Hi everyone,
Is there anyone who knows if the SIFT or Polyphen-2 can be used to analyse the SNPs from pig genome?? Please I want your suggestions. I have made some changes in the uniprot files in Polyphen-2 to get the pig annotations and files but I am not sure if it gives me correct results. is there any other way to do this?
How to decide which SNPs are damaging if we get a bit different results from SIFT and Polyphen? Should I consider the overlapping set between SIFT and polyphen?
You should ask this directly to the authors of those softwares.
Thanks all,
I have installed Polyphen2 version 2.0.22.I think i have to upgrade this. If polyphen is specie independent then does that means I don't have to make any changes in the uniprot script to download annotations for pig?? Secondly I also run few SNPs from chicken which were predicted as deleterious by polyphen but tolerated by SIFT and vice versa e.g.
Q90808 G4R (tolerated in SIFT and deleterious in polyphen) Q3V5M1 G558R (deleterious in SIFT and benign in polyphen) Q2AB82 L295F (tolerated in SIFT and deleterious in polyphen)
So, what could be the reason when a SNP which is highly conserved across species is predicted as deleterious by SIFT but not by polyphen? How to decide which SNPs are damaging if we get a bit different results? Should I consider the overlapping set between SIFT and polyphen?
If this is a separate question it should be posted as such, not appended inline as an answer, or if it is a continuation of the same question please edit the original question.
I supervised a project last year on SNP phenotype prediction, and you should not expect 100% concordance between different methods. No computational method is going to tell you 100% what the effects will be, whether you choose to trust an overlapping set or not!
thanks alot Daniel for the comment.infact it was the continuation of the same question.
there is a paper called 'pathogenic or not? And if so then How?' and i think i recall reading in it why you can/can't compare the results of the these tools. It certainly called for greater transparency of methodology so you could make more informed decisions on conflicts/agreement between software.
the tools use different methodologies so you won't necessarily get overlap of results, and as daniel says, overlap of results doesn't confirm anything (though it might make you more willing to get the lab biologists to look into it). SIFT uses phylogenetic information and polyphen uses structural information + multiple sequence alignments. YOu really need to understand how the methods work to interpret them correctly so i think you have no option but to read their respective papers.
the tools use different methodologies so the results of the 2 aren't necessarily comparable. You really need to understand the methodologies to interpret the results correctly and to decide whether you think the overlap is important. SIFT is based on phylogenetic information and polyphen is based on structural information and multiple sequence alignments. A residue might be highly conserved so sift would say a change in that is a bad thing but polyphen might look in the structure and say that the new amino acid doesn't compromise the structure.
Hello Kamila,
I am new to polyPhen and I am studying dog genome. I wanted to ask if u had to make any changes to the Uniprot files that you have mentioned in your question as there was no comment regarding that.