Table 4 |
||||||
|
Motif recognition on biological data. |
||||||
|
Data set |
Published motif |
Motif pattern discovered |
Motif recognition program |
ℓ |
d |
Time (CPU sec.) |
|
|
||||||
|
hm01 |
gggaggctgaggcatgag |
cggaggcctaagcctcag |
GLAM [22] |
18 |
8 |
42.1 |
|
hm03 |
Cagccaggctgcagtgctg |
Catccatacagaa |
GLAM [22] |
13 |
6 |
12.3 |
|
hm04 |
gcgatgtgtaatagtcgc |
gacatgtgtaaaaga |
MEME [11] |
15 |
9 |
54.2 |
|
hm08 |
ggagaaattctaa |
aTGACgTC |
Weeder [14] |
13 |
6 |
4.34 |
|
hm20 |
ctgTAatc |
gagTAaac |
MITRA [6] |
8 |
3 |
6.7 |
|
hm26 |
GCCGGC |
GCCGGC |
MITRA [6] |
6 |
0 |
3.44 |
|
|
||||||
|
Data collected from TRANSFAC and the published motifs are found by the assessment of Tompa et. al. [2] of differing motif tools. For each set of data, we determined motifs of the same length using sMCL-WMR. The number of strings ranges from 8 to 34. |
||||||
|
Boucher and King BMC Bioinformatics 2010 11(Suppl 1):S11 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-S1-S11 |
||||||