Hi all.
I know there are similiar threads in the Forum, but none of them seem to address the following problem:
I have an annotation of a bacterial genome and am preparing a submission to NCBI. The annotation is an extensive manual curation of an automatic annotation made in RAST. The curation has been done in the original Excel table that was generated in RAST. Since we had a reference genome to compare with, such a table is much easier to work with manually (column by column, row by row) than other formats, e.g. GenBank, GFF, etc. The problem is that there (apparently...) is no straight-forward way to convert such a table to a format read by Sequin (i.e. .tbl). The attached picture shows (a small part of) the type of table I have in Excel. So, the question is really: how to convert this format to the .tbl format that Sequin reads? Any tools or scripts available? (Note that I am aware of the automatic annotation pipeline at NCBI, and it has been tried. The manual annotation is signifacantly better and it seems like a terrible waste of time not to use it...). Regards, Lars
I know there are similiar threads in the Forum, but none of them seem to address the following problem:
I have an annotation of a bacterial genome and am preparing a submission to NCBI. The annotation is an extensive manual curation of an automatic annotation made in RAST. The curation has been done in the original Excel table that was generated in RAST. Since we had a reference genome to compare with, such a table is much easier to work with manually (column by column, row by row) than other formats, e.g. GenBank, GFF, etc. The problem is that there (apparently...) is no straight-forward way to convert such a table to a format read by Sequin (i.e. .tbl). The attached picture shows (a small part of) the type of table I have in Excel. So, the question is really: how to convert this format to the .tbl format that Sequin reads? Any tools or scripts available? (Note that I am aware of the automatic annotation pipeline at NCBI, and it has been tried. The manual annotation is signifacantly better and it seems like a terrible waste of time not to use it...). Regards, Lars