You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We noticed in a head-to-head comparison of ORFs
predicted with canonical and non-canonical starts
that some longer ORFs with non-canonical starts
do not have any supporting reads in the extended 5'part.
We should think about on how to deal with this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I have looked closer into the profiles and it seems that the problem doesn't lie in 'no reads at all' but small fraction of them compared to other potential TIS (or annotated one).
We noticed in a head-to-head comparison of ORFs
predicted with canonical and non-canonical starts
that some longer ORFs with non-canonical starts
do not have any supporting reads in the extended 5'part.
We should think about on how to deal with this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: