Document Detail

Unassigned MURF1 of kinetoplastids codes for NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  18831753     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
BACKGROUND: In a previous study, we conducted a large-scale similarity-free function prediction of mitochondrion-encoded hypothetical proteins, by which the hypothetical gene murf1 (maxicircle unidentified reading frame 1) was assigned as nad2, encoding subunit 2 of NADH dehydrogenase (Complex I of the respiratory chain). This hypothetical gene occurs in the mitochondrial genome of kinetoplastids, a group of unicellular eukaryotes including the causative agents of African sleeping sickness and leishmaniasis. In the present study, we test this assignment by using bioinformatics methods that are highly sensitive in identifying remote homologs and confront the prediction with available biological knowledge. RESULTS: Comparison of MURF1 profile Hidden Markov Model (HMM) against function-known profile HMMs in Pfam, Panther and TIGR shows that MURF1 is a Complex I protein, but without specifying the exact subunit. Therefore, we constructed profile HMMs for each individual subunit, using all available sequences clustered at various identity thresholds. HMM-HMM comparison of these individual NADH subunits against MURF1 clearly identifies this hypothetical protein as NAD2. Further, we collected the relevant experimental information about kinetoplastids, which provides additional evidence in support of this prediction. CONCLUSION: Our in silico analyses provide convincing evidence for MURF1 being a highly divergent member of NAD2.
Sivakumar Kannan; Gertraud Burger
Related Documents :
20507913 - Protein annotation and modelling servers at university college london.
16487483 - Protein structure prediction using mutually orthogonal latin squares and a genetic algo...
2001253 - Insulin secretory granule biogenesis. co-ordinate regulation of the biosynthesis of the...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2008-10-02
Journal Detail:
Title:  BMC genomics     Volume:  9     ISSN:  1471-2164     ISO Abbreviation:  BMC Genomics     Publication Date:  2008  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2008-10-27     Completed Date:  2008-11-05     Revised Date:  2009-11-18    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  100965258     Medline TA:  BMC Genomics     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  455     Citation Subset:  IM    
Robert Cedergren Research Center for Bioinformatics and Genomics, Département de Biochimie, Université de Montréal, 2900 Boulevard Edouard-Montpetit, Montréal, Québec, H3T 1J4, Canada.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Amino Acid Sequence
Artificial Intelligence
Computational Biology / methods*
Genome, Mitochondrial
Kinetoplastida / enzymology,  genetics*
Markov Chains
Molecular Sequence Data
NADH Dehydrogenase / genetics*
Open Reading Frames
Sequence Alignment
Sequence Analysis, Protein
Reg. No./Substance:
EC Dehydrogenase

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Publisher: BioMed Central
Article Information
Download PDF
Copyright ? 2008 Kannan and Burger; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
open-access: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received Day: 15 Month: 11 Year: 2007
Accepted Day: 2 Month: 10 Year: 2008
collection publication date: Year: 2008
Electronic publication date: Day: 2 Month: 10 Year: 2008
Volume: 9First Page: 455 Last Page: 455
ID: 2572627
Publisher Id: 1471-2164-9-455
PubMed Id: 18831753
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-455

Unassigned MURF1 of kinetoplastids codes for NADH dehydrogenase subunit 2
Sivakumar Kannan1 Email:
Gertraud Burger1 Email:
1Robert Cedergren Research Center for Bioinformatics and Genomics, D?partement de Biochimie, Universit? de Montr?al, 2900 Boulevard Edouard-Montpetit, Montr?al, Qu?bec, H3T 1J4, Canada


The single-celled flagellated eukaryotes of the group kinetoplastids include notorious human pathogens such as Trypanosoma and Leishmania. Mitochondrial (mt) genomes of numerous trypanosomatids have been sequenced, with complete and nearly complete mtDNA sequences available for five species: Leishmania tarentolae (GenBank Accession No: NC_000894), Trypanosoma brucei (M94286), T. cruzi (DQ343645), Crithidia oncopelti (X56015), Leptomonas seymouri (DQ239758), and major portions of mtDNA for two other members of the group: Leishmania major (AH015294), Leptomonas collosoma (AH015822). For a review, see [1].

