0
votes
1
reply
10
views
3
votes
7
replies
127
views
27 minutes ago by
ntsopoul
▴
60
0
votes
0
replies
13
views
0
votes
0
replies
25
views
0
votes
2
replies
245
views
0
votes
0
replies
33
views
3
votes
6
replies
10k
views
updated 3 hours ago by
Bioinfotec
▴
10
•
written 7.5 years ago by
nut_B
▴
10
0
votes
1
reply
56
views
updated 3 hours ago by
Ram
43k
•
written 3 hours ago by
kirill.zaslavsky
•
0
1
vote
5
replies
133
views
0
votes
1
reply
62
views
0
votes
0
replies
59
views
5 hours ago by
Ben_Ensembl
★
2.4k
795
votes
167
replies
141k
views
109 follow
updated 12 weeks ago by
Biostar
2.6k
•
written 7.4 years ago by
Istvan Albert
100k
1
vote
3
replies
133
views
updated 5 hours ago by
GenoMax
141k
•
written 8 hours ago by
lorena9132
•
0
0
votes
0
replies
62
views
0
votes
0
replies
51
views
7 hours ago by
solomoncharles77
▴
90
2
votes
2
replies
146
views
0
votes
0
replies
65
views
1
vote
2
replies
175
views
0
votes
1
reply
222
views
updated 10 hours ago by
ATpoint
81k
•
written 3 days ago by
arriyaz.nstu
▴
30
2
votes
2
replies
153
views
0
votes
0
replies
58
views
4
votes
4
replies
165
views
2
votes
3
replies
170
views
1
vote
1
reply
226
views
updated 12 hours ago by
andres.firrincieli
3.6k
•
written 4 days ago by
Milly
•
0
0
votes
2
replies
148
views
0
votes
2
replies
146
views
13 hours ago by
orzrzlyo
▴
20
0
votes
1
reply
149
views
updated 5 hours ago by
BioinfGuru
★
1.7k
•
written 20 hours ago by
wiscoyogi
▴
40
0
votes
2
replies
174
views
0
votes
1
reply
131
views
updated 22 hours ago by
LChart
3.9k
•
written 1 day ago by
leranwangcs
▴
120
1
vote
3
replies
339
views
updated 23 hours ago by
LChart
3.9k
•
written 2 days ago by
leranwangcs
▴
120
1
vote
1
reply
135
views
0
votes
1
reply
124
views
1
vote
5
replies
258
views
0
votes
1
reply
146
views
updated 1 day ago by
Ram
43k
•
written 1 day ago by
michelle.swarovski
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
123
views
updated 1 day ago by
GenoMax
141k
•
written 1 day ago by
haiying.kong
▴
360
0
votes
2
replies
191
views
10 hours ago by
matteo.levorato
•
0
1
vote
0
replies
89
views
1
vote
2
replies
157
views
updated 6 hours ago by
Jeremy Leipzig
22k
•
written 1 day ago by
Sd
•
0
0
votes
0
replies
81
views
0
votes
0
replies
93
views
1
vote
2
replies
144
views
2
votes
0
replies
123
views
2
votes
1
reply
180
views
4
votes
6
replies
325
views
updated 12 hours ago by
b.contreras.moreira
▴
150
•
written 1 day ago by
Begonia_pavonina
▴
150
6
votes
7
replies
326
views
updated 2 hours ago by
sansan_96
▴
80
•
written 1 day ago by
manaswiniparija3
▴
40
2
votes
0
replies
139
views
1
vote
1
reply
132
views
0
votes
0
replies
97
views
1 day ago by
Balazs Horvath
▴
10
0
votes
0
replies
101
views
2
votes
4
replies
298
views
Recent Votes
Recent Locations •
All
Canada, just now
United States, just now
New Zealand, 3 minutes ago
United States, 3 minutes ago
USA, 4 minutes ago
Mexico, 4 minutes ago
Russia, 4 minutes ago
Recent Awards •
All
Popular Question to
Matteo Ungaro
▴
100
Popular Question to
rbronste
▴
420
Popular Question to
Basti
★
2.0k
Recent Replies
Comment: How to filter columns in a raw sparse matrix in R
by
bk11
★
2.3k
You can do this-
good_cells <-c(all_good_cells_rhemac10$V1)
combined_rhemac10_count_matrix_good_cells <- combined_rhemac10_count_m…
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matching names
by
ntsopoul
▴
60
you are right! Excel just did not find it...
Answer: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matching names
by
ntsopoul
▴
60
I found a good solution but it is really cumbersome.
I use UniProt.ws to derive unique gene names (readable names) and also ambiguous name…
Comment: Merging Outputs from plink --assoc and --hardy to Produce Table
by
Koketso
•
0
Thank you so much. How about calculating allelic odds ratios? Which plink/R command can I use for that?
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matching names
by
ATpoint
81k
For such analysis I always first translate everything to Ensembl Gene IDs (biomaRt is a good help here) and then I do the matching with thi…
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matching names
by
GenoMax
141k
I can see this in the list
GI:2387631 Nup42 O Gene nucleoporin 42 10.72 5 24369961 24389011 + AA867018|AB067574|AI426644|AK077066|AK07…
Comment: Rename multiple fastq.gz files
by
Jérémie
•
0
Sorry, I misunderstood. Thank you so much for this.
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matching names
by
sansan_96
▴
80
Hello,
This conversion tool has been useful to me, maybe it can help you:
https://biit.cs.ut.ee/gprofiler/convert
Comment: BRAKER3 genome annotation
by
sansan_96
▴
80
Perhaps eggNOG-MAPPER can be useful for functional annotation:
1. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/47/D1/D309/5173662
2. http://eggnog…
Comment: BRAKER3 genome annotation
by
Buffo
★
2.4k
I suggest searching for the difference between structural annotation (identifying the coordinates of the ORFs in a sequence) and functional…
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matchin names
by
ntsopoul
▴
60
looks good but I cannot find either Nupl2 nor Nup42 in the list!
Comment: Integration of transcriptomics and proteomics: difficult matchin names
by
GenoMax
141k
This table from Jackson labs that correlates many mouse identifiers with external databases will help. Look at the headers of the columns t…
Comment: Rename multiple fastq.gz files
by
bk11
★
2.3k
I just gave hint in the comment above. Please try this, it should work for you.
#!/bin/bash
for file in `ls *fastq.gz`; do
f…
Comment: BRAKER3 genome annotation
by
andorjkiss
▴
40
I also have this exact same question. I have my entire genome annotated and a braker.GTF file, but without protein "product" names.
Traffic: 2443 users visited in the last hour
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by the
version 2.3.6
version 2.3.6