡{−K+e−λ∗x}≤lim⁡inf⁡n→∞ P(Mn−ln⁡nλ*<x)≤lim⁡sup⁡n→∞ P(Mn−ln⁡nλ*<x)≤exp⁡{−K−e−λ*x}, MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=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@9178@

where

K−=λ*δeλ*δ−1K*, K+=λ*δ1−e−λ*δK*. MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGlbWsdaWgaaWcbaGaeyOeI0cabeaakiabg2da9maalaaabaacciGae83UdW2aaWbaaSqabeaacWaGulOkaOcaaOGae8hTdqgabaGaemyzau2aaWbaaSqabeaacqWF7oaBdaahaaadbeqaaiadacRGQaGkaaWccqWF0oazaaGccqGHsislcqaIXaqmaaGaem4saS0aaWbaaSqabeaacWaGilOkaOcaaOGaeiilaWIaeeiiaaIaem4saS0aaSbaaSqaaiabgUcaRaqabaGccqGH9aqpdaWcaaqaaiab=T7aSnacmskhaaWcbKaJKgacmsQamai1cQcaQaaakiab=r7aKbqaaiabigdaXiabgkHiTiabdwgaLnaaCaaaleqabaGaeyOeI0Iae83UdW2aiGjGCaaameqcycyaiGjGcWaGWkOkaOcaaSGae8hTdqgaaaaakiabdUealnaaCaaaleqabaGamaiYcQcaQaaakiabc6caUaaa@6263@

For the simple score scheme with values {-m, ..., -1, 0, 1} occurring with probabilities {p-m, ..., p-1, p0, p1} we have,

K- = (e-λ* - e-2λ*) E (Xeλ*X).

We can set the left hand side of Equation (2) to some predetermined significance level, say P = 0.05 or 0.01, and solve for x. A segment with score exceeding MP=ln⁡nλ*+x MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaacqWGnbqtdaWgaaWcbaGaemiuaafabeaakiabg2da9maalaaabaGagiiBaWMaeiOBa4MaemOBa4gabaacciGae83UdW2aaWbaaSqabeaacWaAulOkaOcaaaaakiabgUcaRiabdIha4baa@3ADC@ is then said to be significant at the 100P% level.

In this paper, we use K- in place of K* in Equation (2) for a "conservative" estimate of the probability and K+ for a "generous" one.

We use Equation (2) with P = 0.05 and P = 0.01 to get M0.05 and M0.01 respectively. If the value of an excursion exceeds the critical value M0.05 (or M0.01), then the segment from the beginning of the excursion up to the base where the peak value is realized is said to be a high-scoring segment (HSS) significant at the 5% (or 1%) level.

HSS Selection

For each of the genomic sequences listed in Table 1, we obtain a set of HSS, significant at the 5% (or 1%) level. In each set of HSS, it is common to find several of them located close to one another. We thus apply a filtering procedure so that, if this happens, we shall only select one of several neighboring excursions as a representative for that part of the genome. In fact, we first sort all the HSS according to their aggregate scores. Starting with the one with the highest value, say segment A, we 'discard' neighboring HSS that are within 2 map units of it. After that, we pick among the rest (not including segment A and the discarded HSS), the HSS with the next highest value, say segment B, and repeat the process. Only the representative segments A, B, and so forth, will be used in replication origin prediction.

Results and Discussion

HSS Tables and Excursion Plots

Table 2 lists the HSS for each herpesvirus in Table 1. We have also tried locating high-scoring segments by running the excursions from the 3' end to 5' end of the genome. The results obtained are not much different from the "vanilla" version (i.e., from 5' to 3').

Table 2.

Herpesviruses : HSS at 5% level using the conservative bound.

HSS HSS
Virus Start Peak Value Virus Start Peak Value
alhv1 1204 1370 54 ebv 11854 11950 45
32478 32850 48 77111 77150 24
113630 113684 46 43158 43235 23
85923 85992 45 ehv1 20348 20431 47
72999 73115 44 134195 134276 36
125691 125726 31 65055 65126 35
athv3 8827 8892 40 99301 99374 34
bohv1 100410 100484 26 11034 11141 32
109702 109730 25 105796 105862 30
128487 128515 25 73653 73746 27
16593 16626 21 113818 113849 25
113720 113738 18 149310 149341 25
124479 124497 18 110314 110352 23
29 45 16 128924 128992 23
58542 58569 15 ehv2 160281 160518 102
bohv4 60687 60826 35 86522 86622 76
bohv5 68440 68507 49 53843 54012 61
113549 113583 28 140661 140826 57
129429 129463 28 4580 4655 51
592 616 21 171454 171529 51
86191 86215 21 95342 95440 50
102074 102106 17 10772 10820 48
92511 92535 15 39893 39977 48
120935 120959 15 177646 177694 48
59921 59938 14 113310 113399 47
17408 17433 13 134709 134772 45
41883 41899 13 166114 166207 42
calhv3 70131 70198 31 45831 45965 41
ccmv 50872 50973 50 15443 15482 39
158344 158701 45 19722 19845 39
95375 95603 39 182317 182356 39
3519 3602 35 153977 154145 36
24084 24156 33 123321 123362 35
182982 183136 31 147222 147341 35
14314 14370 23 34816 34884 29
177170 177247 23 76380 76454 29
189041 189075 22 103167 103223 29
147310 147384 20 64344 64402 25
cehv1 116723 116836 53 786 831 24
92092 92118 26 ehv4 109852 110086 60
61680 61700 20 19878 19943 50
132785 132805 20 132383 132462 49
149415 149435 20 105284 105365 48
52055 52075 17 23895 24016 43
42984 43006 16 3984 4110 42
11389 11407 15 73340 73509 37
24415 24441 14 98849 98930 33
cehv15 11965 12011 28 46612 46674 32
114927 114988 19 10630 10697 31
cehv16 92913 92940 23 58833 58906 31
62970 62991 21 82616 82701 31
133468 133489 21 127230 127351 31
149813 149834 21 112929 112967 29
8303 8331 20 145082 145120 29
118685 118713 20 gahv1 24852 24890 30
53056 53100 18 gahv2 106724 106811 35
25423 25473 16 gahv3 11168 11198 27
1717 1736 15 122384 122414 27
114861 114890 15 134414 134461 26
125280 125299 15 162999 163046 26
30975 30991 14 58953 58999 25
cehv2 7681 7738 33 hcmv 3402 3542 41
115791 115848 33 186855 186995 41
61483 61503 20 16757 16915 35
129527 129547 20 96685 96824 34
144461 144481 20 11713 11808 32
90857 90884 19 198116 198171 31
51884 51910 14 173560 173599 30
93873 93887 14 210724 210781 30
112292 112320 14 26361 26475 27
cehv7 86167 86296 37 108222 108303 24
cehv8 149643 149720 33 159296 159380 24
15671 15733 30 71011 71055 23
29233 29278 29 226192 226230 23
163766 163806 28
177904 178092 28
89538 89589 27
hcmv-m 3798 3939 42 mfrv 128046 128640 114
181238 181334 33 23139 23374 109
97069 97206 32 2488 3068 106
173950 173994 32 32573 33752 84
216020 216077 30 64296 64454 62
203400 203456 29 111496 111624 44
17082 17297 26 72739 72809 43
12060 12145 25 53766 53825 32
157590 157726 25 69912 70061 32
hhv6 130410 130501 59 114828 114860 32
3605 3712 51 mmrv 2388 2967 111
154838 154945 51 23902 24187 108
137079 137210 43 33761 35136 103
hhv6b 132997 133163 62 130346 131085 97
139482 139569 51 65611 65853 56
3911 3988 37 74140 74204 37
157232 157309 37 71311 71462 31
hhv7 134169 134376 117 117507 117551 29
128589 128984 70 112930 113033 28
hhv8 136287 136704 93 muhv4 6000 6037 29
982 1125 44 ohv2 115365 115545 72
58833 58906 28 126823 127116 68
23547 23598 27 118943 118988 42
30712 30775 27 72630 72699 36
119416 119467 27 1269 1370 29
106412 106452 25 27589 27633 29
hsv1 62465 62485 20 76335 76370 26
35000 35034 19 79158 79265 26
115242 115303 19 oshv1 73292 73460 64
131990 132008 18 35416 35493 61
144115 144142 18 146021 146164 55
11705 11734 17 190174 190312 54
52753 52818 17 195928 196026 54
96047 96069 16 201648 201786 54
136146 136162 16 23065 23135 50
hsv2 5584 5628 35 161395 161505 50
121621 121665 35 2682 2735 49
52978 53003 19 180276 180329 49
91716 91747 19 108068 108173 45
146600 146631 19 171433 171549 44
95238 95256 18 67872 67975 43
48761 48778 17 114689 114763 42
62919 62939 17 pshv1 18751 18791 31
132691 132711 17 121452 121486 31
81195 81220 16 160685 160719 31
99337 99370 15 130332 130365 27
ichv1 6068 6290 81 151806 151839 27
121738 121960 81 23896 23942 22
104134 104399 70 134013 134049 21
17065 17333 58 78233 78256 20
132735 133003 58 rcmv 150923 151612 92
451 726 50 207600 207980 80
116121 116396 50 143617 144150 74
60752 60845 30 178241 178326 37
42919 43007 28 214638 214702 37
20109 20187 24 219069 219153 33
10016 10063 23 201767 201885 28
125686 125733 23 161797 161929 27
mcmv 155163 156341 125 171828 171870 27
24072 24108 21
161228 161391 40 sahv2 28533 28613 45
115543 115640 37 shv1 63862 63892 24
102865 102960 35 96251 96275 21
79497 79573 34 114686 114715 20
15628 15724 33 129607 129636 20
144170 144290 33 50382 50407 19
73525 73579 27 75955 75984 17
39209 39248 24 16151 16172 15
92997 93036 24 33045 33063 15
219239 219282 22 109083 109098 15
mehv1 NIL 135503 135518 15
8432 8455 14
thv 168842 168927 25
24153 24200 23
28257 28286 17
vzv 2574 2785 39
110195 110227 32
119669 119701 32