The unassigned open reading frame (ORF) murf1 in T. brucei mtDNA has been known for 25 years, but until today, there is no protein of known function that shares significant sequence similarity with this ORF [2]. In a recent study, we conducted a comprehensive function prediction of all hypothetical mitochondrion-encoded proteins using a machine-learning-based classifier MOPS [3]. This classifier does not rely on sequence similarity but rather on a host of other features including physico-chemical properties of proteins, and hence should be able to detect remote homologs. MOPS predicted, but only with moderate support, MURF1 of the kinetoplastid Phytomonas serpens as subunit 2 (NAD2) of the NADH-Ubiquinone Oxidoreductase (NADHdh) or Complex I of the electron transport chain ? a multi-complex pathway embedded in the inner mitochondrial membrane. NADHdh is the largest complex of this pathway with ~45 distinct subunits, seven of which are usually encoded in the mitochondria. We chose to scrutinize this function assignment in detail, motivated by several reasons: the long-standing controversy surrounding MURF1, the large available body of related biological knowledge, and the significance of this organismal group for human health [2,4-6].


As mentioned in the Background, the hypothetical protein MURF1 was predicted by the automated similarity-free classifier MOPS to be a divergent NADHdh subunit 2 (NAD2). To test this prediction, we conducted the following analyses.

Sequence ? Sequence Comparison

BLAST searches of Phytomonas MURF1 sequence against NRDB or UniProt did not result in any informative hits, but identified all the MURF1 homologs from other kinetoplastids such as T. brucei, L. tarentolae, etc. In contrast, FASTA searches against UniProt returned, after MURF1 homologs, NADHdh subunit 5 from the kinetoplastid Crithidia as top informative hit with an e-value of 6.5e-09, followed by NAD2 from the red alga Chondrus crispus with an e-value of 8.8e-07. A list of all hits and their corresponding e-values is compiled in Table 1.

Profile ? Sequence Comparison

For the identification of distantly related sequences, methods that exploit profiles (i.e., position-specific descriptions of the consensus of a multiple sequence alignment) are more sensitive than those based on pairwise alignment such as BLAST and FASTA. Here, we used PSI-BLAST to generate a MURF1 profile and searched it against NRDB, but no other proteins beyond kinetoplastid MURF1 sequences were found.

Profile HMM ? Profile HMM Comparison

Our hypothesis is that MURF1 is a highly derived distant homolog of NAD2. We used Profile HMM ? Profile HMM comparison because it is the most sensitive method in identifying distant homologs. In contrast to simple sequence profiles, Profile Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) contain extra information about insertions/deletions and gap scores. HHsearch (the first implementation of this approach), was shown to outperform profile ? sequence comparison methods such as PSI-BLAST and HMMER, profile ? profile comparison tools such as PROF_SIM and COMPASS and the other HMM ? HMM comparison tool PRC [7].

We built a profile HMM for MURF1 from the multiple alignment of several kinetoplastid MURF1 sequences. Using HHsearch, we searched this profile HMM against the profile HMMs available in Pfam, PANTHER, COG and TIGR. In most cases, the top hit was to the "NADH-Ubiquinone/plastoquinone (Complex I)" profile HMM, which was built from 12 distinct subunits of different function. Though these subunits are non-homologous proteins, Pfam puts them all together in to a single family because they share high hydrophobicity (transmembrane domains). Only the search against the COG database returned a specific subunit as top hit, i.e., NAD2. HHsearch results are summarized in Table 2.

To narrow down the exact function of MURF1, we generated profile HMMs for all 12 subunits of NADHdh. For that, we clustered the protein sequences of all NADHdh subunits at different identity thresholds ranging from 40% to 75%, constructed a multiple sequence alignment for each of the subunits at each threshold, and generated a total of 84 profile HMMs. We then searched the MURF1 profile HMM against all the profiles of NADHdh subunits. As expected for remote homologs, the scores are relatively low. The six top hits are NAD2 with an e-values ranging from 2.70e-15 to 1e-11. The e-value of the other subunit best hits is 4 orders of magnitude worse (Table 3).


While sequence ? sequence comparison and profile HMM ? profile HMM comparison point to MURF1 being a subunit of NADHdh, profile ? profile comparison against the profile HMMs of individual subunits of NADHdh is able to clearly assign MURF1 to NAD2. In the following, we will confront this in silico prediction with the available biological knowledge. If the MURF1 protein of trypanosomes is indeed NAD2, then the following criteria must apply.

