Hello Erin,
The coloring of this gene does look incorrect. The developer of the
UCSC Genes track is looking into it. I will let you know the outcome.
Thank you for pointing this out, and sorry for any confusion it has caused!
--
Brooke Rhead
UCSC Genome Bioinformatics Group
Kaminsky, Erin Baldwin wrote:
> Hello-
> I have a question regarding the recent update of the UCSC Genes (Wed,
10 Sep 2008). In comparing the old version and the updated one, it
appears that some of the genes have changed color-code classifications.
It seems as though there are fewer black/dark blue classifications for
the updated version. For example, in the May 2004 version, SHOX was
listed as dark blue ("Reviewed" or "Validated") but in the updated 2006
version, SHOX appears to be light blue (non-RefSeq transcript). Any
suggestions as to the changes?
> Thank you!
> --Erin
>
> ________________________________
> This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
> information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
> prohibited.
>
> If you have received this message in error, please contact
> the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
> original message (including attachments).
> _______________________________________________
> Genome maillist - [email protected]
> http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/genome
_______________________________________________
Genome maillist - [email protected]
http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/genome
