Question: Residue Conservation: Sequence Logo Vs Codeml Or Rate4Site
gravatar for Pappu
6.3 years ago by
Pappu1.9k wrote:

I made a sequence logo from an alignment of homologous protein sequences. I can clearly see the residue conservation in it. However I read a paper where the authors calculated dn/ds by codeml to infer the conserved residues with very low ratio. So my question is if it is worth spending time to calculate dn/ds instead of making a sequence logo which is quite fast in order to see the residue conservation. Thank you.

ADD COMMENTlink modified 6.0 years ago by pld4.8k • written 6.3 years ago by Pappu1.9k
gravatar for nbeveryday
6.0 years ago by
nbeveryday10 wrote:

I use Rate4Site, and it works fine for me.

ADD COMMENTlink written 6.0 years ago by nbeveryday10
gravatar for Juke34
6.0 years ago by
Juke344.4k wrote:

I think it is important to spend time to calculate dN/dS. A profile gives you very few information compared to a dN/dS analysis. It is largely admitted that the dN/dS analysis is reliable and informative. Many publications use this method. 

Codeml uses lot of computational ressource. You can use MapNH instead, that is really light and faster. It does a good approximation. The results are substantially the same.

ADD COMMENTlink written 6.0 years ago by Juke344.4k
gravatar for pld
6.0 years ago by
United States
pld4.8k wrote:

A sequence logo (assuming you're referring to Tom Schneider's work), and dN/dS ratio are measuring two very different features. The sequence logo is telling you the conservation of single residues, while the dN/dS ratio is telling you the ratio about selection pressures at the codon level. The sequence logo (at the amino acid residue level) does not provide any information about non-synonymous substitutions and therefore does not provide the total picture of a residue at a position.

For example I have a three amino acid peptide: ACF, I can have 16 different sequences that encode this, but a sequence logo at the amino acid level hides this information, all three residues would appear equally conserved, even if 2/3 residues are coded with the same codon while the third uses all of its codons. You miss the whole picture: the 2 residues with the same codon might be under purifying selection while the third may be under neutral/no selection.

I would do the codeml run, it is worth it if you are interested in exploring selection pressures acting on specific sites in related proteins. It will take a bit longer, but it is not a prohibitively large amount of time.

ADD COMMENTlink modified 6.0 years ago • written 6.0 years ago by pld4.8k
Please log in to add an answer.


Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 1036 users visited in the last hour