Dear Colleagues, I am seeking your experience about BLASt result. Having been following after the morphological character of a cephalopod specimen I identified it as Abralia andamanica, as also the BLAST (92%; acc. nr. HQ846076). However, recently when I tried to reanalysed it, both the trimmed and untrimed nucleotides gave me a very different species which is not match to its morphological character, i.e. Uroteuthis duvauceli with 99.25 - 99.37% identification (acc. nr. KC959455). I wonder which one should I follow? Thanks.
Good day,
I think I'm not getting your question right. When you said "re-analyze", does this mean that you took the same fasta file and ran it through BLAST again? Or did you take another sample from the same batch? In case of any doubt, it's always helpful to appeal to morphological traits, so you can discard any possibility of contamination.
I am sorry, l took the same fasta file and re-run it through BLAST, that was th eonly one sample that l have. I wonder why cant I get the same result in BLAST using the same fasta file. So, we shall trust morphological traits more than the molecular/COI barcide? Thanks for your opinion.
Never said that. However, ir you are getting different results from the same sample, there is a chance of it being contaminated with another specimens DNA. I'd reprocess the main seq file in chromas and seek for unconsistencies, before making any further conclusion.
Good luck
Dear Dr Adán Valenzuela Castillo , i wonder what do you mean with "contaminated with another specimens DNA"?, since we isolated the DNA (genome) from only one specimen, actually i ever had same problem with Dr Norma Afiati , very need your advice, thank you
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers