Genomic data mining through python language

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/09/2017
Views (1296)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Genomic data mining through python language

Rashid Saif, Kinza Qazi, Talha Tamseel, Saeeda Zia
Int. J. Biosci. 11(3), 116-125, September 2017.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2017; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

Pythonis a rigorous programming language, which may be used for many purposes including genomic data mining. This language was designed to emphasize on code readability and syntax, which allows programmer to express code in lesser space with comprehensive and exhaustive manner. Different analysis through Python can be conducted during dry labs sessions, which infer concrete and generalizable results from the wet lab genomic experiments, such as gene expression analysis, phylogenetic, GC percentage and gene sequencing. In this article, built-in Python functions like variables, stings, operators and formatting styles are introduced, and short programs are structured, implemented and executed. Basic operators are used to perform calculations through this language, gene sequences are analyzed and small built-in functions e.g. “length, print, integers and types” of Python are also conversed in this communication. Case sensitive commands are elaborated to avoid errors during the process of computing. This endeavor also shed light on the topic that how different Python methods and functions may be used to compute data structures, dictionaries, sets, lists, tuples, loops and statements on the genomic sequences. Finally, different programs are constructed to count undefined bases in a given sequence with the help of statement, condition functions based on Boolean expressions, loops function are also used to analyze undefined amino acids present in protein sequences with the help of “for” and “while” loops.

Anders S, Pyl PT, Huber W. 2014. HTSeq–a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 32(2), 166-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu638

Cock PJ, Antao T, Chang JT, Chapman BA, Cox  CJ, Dalke A, Friedberg I, Hamelryck T, Kauff F, Wilczynski B. 2009. Biopython: freely available Python tools for computational molecular biology and bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 25(11), 1422-1423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp163

Goodstadt L. 2010. Ruffus: a lightweight Python library for computational pipelines. Bioinformatics 26(21), 2778-2779. www.10.1093/bioinformatics/btq524

Hamelryck T, Manderick B. 2003. PDB file parser and structure class implemented in Python. Bioinformatics 19(17), 2308-2310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btg299

Mann C. 2010. Python for bioinformatics. Kybernetes 39(8) http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/k.2010.06739hae.004

Lesk A. 2013. Introduction to bioinformatics. Oxford University Press.

List M, Ebert P, Albrecht F. 2017. Ten Simple Rules for Developing Usable Software in Computational Biology. PLOS Computational Biology 13(1), e1005265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005265

Oliphant TE. 2007. Python for scientific computing. Computing in Science & Engineering 9(3), 10-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/mcse.2007.58

Pearson WR, Lipman DJ. 1988. Improved tools for biological sequence comparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 85(8), 2444-2448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.85.8.2444

Perkins J. 2010. Python text processing with NLTK 2.0 cookbook. Packt Publ.

Przulj N. 2013. Introduction to the special issue on biological networks. Internet Mathematics 7(4), 207-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15427951.2011.621769

Related Articles

Implementation and evaluation of limited face to face classes: basis for adoption of health and safety manual

Christian Jude B. Calunsag*, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 65-75, August 2026.

Baseline characterization of farming systems in the province of Bassitenga in Burkina Faso

Boly Ismaël Ardho*, Traoré Mamadou, Hema Alain Sabiriba, Sory Lallé Daouda, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 54-64, August 2026.

Zootechnical performance and economic profitability of sasso broiler chickens reared under a semi-automatic production system in Burkina Faso

Bernadette Yougbaré*, Arnaud Stéphane Rayangnéwêndé Tapsoba, Fatogoman Téophile Sanou, Clément Kaboré, Amadou Traoré, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 35-44, August 2026.

Factors influencing the use of Mucuna pruriens as food in Benin, West Africa

Yves Boladé Djimba, Janvier Mêlégnonfan Kindossi*, Folachodé Ulrich Gildas Akogou, Ephraïm Olouwafemi Biao, Jacques Agangni, Kokou Mensah Adjangba, Ogouyôm Herbert Iko Afé, Franck Hongbété, Rodrigue V. Cao Diogo, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 19-34, August 2026.

Contribution to the inventorier and establishment of a collection of agricultural entomofauna from the Niayes area of Dakar

Mamecor Faye*, Amy Collé Guèye, Coumba Gning, Lamine Konaté, Mbacké Sembène, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 10-18, August 2026.

Assessment of the trophic ecology and variation in the natural diet of an anuran amphibian species (Afrixalus dorsalis) in the Wetlands of the Ehotilé Islands (Ivory Coast)

Beh Romaric Konate*, Amani Reine Élisabeth Kouadio, Louis César Agou, Enoutchy Fabrice Bouah, N'Guessan Ludovic Yao, Etilé Raphaël N’doua, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 1-9, August 2026.

Bioefficacy testing of indigenous plant-based biopesticides against green leafhopper (GLH) of rice

Diosa G. Alasaas*, Angelina T. Gonzales, Ricardo Casauay, Mayflor D. Compra, Int. J. Biosci. 29(1), 237-246, July 2026.