[maker-devel] Speaking of AED...

[Carson Holt]

I think I would agree.  Annotation 1 is a perfect match to the evidence.  It is ab initio 1 that would have been AED of 0.2, but annotation 1 should have been AED of 0.

—Carson



> On Nov 7, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Jim Hu <jimhu at email.tamu.edu> wrote:
> 
> I was teaching Yandell and Ence (2012) in the genomics class I co-teach, and was having trouble understanding the values for AED in Box 4 Figure Bb derive from the evidence set in Figure Ba. 
> 
> Box 4 says: "AAED is caculated in the same manner as SN and SPm but in place of a reference gene model, the coordinates of the union of the aligned evidence (see panel Ba) are used instead". In the union, I expect that a bp that is in an exon in any of the evidence would be considered a TP. If so, then why isn't nt-level AED for Annotation 1 in Bb  zero?
>   
> I'm probably missing something trivial. 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jim
> =====================================
> Jim Hu
> Professor
> Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics
> 2128 TAMU
> Texas A&M Univ.
> College Station, TX 77843-2128
> 979-862-4054
> 
> _______________________________________________
> maker-devel mailing list
> maker-devel at box290.bluehost.com
> http://box290.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/maker-devel_yandell-lab.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://yandell-lab.org/pipermail/maker-devel_yandell-lab.org/attachments/20141108/067ba14e/attachment-0003.html>