150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18405366)
1. Local conservation scores without a priori assumptions on neutral substitution rates.
Dingel J; Hanus P; Leonardi N; Hagenauer J; Zech J; Mueller JC
BMC Bioinformatics; 2008 Apr; 9():190. PubMed ID: 18405366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Analysis of sequence conservation at nucleotide resolution.
Asthana S; Roytberg M; Stamatoyannopoulos J; Sunyaev S
PLoS Comput Biol; 2007 Dec; 3(12):e254. PubMed ID: 18166073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Detection of nonneutral substitution rates on mammalian phylogenies.
Pollard KS; Hubisz MJ; Rosenbloom KR; Siepel A
Genome Res; 2010 Jan; 20(1):110-21. PubMed ID: 19858363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Identifying a high fraction of the human genome to be under selective constraint using GERP++.
Davydov EV; Goode DL; Sirota M; Cooper GM; Sidow A; Batzoglou S
PLoS Comput Biol; 2010 Dec; 6(12):e1001025. PubMed ID: 21152010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Vestige: maximum likelihood phylogenetic footprinting.
Wakefield MJ; Maxwell P; Huttley GA
BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 May; 6():130. PubMed ID: 15921531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Statistical power of phylo-HMM for evolutionarily conserved element detection.
Fan X; Zhu J; Schadt EE; Liu JS
BMC Bioinformatics; 2007 Oct; 8():374. PubMed ID: 17919331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Statistical alignment with a sequence evolution model allowing rate heterogeneity along the sequence.
Arribas-Gil A; Metzler D; Plouhinec JL
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2009; 6(2):281-95. PubMed ID: 19407352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Strategies for measuring evolutionary conservation of RNA secondary structures.
Gruber AR; Bernhart SH; Hofacker IL; Washietl S
BMC Bioinformatics; 2008 Feb; 9():122. PubMed ID: 18302738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Extensively Parameterized Mutation-Selection Models Reliably Capture Site-Specific Selective Constraint.
Spielman SJ; Wilke CO
Mol Biol Evol; 2016 Nov; 33(11):2990-3002. PubMed ID: 27512115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bayesian coestimation of phylogeny and sequence alignment.
Lunter G; Miklós I; Drummond A; Jensen JL; Hein J
BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 Apr; 6():83. PubMed ID: 15804354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Distribution and intensity of constraint in mammalian genomic sequence.
Cooper GM; Stone EA; Asimenos G; ; Green ED; Batzoglou S; Sidow A
Genome Res; 2005 Jul; 15(7):901-13. PubMed ID: 15965027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Faster than neutral evolution of constrained sequences: the complex interplay of mutational biases and weak selection.
Lawrie DS; Petrov DA; Messer PW
Genome Biol Evol; 2011; 3():383-95. PubMed ID: 21498884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Population genetic models of GERP scores suggest pervasive turnover of constrained sites across mammalian evolution.
Huber CD; Kim BY; Lohmueller KE
PLoS Genet; 2020 May; 16(5):e1008827. PubMed ID: 32469868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evolutionary model selection with a genetic algorithm: a case study using stem RNA.
Kosakovsky Pond SL; Mannino FV; Gravenor MB; Muse SV; Frost SD
Mol Biol Evol; 2007 Jan; 24(1):159-70. PubMed ID: 17038448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Weak preservation of local neutral substitution rates across mammalian genomes.
Imamura H; Karro JE; Chuang JH
BMC Evol Biol; 2009 May; 9():89. PubMed ID: 19416516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Using evolutionary Expectation Maximization to estimate indel rates.
Holmes I
Bioinformatics; 2005 May; 21(10):2294-300. PubMed ID: 15731213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Site-specific evolutionary rate inference: taking phylogenetic uncertainty into account.
Mayrose I; Mitchell A; Pupko T
J Mol Evol; 2005 Mar; 60(3):345-53. PubMed ID: 15871045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation.
Yang Z; Goldman N; Friday A
Mol Biol Evol; 1994 Mar; 11(2):316-24. PubMed ID: 8170371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of human chromosome 21 conserved nongenic sequences (CNGs) with the mouse and dog genomes shows that their selective constraint is independent of their genic environment.
Dermitzakis ET; Kirkness E; Schwarz S; Birney E; Reymond A; Antonarakis SE
Genome Res; 2004 May; 14(5):852-9. PubMed ID: 15078857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. GARD: a genetic algorithm for recombination detection.
Kosakovsky Pond SL; Posada D; Gravenor MB; Woelk CH; Frost SD
Bioinformatics; 2006 Dec; 22(24):3096-8. PubMed ID: 17110367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
