TABLE 3.
Summary information for the six probes yielding the highest signals when the CBv1 array was hybridized with a target derived from a natural Chesapeake Bay picoplankton community
| Clone (probe locationa) | Signal (% of peak) | Closest match (GenBank accession no.)b | % Similarityc |
|---|---|---|---|
| CB914H3 (D11) | 100 | Uncultivated; clone NRS1C607 from Neuse River Estuary (AF518561) | 91 (323/327) |
| CB916H3 (G6) | 74 | Uncultivated; clone SIS2-7 from decaying sea grass (AF389736) | 89 (321/327) |
| CB894H6 (B9) | 50 | Uncultivated; clone g1-HW4 from soil (AY196408) | 89 (327/327) |
| CB910H3 (A7) | 48 | Uncultivated; clone SIS2-7 from decaying sea grass (AF389736) | 88 (320/327) |
| CB907H10 (D8) | 30 | Bradyrhizobium sp. strain IRBG 230 (AB079617) | 96 (194/324) |
| CB907H9 (E5) | 26 | Uncultivated; clone nifH51 from sweet potato (AY159593) | 94 (324/324) |
a
Array location (as in Fig. 3).
b
The most similar sequence in GenBank as determined by the BLAST algorithm (2).
c
Similarities between the probe and the top-ranked BLAST match are presented as a percentage followed, in parentheses, by the ratio of the length of the matching region to the total length of the submitted fragment.