1. There should be no previously annotated nad2 gene in either mitochondrial or nuclear genomes of kinetoplastids. A nad2 gene has not been reported in any mitochondrial genome of kinetoplastids. Recently, the sequence of the nuclear genome became available for the P. serpens [4]. Neither genome nor EST data (2,190 ESTs) indicate the presence of this gene.

2. There should be numerous precedents for nad2 being encoded by mtDNA. The nad2 gene is mtDNA-encoded by the large majority of eukaryotes (see GOBASE, 'Gene Distribution' ). The rare species that lack this mitochondrial gene also lack other NADH subunits (Apicomplexa, yeast).

3. The murf1 gene should be transcribed. Evidence for murf1 being expressed rather than being a spurious ORF is provided by several observations. First, the deduced amino acid sequence is conserved across trypanosomes, despite considerable divergence at the nucleotide level. Second, transcription of this gene has been demonstrated in P. serpens [5].

4. Rotenone-sensitive NADH dehydrogenase Complex I should be present in kinetoplastids. The presence of Complex I has been biochemically confirmed in Trypanosoma and Phytomonas [6,8].


On all accounts enumerated above, the biological knowledge reinforces the in silico prediction. Together, this provides convincing evidence that MURF1 is a highly derived homolog of NAD2. For illustration purpose, Fig. 1 depicts the multiple protein sequence alignment of the most conserved block of known NAD2 proteins and kinetoplastid MURF1 sequences.


Notably, a functional NADHdh is crucial to the survival of trypanosomes. Under aerobic conditions (procyclic, insect stage), NADHdh is required as a component of the respiratory chain, to catalyze electron transport toward complex IV. The thus generated proton gradient is utilized for ATP synthesis. Under anaerobic conditions (bloodstream form), a functional NADHdh is equally essential. In the blood stream of mammals, NADHdh provides electrons for the alternative oxidase, a pathway required for maintaining the balance of NADH/NAD+ in the cell. This confirms that trypanosomes depend on a functional NADHdh. In fact, Atovaquone, an anti-leishmanial drug, inhibits the NADHdh activity in P. serpens and this inhibition was suggested to underlie the anti-leishmanial activity of that drug [6]. In this context, the identification of MURF1 as a divergent NAD2 could offer new avenues to the prevention or treatment of trypanosomatid-caused diseases.


All function-known protein sequences used in this study were retrieved from the organelle genome database GOBASE release 12.0 [9]. The homologs for MURF1 were retrieved from Entrez, and their accession numbers are given in Table 4[10].

Assignment of MURF1

For the function assignment of MURF1, we chose to use sequence-sequence, sequence-profile and profile-profile methods described below, which are most sensitive methods to detect remote homologs.

Sequence ? Sequence Comparison

A BLAST (blastp) search was conducted for the MURF1 protein sequence against NCBI's NRDB (non-redundant protein database) (October, 2006; 4,565,699 sequences), with default parameters [11]. In addition, a FASTA search was conducted for the MURF 1 protein sequence against UniProt (release 10.4) with default parameters, at the EBI website [12].

Profile ? Sequence Comparison

This comparison was conducted in two different ways. First, PSI-BLAST was employed to search MURF1 remotely against NCBI's NRDB, with four iterations [13]. Second, we performed profile HMM ? sequence comparison using profiles from Pfam version 21.0, executed at the Pfam website [14].

Profile HMM ? Profile HMM Comparison

For Profile HMM ? profile HMM comparison, we used HHsearch of the HHpred package, which takes the MURF1 sequence as input and searches against NRDB using PSI-BLAST [15]. The MURF1 homologs obtained from the PSI-BLAST search are then used to generate a profile HMM. As a next step, this MURF1 profile HMM is searched against all profile HMMs of function-known proteins available from the public databases Pfam, PANTHER, SMART, COG, PDB and SCOP.

