Skip to main content
. 2009 Apr 13;4(4):e5179. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005179

Table 7. Sensitivities and average scores of the different HMMs for evolutionarily distant retroviral LTRs at low specificity.

Thre-shold Beta exo-genous HML cons Beta opossum Alpha-beta chicken Alpha exo-genous Lenti Delta Spuma Epsilon Gamma exo-genous HERV-gamma cons Gamma opossum
Size of test set 3 23 89 47 3 8 8 7 4 3 69 474
Average length of LTRs 382 728 332 290 325 412 700 1177 809 554 630 448
Hml −4 −14 40* −43 −49 −31 −11 −16 −15 −33 −20 −13 −34
1/3 100% 7.9% 0 0 1/8 1/8 0 0 0 12% 1.7%
Gamma −1 −14 1.9 −13 −17 −23 −0.41 −0.14 −6.6 −8.2 12* 23* −9.9
0 83% 20% 0 0 4/8 5/8 0 0 3/3 100% 22%
Beta 2 2.3 18* −5.8 1.5* 16* 3.7** 8.6* 1.8 −11 −8.1 2.1 −6.4
1/3 100% 18% 51% 3/3 6/8 7/8 3/7 0 0 49% 9.1%
Lenti −2 −15 −5.2 −18 −17 −11 34* −7.1 −14 −18 −7.8 −6.5 −16
0 30% 6.7% 0 0 100% 1/8 0 0 0 23% 5.9%
General 1 −2.2 9.4* −5.9 −1.9* 5.0* 5.6** 3.0* −1.1 −8.5 −3.6* 7.5* −4.8
1/3 100% 28% 45% 3/3 7/8 5/8 1/7 0 0 96% 21%

The thresholds were the same as in the RepeatMasker comparison in Table 3. (*) indicates that at least some LTRs in the LTR set are in the training set of the HMM model. (**) indicates that the set was used as a test set.