February 28

Lab 4 – Phamerator

Date of Lab: 01/31/17

Rationale: The purpose of the lab was to practice genome annotation and learn how to use Phamerator.

Tools used: DNA master, NCBI, Phamerator

Procedures:

  1. Open the software Phamerator through virtual box and login with the password “phamerator”.
  2. Under “Phages” tab> search the interested gene (It will allow you to look at multiply genes at the same time) > MAP
    1. the number in the colored box = gene number
    2. number above the box = pham number
    3. number in (#) = number of members in that pham
    4. lines on the graph: identifying sequence that are similar on other part/ duplication/different place/ phage
    5. upper gene= forward
    6. lower gene = reverse
  3. If we pointed at the gene/the rectangle, it would show the function of the gene(only apply on some genes)
  4. Annotate the assigned gene (gene 22)

Conclusion:

We got to learn to use a new tool to help us to annotate the genes with more details and have more practice on annotating the genes.

Notes:

  • each ruler = genome
  • rectangle = auto annotated gene
  • high gene density
    • shouldn’t have too many gap/overlap–should be packed
  • there will be gap for promoter between genes
  • If it is a perfect match :
    • query coverage ~200%
    • E value ~ 0
  • Long DNA = tap measure gene
  • Short gene = regulator
  • F = function
  • Fs = function source: blast, pharmarater, HHpred, cdd(conserved domine), record best blast
February 28

Bio lab7 –Lore presentation

 

Theresa WangChin Wong

Date of Lab: 02/21/17

Rationale: The purpose of this lab was to present the annotation of our assigned and to ensure the annotation was accurate.

Procedures:

  1. Add the Q:S value to the google spreadsheet.
  2. Help reannotate the genes of other groups if necessary.

 

Notes:

*only shorten a gene If there’s too much overlap
*Enter new start site into DNA Master: input the new start site > hit the calculator button > “Post”

 

*When we are deciding the start site, we prefer to choose the gene with a better SD score than with the longer ORF.

 

Conclusion:

I learned a lot from learning about how the other gene area annotated and why changes were made on annotating the genes base on different situation.

 

February 28

Lab 6 Lore annotation –Gene 13

Theresa WangChin Wong

Date of Lab: 02/14/17

Rationale: The purpose of this lab was to annotate Lore for the assigned gene and put the results on the excel spreadsheet.

Tools used: DNA master, NCBI, Phamerator, Starterator, Glimmer, GeneMark

Procedures:

  • We did not make any changes on gene 13.
  • Start: 7279bp Stop: 9276bp FWD GAP: 110bp Gap SD Final Value: SD Score: -4.389 (2nd best score) Z-Value: 2.209 CP: The gene is covered SCS: Agrees with Glimmer, Agrees with GeneMark NCBI BLAST: Tapemeasure protein Arthrobacterphage Toulouse E-Value: 0.0 CDD: Phage-related protein [Mobilome: prophages, transposons] E-Value: 5.90e-11 PhagesDB BLAST: StewieGriff_Draft_13, function unknown, 665 Q:1 S:1 E-Value: 0 HHPred: No good hit LO: Yes ST: Agrees with Starterator F: tape measure protein FS: Phages DB, NCBI, HHPred, Phamerator

  • We chose the #1 gene with the 2nd best score and the longest ORF to be our starting site. Since it also agrees with Glimmer, GeneMark and Starterator, and it cover most of the gene. We did not choose the gene with the best score(gene9) because it would create a larger gap.

  • Gene #1 has the most number of blue vertical bars on Starterator and that’s the gene Starterator suggested.

We got a 0.0 E value on NCBI BLAST, its function is tapemeasure protein

 

  • We got Query1: Subject 1 on NCBI BLAST, that’s mean our query gene match with the subject(top hit) gene with the same length. So we can agree with the start codon.
  • Phagesdb: StewieGriff_Draft_13, function unknown, 665 has an e value of 0.0.
  • Conserved domains
  • NO hit on HHPred

Conclusion:

With the help of the excel spreadsheet, we did the annotation step by step and we are able to compare our results with other genes at the same time.

February 28

Lab 5 Starterator

Theresa WangChin Wong

Date of Lab: 02/07/17

Rationale: The purpose of the lab was to annotate our assigned genes (ranging from 8401-9800) and learn how to use Starterator.

