Figure 4.

The top 100 ranked protein tribes containing putative effector candidates. Clusters were determined using hierarchical clustering of the top 100 ranked tribes containing putative effector candidates. A. Combined score used to rank tribes based on their content of effector features. B. Score for similarity of tribe members to haustorial expressed secreted proteins (HESPs) or characterized fungal AVRs. C. Score for number of members encoded by genes with at least one flanking intergenic region >10 Kb. D. Score for number of members classified as repeat containing (RCPs). E. Score reflecting number of members classified as small and cysteine rich (SCRs). F. Score for number of members containing any characterized effector motifs or nuclear localization signals (NLS). G. Score for number of members not annotated by PFAM domain searches. H. Score for number of members in the top 100 expressed in infected material, determined by mRNA-seq analysis. I. Scatter plot indicating number of members in the top 1, 5 or 10% expressed in infected material. J. Score for number of members in the top 100 expressed in haustoria, determined by mRNA-seq analysis. K. Scatter plot indicating number of members in the top 1, 5 or 10% expressed in haustoria. L. Number of PST members showing sequence polymorphisms between isolates. Stars indicate tribes that contain members assessed for expression using qRT-PCR.

Cantu et al. BMC Genomics 2013 14:270   doi:10.1186/1471-2164-14-270
Download authors' original image