Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Print PDF (647K)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (23)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Commercial Re-use Guidelines
for Open Access NAR Content
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Day, W. H.E.
Right arrow Articles by McMorris, F.R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Day, W. H.E.
Right arrow Articles by McMorris, F.R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nucleic Acids Research, 1992, Vol. 20, No. 5 1093-1099
© 1992

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY

Critical comparison of consensus methods for molecular sequences

William H.E. Day and F.R. McMorris

Department of Computer Science, Memorial University of Newfoundland St John's, NF A1C 5S7, Canadaand Department of Mathematics, University of Louisville Louisville, KY 40292, USA

Received November 18, 1991. Revised February 2, 1992. Accepted February 2, 1992.

Consensus methods are recognized as valuable tools for data analysis, especially when some sort of data aggregation is desired. Although consensus methods for sequences play a vital role in molecular biology, researchers pay little heed to the features and limitations of such methods, and so there are risks that criteria for constructing consensus sequences will be misused or misunderstood. To understand better the issues involved, we conducted a critical comparison of nine consensus methods for sequences, of which eight were used in papers appearing in this journal. We report the results of that comparison, and we make recommendations which we hope will assist researchers when they must select particular consensus methods for particular applications.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 BioinformaticsHome page
A. Tomovic and E. J. Oakeley
Position dependencies in transcription factor binding sites
Bioinformatics, April 15, 2007; 23(8): 933 - 941.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
J. Hu, B. Li, and D. Kihara
Limitations and potentials of current motif discovery algorithms
Nucleic Acids Res., September 2, 2005; 33(15): 4899 - 4913.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
A. Sosinsky, C. P. Bonin, R. S. Mann, and B. Honig
Target Explorer: an automated tool for the identification of new target genes for a specified set of transcription factors
Nucleic Acids Res., July 1, 2003; 31(13): 3589 - 3592.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Information ScienceHome page
J. G. Wolff
A scaleable technique for best-match retrieval of sequential information using metrics-guided search
Journal of Information Science, January 1, 1994; 20(1): 16 - 28.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.