For each FAMeS metagenomic data set, the percentage of assignments (in various categories) obtained by INDUS, TACOA, SOrt-ITEMS, MEGAN and SPHINX is given in Additional File 6.
Results also indicate that the percentage of assignments made by INDUS (21.3%) at non-specific levels is significantly lower than that by TACOA (48.7%) and slightly higher than that by SOrt-ITEMS (12.3%), MEGAN (13.6%) and SPHINX (13.3%).
An IV adjusted ITT treats the RCT as an IV with treatment assignment being the instrument, and the effect of this assignment on outcome is adjusted by the percentage of assigned participants who receive the treatment [ 11].
The effect of treatment assignment on outcome observed (intention to treat analysis) is adjusted by the percentage of assigned participants who ultimately receive the treatment (contamination adjustment).
The significance of each DA was evaluated (i) by testing difference between groups using Wilks Lambaa tests and (ii) through the percentage of correct assignment of eggs or workers to their social origin, which was given by statistical models and cross-validations (Leave-one-out method).
For the 454-400, 454-250 and the Sanger test data sets, it is seen that assignment accuracy (with respect to the percentage of correct assignments) is observed to be more or less comparable for INDUS, TACOA and SPHINX.
With respect to 'wrong' assignments, results indicate that while the percentage of wrong assignments obtained with INDUS 10-122%) is significantly lower than that of TACOA 22-311%) and MEGAN 23-355%), it is slightly higher than SPHINX (7-12%) and SOrt-ITEMS (4 -10%).
All evaluated methods are compared according to two quality measures: (a) the percentage of correct assignments of identifiers before an occlusion to identifiers after that occlusion and (b) percentage of correctly assigned frames in unoccluded sequences.
Because we knew which probability distribution function generated each synthesized datum, this procedure allowed us to calculate the percentage of correct assignments for each site independently and for all sites combined based on using either δDF or 87Sr/86SrF.
Wilks' λ significance and the percentage of correct assignments were used to evaluate the validity of the discriminant function.
