Q: Are Blasts available according to the query sequences? ¶
Q: Is a Blast more time-efficient than FASTA by searching only for the more significant patterns in the sequences? ¶
A: Yes, yet with comparative sensitivity.
Q: Is a Blast much more sensitive in picking up distant evolutionary relationships than a standard protein-protein BLAST? ¶
Q: Is a Blast an accelerated version of NCBI BLASTP for CUDA which is 3x~4x faster than NCBI Blast? ¶
Q: Is a Blast based on a heuristic algorithm? ¶
A: Yes, and the results received through BLAST, in terms of the hits found, may not be the best possible results, as it will not provide you with all the hits within the database.
Q: Is a Blast BLAT? ¶
A: Yes, While BLAST does a linear search, BLAT relies on k-mer indexing the database, and can thus often find seeds faster.
Q: Was a Blast being conducted under normal conditions? ¶
A: Yes, and the word size would be 3 letters.
Q: Is a Blast a commercial parallel implementation of NCBI BLAST? ¶
A: Yes, and supporting hundreds of processors.
Q: Is a Blast a parallel implementation of NCBI BLAST using Message Passing Interface? ¶
Q: Is a Blast that there are often High-scoring Segment Pairs contained in a statistically significant alignment? ¶
Q: Is a Blast used to find homologous sequences by searching and comparing a query sequence with those in the databases? ¶
A: Yes, and they do have their differences.
Q: Is a Blast faster than any Smith-Waterman implementation for most cases? ¶
A: Yes, and it cannot "guarantee the optimal alignments of the query and database sequences" as Smith-Waterman algorithm does.
Q: Was a Blast developed from the algorithm used for Smith-Waterman? ¶
Q: Is a Blast one of the most widely used bioinformatics programs for sequence searching? ¶
Q: Is a Blast also often used as part of other algorithms that require approximate sequence matching? ¶
Q: Is a Blast among the key technical innovations of the BLAST programs? ¶