Exact(3)
For each alignment, we selected the appropriate model of evolution with the Akaike Information Criterion [ 14].
From the 245 taxa alignment, we selected a balanced sample of 66 species (listed in supplementary table 1, Supplementary Material online), of which ten were outgroup taxa.
For each alignment, we selected the nucleotide substitution model that best fitted the data among 56 different evolutionary models based on the Akaike Information Criteria approach using Modeltest 3.6 [ 40].
Similar(57)
For sake of simplicity, to compare the three alignments we selected only one PCR fragment (amplicon #3, ∼8 kb), brought to a simulated average coverage of ∼250x by using sampled trimmed reads.
To compare these three alignments, we selected 50 sequences representing the phylogenetic diversity of the intestinal microbial community, extracted the alignments of these 50 sequences from the larger alignments, and then used these alignments to generate phylogenetic trees (using a maximum likelihood method available on the CIPRES web-portal: http://8ball.sdsc.edu 8889/cipres-web .sdsc.edu 8889/cipres-web
Among all constructed single gene alignments, we selected 78 genes that had the highest possible coverage of Ministeria sequences and that contained at least one sequences from one of choanozoan (i.e. Amoebidium parasiticum, Sphaeroforma arctica, Capsaspora owczarzaki, Ministeria vibrans, Proterospongia sp. and Monosiga brevicollis) lineages.
Among the sRNAs with the same 5' alignments, we selected representative sRNA with maximum read.
On the basis of the data and alignments, we selected SMARCAL1 residues 7 32.
From these alignments, we selected 125 species covering a broad taxonomic diversity without redundancy in the taxonomic sampling.
From each set of 210,000 simulated alignments we selected pools of genes belonging to different rate categories in such a way as to maintain, in each pool, the same evolutionary rate distribution than that observed in the 1558 real mammalian genes.
For alignments we select representatives manually, again trying to cover the maximum diversity within the family both in terms sequence diversity and taxonomy, but do not include fragments or sequences which are disrupted in some way and/or contain long insertions or deletions because our aim here is to showcase the typical representatives of a family.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com