TABLE 2.
LIBSHUFF comparisons of coxL clone librariesa
| Comparison | Covhom | Covhet | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caldera Rim (A) and Pu'u Puai (B) | 22.0 | 0.0 (A vs B) | 0.001 |
| 16.0 | 0.0 (B vs A) | 0.001 | |
| Caldera Rim (A) and Halema'uma'u (B) | 3.7 (A vs B) | 0.001 | |
| 25.8 | 6.5 (B vs A) | 0.002 | |
| Caldera Rim (A) and Forest (B) | 0.0 (A vs B) | 0.001 | |
| 0.0 | 0.0 (B vs A) | 0.021 | |
| Pu'u Puai (A) and Halema'uma'u (B) | 0.0 (A vs B) | 0.001 | |
| 0.0 (B vs A) | 0.001 | ||
| Pu'u Puai (A) and Forest (B) | 0.0 (A vs B) | 0.001 | |
| 0.0 (B vs A) | 0.017 | ||
| Forest (A) and Halema'uma'u (B) | 0.0 (A vs B) | 0.001 | |
| 0.0 (B vs A) | 0.001 |
a
Homologous coverage (Covhom) and heterologous coverage (Covhet) of libraries (as a percentage) for the comparisons indicated. Probability values (P) are given for the significance of differences between homologous and heterologous coverages in a reciprocal comparison as a function of evolutionary distance. See reference 30 for details.