Table 1 TIS prediction accuracy of our algorithm (TICO) in comparison with other post-processing tools. RBSfinder [10], GS-Finder [4] and MED-Start [5] were used as post-processors on the same GLIMMER2.02-prediction as TICO. Accuracy was measured in percent of TIS that were predicted correctly with respect to reference annotations. Datasets are explained in detail in section »Results«.
From: An unsupervised classification scheme for improving predictions of prokaryotic TIS
Dataset | total number | %detected ORFs | % correctly predicted TIS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLIMMER | MED-Start | TICO | GS-Finder | RBSfinder | |||
EcoGene | 854 | 99.3 | 63.2 | 92.0 | 94.2 | 90.3 | 81.9 |
Link | 195 | 100 | 66.7 | 95.4 | 94.9 | 92.3 | 80.0 |
Bsub | 1248 | 98.6 | 61.3 | 89.2 | 89.4 | 87.9 | 78.5 |
58 | 98.3 | 69.0 | 94.8 | 91.4 | 94.8 | 82.8 | |
PseudoCAP | 3281 | 97.5 | 57.8 | 3.6 | 85.2 | 83.6 | 67.7 |
R. solanac. chr | 3440 | 97.2 | 51.5 | 5.0 | 74.9 | 71.4 | 56.8 |
R. solanac. plasmid | 1676 | 97.0 | 48.9 | 6.0 | 70.1 | 66.2 | 55.5 |
B. pseudom. chr1 | 3399 | 97.7 | 53.2 | 5.5 | 69.6 | 64.3 | 53.3 |
B. pseudom. chr2 | 2329 | 97.7 | 48.9 | 4.7 | 67.0 | 67.5 | 52.1 |