Please tell me the biggest disadvantages of using 16s rRNA for phylogeny and techniques, which are better in this regard. I would appreciate if someone can also send me papers to read on that.
regards
Jitendra
There are a lot of literature about 16S are already exist because of its high popularity in phylogenetic approches. In general, all advantages and disadvantages of phylogeny, based on 16S RNA depends on some aspects and aims of your approach:
1. What level of phylogeny you intend to reconstruct on this basis (higher level phylogeny or low level phylogeny)?
2.What organisms you interested to study in such way?
3. What algorithms of phylogenetic analysis you intend to use?
4. Do you plan to combine or compare data, obtained as a result of 16S analysis with other data?
Thanks for your answer, Andrii!!
My main strategy is to go with point 4...
regards
16s is a very useful molecular marker for both below species level and above species level (within a family). This makes 16s a versatile tool as it provides resolution at different taxonomic levels.
Another interesting trait is that it usually contain indels (unlike most protein-coding genes), which give additional phylogenetic information as they are conserved across the evolutionary history of a lineage.
From my experience with 16s and the literature on its use I can't point at any significant disadvantage.
Dear Daniel,
Greta thanks!!
Does the database error create too much of a problem in comparing sequences to find evolutionary relationship. If yes? what are the alternates available to overcome such limitations?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Molecular Biology
- Molecular Biological Techniques