Entries in italics are significant at 1% too.

For visualizing the locations of the selected HSS relative to the entire genome, the excursion plot is a convenient tool. The excursion plot of the Human Herpesvirus 3 (vzv) is presented in Figure 1, where the AT excursion values are plotted against the bases along the genome. The general appearance of Figure 1 is typical of the excursion plots for all the herpesviruses analyzed. In the case of vzv, three peaks with excursion values exceeding the 5% significance level are observed. Two of these peaks are close to the centers of the only two known replication origins of vzv (see Table 3).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

The Excursion Plot of the vzv virus. The horizontal line corresponds to the 5% significant level. The two triangles denote the locations of known replication origins of the vzv.

Table 3.

Prediction results at 5% level using the conservative bound.

Nearest HSS
Virus Ori Center Start Peak Value Prediction
bohv1 111190 109702 109730 25 Yes
bohv1 127028 128487 128515 25 Yes
bohv4 97996.5 60687 60826 35 No
bohv5 113312 113549 113583 28 Yes
bohv5 129701 129429 129463 28 Yes
cehv1 61690.5 61680 61700 20 Yes
cehv1 61893.5 61680 61700 20 Yes
cehv1 132795.5 132785 132805 20 Yes
cehv1 132998.5 132785 132805 20 Yes
cehv1 149425.5 149415 149435 20 Yes
cehv1 149628.5 149415 149435 20 Yes
cehv16 62981 62970 62991 21 Yes
cehv16 133479 133468 133489 21 Yes
cehv16 149824 149813 149834 21 Yes
cehv2 61493.5 61483 61503 20 Yes
cehv2 129537.5 129527 129547 20 Yes
cehv2 144471.5 144461 144481 20 Yes
cehv7 109636.5 86167 86296 37 No
cehv7 118622.5 86167 86296 37 No
ebv 8313.5 11854 11950 45 No
ebv 40797 43158 43235 23 Yes
ebv 143825.5 77111 77150 24 No
ehv1 126262.5 128924 128992 23 Yes
ehv4 73909.5 73340 73509 37 Yes
ehv4 119471.5 112929 112967 29 No
ehv4 138577.5 132383 132462 49 No
gahv1 24871.5 24852 24890 30 Yes
hcmv 93923.5 96685 96824 34 Yes
hhv6 67805 130410 130501 59 No
hhv6b 69160.5 132997 133163 62 No
hhv7 66991.5 128589 128984 70 No
hsv1 62475 62465 62485 20 Yes
hsv1 131999 131990 132008 18 Yes
hsv1 146235 144115 144142 18 Yes
hsv2 62930 62919 62939 17 Yes
hsv2 132760 132691 132711 17 Yes
hsv2 148981 146600 146631 19 Yes
rcmv 77318 24072 24108 21 No
shv1 63878 63862 63892 24 Yes
shv1 114701 114686 114715 20 Yes
shv1 129901 129607 129636 20 Yes
vzv 110218.5 110195 110227 32 Yes
vzv 119678.5 119669 119701 32 Yes

For each replication origin, we list the high-scoring segment (at 5% level) closest to it. When the peak of a high-scoring segment is less than 2 map units away from the center of a replication origin, we say that our method has correctly predicted that particular replication origin.

