Dear all,
For the prediction of the effect nonsynonymous SNVs have on protein function or structure, I've been using SIFT, PolyPhen2 and MutationAssessor.
However, I found the paper about Condel where they use a weighted average score to obtain a general 'ranking' for a list of mutated genes. I thought it would be very useful (and less time-consuming) to use Condel, instead of the 3 softwares separately.
However, when I use the webserver of Condel, I used genomic coordinates as an input. When I enter only 1 coordinate, I sometimes get as many as 12 different predictions. Some of them with a different location in the protein, others with the same alleles, same location and the same amino acid changes. (I added an example in attachment.) Does anybody know how this can be explained and how it can be 'prevented'?
Thanks a lot,
Lien
For the prediction of the effect nonsynonymous SNVs have on protein function or structure, I've been using SIFT, PolyPhen2 and MutationAssessor.
However, I found the paper about Condel where they use a weighted average score to obtain a general 'ranking' for a list of mutated genes. I thought it would be very useful (and less time-consuming) to use Condel, instead of the 3 softwares separately.
However, when I use the webserver of Condel, I used genomic coordinates as an input. When I enter only 1 coordinate, I sometimes get as many as 12 different predictions. Some of them with a different location in the protein, others with the same alleles, same location and the same amino acid changes. (I added an example in attachment.) Does anybody know how this can be explained and how it can be 'prevented'?
Thanks a lot,
Lien
Comment