HW5 Results

Comments

Student results were all over the map. Some found long sequences (>10), as in #16. Others had worse results with FootPrinter than with DIALIGN, as in #13; this might have been a result of using too-large sets of proteins that distort the results, as seen in set 6 match 2. Contrast this with #18, which indicates that FootPrinter worked better with too-large protein sets than either DIALIGN or CLUSTALW.

The complexity of motifs found varied. Compare the first and fourth sets of matches in #26. The first are simple, e.g. GAAAAA, while the fourth has more complex motifs, e.g. GCGACGGCG.

These observations certainly aren't conclusive; like much else in this class interpreting the data is harder than producing them! Browse the results and form your own conclusions.

Student results

  1. Aquifex aeolicus (?)
  2. Archaeoglobus fulgidus
  3. Aeropyrum pernix
  4. Aeropyrum pernix
  5. Bacillus halodurans C-125:
  6. Bacillus subtilis
  7. Caulobacter crescentus
  8. Chlamydia muridarum
  9. Chlamydophila pneumoniae CWL029
  10. Deinococcus radodurans
  11. E. coli K12
  12. Helicobacter pylori J99
  13. Helicobacter pylori 26695
  14. Halobacterium sp. NRC-1
  15. Lactococcus lactis
  16. Methanococcus jannaschii
  17. Methanobacterium thermoautotrophicum
  18. Mycobacterium leprae
  19. Mycoplasma pneumoniae
  20. Mycoplasma pneumoniae
  21. Mycoplasma tuberculosis
  22. Pyrococcus abyssi
  23. Synechocystis
  24. Synechocystis
  25. Sulfolobus solfataricus
  26. Thermoplasma acidophilum
  27. Thermotoga maritima
  28. Treponema pallidum
  29. Thermoplasma volcanuim
  30. Xylella fastidiosa