↓ Skip to main content

Parameterizing sequence alignment with an explicit evolutionary model

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Parameterizing sequence alignment with an explicit evolutionary model
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12859-015-0832-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Rivas, Sean R. Eddy

Abstract

Inference of sequence homology is inherently an evolutionary question, dependent upon evolutionary divergence. However, the insertion and deletion penalties in the most widely used methods for inferring homology by sequence alignment, including BLAST and profile hidden Markov models (profile HMMs), are not based on any explicitly time-dependent evolutionary model. Using one fixed score system (BLOSUM62 with some gap open/extend costs, for example) corresponds to making an unrealistic assumption that all sequence relationships have diverged by the same time. Adoption of explicit time-dependent evolutionary models for scoring insertions and deletions in sequence alignments has been hindered by algorithmic complexity and technical difficulty. We identify and implement several probabilistic evolutionary models compatible with the affine-cost insertion/deletion model used in standard pairwise sequence alignment. Assuming an affine gap cost imposes important restrictions on the realism of the evolutionary models compatible with it, as single insertion events with geometrically distributed lengths do not result in geometrically distributed insert lengths at finite times. Nevertheless, we identify one evolutionary model compatible with symmetric pair HMMs that are the basis for Smith-Waterman pairwise alignment, and two evolutionary models compatible with standard profile-based alignment. We test different aspects of the performance of these "optimized branch length" models, including alignment accuracy and homology coverage (discrimination of residues in a homologous region from nonhomologous flanking residues). We test on benchmarks of both global homologies (full length sequence homologs) and local homologies (homologous subsequences embedded in nonhomologous sequence). Contrary to our expectations, we find that for global homologies a single long branch parameterization suffices both for distant and close homologous relationships. In contrast, we do see an advantage in using explicit evolutionary models for local homologies. Optimal branch parameterization reduces a known artifact called "homologous overextension", in which local alignments erroneously extend through flanking nonhomologous residues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 26%
Computer Science 10 21%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 5 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,853,006
of 25,756,911 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#798
of 7,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,183
of 397,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#16
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,741 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 397,031 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.