In addition, we generated our own profile HMMs for each of the 12 NADHdh subunits (1?11 and 4L) from all known sequences of these protein classes. These sequences were clustered at eight different identity thresholds (40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70 and 75%) using CD-HIT, followed by multiple sequence alignment performed with MUSCLE [16,17]. (Note: The number of instances for subunit NAD8 and NAD10 are less than 3 at identity thresholds 65 and 75% respectively and hence profile HMMs were not generated below these thresholds for these two subunits) [see Additional file 1]. The multiple alignment served as input for generating profiles using hmmbuild of HMMER version 2.3.2, 2003 package [18]. In order to verify whether profile HMM-profile HMM comparison is efficient in distinguishing the subunits, we tested this approach on the function-known sequences. Herefore, we used NAD2 and NAD5 subunits ? the most difficult subunits to distinguish. For evaluating NAD2-profile HMMs, all NAD2 sequences were divided randomly into ten non-overlapping subsets of equal size. A test-profile HMM was generated using one of the subsets, while the remaining nine subsets were used for generating a "master" profile HMM. The NAD2 test-profile HMM was then searched against the NAD2 "master" profile HMM and the NAD5 profile HMM (generated using all NAD5 sequences) using HHsearch. This procedure is repeated ten times. The same test was done for NAD5. All test-profile HMMs were correctly identified at 100%. Finally, the MURF1 profile HMM was searched against all the 84 profiles using HHsearch with default parameters.

Authors' contributions

SK carried out the sequence analyses and drafted the manuscript. GB conceived the study, supervised and helped to draft the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Supplementary Material Additional file 1

Number of NADHdh subunit sequences after clustering at different identity thresholds. This table shows the number of various NADHdh subunit sequences obtained after clustering at identity thresholds from 99 ? 40% using CD-HIT.

Click here for additional data file (1471-2164-9-455-S1.pdf)


We thank Yaoqing Shen for critically reading the manuscript. SK is Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) Strategic Training Fellow in Bioinformatics (Genetics Institute grant STG-63292). This work was supported by grants from the CIHR Genetics Institute (grants MOP-15331 and MOP-79303). The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIAR) is acknowledged for travel and interaction support provided to GB.

Feagin J. Mitochondrial genome diversity in parasitesInt J Parasitol 2000;30:371–390. [pmid: 10731561]
Eperon IC,Janssen JWG,Hoeijmakers JHJ,Borst P. The major transcripts of the kinetoplast DNA of Trypanosoma brucei are very small ribosomal RNAsNucl Acids Res 1983;11:105–125. [pmid: 6306559]
Kannan S,Hauth AM,Burger G. Function prediction of hypothetical proteins without sequence similarity to proteins of known functionProtein and Peptide Letters.
Pappas GJ,Benabdellah K,Zingales B,Gonz?lez A. Expressed sequence tags from the plant trypanosomatid Phytomonas serpensMol Biochem Parasitol 2005;142:149–157. [pmid: 15869816]
Maslov D,Nawathean P,Scheel J. Partial kinetoplast-mitochondrial gene organization and expression in the respiratory deficient plant trypanosomatid Phytomonas serpensMol Biochem Parasitol 1999;99:207–221. [pmid: 10340485]
Gonz?lez-Halphen D,Maslov D. NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase activity in the kinetoplasts of the plant trypanosomatid Phytomonas serpensParasitol Res 2004;92:341–346. [pmid: 14727190]
Soding J. Protein homology detection by HMM-HMM comparisonBioinformatics 2005;21:951–960. [pmid: 15531603]
Fang J,Wang Y,Beattie DS. Isolation and characterization of complex I, rotenone-sensitive NADH: ubiquinone oxidoreductase, from the procyclic forms of Trypanosoma bruceiEur J Biochem 2001;268:3075–3082. [pmid: 11358527]
O'Brien EA,Zhang Y,Yang L,Wang E,Marie V,Lang BF,Burger G. GOBASE ? a database of organelle and bacterial genome informationNucleic Acids Res 2006:D697–699. [pmid: 16381962]
Ostell J. The Entrez search and retrieval systemThe NCBI Handbook. 2002
Altschul SF,Gish W,Miller W,Myers EW,Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search toolJ Mol Biol 1990;215:403–410. [pmid: 2231712]
Pearson WR. Rapid and sensitive sequence comparison with FASTP and FASTAMeth Enzymol 1990;183:63–98. [pmid: 2156132]
Altschul SF,Madden TL,Sch?ffer AA,Zhang J,Zhang Z,Miller W,Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programsNucleic Acids Res 1997;25:3389–3402. [pmid: 9254694]
Finn RD,Mistry J,Schuster-B?ckler B,Griffiths-Jones S,Hollich V,Lassmann T,Moxon S,Marshall M,Khanna A,Durbin R,Eddy SR,Sonnhammer EL,Bateman A. Pfam: clans, web tools and servicesNucleic Acids Res 2006:D247–251. [pmid: 16381856]
Soding J,Biegert A,Lupas AN. The HHpred interactive server for protein homology detection and structure predictionNucleic Acids Res 2005:W244–248. [pmid: 15980461]
Li W,Godzik A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequencesBioinformatics 2006;22:1658–1659. [pmid: 16731699]
Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughputNucl Acids Res 2004;32:1792–1797. [pmid: 15034147]
Eddy SR. Profile hidden Markov modelsBioinformatics 1998;14:755–763. [pmid: 9918945]


