<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1543" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>XM_
sequences are predicted sequences. I would not rely on them as they have
not been verified. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>NM_
sequences are RefSeq sequences, and are much more stable - They are the NCBI
curated sequences and have evidence supporting them.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In
some cases, you can do from the XM_ sequences to the GeneID to the new NM_
sequence that represents that Gene. I think the XM_ GenBank entry also
documents the new NM_ entry.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=788485820-06062006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Ryan</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
bio_bulletin_board-bounces+golharam=umdnj.edu@bioinformatics.org
[mailto:bio_bulletin_board-bounces+golharam=umdnj.edu@bioinformatics.org]
<B>On Behalf Of </B>Michael Muratet US-Huntsville<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday,
June 06, 2006 11:53 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
bio_bulletin_board@bioinformatics.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BiO BB] Withdrawl of
Refseq accessions<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Greetings</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I recently discovered that about 3000 Refseq
accessions that were present in the 4/2005 release have been withdrawn. The
ones I've looked at appear to be NCBI predictions using their gnomon tool and
had 'XM_*' accessions. I'm concerned that a database that is supposed to be
stable is so dynamic. I asked NCBI about it, but didn't get an explanation.
Does anybody have any experience with such large scale withdrawls? Does
anybody know why?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Mike</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>