The mean rank differences among their members for dinucleotide through pentanucleotide motifs follow those of the taxonomic groupings in Supplementary Tables 12, 13, and 14.
However, there is geographic variation in the proportions of catch within these groupings among EEZs (Supplementary Figs S3 & S4).
EEZs with the greatest functional evenness based on fine-scale trait data did not necessarily have the highest evenness values when based on coarse functional groups for any catch groupings (dark shading in Fig. 2 vs Supplementary Fig. S1).
All of these are distributed within the L4 Bartonella clade, which shows species groupings generally consistent with previous analyses (supplementary fig. S1, Supplementary Material online).
Complete results for all groupings are available on our Supplementary Information website.
> The average percentage identity for each length groupings for CNSs provided in supplementary figure S1, Supplementary Material online, shows that the shorter CNSs have higher percentage identity leading up to >90% and have a higher conservation level whereas the longer CNSs tend to have lower conservation level.
Clustering similar to that of the P1 region was observed for the separate gene regions, but with low bootstrap support except for 1B (O/UGand/03 and O/TAN/3/93, O/UGA/6/76 and O/UGA/17/98), 1C (O/UGA/17/98 and O/UGA/6/76) and 1D (OKEN/10/95 and O/UGA/5/96) groupings, which had high bootstrap support (Supplementary data, S1-S3).
Supplementary Table S1 lists the countries forming the regional groupings.
The unification process resulted in relatively small changes in gene count distribution between the original pathways and the resultant SuperPaths (Supplementary Figure S3), suggesting a substantial preservation of gene groupings.
An important finding is that for equivalent settings of the parameters of these different algorithms we obtained broadly the same groupings of the genes [see Additional file 1 – Supplementary Figure S1].
The set of differentially methylated CpGs identified in Fig. 2b d included genes that we assayed for expression in Fig. 1f, such as IGFBP2, CXCL12 etc, which show clear groupings via their methylome between healthy and MDS samples (Supplementary Figure 4B and 4C, respectively).
