Thanks Jen. But it looks like the datatype was already set to fasta.
I tried setting it again and saving but it didn't seem to help.
Is there anything else I can try?
thanks,
Greg
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Jennifer Jackson j...@bx.psu.edu wrote:
Hi Greg,
Nice pic, it helps! My guess
Looking at your screenshot, you have Use a built-in index selected. If you
change this to Use one from the history, do you see your fasta file listed?
-Dannon
On Oct 10, 2012, at 9:02 AM, greg margeem...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Jen. But it looks like the datatype was already set to fasta.
Yes that was it! I knew I was missing something obvious.
Thanks,
Greg
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Dannon Baker dannonba...@me.com wrote:
Looking at your screenshot, you have Use a built-in index selected. If you
change this to Use one from the history, do you see your fasta file
Hi Judith,
The analysis in the paper focused on profiling taxonomic ranks. This was
done with Megablast versus the GenBank databases NT WGS. The accession
identifiers being associated with nucleotide data, not protein (as would
result from a comparison against NR), is most likely the
4 matches
Mail list logo
