Table 3.
GC and GC3 content comparison
| Gene name | ESP1 | BIP1 | ACBP1 | PAR1 | PAR2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sl sequence length (bp) |
5416 |
2013 |
1125 |
2049 |
507 |
| Sl exon GC content (%) |
42.4 |
47.3 |
48.3 |
42.3 |
48.3 |
| Sl exon GC3 content (%) |
41.2 |
53.5 |
42.9 |
38.1 |
49.7 |
| Sv sequence length (bp) |
5416 |
2013 |
1125 |
2049 |
507 |
| Sv exon GC content (%) |
42.4 |
47.3 |
47.7 |
42.4 |
48.3 |
| Sv exon GC3 content (%) |
41.1 |
53.7 |
42.9 |
37.3 |
49.1 |
| Sl putative gene GC content* |
38.2 |
42.3 |
38.8 |
40.4 |
39.9 |
| Sv putative gene GC content* | 37.5 | 42.8 | 39.2 | 40.2 | 40.6 |
Sl: Silene latifolia, Sv: S. vulgaris.
*Exon and intron sequences were taken into account.
GC and GC3 contents were computed on gene sequences of identical size in both S. latifolia and S. vulgaris. PAR2 is truncated in the BAC sequence of S. latifolia and ESP1 is truncated in S. vulgaris. In these cases, only partial sequences with coverage in both species were compared.