Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 20;17(2):903–917. doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00732

Table 6. Epitope Predictionsa.

protein location epitope score
CotB1 54–73 KHLKSITKNAKECGSSDCEW 1.000
100–119 GPEKVEGILQDVSCDFVTLI 0.548
CotB2 5–24 LCCDQIKCLVGETVKVNLRG 1.000
123–142 GDEVIYVIKSHIKSVSQVVK 0.932
46–65 HGELVYYQLKHVKSLVKKVK 0.702
InhA 436–455 DYEKLNKGIGLATYLDQSVT 1.000
692–711 AIVGTLNGKPTVESSTRFQI 0.903
513–532 FKSLYEIEAEYDFLEVHAVT 0.846
613–632 TPQFKLDGFAVSNGTEKKSH 0.832
643–662 GSDNALKFARGPVYNAGMVV 0.766
260–279 DALKAAVDSGLDLSEFDQFD 0.744
18–37 TQSAYAETPANKTATSPVDD 0.708
555–574 TNGKWIDKSYDLSQFKGKKV 0.697
189–208 LFGNEPFTLDDGSKIETFKQ 0.671
90–109 LTKEASDFLKKVKDAKADTK 0.662
CotX1 36–55 QESKTYQISEESITIVDSAD 1.000
106–125 QINKQETVIRNSRNVTVTTT 0.534
BC_0987   none predicted  
a

Immunogenic regions with location within their respective protein and score based on the SVMTriP algorithm.22 Epitopes recommended by the algorithm are indicated in bold. These were submitted to BLAST and shown to be Bacillus cereus group specific with one exception in S. pneumoniae (see Results and Discussion).