• JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
 
  Bookmark and Share
 
 
Master's Dissertation
DOI
https://doi.org/10.11606/D.45.2000.tde-26112001-150157
Document
Author
Full name
Said Sadique Adi
E-mail
Institute/School/College
Knowledge Area
Date of Defense
Published
São Paulo, 2000
Supervisor
Committee
Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo (President)
Matioli, Sergio Russo
Meidanis, Joao
Title in Portuguese
Ferramentas de auxílio ao seqüenciamento de DNA por montagem de fragmentos: um estudo comparativo.
Keywords in Portuguese
biologia computacional
DNA
montagem de fragmentos
Abstract in Portuguese
Atualmente, existe um grande número de ferramentas para montagem de fragmentos de DNA disponíveis. Neste trabalho apresentamos um estudo comparativo das ferramentas CAP2, FAKtory, TIGR e PHRAP. Para realizarmos este estudo, primeiramente executamos esses sistemas de montagem sobre 12 casos de testes distintos. Após isso, tomamos os resultados obtidos por cada um deles e os comparamos com as seqüências de onde os fragmentos foram originalmente obtidos. Os testes utilizados avaliam a eficiências dos programas com relação a três problemas associados ao processo de montagem (erros no sequenciamento, fragmentos quimeras e regiões repetidas) e pudemos ver que nenhum dos sistemas é claramente superior aos demais no tratamento de todos eles. Cada ferramenta de montagem parece tratar de melhor forma um problema em especial.Além de avaliarmos os resultados, realizamos também um estudo.
Title in English
DNA fragments assembly programs: a comparative study.
Keywords in English
computacional biology
fragments assembly programs
Abstract in English
Noways, several peckages for DNA fragment assembly are aviable. In this wok we present a comparative study of the preformances of the programs CAP2, FAKtory, TIGR e PHrap. To get to our objetives, we firt ran each of these programs on twelve intances. After this,we compared the outputs with the sequences from wich the fragments were originally obtained. In this comparison,we took into consideration three problems related to fragments assembly (sequencing errors, chimeric fragments and repeats regions). We conclude that no one of the packages we tested is more efficient than the others when considering all the problems cited above. If we consider a particular problem, the we observed different performances among the programs. Even more, we compare the packages with respect to theirs to CPU times.
 
WARNING - Viewing this document is conditioned on your acceptance of the following terms of use:
This document is only for private use for research and teaching activities. Reproduction for commercial use is forbidden. This rights cover the whole data about this document as well as its contents. Any uses or copies of this document in whole or in part must include the author's name.
prjdiss.pdf (727.77 Kbytes)
Publishing Date
2002-11-28
 
WARNING: Learn what derived works are clicking here.
All rights of the thesis/dissertation are from the authors
CeTI-SC/STI
Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations of USP. Copyright © 2001-2024. All rights reserved.