Is BLASTp the quickest method to get a rough idea on ortholog from protein sequence?
1
0
Entering edit mode
14 days ago
greyman ▴ 150

I know that when species are not very close to each other, hmmer will be a great tool to search for ortholog. However, I have more than 100 different types of gene of interest. I just want a really quick search to find "potential" orthologs from two organisms which belong to the same phylum. I wonder will blastp work if I apply stringent evalue cutoff 1e-10 and piden of 50? Any criticism, suggestion on other easy tools and opinion are welcome.

blastp ortholog homolog blast • 334 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

BlastX is a little bit better if I remember correctly See the example below:
BlastP vs BlastX

And a close question was asked some time ago

Ortholog Protein Finding Tool

ADD REPLY
1
Entering edit mode
13 days ago

if you want a quick and dirty approach then yes, blastP is the most easy/crude approach you can get indeed.

Moreover, being a blast hit is a per-requiste for any ortholog gene/protein. Usually then some more advances processing is done on the output to filter the correct or most likely orthologs.

ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

Hi, I am not sure filtering by query coverage or the alignment length would be a better way, the qcovhsp i got are pretty low , lesser than 50 .... do you have any suggestion on downstream processing?

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

well, you can have a look at that link posted above. OrthoFinder is good way to go.

if you only stick to blast, then you can consider doing a best-reciprocal blast analysis (you blast A vs B and then B vs A, and if A->B gives the same tophit as B->A for a query gene, it's an extra indication already).

alternatively you can apply the LiRost criterion (not sure that is official name though), basically coming down to filtering on alignable region and %identity of it. From top of my head I think it's something like 150 residues length with a %ID of >30%

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

Thank you for the suggestion for blastp. For the suggestion on OrthoFInder, I have successfully run it and it generated a slightly different result than the reciprocal blast analysis, do I choose one that is both verified by blastp and OrthoFInder or simply rely on the output of OrthoFinder to be enough?

As I am only select a subset of genes from each species, will it introduces some bias in OrthoFinder? I was thinking of using blastp to filter the output from OrthoFinder, maybe blastp is unnecessary in this case?

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

orthofinder over reciprocal blast for me.

but indeed if you want to be extra conservative you can take the intersection, though that comes with additional concerns (and perhaps missed orthologs)

ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 2519 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