Skip to main content

Table 2 MGC versus Orphelia and FragGeneScan.

From: MGC: a metagenomic gene caller

Methods

MGC

Orphelia

FragGeneScan

Genomes

Sp

Sn

H.M

Sp

Sn

H.M

Sp

Sn

H.M

M. jannaschii

97.19±0.12

92.63±0.19

94.85±0.13

95.20±0.17

90.46±0.16

92.77±0.14

76.03±0.22

90.35±0.33

82.57±0.19

A. fulgidus

95.04±0.14

84.13±0.23

89.31±0.15

88.57±0.21

80.58±0.17

84.38±0.16

52.58±0.3

75.86±0.31

62.11±0.29

B. subtilis

96.68±0.13

88.06±0.17

92.17±0.12

88.91±0.12

83.45±0.11

86.10±0.09

66.47±0.25

78.98±0.22

72.19±0.23

B. aphidicola

98.01±0.19

91.11±0.37

94.43±0.23

95.54±0.28

89.40±0.33

92.37±0.22

80.91±0.56

92.2±0.32

86.19±0.34

W. endosymbiont

88.25±0.35

87.85±0.17

88.05±0.24

86.24±0.39

83.79±0.31

84.99±0.27

71.44±0.49

71.24±0.54

71.34±0.45

N. pharaonis

95.28±0.12

85.79±0.20

90.29±0.14

75.99±0.34

68.74±0.34

72.17±0.33

52.89±0.37

63.62±0.34

57.76±0.36

E. coli

96.47±0.08

87.73±0.16

91.92±0.08

85.99±0.18

80.79±0.16

83.31±0.16

62.57±0.2

74.93±0.19

68.19±0.15

H. pylori

97.77±0.14

89.70±0.22

93.56±0.17

94.17±0.20

88.99±0.22

91.50±0.20

72.76±0.35

87.54±0.39

79.47±0.32

P. aeruginosa

96.16±0.09

91.70±0.11

93.88±0.08

71.21±0.20

68.40±0.18

69.78±0.19

56.17±0.3

63.46±0.3

59.59±0.29

C. tepidum

93.42±0.14

79.08±0.24

85.65±0.18

77.51±0.22

66.95±0.23

71.85±0.21

50.87±0.36

65.59±0.22

57.3±0.29

B. pseudomallei

94.79±0.13

87.84±0.25

91.18±0.18

69.54±0.31

64.79±0.22

67.08±0.26

51.34±0.2

55.69±0.27

53.42±0.22

C. jeikeium

96.13±0.11

87.70±0.23

91.72±0.17

79.52±0.22

74.23±0.23

76.79±0.22

65.41±0.28

72.78±0.3

68.9±0.26

P. marinus

97.71±0.11

87.92±0.20

92.55±0.12

94.41±0.20

84.98±0.24

89.45±0.20

75.48±0.4

88.49±0.32

81.47±0.33

Average

95.51

87.76

91.44

84.83

78.89

81.73

64.22

75.44

69.27

Average S.D.

0.14

0.20

0.15

0.23

0.22

0.20

0.33

0.31

0.29

  1. This table compares the prediction performance of MGC, Orphelia [1] and FragGeneScan [7]. Sensitivity (Sn), Specificity (Sp) and Harmonic Mean (H.M) scores are derived identically to Table 1.