Table 3 |
||||||||
|
Significance of the TF-map alignment scores |
||||||||
|
S |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Promoter |
Coding |
5'UTR |
3'UTR |
Intronic |
Downstream |
5'Intergenic |
3'Intergenic |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
PPPS |
25.41 |
10.06 |
7.43 |
5.36 |
10.54 |
10.84 |
10.84 |
10.77 |
|
PPSS |
25.41 |
9.79 |
5.03 |
5.24 |
7.50 |
6.31 |
4.98 |
5.61 |
|
PHSR |
42.00 |
5.80 |
5.04 |
2.49 |
4.57 |
5.79 |
4.64 |
3.63 |
|
|
||||||||
|
Average score of multiple TF-map alignments of groups constituted of orthologous promoters from the HRCZ SET (denoted as P), introducing one or two non-corresponding orthologous sequences (denoted as S). Last row shows the average score of pairwise TF-map alignments that involve each human promoter (PH) and the corresponding rodent region of the same gene (SR) in the HRCZ SET. |
||||||||
|
Blanco et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2007 8:138 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-138 |
||||||||