<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Improving Multiple Sequence Alignments with a Phylogeny-Aware Algorithm</title>
	<atom:link href="http://anthropology.net/2008/06/20/improving-multiple-sequence-alignments-with-a-phylogeny-aware-algorithm/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://anthropology.net/2008/06/20/improving-multiple-sequence-alignments-with-a-phylogeny-aware-algorithm/</link>
	<description>Beyond bones &#38; stones</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:33:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://anthropology.net/2008/06/20/improving-multiple-sequence-alignments-with-a-phylogeny-aware-algorithm/#comment-13510</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:50:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthropologynet.wordpress.com/?p=926#comment-13510</guid>
		<description>Actually, in this study, they did not compare sequences of primates to primates, primates to rodents, and primates to all mammals. Rather, they simulated synthetic DNA sequence data.

&quot;Fo the 16-taxon tree, we set evolutionary relationships close, intermediate, and distant, approximately representing comparisons of primates, primates and rodents, and mammals, respectively.&quot;

This is a difference. I think one cannot learn something about the frequency of indels from this study, because the frequency of indels actually went into their model as a parameter and was not a result. 

They were not able to &quot;identify that insertions are far more common in primate evolution than deletions&quot; -- this is an assumption they made!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, in this study, they did not compare sequences of primates to primates, primates to rodents, and primates to all mammals. Rather, they simulated synthetic DNA sequence data.</p>
<p>&#8220;Fo the 16-taxon tree, we set evolutionary relationships close, intermediate, and distant, approximately representing comparisons of primates, primates and rodents, and mammals, respectively.&#8221;</p>
<p>This is a difference. I think one cannot learn something about the frequency of indels from this study, because the frequency of indels actually went into their model as a parameter and was not a result. </p>
<p>They were not able to &#8220;identify that insertions are far more common in primate evolution than deletions&#8221; &#8212; this is an assumption they made!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sphaerula &#187; More Accurate Multiple Sequence Alignment</title>
		<link>http://anthropology.net/2008/06/20/improving-multiple-sequence-alignments-with-a-phylogeny-aware-algorithm/#comment-11524</link>
		<dc:creator>Sphaerula &#187; More Accurate Multiple Sequence Alignment</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthropologynet.wordpress.com/?p=926#comment-11524</guid>
		<description>[...] anthropology.net [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] anthropology.net [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
