Table 4.
Evaluation of AGOUTI scaffolding in terms of gene models
| Number of contig pairs scaffolded | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assembly | K | Total | Case 1 | Case 2 | Case 3 | Case 4 |
| CE1 | 2 | 3,671 | 3,427 | 92 (74)a | 75 (57) | 77 (67) |
| 5 | 2,994 | 2,858 | 56 (40) | 56 (40) | 24 (21) | |
| CE2 | 2 | 2,660 | 2,463 | 72 (55) | 47 (34) | 78 (68) |
| 5 | 2,184 | 2,072 | 39 (29) | 39 (26) | 34 (27) | |
| CE3 | 2 | 2,093 | 1,928 | 59 (44) | 42 (33) | 64 (60) |
| 5 | 1,699 | 1,611 | 36 (24) | 25 (20) | 27 (25) | |
| CE4 | 2 | 1,822 | 1,697 | 50 (39) | 32 (26) | 43 (38) |
| 5 | 1,486 | 1,424 | 24 (16) | 26 (21) | 12 (10) | |
| CE5 | 2 | 1,302 | 1,215 | 41 (34) | 20 (18) | 26 (21) |
| 5 | 1,054 | 1,011 | 18 (13) | 13 (13) | 12 (8) | |
| CE6 | 2 | 624 | 582 | 22 (19) | 6 (5) | 14 (10) |
| 5 | 501 | 483 | 10 (7) | 4 (4) | 4 (1) | |
aThe figures in parentheses show the number of consecutive contig pairs in each case