BLAST alignment score analysis
0
0
Entering edit mode
10.8 years ago
dr.vaser • 0

I've been evaluating a Smith Waterman implementation with ncbi BLAST and found out that for the same alignment (with no gaps) the alignment scores differ between those two algorithms. Here is the example:

Query= O95477-X, Length= 2261

Smith Waterman (ssearch):

> sp|O95477|ABCA1_HUMAN ATP-binding cassette sub-family A member 1 OS=Homo
sapiens GN=ABCA1 PE=1 SV=3
Length=2261

 Score = 11774, Expect = 0e+00
 Identities = 2257/2261 (100%), Positives = 2258/2261 (100%), Gaps = 0/2261 (0%)

BLAST:

> sp|O95477|ABCA1_HUMAN ATP-binding cassette sub-family A member
1 OS=Homo sapiens GN=ABCA1 PE=1 SV=3
Length=2261

 Score =  4684 bits (12148), Expect = 0.0, Method: Compositional matrix adjust.
 Identities = 2257/2261 (99%), Positives = 2258/2261 (99%), Gaps = 0/2261 (0%)

The scores above are 11774 and 12148 (the actual alignments aren't pasted here due to their sizes). The search was done online (blast/ssearch web site) with the BLOSUM62 matrix and the uniprot/sprot database.

My question is how does BLAST calculate the score 12148 (if that is the corresponding score) even though it uses the same matrix and gets the same alignment as ssearch.

alignment BLAST • 3.0k views
ADD COMMENT

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 2657 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6