Table 3

Mean rank evaluation of small disulfide-rich proteins using standard and specific scoring functions.

Amino acid

DT^a

DS0^a

DS^a

Fug^a

Gon^a

B62^a

A

8.16

8.59

7.71

8.39

8.85

8.83

C

9.84

11.60

8.09

10.42

11.8

11.72

D

6.85

7.50

7.31

6.90

7.12

7.01

E

6.70

7.57

7.22

6.89

6.88

6.89

F

8.58

8.77

7.58

10.14

9.79

9.86

G

8.03

7.74

7.35

7.48

7.40

7.46

H

7.99

8.04

7.51

8.00

7.72

8.09

I

7.74

8.55

7.28

7.82

8.36

8.19

K

7.47

8.07

7.56

7.49

7.59

7.36

L

9.13

9.41

8.34

9.25

9.70

9.90

M

9.74

9.04

7.33

8.95

9.16

8.87

N

7.57

8.14

8.09

7.411

8.40

8.02

P

8.20

8.41

8.00

8.11

8.70

8.56

Q

6.88

7.94

7.81

7.35

7.38

7.38

R

7.93

8.20

6.96

7.84

7.99

8.11

S

7.56

7.55

7.55

7.56

8.29

8.17

T

8.14

8.61

7.63

8.53

9.40

8.91

V

8.30

7.69

7.69

7.82

8.76

8.48

W

8.78

7.46

7.45

8.20

9.03

8.82

Y

8.61

8.59

7.53

8.76

9.77

9.32

Average

7.90

8.27

7.59

8.02

8.44

8.38

^aMean rank evaluation using the EvDTree (DT), EvDTreeDS0 (DS0), EvDTreeDS (DS), FUGUE (Fug), Gonnet (Gon) and Blosum62 (B62) substitution scores. Bold numbers indicate the best values among the methods.

Gelly et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2005 6:4   doi:10.1186/1471-2105-6-4