[Figure ID: F1]
Figure 1 

Multiple sequence alignment of kinetoplastid MURF1 sequences with NAD2 sequences from other eukaryotes. The top five sequences are kinetoplastid proteins. Only the most conserved region of the protein is depicted. The range of amino acid positions included in the alignment is indicated by the numbers following the species name. Dashes specify alignment gaps.

[TableWrap ID: T1] Table 1 

List of FASTA hits for P. serpens MURF1 searched against UniProt

UniProt ID Species Name Protein Name e-value Similarity
Q9XKY50 Phytomonas serpens MURF1 5.3e-148 100.0%
Q33559 Leishmania tarentolae MURF1 2.7e-109 90.9%
Q8HE85 Trypanosoma sp. MURF1 3.1e-17 87.6%
Q33547 Blastocrithidia culicis MURF1 1.2e-16 86.5%
Q33552 Crithidia fasciculata MURF1 6e-16 88.4%
Q33556 Herpetomonas muscarum MURF1 5.1e-13 85.0%
Q34937 Leishmania. tarentolae MURF2 2e-09 60.4%
Q34096 Crithidia fasciculata MURF2 3.2e-09 56.3%
Q34192 Crithidia oncopelti NAD5 3.8e-09 54.5%
P48903 Chondrus crispus NAD2 5.4e-07 57.9%
Q5LRX2 Silicibacter pomeroyi Putative membrane protein 1.2e-06 58.0%
Q6E773 Saprolegnia ferax NAD2 1.5e-06 53.8%
Q6SKY5 Speleonectes tulumensis NAD5 2.3e-06 55.2%
Q5AG49 Candida albicans Hypothetical protein 3.3e-06 67.7%
Q5AGI5 Candida albicans Hypothetical protein 7.1e-06 67.9%
Q8SKS6 Ancylostoma duodenale NAD4 7.4e-06 57.3%
Q85TH7 Melipona bicolor NAD4 7.7e-06 58.1%
Q33575 Trypanosoma brucei NAD4 8.7e-06 57.3%
P24499 Trypanosoma brucei brucei ATP6 1.1e-05 55.4%
Q70NW4 Strongyloides stercoralis NAD4 1.2e-05 56.7%
Q33570 Trypanosoma cruzi ATP6 1.5e-05 56.9%
Q5CV17 Cryptosporidium parvum Hypothetical protein 1.5e-05 61.5%
Q057W5 Buchnera aphidicola NADH dehydrogenase I chain L 1.9e-05 54.9%
Q8IBJ6 Plasmodium falciparum Hypothetical protein 2.9e-05 58.4%

[TableWrap ID: T2] Table 2 

Best informative hits for the MURF1 profile HMM when searched against profile HMMs from various databases

Best informative hit e-value Identity Probability
Pfam NADH-Ubiquinone/plastoquinone (Complex I), various subunits 1.6e-08 21% 96.80
PANTHER NADH dehydrogenase 4.3e-09 16% 99.20
COG NADH:Ubiquinone oxidoreductase subunit 2 3.8e-03 19% 39.65
TIGR NDH_I_N Proton-translocating NADH-Quinone oxidoreductase 91 19% 75.95

[TableWrap ID: T3] Table 3 

Best hits for the MURF1 profile HMM when searched against the profile HMMs of all NADH dehydrogenase subunits using HHsearch. The hits are ranked based on E-valuesa

