Skip to main content
. 2008 Oct 24;24(24):2818–2824. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn548

Table 4.

Scaffold analysis of CABOG and Newbler assemblies

Assembler #Scaf. Scaf. N50 Scaf. max Scaf. sum Cov. (%)
P.gingivalis / FLX mates (M2)
    CABOG 7 392 892 661 267 2 324,483 98.7
    Newbler 9 268 678 718 704 2 187 430 94.1
P.gingivalis / FLX mates+FLX mates (M1+M2)
    CABOG 7 417 898 758 093 2 339 970 98.9
    Newbler 11 266 698 718 559 2 183 668 93.9
P.gingivalis / FLX reads+FLX mates (F1+M2)
    CABOG 9 450 308 758 275 2 335 950 98.8
    Newbler 382 223 720 519 2 189 593 94.2
P.gingivalis / FLX reads+Sanger mates (F1+S1)
    CABOG 6 1 507 760 1 507 760 2 268 548 96.6
    Newbler 51 1 489 797 1 489 797 2 185 214 94.3
P.gingivalis / FLX mates+Sanger mates (M2+S1)
    CABOG 1 2 317 095 2 317 095 2 317 095 98.7
    Newbler 6 1 550 861 1 550 861 2 184 352 93.9

The analysis included all scaffolds 2 kb or longer found in each assembler's FASTA output. Scaffold length statistics are shown in bases excluding the lengths of the gaps between contigs. Note that scaffold sum may not equal contig sum (Table 2) due to the 2 kb threshold being applied at the scaffold not contig level. Cov, bases of the reference covered by a sum over single best alignments of each full or partial scaffold sequence.