Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(2)
Assembled sequences were used for blast searches and annotation against the NCBI nr database using a cutoff e-value of e-05 and minimum coverage length ≥33aa.
Daucus protein sequences greater than 33 amino acids available in GenBank were used for blast (TBLASTX) analysis against our EST collection, using a cutoff value of e-05 and minimum coverage length ≥100 nt.
Similar(58)
We also generated datasets containing those contigs that were composed of reads from only a single elevation (minimum coverage = 5×; minimum length = 200 bases).
We also generated data sets containing those contigs that were composed of reads from only a single ecotype (same parameters as above, minimum coverage = 5×; minimum length = 200 bases).
During the assembly the minimum coverage cutoff was 4, the expected insert length was 400 and the minimum contig length was 45.
Minimum length = 200 bases; minimum coverage = 5×.
Two proteins were considered as orthologs if BLASTP matches with at least 30% sequence identity and a minimum coverage of 50% of the query sequence length were detected in both directions.
For optimal results, it is also important to follow the recommendations of the chosen de novo assembler with respect to insert length of the sequencing library, minimum coverage of the target genome with PE reads and other recommendations.
These regions were required to have a minimum length of 300 base pairs and a minimum coverage of 50 reads, as the default Partek settings are permissive.
Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) candidates were screened using the CLC Genomics Workbench 5.1 with the following parameters: window length, 11; maximum gap and mismatch count, 3; minimum coverage, 1; minimum variant frequency, 75%.
Maximum N50 was used as the measure to determine optimal K-mer length using Velvetoptimiser (https://github.com/Victorian-Bioinformatics-Consortium/VelvetOptimiser) a minimum coverage of 10x was selected and the –exp_cov option 'auto' was used.
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