Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 7;5:e3788. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3788

Figure 7. Evaluation of MetaCRAST, Crass, and MinCED run times on simulated AMD (A and B) and EBPR (C and D) metagenomes.

Figure 7

We evaluated seven different combinations of algorithms, implementations, and parameters. We evaluated both Crass and MinCED with default parameters. For MetaCRAST, we evaluated five different conditions differing in parallelization and metagenome loading method—BioPerl loading and 16 threads, BioPerl and a single thread, readfq with mce_open for loading and 16 threads, readfq with mce_open and a single thread, and readfq with the standard open routine and a single thread. The procedure for generating the simulated metagenomes is described in Materials and Methods. Run time was calculated as the sum of the user and system time (together the total CPU time). All data points represent the averages of three individual simulations and are presented with error bars representing two times the standard error above and two below the average.