Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(13)
For both the CPR and Tweedle families, the proportion of gaps was significantly higher in Sophophora by t-test (P<0.01 and P<0.05, respectively).
The proportion of gaps or completely undetermined characters (N) in the final alignment is 17.5%.
The proportion of gaps and undetermined characters was 4.04 %, and GC content was 38.4%.
Both alignments were combined and manually curated to obtain a final multiple sequence alignment of 449 residues with a proportion of gaps of 15.90%.
Using JALVIEW, we extracted conservation scores (in a scale from 0 to 11) for every nucleotide site with a proportion of gaps that is less than 25%.
The parameter with the largest marginal effect on both accuracy and retention was g s, the maximum proportion of gaps allowed in a sequence.
Similar(47)
A similar trend was observed with the proportion of gap sizes (length of uncovered bases, Fig. 5 bottom panel) and chimeric reads (Fig. 4), where a sharp increase in these values was observed for samples with input DNA <10 pg.
In addition, for three nested feedback loops (Motifs 10, 11, and 12), we calculated the percentage of gap gens out of the genes that constitute each network motif with mutual inhibition, and found a significant proportion of gap genes (52% for Motif 10, 43% for Motif 11, and 56% for Motif 12).
Columns are discarded when the proportion of gap characters exceeds a threshold g c, or when the mean sum-of-pairs score within the window 1 w ∑ v = 1 w ∑ i ≠ j S i j v n (n − 1 ) is lower than a threshold s c.
Counting only those columns that remain, a sequence i is discarded when the proportion of gap characters exceeds a threshold g s, or for when the mean sum of pairs score to all other sequences 1 m ∑ v = 1 w ∑ i ≠ j S i j v (n − 1 ) is equal to or lower than s s.
Only in the N-terminal region of the alignment, where some sequences were incomplete, slightly higher proportions of gaps were allowed.
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