Project titles for:
Project titles for: 2008-10
- In silico analysis of Larger subunit of AGPase in Rice and Maize
- In silico Analysis of mutated in Larger subunit of AGPase in Maize
- Structural Comparison of Betaine Aldehyde Dehydrogenase-1 of Barley and Rice
- Analysis of Gene Expression Database of Skin Cancer
- Evaluation of Sequence Alignment Tools
- Phylogenetic analysis of Drb 3.2 gene
- Modelling of Smaller subunit of AGPase in Rice and Maize
- Prediction of Protein structure from sequence
- Development of Clinical Information Database of domestic animals
- To identify distant relationship between flavoprotein superfamily
- Promoters comparison in bacteria
- Transport protein features analysis
- Genome deciphering and comparative genomics of Solanaceous genome
- Computational approach in deciphering effect of gene alteration in Arabidopsis Thaliana
- Simulation of conformational changes in protein
Comparison and alignment of a series of protein and DNA sequences were among the first and are now established as the most powerful and frequently used bioinformatics methods. A variety of computational algorithms and programs have been created for this purpose. Decision about which tools to use is one of the important problems for bioinformaticians, especially for the majority of biologists who are non-specialist users. Therefore, a comparisons study for the different multiple sequence alignment tools (MSA) is necessary for the biologists and bioinformaticians to use the proper software that interprets correctly their biological data. The present study addressed this critical issue in relation to MSA algorithms by systematically comparing and evaluating the functionality, usability and the algorithms of six famous multiple sequence alignment tools (MUSCLE, T-COFFEE. BALIPHY, PROBCONS, KALIGN, MAFFT). In comparison of NCBI TAXONOMY TREE no one program gave the same tree. In phylogeny concept BaliPhy and ProbCons gave the accurate tree as compared to others. A novel method was proposed for qualifying the MSA tools result by using Scorecons server to compute the conservation scores which was named SCS method (ScoreCons Server method). Mafft gave the highest conservation score followed by Muscle. Each program gave result on different parameters. As no single program was concluded the best for evaluating data, so different programs should be used.