Table 2 The tetrad detection software applied to real biological datasets. (a) Evaluation of the software on dataset D1 using the default parameter setting. Since all the spores in D1 are already labeled according to their tetrad assignment (from manual dissection), we were able to count the number of tetrads identified by the software that were either in agreement with the data labels (correct tetrads), or not (false tetrads), as well as the number of tetrads that the software was not able to identify (missed tetrads). The triplets were counted in the same way. (b) Evaluation of the software on dataset D2 using either the default parameter setting or filtering markers with too many missing values (corresponding to the second and third columns). Although there is no known tetrad assignment of the spores in D2, the spores were barcoded, with spores derived from the same tetrad sharing a barcode. As a result we counted the number of tetrads identified by the software comprised of same-barcode spores (confirmed tetrads). We also counted consistent tetrads comprised of either same-barcode spores or spores with no barcode and incorrect tetrads whose spores have different barcodes. The sum of confirmed, consistent and incorrect tetrads is the total number of tetrads identified by the software. The triplets were counted in the same way
(a)D1_Default
Spores412
Markers536
Run time12s
Correct tetrads5098.04%
Missed tetrads11.96%
False tetrads11.96%
Correct triplets5296.30%
Missed triplets23.70%
False triplets711.86%
(b)D2_DefaultD2_Filter_markers
Spores26662666
Markers579531
Run time68m23s54m57s
Confirmed tetrads18184.98%23084.56%
Consistent tetrads3215.02%4215.44%
Incorrect tetrads00.00%00.00%
Total tetrads213272
Confirmed triplets9121.67%21547.36%
Consistent triplets7818.57%9220.26%
Incorrect triplets25159.76%14732.38%
Total triplets420454