Characteristics of Gene Indexing Databases and Classification Methods
| Feature | Databases and clustering methods | |||||
| TGI[i] | UniGene[ii] | STACK[iii] | GeneNest[iv] | Mouse cDNA project[v] | Rice cDNA project (our method) | |
| Clustering program | MegaBlast [vi]andCAP3 [vii] | MegaBlast | d2_cluster [viii] | BLAST | BLAST | BLAST |
| Representative clones | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Consensus sequences | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | no | No |
| Alignments | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Alternative splices | Different clusters | Same clusters | Different clusters | Same clusters | Same clusters | Same and different clusters |
| Redundancy of groups | High | Low | High | Low | Low | Low |
| Visualization tool | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Other information | Coding potential | Annotation tissue | Tissue | Sequence quality | Tissue | Tissue |
[v] Konno et al. 2001.
[vii] Huang et al. 1999.
[viii] Burke et al. 1999. Four gene indexing databases and two classification methods used for our full-length cDNA projects are compared based on eight distinct points of view.