Table 2.
A. Filter results for 11,345 17-base signatures matching EST contigs. | ||
Significant | Non-significant | |
8,012 (66.2%) | 4,094 (33.8%) | |
Reliable | 7,686 (63.5%) | 1,734 (14.3%) |
9,420 (77.8%) | 6,519 contigs | 1,235 contigs |
Non-reliable | 326 (2.7%) | 2,360 (19.5%) |
2,686 (22.2%) | 632 contigs | 2,276 contigs |
B. Filter results for 10,179 20-base signatures matching EST contigs. | ||
Significant | Non-significant | |
7,053 (65.3%) | 3,751 (34.7%) | |
Reliable | 6,698 (61.1%) | 1,473 (13.6%) |
8,171 (75.6%) | 5,830 contigs | 1,490 contigs |
Non-reliable | 355 (3.3%) | 2,278 (21.1%) |
2,633 (24.4%) | 386 contigs | 2,155 contigs |
C. Filter results for 3,889 17-base signatures matching EST singletons. | ||
Significant | Non-significant | |
2,700 (64.6%) | 1,477 (35.4%) | |
Reliable | 2,587 (61.9%) | 638 (15.3%) |
3,225 (77.2%) | 2,423 singletons | 663 singletons |
Non-reliable | 113 (2.7%) | 839 (20.1%) |
952 (22.8%) | 127 singletons | 857 singletons |
D. Filter results for 3,367 20-base signatures matching EST singletons. | ||
Significant | Non-significant | |
2,318 (64.4%) | 1,282 (35.6%) | |
Reliable | 2,207 (61.3%) | 499 (13.9%) |
2,706 (75.2%) | 2,096 singletons | 511 singletons |
Non-reliable | 111 (3.1%) | 783 (21.8%) |
894 (24.8%) | 128 singletons | 780 singletons |
Percentages refer to the total distinct signatures. Filters are described in the text, and are as defined in Meyers et al., [11]. In parts A and B, the number of EST contigs matched was out of a total of 6,430 unique contigs matched by 17-base signatures or 5,831 by 20-base signatures; signatures from different filter categories may match to the same contig (see Additional file 1A–1B and Table 3 for details). In parts C and D, the number of EST singletons matched was out of a total of 2,190 unique singletons matched by 17-base signatures or 2,097 by 20-base signatures; signatures from different filter categories may match to the same singleton (see Additional file 1A–1B and Table 3 for details).