Table 3 |
|||||
|
Scaffolding results for the Yersinia genomes. |
|||||
|
Strain |
AflII based |
NheI based |
Both Maps |
Draft genome |
|
|
Size in Mbp (% of genome) |
Size in Mbp (% of genome) |
Size in Mbp (% of genome) |
Size in Mbp (% of genome) |
# of gaps (>10 Kbp) |
|
|
|
|||||
|
Y. kristensenii |
3.91 (83.9) |
4.36 (93.7) |
37 (8) |
||
|
Y. aldovae |
3.51 (82.9) |
3.64 (86.2) |
39 (14) |
||
|
Y. mollaretii |
3.73 (76.1) |
3.95 (80.6) |
4.15 (84.8) |
4.30 (87.8) |
56 (24) |
|
Y. fredriksenii |
4.34 (81.0) |
4.54 (84.8) |
4.63 (86.3) |
4.72 (88.1) |
33 (20) |
|
Y. bercovieri |
3.32 (72.8) |
3.50 (76.7) |
3.62 (79.2) |
3.87 (84.8) |
57 (25) |
|
Y. intermedia |
4.38 (86.9) |
4.14 (82.0) |
4.35 (86.3) |
4.62 (91.5) |
53 (15) |
|
Y. rohdei |
3.91 (85.3) |
3.81 (82.9) |
4.01 (87.3) |
4.15 (90.4) |
40 (16) |
|
Y. ruckerii |
1.93 (49.4) |
3.13 (80.1) |
3.20 (82.0) |
3.34 (85.5) |
39 (17) |
|
|
|||||
|
Here we report the size of the scaffolds obtained by combining each of the optical maps and the 454 contigs. These scaffolds were then merged and augmented with contig graph information (see Methods) to obtain the draft genome and we report the results after both stages. For the draft genome we also report the number of gaps in the final scaffold. |
|||||
|
Nagarajan et al. BMC Genomics 2010 11:242 doi:10.1186/1471-2164-11-242 |
|||||