1 / 9

Homology vs Analogy via Motifs Benasque 2012 – RNA Motifs Session Manuel Lladser & Rob Knight

Homology vs Analogy via Motifs Benasque 2012 – RNA Motifs Session Manuel Lladser & Rob Knight. Single Adenine: produced independently. What happens in between?. Ribosomal RNA: Evolved from one common ancestor. Motifs in random sequences.

winola
Download Presentation

Homology vs Analogy via Motifs Benasque 2012 – RNA Motifs Session Manuel Lladser & Rob Knight

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Homology vs Analogy via Motifs Benasque 2012 – RNA Motifs Session Manuel Lladser & Rob Knight

  2. Single Adenine: produced independently What happensin between? Ribosomal RNA: Evolved from one commonancestor

  3. Motifs in random sequences. [Kennedy, Lladser, Wu, Zhang, Yarus, De Sterck& Knight (2010).]

  4. Probability of modular correlated pattern given Memorylessor Markovian background : Embeddingsusing automata. What’s the probability that 1a#b1 occurs in a random binarytext of a’s and b’s of length n? [Lladser, Betterton & Knight (2008)]

  5. What about more complicated motifs?

  6. Natural & artificial RNAs occupy the same restricted region of sequence space: Neutral network hypothesis. Many natural (left) and artificial (middle) aptamers and ribozymes occupy the same (right) restricted region of sequence space. The maximum function probability is achieved with the CompositionA ∼ 30%, C ∼ 15%, G ∼ 30% and U ∼ 25%. [Kennedy, Lladser, Wu, Zhang, Yarus,DeSterck and Knight (2010)]

  7. So far we have looked in random seqs, but what if seqs are known? • Example: the hammerhead ribozyme. We know it evolved at least three times… • Modular nature of the motif greatly complicates its analysis and increases its chance of occurring: need Pr(seqs|model)

  8. Pr(seqs|model) for different models iid (or any Markovian model) Infernal (once model is trained – need to take care for overfitting) SCFG One tree (but how to align modules?) Optimize each tree for each origin? Lots of ways to break up tree… Many trees?

  9. Open questions? • What’s the right way to compute scores? • Non-nested pairing (pseudoknots and tertiary motifs) • Noncanonical interactions • Computational complexity of handling multiple origins Your thoughts?

More Related