| Literature DB >> 23841456 |
Sébastien Halary1, James O McInerney, Philippe Lopez, Eric Bapteste.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increasingly, similarity networks are being used for evolutionary analyses of molecular datasets. These networks are very useful, in particular for the analysis of gene sharing, lateral gene transfer and for the detection of distant homologs. Currently, such analyses require some computer programming skills due to the limited availability of user-friendly freely distributed software. Consequently, although appealing, the construction and analyses of these networks remain less familiar to biologists than do phylogenetic approaches.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23841456 PMCID: PMC3727994 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-13-146
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1A schematic of EGN workflow. This graph represents the different steps achieved in a typical EGN analysis (in chronological order from the top to the bottom of the figure). All options allowing some user-defined choices are indicated in red.
Figure 2Networks reconstructed using EGN. a. Principal connected component of the genome network (e-value ≤ 1E-05, identities ≥ 30%, with “best reciprocity” option). Node colors are reported below the component. Borrelia’s plasmids (pink) are tightly packed together and relatively isolated from the rest of the network. b. Detail of the genome network showing only nodes linked with Borrelia’s plasmids. Borrelia’s plasmids are directly only connected to Borrelia’s chromosomes. c. Schematic connected components, same color code as above. “Full homology” edges are indicated by solid lines, other similarity edges are indicated by dashes. Components with a majority of nodes corresponding to genes on chromosomes were significantly richer in “full homology” edges than connected components with a majority of nodes corresponding to genes on plasmids.