Prediction Performance

The high-scoring segments are checked against known replication origins in herpesviruses to evaluate their performance as a prediction tool. Table 3 lists all the known replication origins for the herpesviruses in Table 1. These origins are reported either in published literature or GenBank annotations. For each replication origin, we list the HSS (at 5% level) closest to it. For this table we had used the "conservative" estimate for the value of K* (See Equations (2) and (3)). When the peak of an HSS is less than 2 map units (one map unit is one percent of the genome length) away from the center of a replication origin, we say that our method has correctly predicted that particular replication origin. From Table 3, we see that of the 43 replication origins known, compiled from literature or annotations, 32 of them are close to HSS that have been identified.

We had also tried using the "generous" estimate for K* at the 5% and 1% level of significance. Table 4 gives a summary of the performance of our prediction scheme when those bounds were used. The first two columns of the table gives the sensitivity level and positive prediction value of our scheme. Sensitivity refers to the percentage of replication origins predicted by our method, and PPV (positive predictive value) the proportion of HSS that correctly predict replication origins. APD (average predictive distance), given in map units (± one standard deviation), shows the average of the distances (in map units) between the center of each replication origin and the HSS that predicts it. Note that the APD values say that on average, when a prediction by an HSS is successful, the replication origin is about 0.35 map units away from it. We have also done some simple analysis of the location of the center of each replication origin with respect to the HSS closest to it. We count the number of times the center of replication origin falls within the left, right or center of the HSS. The columns %L, %R, and %C in Table 4 give these proportions. Our results show that the origin falls within the center of the HSS half the time.

Table 4.

Prediction Performance Summary.

Significance Sensitivity PPV APD %L %R %C
5% (C) 74% 22% 0.34 ± 0.57 16% 31% 53%
5% (G) 86% 17% 0.35 ± 0.53 24% 30% 46%
1% (C) 67% 25% 0.31 ± 0.52 14% 34% 52%
1% (G) 74% 18% 0.34 ± 0.57 16% 31% 53%

(C) indicates that the "Conservative" bound is used while (G) indicates that the "Generous" bound is used. Sensitivity refers to the percentage of replication origins predicted by our method, and PPV (positive predictive value) the proportion of HSS that correctly predict replication origins. APD (average predictive distance), given in map units (± one standard deviation), shows the average of the distances between the center of each replication origin and a HSS that predicts it in map units. %L, %R and %C count the number of times the center of replication origin falls within the left, right or center of the HSS.

Comparison with Other Approaches

How does the AT excursion method compare with the sliding window approach using palindrome based scoring schemes previously presented in [12]? Since the BWS1 scheme has been shown to perform best among the various palindrome based schemes, we have examined the numbers of replication origins correctly predicted by AT excursion and by BWS1. The results are summarized in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Predictions of AT excursion and BWS1. In this figure, the set A consists of origin replications predicted by the AT excursion method and B consists of those predicted by the BWS1 method. A ⋂ BC = {cehv71, cehv72, ehv41, hsv21, hsv22, hsv23}, AC ⋂ B = {cehv162, cehv163, ebv1, ebv3, hhv6, hhv6b, rcmv}, (A ⋃ B)C = {bohv4, ehv42, ehv43, hhv7}. The rest of the replication origins (26 of them) are predicted by both methods. Note that for viruses with several known replication origins, such as the hsv2, which has three (see Table 3), we denote the replication origins as hsv21, hsv22, hsv23, etc.

The majority of the 43 known origins in the herpesviruses listed in Table 1 are predicted by both methods and most of the remaining ones are predicted by one method or the other. Only four of the origins fail to be predicted by either method. This suggests that the AT excursion method and the BWS1 scheme complement each other very well.

