FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-03-2002, 03:18 AM   #31
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Post

Monkenstick, thanks for that, I'm sure it's fascinating and useful.... but you couldn't translate it into English please, could you? If I don't quite follow it, I'm damn sure Chris Groves won't be able to!

Cheers, Oolon

[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]</p>
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
Old 09-03-2002, 03:54 AM   #32
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 214
Post

I just had a better idea - comparing whole mitochondrial genomes!
Quote:
CLUSTAL W (1.82) Multiple Sequence Alignments

Sequence format is Pearson
Sequence 1: cow 16338 bp
Sequence 2: kangaroo 16896 bp
Sequence 3: human 16569 bp
Start of Pairwise alignments
Aligning...
Sequences (1:2) Aligned. Score: 70
Sequences (1:3) Aligned. Score: 72
Sequences (2:3) Aligned. Score: 66
Guide tree file created: [/ebi/extserv/old-work/34679.11486.dnd]
Start of Multiple Alignment
There are 2 groups
Aligning...
Group 1: Sequences: 2 Score:242477
Group 2: Sequences: 3 Score:226703
.....

Sequences (cow:human) Aligned. Score: 72
Sequences (kangaroo:human) Aligned. Score: 66
Alignment Score 228147
CLUSTAL-Alignment file created [/ebi/extserv/old-work/34679.11486.aln]

72 percent homology vs 66 percent

human DNA is closer to cow DNA than to kangaroo DNA

[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: monkenstick ]</p>
monkenstick is offline  
Old 09-03-2002, 11:10 AM   #33
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com
Posts: 2,829
Post

Interesting - pretty much goes to show that if you pick and choose the details to suit you, you can demonstrate anything. Then all you have to do is "forget" to mention the ones that didn't give the results you wanted.
Albion is offline  
Old 09-03-2002, 12:48 PM   #34
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Post

Monkenstick, I wonder how automated one can make that analysis procedure; I'm half-thinking of trying some myself. Ideally, one might want to write a Unix shell script that grabs the files and then passes them to some command-line programs.

I have AppleBSD, a.k.a. MacOS X, and I've successfully built and run "phylip" at home. I'm worried about how much editing of intermediate results that one might have to do, so one program's output can be used as another one's input.
lpetrich is offline  
Old 09-03-2002, 03:27 PM   #35
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 214
Post

hey lpetrich, theres an absolutely fantastic website/program for bioinformaticians;

<a href="http://www.angis.org.au/new/bioinformatic/biomanager.html" target="_blank">http://www.angis.org.au/new/bioinformatic/biomanager.html</a>

you can do all sorts of stuff with it, and its automated - give it some tasks to do, come back the next day and they're all done and saved on your account. when you click on the output of one program, it lists every program which can use that output as an input - you simply have to choose one then by clicking on it.

I had access to it last semester as part of a bioinformatics course, but not anymore

[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: monkenstick ]</p>
monkenstick is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:22 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.