PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15661851

MAFFT version 5: improvement in accuracy of multiple sequence alignment.

Abstract

The accuracy of multiple sequence alignment program MAFFT has been improved. The new version (5.3) of MAFFT offers new iterative refinement options, H-INS-i, F-INS-i and G-INS-i, in which pairwise alignment information are incorporated into objective function. These new options of MAFFT showed higher accuracy than currently available methods including TCoffee version 2 and CLUSTAL W in benchmark tests consisting of alignments of >50 sequences. Like the previously available options, the new options of MAFFT can handle hundreds of sequences on a standard desktop computer. We also examined the effect of the number of homologues included in an alignment. For a multiple alignment consisting of approximately 8 sequences with low similarity, the accuracy was improved (2-10 percentage points) when the sequences were aligned together with dozens of their close homologues (E-value < 10(-5)-10(-20)) collected from a database. Such improvement was generally observed for most methods, but remarkably large for the new options of MAFFT proposed here. Thus, we made a Ruby script, mafftE.rb, which aligns the input sequences together with their close homologues collected from SwissProt using NCBI-BLAST.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kazutaka Katoh, Kei-ichi Kuma, Hiroyuki Toh, Takashi Miyata. 2005-01-20. MAFFT version 5: improvement in accuracy of multiple sequence alignment.. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar%2Fgki198

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

An Assessment of Reliability Estimation Methods for Binomial Health Care Quality Measures.

We evaluated the performance of commonly used methods for estimating the reliability of binomial health care quality measures using simulated datasets spanning a range of performance score means and variances, numbers of entities, and patient sample sizes. For each simulation, reliability was estimated for all selected methods and compared with the known true reliability derived from the simulation parameters, with methods assessed on their accuracy and precision. Logistic regression with reliability estimated on the outcome scale demonstrated the highest accuracy and precision among all methods evaluated. The widely used Adams beta-binomial method performed poorly, although a modification recommended by Nieser and Harris substantially improved its performance. These approaches are applicable only to binomial measures. Among methods that can be applied to both binomial and continuous measures, permutation resampling of the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was the most accurate and precise, outperforming other commonly used approaches. Overall, for binomial quality measures, logistic regression on the outcome scale is the preferred method for reliability estimation, followed closely by the modified beta-binomial approach, while for non-binomial measures, permutation-based Spearman rank correlation appears to be the most suitable method.

Reproducibility of Results↗

Verifying DiffEXAFS measurements with differential X-ray diffraction.

Differential EXAFS (DiffEXAFS) is a novel technique for measuring atomic perturbations on a local scale. Here a complementary technique for such studies is presented: differential X-ray diffraction (DiffXRD), which may be used to independently verify DiffEXAFS results whilst using exactly the same experimental apparatus and measurement technique. A test experiment has been conducted to show that DiffXRD can be used to successfully determine the thermal expansion coefficient of SrF(2).

Reproducibility of Results↗