Table 2.
Tests on prion sup35 fragments
| Positive fragments | Classification result | w s |
|---|---|---|
| 7–17 GNNQQNYQQY |
+ |
0.34 |
| 16–26 YSQNGNQQQG |
- |
0.08 |
| 28–38 RYQGYQAYNA |
+ |
0.21 |
| 43–53 GGYYQNYQGY |
+ |
0.53 |
| 46–56 YQNYQGYSGY |
+ |
0.53 |
| 52–62 YSGYQQGGYQ |
+ |
0.16 |
| 55–65 YQQGGYQQYN |
+ |
0.13 |
| 94–104 PQGGRGNYKN |
- |
0.09 |
| 103–113 NFNYNNNLQG |
+ |
0.22 |
| 106–116 YNNNLQGYQA |
+ |
0.17 |
| 109–119 NLQGYQAGFQ |
+ |
0.17 |
| 127–137 NDFQKQQKQA |
- |
0.11 |
|
Negative fragments |
|
|
| 67-76 AGYQQQYNPQ |
+ |
0.17 |
| 70-79 QQQYNPQGGY |
- |
0.08 |
| 73-82 YNPQGGYQQY |
- |
0.06 |
| 76-85 QGGYQQYNPQ |
+ |
0.13 |
| 79-88 YQQYNPQGGY |
+ |
0.13 |
| 82-91 YNPQGGYQQQ |
- |
0.03 |
| 139-148 KPKKTLKLVS |
- |
0.09 |
| 142-151 KTLKLVSSSG |
- |
0.09 |
| 145-154 KLVSSSGIKL |
- |
0.12 |
| 148-157 SSSGIKLANA |
- |
0,12 |
| 151-160 GIKLANATKK |
- |
0,07 |
| 154-163 LANATKKVGT |
- |
0,07 |
| 157-166 ATKKVGTKPA |
- |
0,03 |
| 160-169 KVGTKPAESD |
- |
0,03 |
| 163-172 TKPAESDKKE |
- |
0,03 |
| 166-175 AESDKKEEEK |
- |
0.03 |
| 169-178 DKKEEEKSAE |
- |
0.03 |
| 172-181 EEEKSAETKE |
- |
0.03 |
| 175-184 KSAETKEPTK |
- |
0.06 |
| 178-187 ETKEPTKEPT |
- |
0.06 |
| 181-190 EPTKEPTKVE |
- |
0.06 |
| 184-193 KEPTKVEEPV |
- |
0.09 |
| 187-196 TKVEEPVKKE |
- |
0.09 |
| 190-199 EEPVKKEEKP |
- |
0.03 |
| 193-202 VKKEEKPVQT |
- |
0.03 |
| 196-205 EEKPVQTEEK |
- |
0.03 |
| 199-208 PVQTEEKTEE |
- |
0.11 |
| 202-211 TEEKTEEKSE |
- |
0.11 |
| 205-214 KTEEKSELPK |
- |
0.08 |
| 208-217 EKSELPKVED |
- |
0.08 |
| 211-220 ELPKVEDLKI |
- |
0.11 |
|
Sensitivity |
0.75 |
|
| Specificity | 0.91 |
Classification efficiency tested on fragments of prion sup35. The method was trained on Waltz dataset with a sliding window 5-residue long, classification coefficient was set to w l = 0.13. Emphasized are windows recognized by the classification method as potentially the most positive (amyloidogenic) of the whole tested fragment; the fragments obtained the actual distance value w s (window of a greatest distance).