Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • syintel87
    Member
    • Dec 2012
    • 81

    tblastx fmt1 Output Interpretation

    Hello,
    While locally running "blastx" with output option "-outfmt 1", I have a question.

    The below is an example of my result. As seen, throughout the outputs, all pairs of anchored proteins are not matched. How can I interpret these non-identical alignment?

    Query_3 477 GSVEYVHMLNGTMCATTRTVCAL 409
    medicagoRALF3 38 .GM.WI.QTKTAT.EGSIAD.M. 60

    Query_4 34 PYHLLLQKFYKT 69
    medicagoRALF11 104 ..NRGCS.Y.RC 115
    Thank you in advance.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by syintel87; 03-06-2015, 08:56 AM.
  • GenoMax
    Senior Member
    • Feb 2008
    • 7142

    #2
    Are you searching with very short query sequences (like illumina reads)?

    Comment

    • syintel87
      Member
      • Dec 2012
      • 81

      #3
      My query sequences are contigs that are de novo assembled, some of which are short (e.g. 500) whereas others are very long (e.g. 100,000).

      But database of blast is composed of several peptide proteins whose length is short (e.g. 44).

      Comment

      • GenoMax
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2008
        • 7142

        #4
        Have you tried to do the search the other way around (using your peptides as query)?

        Try using BLAT too. Especially if you know that you expect the peptides to be there in your data.

        Comment

        • syintel87
          Member
          • Dec 2012
          • 81

          #5
          In addition to "-outfmt 1", I tried other options as well.
          There seem to be different ways of alignment.

          0 = pairwise
          1 = query-anchored showing identities
          2 = query-anchored no identities
          3 = flat query-anchored, show identities
          4 = flat query-anchored, no identities

          [-outfmt 0]
          Query_2 229 KMSFRYLFFAIKKYALSKF 173
          thalianaRALF4 5 ...LTS...VSIVIV..L. 23

          [-outfmt 1]
          Query_2 229 KMSFRYLFFAIKKYALSKF 173
          thalianaRALF4 5 ...LTS...VSIVIV..L. 23

          [-outfmt 2]
          Query_2 229 KMSFRYLFFAIKKYALSKF 173
          thalianaRALF4 5 KMSLTSLFFVSIVIVLSLF 23

          [-outfmt 3]
          Query_2 229 KMSFRYLFFAIKKYALSKF 173
          thalianaRALF4 5 ...LTS...VSIVIV..L. 23

          [-outfmt 4]
          Query_2 229 KMSFRYLFFAIKKYALSKF 173
          thalianaRALF4 5 KMSLTSLFFVSIVIVLSLF 23
          The results of [-outfmt 2] and [-outfmt 4] may be the results that I look forward to getting. However, I still cannot understand the principles and differences that distinguish output format 0 to 4.

          Comment

          • syintel87
            Member
            • Dec 2012
            • 81

            #6
            Ah, now I see! In formats "0, 1, and 3", dots stand for identities between query and target. And differences are shown with protein letters.

            I should have posted after more consideration.
            Thanks GenoMax! I am going to try "BLAT", too.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • SEQadmin2
              Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
              by SEQadmin2


              I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.


              Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
              Yesterday, 07:11 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
              by SEQadmin2


              Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


              The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
              ...
              06-02-2026, 10:05 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              Single-Cell Sequencing at an Inflection Point: Early Impacts of New Platforms and Emerging Trends
              by SEQadmin2


              With the launch of new single-cell sequencing platforms in 2026, the field stands at an exciting inflection point. This article surveys the most impactful advances in the field and discusses how they’re reshaping research in cancer, immunology, and beyond.


              Introduction

              Single-cell sequencing technologies have undergone remarkable advances over the past decade, transitioning from low-throughput experimental approaches to highly scalable platforms capable of...
              05-22-2026, 06:42 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
            0 responses
            20 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
            0 responses
            38 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
            0 responses
            44 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM
            0 responses
            49 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...