Table 2 |
|||
|
Comparison of clustering performances of SiLiX and hcluster_sg (used alone or in combination with SiLiX). |
|||
|
method (%identity) |
Jac. |
Spec. |
Sens. |
|
|
|||
|
SiLiX (0.25) |
0.69 |
0.73 |
0.95 |
|
SiLiX (0.35) |
0.78 |
0.88 |
0.89 |
|
SiLiX (0.45) |
0.74 |
0.94 |
0.78 |
|
SiLiX (0.25) + hcluster_sg(100) |
0.77 |
0.85 |
0.92 |
|
hcluster_sg |
0.76 |
0.84 |
0.91 |
|
|
|||
|
Specificity, sensitivity and Jaccard coefficient were estimated by comparison with InterPro classification. The best quality metrics are indicated in bold. SiLiX was used with an alignment coverage threshold set to 80% and with various sequence identity thresholds. hcluster_sg was used on the entire dataset or only on the largest families (more than 100 sequences) retrieved by SiLiX with a permissive sequence identity thresholds of 25% (hcluster_sg(100)). |
|||
|
Miele et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2011 12:116 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-116 |
|||
