Therefore, it would seem that general affinity purification methods are detecting interactions that are somewhat mediated by the proteins' cellular abundances.
Both methods are detecting a single hot spot, but it is elongated instead of the optimal (circular) configuration for Kulldorff's method.
Of interest is to examine the consistency of the predictions, i.e. to see whether the different methods are detecting different subsets of correlated pairs.
No differences among the methods were detected in terms of tail length measurements.
Although minor differences in the application rates measured by the two methods were detected, they did not cause appreciable differences in the distribution uniformity indicators used.
However, no significant difference in the accuracy of k-NN and ANN methods was detected in the reference data set sizes for N > 1200.
A significant signal (see Materials and Methods) was detected at 93% of the loci identified by the designed probes in at least one of the samples from Nipponbare.
In this case, use of 90% confidence intervals strengthens the conclusion of interest rather than weakening it, because no differences between methods were detected even with such lenient criteria (alpha = 0.1 and multiple comparisons made).
No overlap between the methods was detected.
However, less significant differences between methods were detected.
