↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Query-Dependent Banding (QDB) for Faster RNA Similarity Searches

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
Title
Query-Dependent Banding (QDB) for Faster RNA Similarity Searches
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, March 2007
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric P Nawrocki, Sean R Eddy

Abstract

When searching sequence databases for RNAs, it is desirable to score both primary sequence and RNA secondary structure similarity. Covariance models (CMs) are probabilistic models well-suited for RNA similarity search applications. However, the computational complexity of CM dynamic programming alignment algorithms has limited their practical application. Here we describe an acceleration method called query-dependent banding (QDB), which uses the probabilistic query CM to precalculate regions of the dynamic programming lattice that have negligible probability, independently of the target database. We have implemented QDB in the freely available Infernal software package. QDB reduces the average case time complexity of CM alignment from LN(2.4) to LN(1.3) for a query RNA of N residues and a target database of L residues, resulting in a 4-fold speedup for typical RNA queries. Combined with other improvements to Infernal, including informative mixture Dirichlet priors on model parameters, benchmarks also show increased sensitivity and specificity resulting from improved parameterization.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Brazil 2 2%
Portugal 2 2%
Mexico 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 98 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 10%
Student > Master 9 8%
Professor 5 4%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 56 50%
Computer Science 16 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Mathematics 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 19 17%