There are certain advantages in the AT excursion approach over BWS1. First, AT excursion does not require any sequence specific parameters to be prescribed by the user. It is window size free because it does not require any sliding window to measure AT concentration. Moreover, while the palindrome based methods require the specification of a minimal palindrome length before the analysis can be carried out, no such parameter is needed for AT excursion. Second, the AT excursion method is statistically based, as the probabilistic distribution has already been established [20-22]. This allows the statistical significance for HSS be evaluated easily.

We also note that the more elaborate AT excursion approach performs better than the simpler procedure of measuring the percentage of A and T bases on a sliding window in terms of number of correct predictions and the proximity of these predictions to the true origins. Out of the 43 known replication origins for the herpesviruses in Table 1, 32 are correctly predicted by AT excursion but only 28 by AT sliding window plot. Furthermore, the boxplots of the predictive distances (Figure 3) of the AT excursion approach suggests that the predictions given by the AT excursion approach are much closer to known replication origins as compared to those of the AT sliding window plot approach. (In fact, the predictive distances of the AT excursion approach compared to that of the PLS and BWS1 approaches mentioned in [12] are observably shorter. See Figure 3.) This suggests that the excursion values might more correctly capture the essence of A/T abundance variation along genomic sequences.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Predictive Distances for PLS, BWS1, AT-swp and AT excursion. These boxplots show the predictive distances for PLS, BWS1, AT-swp and AT excursion.

Herpesvirus Replication Origins Alignment and Motif Finding

One might ask whether or not the nucleotide sequences around replication origins in various viruses of the same family share sufficient similarities so that the origins can be identified by sequence alignments and motif finding techniques. We therefore extracted the nucleotide sequences of the known herpesvirus origins according to their documented locations for closer examination. These sequences are available as supplementary materials on the companion website. A multiple alignment using CLUSTAL W [24] and motif searches using MEME and MAST [25,26] have been conducted for the herpesvirus origin sequences. No significant sequence similarity or common motif pattern across all the origin sequences has been found, agreeing with the findings of [11,13,14].

What if we first classify these nucleotide sequences according to some classification schemes, will the members within each class share noticeable sequence similarities? We classified the origins according to (i) the sub-family of the virus (herpesviruses are classified into the alpha, beta, and gamma sub-families by their biological properties [27]), (ii) the type of origin (i.e., whether the origin is a oriL, oriLyt or oriS). We ran MEME and MAST separately on the sequences in each sub-family/type of origins to detect common motif patterns. From the outputs under classification (i), we note that the origins from the alpha sub-family can be further divided into two groups. Each group has a common motif pattern across its members. For the beta and gamma sub-families, no distinct patterns can be found. However, the rcmv and ebv origins contain many repeat patterns. For classification (ii), we find that both the oriL and oriLyt origins contain sequence motifs common to a number of their members. No motif was found for oriS sequences. The results of our motif search are made available in the supplementary materials.

Although our investigations are preliminary, the motifs found in these subsets of herpesvirus genomes may suggest new information that can be incorporated into the replication origin prediction procedures.

Other Families of Viruses

Aside from the herpesviruses, we have also applied the AT excursion method to search for HSS in the poxviruses and iridoviruses. These two viral families are chosen because, like the herpesviruses, they are large, complex dsDNA viruses with no RNA stage. Their genome lengths are also similar in magnitude to those of the herpesviruses.

Poxviruses infect a large variety of animal species that gather in swarms and herds (e.g., mosquitoes, cows). Smallpox is a major disease caused by the variola virus, a member of the poxvirus family. Smallpox was eradicated in 1977 by preventive inoculations with cowpox or vaccinia viruses through the dedicated efforts of the World Health Organization and many individuals. In the recent few years, as the threat of the variola virus being used as a biological weapon is raised, there is growing interest in further studying poxviruses for biodefense purposes [28,29]. Iridoviruses are found in a variety of fish, amphibians, and reptiles. Some iridoviruses have been associated with serious diseases (e.g., viral erythrocytic necrosis of salmonids), while others have only been found in apparently healthy animals (e.g., goldfish iridovirus). Iridovirus infection is considered a serious concern in modern aquaculture, fish farming, and wildlife conservation [30].

