On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Peter <peter(a)maubp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:14 PM, James Taylor
> Peter, this is great and we will look at it. The main thing I want to think
> about is does this affect reproducibility in any way. We may want to keep
> the old tool, and have another tool for the NCBI version (I'd love to see a
> complete set of wrappers for NCBI blast+, which we could include with our
> cloud images right away). Thanks!
> -- jt
Hi James et al.
Could you or someone from the Galaxy team take a look at my wrappers
for blastn, blastp, blastx, tblastn and tblastx and the BLAST XML to tabular
converter for possible inclusion in galaxy-central?
The BLAST+ suite is so big and has so many options that this is by no
means a "complete set of wrappers" but it covers the immediate core
functionality that I expect to need personally.
P.S. One thing this is lacking is unit tests. I worry that these could be
specific to the version of BLAST+ and the version of any database
installed. Ultimately the reference platform here is the "official"
public Galaxy server, right?
Using the -subject feature we can BLAST one file against another
which avoids the database version issue.