Tools used: DNA master, NCBI, Phamerator, Starterator, Glimmer, GeneMark

Procedures:

  1. Download the Fasta file for Lore on fastdb website and load it into DNA master.
  2. To figure out which gene we should annotate, we compare our assigned range with the 5’End & 3’End ranges (on the Features tab). And we found out we it mostly cover gene 13 and overlap with gene 14.
  3. Fill in the start coordinate, stop coordinate, FWD/BKWD, Gap/Overlap
  4. Coding potential :if the gene (black horizontal bar) is longer than the line graph, it is covered
  5. Shine Delgarno :SD score & Z-Value
  6. start choice source: does it agree with Glimmer & GeneMark?)
  7. LO: longest ORF value
  8. NCBI: blast it on NCBI, record the name of the best hit and its E-Value
  9. Conserved Domains: Click the button above the line graph on the NCBI website. Record the best hit & its E-Value.
  • Blast on Phages DB & HHPred
  • Starterator: Open Virtue Box>Starterator>

”Choose what you want to Starterate” :Pham

“Pham Number”: 6177 find it on the Phamerator (the number on top of our assigned gene)

>Link to Report > see whether it agree with Starterator

start choice: base on the gene with the most blue vertical bar (other vertical bar with color than blue = random)

  • Function: find it through Phamerator
  • Function source: Phages DB, NCBI, HHPred, Phamerator

Conclusion:

I became more familiar with the whole process of annotating the gene, with a organized google spreadsheet. And the picture below is the result of my  annotation.

 

February 28

Lab 6: Lore Phage Annotations (continued)

Joseph Chang

Date: 2/14/2017

Rationale of today’s work: The purpose of today’s lab was to finish annotating our assigned genes in the Lore phage genome, specifically, to check gene 6 for accuracy and work on gene 7.

Tools used: DNA Master, GeneMark, PhagesDB Blast, NCBI Blast, HHPred, Phamerator, Starterator

Method: Working with my lab partner, we annotated gene 7 in a similar fashion as annotating gene 6. Like gene 6, no changes were made to the original DNA Master (Glimmer) gene call.

  1. Open previous auto-annotated DNA Master file for the Lore phage genome.
  2. In the Frames view, highlight gene 7 and open its ORF table of possible start sites.
  3. Submit Lore’s FASTA file to GeneMark and obtain PDF of the results.
  4. Run PhagesDB and NCBI Blasts. Note the conserved domain in the NCBI Blast.
    1. Both top results agreed and had query: 1 and subject: 1; good indicator of correct start site.
  5. Run the gene in Phamerator and HHPred and compare the results to the conserved domain.
    1. In this case, they all agreed that the gene coded for a capsid maturation protease.
  6. Run the gene in Starterator and choose the best start site.
    1. Starterator’s best start site agreed with Glimmer’s start site choice.

 

Results:

Start: 3706bp
Stop: 5289bp
FWD GAP: 4bp Overlap
SD Final Value: -5.071 (4th best score) The better scores don’t cover all coding potential
Z-Value: 1.94
CP: The gene is covered
SCS: Agrees with Glimmer, Agrees with GeneMark
NCBI BLAST: capsid maturation protease [Arthrobacter phage Toulouse] q:1 s:1 E-Value: 0.0
CDD: TIGR01543 E-Value: 2.10e-08
PhagesDB BLAST: capsid & capsid maturation protease [Toulouse_6] E-Value: 0.0
HHPred: 1ohg_A Major capsid protein E-Value: 3.9e-29
LO: Yes
ST: Agrees with Starterator
F: capsid maturation protease
FS: Phages DB, NCBI, HHpred

Conclusions and Next Steps: Both of our assigned genes’ Glimmer gene calls were not changed. Our next step is to make a PowerPoint presentation that summarizes our results.

February 28

Lab 8: Annotation Review

Taylor Kowalski

February 28, 2017

Rationale of today’s work:

At this point in the semester we should be considering our “midterm goals” and how far we have come along since beginning in January. It is important that we are understanding the tools we have been working with such as DNAMaster, Phamerator, GeneMark, NCBI, HHPred etc.

Today we were assigned specific genes for the annotation of our newest class assignment: Timinator. I have been assigned to annotate Genes 10, 32, 49, 54 and 76.

Tools used and/or Methods:

DNAMaster, Phamerator, GeneMark, NCBI/BLAST, HHPred, Starterator.

Results:

Gene 10:

Start: 8453bp Stop: 8989bp FWD GAP: 16bp Gap SD Final Value: SD Score: -1.506 (Best score) Longest ORF, best coding potential Z-Value: 3.3 CP: The gene is covered SCS: Agrees with Glimmer, Agrees with GeneMark NCBI BLAST: hypothetical protein BARRETLEMON_8 [Arthrobacter phage BarretLemon] q:1 s:1 E-Value: 5e-119 CDD: ATP11 E-Value: 9.80e-03 PhagesDB BLAST: Timinator_Draft_10, function unknown,178 E-Value: 4e-94 HHPred: SH3 and PX domain-conta E-Value: 18 LO: Yes ST: Agrees with Starterator F: NKF FS: HHPred, NCBI 

