Suppr超能文献

对关于基因组顺序索引评论的反驳。

A rebuttal to the comments on the genome order index.

作者信息

Zhang Ren

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tianjin Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.

出版信息

Comput Biol Chem. 2009 Aug;33(4):350. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2008.11.001. Epub 2008 Nov 14.

Abstract

Recently, Elhaik et al. [Elhaik, E., Graur, D., Josic, K., 2008. 'Genome order index' should not be used for defining compositional constraints in nucleotide sequences. Comp. Biol. Chem. 32, 147] commented on the genome order index, which is defined as S=a(2)+c(2)+g(2)+t(2) where a, c, g and t denote corresponding base frequencies. They claimed that (1) "S<1/3 is in fact a mathematical property that is always true", and (2) "S is strictly equivalent to and derivable from the Shannon H function". The first claim is apparently wrong: for instance, when a=c=0.5, g=t=0, S=0.5>1/3. The second claim is also incorrect because S and H are different special cases of the alpha-order entropy, having different functional forms that are neither strictly derivable from nor equivalent to each other. Therefore, the conclusions made in their comments are wrong.

摘要

最近,埃尔海克等人[埃尔海克,E.,格劳尔,D.,约西克,K.,2008年。“基因组顺序指数”不应被用于定义核苷酸序列中的组成限制。《计算生物学与化学》32卷,第147页]对基因组顺序指数进行了评论,该指数被定义为S = a(2)+c(2)+g(2)+t(2),其中a、c、g和t表示相应的碱基频率。他们声称:(1)“S < 1/3实际上是一个总是成立的数学性质”,以及(2)“S与香农H函数严格等价且可从其推导得出”。第一个声称显然是错误的:例如,当a = c = 0.5,g = t = 0时,S = 0.5 > 1/3。第二个声称也是不正确的,因为S和H是α阶熵的不同特殊情况,具有不同的函数形式,既不能严格地相互推导得出,也不等价。因此,他们评论中的结论是错误的。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验