Amongst these two families, only one genome, namely the Chilo iridescent virus, has documented replication origin locations [31]. Our method has correctly predicted one of these locations. Due to the lack of confirmed origin locations, prediction accuracy cannot be tested on these families. Nevertheless, our predictions may assist researchers to investigate these viruses experimentally to identify and confirm the exact locations of replication origins in their genomes. We have, therefore, made our prediction results available at [1].

AT excursion applied to larger genomes

To gauge whether the AT excursion approach can potentially be generalized to predict replication origins for non-viral genomes, we apply it to several archaeal and bacterial genomes which have been previously analyzed. From [4,5,32] we are able to compile a list of 15 known or suggested replication origins (11 known, 4 suggested). Using the AT excursion method, we manage to correctly predict 9 of the replication origins (6 known, 3 suggested). Although our studies are preliminary, the results show that the AT excursion method can work reasonably well even on larger genomes.

Conclusion

This paper introduces the AT excursion method to quantify local AT abundance in genomic sequences. The simple and intuitive idea of locating regions with high AT content as potential replication origin sites proves to be effective in identifying several replication origins not previously predicted. This shows that the AT excursion approach is a valuable addition to existing prediction tools. However, we have also observed that quite a number of the statistically significant HSS found by AT excursions are not close to replication origins. Whether these HSS correspond to other important functional sites in the genomic sequences remains an interesting question to be investigated.

The availability of statistical significance criteria and the independence of ad hoc parameters like the minimal palindrome length and sliding window size make the AT excursion method particularly easy to apply to those viral genomes where no replication origin information in similar and related genomes is available. On the other hand, if such information is available, the AT excursion method is not capable of taking advantage of it. To address this issue, machine learning approaches (e.g., neural networks and support vector machines), which better allow us to use knowledge in related genomes, are currently being explored. We anticipate that a combination of score based statistics with machine learning approaches will provide a highly accurate prediction tool set for replication origins.

Authors' contributions

DC participated in the design of the study and performed the data and statistical analysis. KPC and MYL conceived the study, and participated in its design and coordination. All authors contributed to writing, reading and approving the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions which improve this paper. Kwok Pui Choi was supported by National University of Singapore ARF Research grant R-155-000-051-112; and Ming-Ying Leung by NIH grants S06GM08012-35, 5G12RR008124-11 and 3T34GM008048-20S1.

Contributor Information

David SH Chew, Email: david.chew@nus.edu.sg.

Ming-Ying Leung, Email: mleung@utep.edu.

Kwok Pui Choi, Email: stackp@nus.edu.sg.

