<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Try also adding 2 exon models to the graph. It would be interesting to see if these are attempted single-exon models where the predictor added a micro-intron to keep the open reading frame going against a single exon blastx hint.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">—Carson</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Apr 8, 2019, at 3:10 AM, Lior Glick <<a href="mailto:liorglic@mail.tau.ac.il" class="">liorglic@mail.tau.ac.il</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="rtl" class=""><div style="" dir="ltr" class="">Hi again - quick update:</div><div style="" dir="ltr" class="">I made a plot comparing the histograms of single-exon genes to multi-exon genes:</div><div style="" dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><span id="cid:ii_ju84rhn00"><newplot (5).png></span><br class=""></div></div><div style="" dir="ltr" class="">It definitely looks like single-exon genes are <b class="">enriched</b> for the 0.5 score, but it does not account for the entire surge, as there also seem to be lots of multi-exon genes involved. This may suggest that the 0.5 peak is a result of multiple effects buried within the software.</div><div style="" dir="ltr" class="">Any other thoughts/suggestions?</div><div style="" dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="" dir="ltr" class="">Thanks again,</div><div style="" dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>