Below is a summary of the abstract you submitted. Presenting author(s) is shown in bold.
If any changes need to be made, you can modify the abstract or change the authors.
You can also download a .docx version of this abstract.
If there are any problems, please email Dan at dar78@pitt.edu and he'll take care of them!
This abstract was last modified on May 31, 2024 at 3:33 p.m..
Genome annotation relies upon software tools to predict the presence and start sites of putative Open Reading Frames (ORFs). However, tools like GLIMMER and GeneMark sometimes disagree in their ORF predictions and called start sites. Additionally, most of these tools were designed to predict ORFs for prokaryote and eukaryote genomes. Here, we compare the ORF predictions of five tools for Arthrobacter globiformis phage Talia1610: GLIMMER, GeneMarkS, GeneMarkS-2, Prodigal, and PHANOTATE. We examine how ORF calls predicted by PHANOTATE, an ORF prediction tool designed specifically for phage genomes, compare with GLIMMER and GeneMark.