» Articles » PMID: 39656790

A BLAST from the Past: Revisiting Blastp's E-value

Overview
Journal Bioinformatics
Specialty Biology
Date 2024 Dec 10
PMID 39656790
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Motivation: The Basic Local Alignment Search Tool, BLAST, is an indispensable tool for genomic research. BLAST has established itself as the canonical tool for sequence similarity search in large part thanks to its meaningful statistical analysis. Specifically, BLAST reports the E-value of each reported alignment, which is defined as the expected number of optimal local alignments that will score at least as high as the observed alignment score, assuming that the query and the database sequences are randomly generated.

Results: Here, we critically evaluate the E-values provided by the standard protein BLAST (blastp), showing that they can be at times significantly conservative while at others too liberal. We offer an alternative approach based on generating a small sample from the null distribution of random optimal alignments, and testing whether the observed alignment score is consistent with it. In contrast with blastp, our significance analysis seems valid, in the sense that it did not deliver inflated significance estimates in any of our extensive experiments. Moreover, although our method is slightly conservative, it is often significantly less so than the blastp E-value. Indeed, in cases where blastp's analysis is valid (i.e., not too liberal), our approach seems to deliver a greater number of correct alignments. One advantage of our approach is that it works with any reasonable choice of substitution matrix and gap penalties, avoiding blastp's limited options of matrices and penalties. In addition, we can formulate the problem using a canonical family-wise error rate control setup, thereby dispensing with E-values, which can at times be difficult to interpret.

Availability And Implementation: The Apache licensed source code is available at https://github.com/batmen-lab/SGPvalue.

References
1.
Pearson W . Effective protein sequence comparison. Methods Enzymol. 1996; 266:227-58. DOI: 10.1016/s0076-6879(96)66017-0. View

2.
Brenner S, Koehl P, Levitt M . The ASTRAL compendium for protein structure and sequence analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999; 28(1):254-6. PMC: 102434. DOI: 10.1093/nar/28.1.254. View

3.
Altschul S, Bundschuh R, Olsen R, Hwa T . The estimation of statistical parameters for local alignment score distributions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001; 29(2):351-61. PMC: 29669. DOI: 10.1093/nar/29.2.351. View

4.
Wolfsheimer S, Herms I, Rahmann S, Hartmann A . Accurate statistics for local sequence alignment with position-dependent scoring by rare-event sampling. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011; 12:47. PMC: 3042914. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-47. View

5.
Styczynski M, Jensen K, Rigoutsos I, Stephanopoulos G . BLOSUM62 miscalculations improve search performance. Nat Biotechnol. 2008; 26(3):274-5. DOI: 10.1038/nbt0308-274. View