Timinator Blast Results for Gene 10

Gene 32:

Start: 27188bp Stop: 28471bp FWD GAP: 1bp Overlap SD Final Value: SD Score: -4.301 (2nd best score) Longest ORF Z-Value: 1.908 CP: The gene is covered SCS: Agrees with Glimmer, Agrees with GeneMark NCBI BLAST: tail protein [Arthrobacter phage BarretLemon] q:1 s:1 E-Value: 0.0 CDD: No good hit PhagesDB BLAST: Timinator_Draft_32, function unknown, 427 q:1 s:1 E-Value: 0.0 HHPred: Endo-1,4-beta-xylanase E-Value: 1.9e-11 LO: Yes ST: Agrees with Starterator F: NKF FS: NCBI calls “tail protein” HHPred: “endo” PhagesDB: KNF 

Timinator Blast Results for Gene 32

 

Conclusions and Next Steps:

So far none of my genes have been too out of the ordinary. Gene 10 had no known function while Gene 32 was a suspected tail protein. Moving forward with this knowledge, scientists can use these functions for further research.

Due to minimal time, I completed genes 10 and 32 of the phage Timinator. I will begin annotating genes 49, 54, and 76 during the next class period.

 

 

 

February 28

Lab 7 Post

Kirsty Wyatt
Lab Date: 2/23/17
Purpose: We took lab time to present and discuss annotations made on Lore genes and to work as a team to help finalize the annotations.
Procedure:
1. Submit PowerPoint presentation
2. Present
3. Discuss why the annotations were made and if there are any concerns
4. Gene 13 needed no changes, it also agreed with another group’s annotations on the same gene
5. Preparation to submit all the annotations for publication
6. Review over annotations, put them into one container (excel, googledocs, Word, etc), BLAST them all again, compare the new BLASTS with the older, make changes if necessary, collect all names of the authors, collect ideas for a cover page, create a cover page, submit.
Conclusion: This lab was interesting because we got to observe, analyze, change, discuss everyone’s annotations and why they annotated it that way. As a group, we learned together. It is exciting to be published on something that is currently a hot topic for scientists.

February 28

Lab 6 Post

Kirsty Wyatt
Lab Date: 2/19/17
Purpose: This lab is to aid us on how to recognize and fix any common mistakes that are possible to occur when annotating a gene. We were encouraged to relook over our annotated gene from last lab.
Procedure:
1. Open DNAMaster, GeneMark, Glimmer, Startertor, Phamerator, HHPred, Phagesdb, NCBI, and the googledoc containing annotation information
2. Determine a start site by comparing many of the sites listed above
3. Refer to the Shine Delgarno to ensure the start site chosen will not cause too big of a gap/overlap
4. Look at the reading frames and choose the longest
5. Identify any possible functions using and comparing many of the sites listed above
Conclusion:
A few mistakes were made, but they were identified and fixed. Looking over our annotations was helpful because we carefully analyzed our work, thus gaining a better understanding of it. We didn’t choose the best score for SD because it would go against starterator and it would have created too large of a gap.

February 28

Lab 5 Post

Kirsty Wyatt
Lab Date: 02/08/17
Purpose: This lab was to familiarize ourselves with Starterator and its usefulness in annotating genes.
Procedure:
1. Open virtual box
2. Open Phamerator
3. Update Phamerator
4. Search for your gene, and 4-6 others to compare
5. Observe the results
6. Take note of Pham number, members of the Pham, and the cluster within the Pham
7. Close Phamerator
8. Open Starterator
9. Compare the start sites on Starterator with those on GeneMark, Glimmer, DNAMaster
10. Note if you changed your starting site
11. Finish annotation
Conclusion:
In this lab, I annotated gene 13 from Lore phage with a partner. Together, we used all the sites and formulated a complete annotation. I got more practice with annotations and using the different sites and how they all compare and correlate.

February 28

Lap 4 post

Kirsty Wyatt
Lab Date: 2/1/17
Purpose: This lab was to familiarize ourselves with Phamerator and its usefulness in annotating genes.
Procedure:
1. Open virtual box
2. Open Sea2017
3. Open Phamerator
4. Update Phamerator
5. Search for your specific genome and 4-6 more to compare
6. Observe the results
7. Take note of Pham number, members of the Pham, and the cluster within the Pham
8. Identify the function of gene if it is included
9. Begin another annotation in DNAMaster, now including information derived from Phamerator
10. You can now fill in BLAST, F: (top hits), and FS: (sources used)
Conclusion: Phamerator is an interesting tool with a colorful layout. It is almost unbelievable how many different sources are available for gene annotating. The more practice, the better, and I feel much more knowledgeable about annotating a gene.