References

  1. Supplementary Materials http://www.stat.nus.edu.sg/~stadc/papers/ATexcursion
  2. Delecluse HJ, Hammerschmidt W. The genetic approach to the Epstein-Barr virus: from basic virology to gene therapy. Mol Pathol. 2000;53:270–279. doi: 10.1136/mp.53.5.270. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Lobry JR. Asymmetric substitution patterns in the two DNA strands of bacteria. Mol Biol Evol. 1996;13:660–665. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Salzberg SL, Salzberg AJ, Kerlavage AR, Tomb JF. Skewed oligomers and origins of replication. Gene. 1998;217:57–67. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1119(98)00374-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhang R, Zhang CT. Identification of replication origins in archaeal genomes based on the Z-curve method. Archaea. 2005;1:335–346. doi: 10.1155/2005/509646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Mackiewicz P, Zakrzewska-Czerwinska J, Zawilak A, Dudek MR, Cebrat S. Where does bacterial replication start? Rules for predicting the oriC region. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:3781–3791. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh699. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh699 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Breier AM, Chatterji S, Cozzarelli NR. Prediction of Saccharomyces cerevisiae replication origins. Genome Biol. 2004;5:R22. doi: 10.1186/gb-2004-5-4-r22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/gb-2004-5-4-r22 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Brodie of Brodie EB, Nicolay S, Touchon M, Audit B, d'Aubenton Carafa Y, Thermes C, Arneodo A. From DNA sequence analysis to modeling replication in the human genome. Phys Rev Lett. 2005;94:248103. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.248103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Touchon M, Nicolay S, Audit B, Brodie of Brodie EB, d'Aubenton Carafa Y, Arneodo A, Thermes C. Replication-associated strand asymmetries in mammalian genomes: toward detection of replication origins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:9836–9841. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0500577102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0500577102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Leung MY, Choi KP, Xia A, Chen LHY. Nonrandom clusters of palindromes in herpesvirus genomes. J Comput Biol. 2005;12:331–354. doi: 10.1089/cmb.2005.12.331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cmb.2005.12.331 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Masse MJ, Karlin S, Schachtel GA, Mocarski ES. Human cytomegalovirus origin of DNA replication (oriLyt) resides within a highly complex repetitive region. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1992;89:5246–5250. doi: 10.1073/pnas.89.12.5246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chew DSH, Choi KP, Leung MY. Scoring schemes of palindrome clusters for more sensitive prediction of replication origins in herpesviruses. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:e134. doi: 10.1093/nar/gni135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gni135 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hamzeh FM, Lietman PS, Gibson W, Hayward GS. Identification of the lytic origin of DNA replication in human cytomegalovirus by a novel approach utilizing ganciclovir-induced chain termination. J Virol. 1990;64:6184–6195. doi: 10.1128/jvi.64.12.6184-6195.1990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dykes C, Chan H, Krenitsky DM, Dewhurst S. Stringent structural and sequence requirements of the human herpesvirus 6B lytic-phase origin of DNA replication. J Gen Virol. 1997;78:1125–1129. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-78-5-1125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lin CL, Li H, Wang Y, Zhu FX, Kudchodkar S, Yuan Y. Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus lytic origin (ori-Lyt)-dependent DNA replication: identification of the ori-Lyt and association of K8 bZip protein with the origin. J Virol. 2003;77:5578–5588. doi: 10.1128/JVI.77.10.5578-5588.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kornberg A, Baker TA. DNA Replication. 2. New York, New York: WH Freeman and Company; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  17. Bramhill D, Kornberg A. A model for initiation at origins of DNA replication. Cell. 1988;54:915–918. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90102-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Segurado M, de Luis A, Antequera F. Genome-wide distribution of DNA replication origins at A+T-rich islands in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. EMBO Rep. 2003;4:1048–1053. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.embor7400008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Karlin S, Altschul SF. Methods for assessing the statistical significance of molecular sequence features by using general scoring schemes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1990;87:2264–2268. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.6.2264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Karlin S, Brendel V. Chance and statistical significance in protein and DNA sequence analysis. Science. 1992;257:39–49. doi: 10.1126/science.1621093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Karlin S. Statistical studies of biomolecular sequences: score-based methods. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B. 1994;344:391–402. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1994.0078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Karlin S. Statistical signals in bioinformatics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:13355–13362. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501804102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0501804102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Karlin S, Dembo A, Kawabata T. Statistical composition of high-scoring segments from molecular sequences. Ann Statist. 1990;18:571–581. [Google Scholar]
  24. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994;22:4673–4680. doi: 10.1093/nar/22.22.4673. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Bailey TL, Elkan C. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology. Vol. 2. Menlo Park, California: AAAI Press; 1994. Fitting a mixture model by expectation maximization to discover motifs in biopolymers; pp. 28–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Bailey TL, Gribskov M. Combining evidence using p-values: application to sequence homology searches. Bioinformatics. 1998;14:48–54. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/14.1.48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Cann AJ. Principles of Molecular Virology. 4. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  28. Henderson DA. The looming threat of bioterrorism. Science. 1999;283:1279–1282. doi: 10.1126/science.283.5406.1279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Miller SE. Bioterrorism and electron microscopic differentiation of poxviruses from herpesviruses: dos and don'ts. Ultrastruct Pathol. 2003;27:133–140. doi: 10.1080/01913120309932. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Tsai CT, Ting JW, Wu MH, Wu MF, Guo IC, Chang CY. Complete genome sequence of the grouper iridovirus and comparison of genomic organization with those of other iridoviruses. J Virol. 2005;79:2010–2023. doi: 10.1128/JVI.79.4.2010-2023.2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JVI.79.4.2010-2023.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Handermann M, Schnitzler P, Rösen-Wolff A, Raab K, Sonntag KC, Darai G. Identification and mapping of origins of DNA replication within the DNA sequences of the genome of insect iridescent virus type 6. Virus Genes. 1992;6:19–32. doi: 10.1007/BF01703754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Freeman JM, Plasterer TN, Smith TF, Mohr SC. Patterns of genome organization in bacteria. Science. 1998;279:1827a. doi: 10.1126/science.279.5358.1827a. http://www.sciencemag.org [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from BMC Bioinformatics are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES