Table 1.
Analysis of homolog RMS
| Nonhomolog (NH) RMS Avg (μm) | Homolog (H) RMS Avg (μm) | UnPaired homolog (uH) RMS Avg (μm) | Paired homolog (pH) RMS Avg (μm) | H vs. NH RMS Avg pval | NH vs. uH RMS Avg pval | NH vs. pH RMS Avg pval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ds1.1-3 | 0.37 | 0.39 | 0.40 | 0.38 | - | - | - |
| ds1.3-7 | 1.11 | 0.98 | 1.02 | 0.96 | ++ | - | ++ |
| ds1.6-10 | 1.12 | 1.07 | 1.12 | 1.04 | - | - | + |
| ds1.9-13 | 1.13 | 1.10 | 1.27 | 1.03 | - | - | + |
| ds1.1-6 | 1.03 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.93 | + | - | + |
| ds1.4-9 | 1.10 | 1.03 | 1.11 | 0.99 | - | - | + |
| ds1.7-12 | 1.14 | 1.14 | 1.31 | 1.07 | - | - | - |
| ds1.3-10 | 1.40 | 1.27 | 1.35 | 1.23 | ++ | - | ++ |
| ds1.6-13 | 1.39 | 1.30 | 1.42 | 1.25 | + | - | ++ |
| ds1.1-9 | 1.35 | 1.24 | 1.31 | 1.21 | ++ | - | ++ |
| ds1.4-12 | 1.37 | 1.29 | 1.45 | 1.22 | - | - | ++ |
| ds1.1-13 | 1.60 | 1.47 | 1.58 | 1.43 | ++ | - | ++ |
| ds5.1-3 | 0.33 | 0.32 | 0.33 | 0.32 | - | - | - |
| ds5.3-7 | 0.92 | 0.86 | 0.95 | 0.81 | - | - | - |
| ds5.6-10 | 0.94 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 0.86 | - | - | - |
| ds5.9-13 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.97 | 0.92 | - | - | - |
| ds5.1-6 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.97 | 0.87 | - | - | - |
| ds5.4-9 | 0.91 | 0.87 | 0.94 | 0.83 | - | - | - |
| ds5.7-12 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 1.01 | 0.87 | - | - | - |
| ds5.3-10 | 1.17 | 1.12 | 1.24 | 1.04 | - | - | + |
| ds5.6-13 | 1.17 | 1.16 | 1.22 | 1.12 | - | - | - |
| ds5.1-9 | 1.13 | 1.11 | 1.18 | 1.07 | - | - | - |
| ds5.4-12 | 1.14 | 1.12 | 1.20 | 1.07 | - | - | - |
| ds5.1-13 | 1.36 | 1.34 | 1.43 | 1.28 | - | - | - |
Table 1 shows the average alignment rms of nonhomologs (NH), all (paired and unpaired at histone) homologs (H), paired at histone homologs (pH), or unpaired at histone homologs (uH). The results of 2 tailed t-tests comparing these groups are also shown. In DS1 a few intervals showed a significant bias when comparing all homologs to nonhomologs. When the homologs were separated into paired or unpaired, it was clear that the increased similarity results from those homologs unpaired at histone homologs (uH). None of the unpaired homologs were statistically different from the nonhomologs. In DS5, the effect was much weaker. Only the 3-10 interval was statistically different at the 0.05 threshold between nonhomologs. In DS5, the effect was much weaker. Only the 3-10 interval was statistically different at the 0.05 threshold between nonhomologs and paired homologues. Qualitatively however, the effect was similar. For every interval but two (1-6, 7-12), the paired homologs were more statistically different than the paired homologs. +, pval < 0.05; ++, pval < 0.01.