Version Differences for E. coli
|
(→Evaluation)
|
(→Evaluation)
|
| Line 162: | |||
| *'''Scaffold the contigs using SSPACE''' | *'''Scaffold the contigs using SSPACE''' | ||
| - | :Since we have the paired-end reads of ''E. coli'', it is possible to assess the order, distance and orientation of contigs and combine them into scaffolds. We, therefore, used [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21149342 SSPACE] to scaffold the contigs and quantified the scaffolds by Mauve assembly metrics. | + | : Since we have the paired-end reads of ''E. coli'', it is possible to assess the order, distance and orientation of contigs and combine them into scaffolds. We, therefore, used [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21149342 SSPACE] to scaffold the contigs and quantified the scaffolds by Mauve assembly metrics. |
| {| {{table}} border="1" | {| {{table}} border="1" | ||
| Line 188: | |||
| |- | |- | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| + | : The results show that SSPACE can scaffold the contigs, though no many, and the integrated contigs output by CISA can provide the largest number of intact coding sequences. | ||