Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 22;4(3):e00583. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00583

Table 5.

Quality assessment of assemblies by Detonate and Transrate.

Assembly RSEM_EVAL scorea SUGIT transcripts
Contigs with positive impact scored %Contigs with positive impact score
CRBB hitsb N refs with CRBBc
Trinity-assembly -15,240,221,881 229,152 44,765 274,889 63.74
CLC-assembly -14,103,274,074 257,035 59,991 384,245 75.60
OASES-assembly -19,974,094,466 376,082 61,612 459,890 57.61
SOAP-assembly -14,863,304,548 182,813 54,837 273,789 94.51
CD-HIT-clustered -14,369,832,453 465,467 68,603 511,561 56.43
Oases-clustered -16,058,124,749 655,184 70,611 549,043 39.69
CAP3-assembled -14,615,684,149 436,219 67,299 464,628 55.36
SoGI database -20,480,838,298 85,621 41,261 75,426 62.16
Unigene set -18,324,896,664 28,403 23,193 59,130 81.82
a

The higher the score, the better the assembly.

b

Number of contigs in assembly with a Conditional Reciprocal Best BLAST (CRBB) hit with the SUGIT database.

c

Number of sequences in the SUGIT database with a CRBB hit.

d

Contig with a positive RSEM_EVAL impact score.