No Hitb Probability E-value Identities Score
1 NAD2_0.45 96.6 2.70E-15 26 75.7
2 NAD2_0.4 96.6 3.20E-15 25 75.3
3 NAD2_0.5 96.6 1.70E-14 23 72.1
4 NAD2_0.55 96.5 1.50E-12 34 63.1
5 NAD2_0.6 96.3 6.30E-12 23 60.4
6 NAD2_0.65 96.2 1.00E-11 26 59.4
7 NAD4_0.4 96 2.10E-11 21 58
8 NAD4_0.55 95.9 2.90E-11 23 57.4
9 NAD4_0.6 95.2 1.40E-10 28 54.2
10 NAD2_0.7 95.1 1.90E-10 27 53.6
11 NAD4_0.7 95 2.40E-10 28 53.2
12 NAD4_0.5 94.3 6.00E-10 28 51.4
13 NAD2_0.75 93.8 1.20E-09 24 50
14 NAD4_0.45 93.2 2.00E-09 27 49
15 NAD4_0.75 93.1 2.30E-09 28 48.7
16 NAD6_0.4 91.8 6.40E-09 24 46.7
17 NAD6_0.45 90.1 1.80E-08 26 44.7
18 NAD5_0.4 89.8 2.10E-08 21 44.4
19 NAD1_0.55 88.9 3.30E-08 18 43.5
20 NAD6_0.5 88.9 3.30E-08 23 43.5
21 NAD5_0.5 88.4 4.00E-08 28 43.1
22 NAD1_0.6 86.7 8.10E-08 17 41.7
23 NAD1_0.5 86 1.10E-07 18 41.2
24 NAD6_0.55 85.7 1.20E-07 25 41
25 NAD5_0.55 85.7 1.20E-07 25 40.9
26 NAD1_0.65 84.8 1.60E-07 20 40.4
27 NAD1_0.4 84.3 1.80E-07 24 40.1
28 NAD1_0.45 84.1 2.00E-07 22 40
29 NAD4_0.65 83.5 2.40E-07 26 39.6
30 NAD1_0.7 83.2 2.60E-07 21 39.4
31 NAD5_0.45 25 2.90E-07 25 39.2
32 NAD5_0.6 80.4 5.50E-07 21 37.9
33 NAD6_0.65 80 6.10E-07 28 37.7
34 NAD1_0.75 79.5 6.90E-07 18 37.5
35 NAD5_0.65 77.3 1.10E-06 18 36.5
36 NAD5_0.75 76.9 1.20E-06 21 36.3
37 NAD5_0.7 76.7 1.30E-06 18 36.2
38 NAD6_0.6 73.6 2.40E-06 25 35
39 NAD6_0.7 69.8 4.70E-06 25 33.7
40 NAD6_0.75 69.2 5.20E-06 20 33.5
41 NAD3_0.4 62.1 1.50E-05 30 31.4
42 NAD3_0.45 55.9 3.50E-05 27 29.8
43 NAD3_0.55 48.2 8.80E-05 25 27.9
44 NAD3_0.6 46.9 0.0001 24 27.6
45 NAD3_0.65 45.8 0.00012 23 27.4
46 NAD3_0.5 43.9 0.00014 21 27
47 NAD4L_0.4 34.2 0.00044 25 24.8
48 NAD4L_0.45 31.2 0.00062 18 24.1
49 NAD4L_0.55 26.8 0.0011 15 23
50 NAD3_0.7 26.7 0.0011 26 23
51 NAD4L_0.6 26.5 0.0011 30 22.9
52 NAD4L_0.7 23.3 0.0016 27 22.1
53 NAD4L_0.5 21.1 0.0022 18 21.6

a Probability, e-value, identity and score for each hit were reported by HHSearch

b The number following the subunit name is the sequence identity threshold used for clustering the sequences from which we generate the profile HMM. For example, NAD2_0.45 profile HMM is generated by clustering all known NAD2 sequences at 45% sequence identity threshold using CD-HIT.

[TableWrap ID: T4] Table 4 

List of kinetoplastid MURF1 sequences with GenBank Accession Numbers

Species Name GenBank Accession
Phytomonas serpens AAD28358
Leishmania tarentolae NP_050068
Trypanosoma brucei E22845
Trypanosoma sp. AAN86606
Blastocrithidia culicis AAA73417
Crithidia fasciculata AAA73421
Herpetomonas muscarum AAA73415

Article Categories:
  • Research Article

Previous Document:  Milk: the new sports drink? A Review.
Next Document:  Recovering probabilities for nucleotide trimming processes for T cell receptor TRA and TRG V-J junct...