--- EXPERIMENT NOTES




 --- EXPERIMENT PROPERTIES

#Mon Dec 11 18:50:07 WET 2017
codeml.models=0 1 2 3 7 8
mrbayes.mpich=
mrbayes.ngen=1000000
tcoffee.alignMethod=MUSCLE
tcoffee.params=
tcoffee.maxSeqs=0
codeml.bin=codeml
mrbayes.tburnin=2500
codeml.dir=
input.sequences=
mrbayes.pburnin=2500
mrbayes.bin=mb_adops
tcoffee.bin=t_coffee_ADOPS
mrbayes.dir=/usr/bin/
tcoffee.dir=
tcoffee.minScore=3
input.fasta=
input.names=
mrbayes.params=
codeml.params=



 --- PSRF SUMMARY

      Estimated marginal likelihoods for runs sampled in files
"/opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.run1.p" and "/opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.run2.p":
(Use the harmonic mean for Bayes factor comparisons of models)

(Values are saved to the file /opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.lstat)

Run   Arithmetic mean   Harmonic mean
--------------------------------------
1     -12905.52        -12924.82
2     -12905.11        -12925.88
--------------------------------------
TOTAL   -12905.29        -12925.48
--------------------------------------


Model parameter summaries over the runs sampled in files
"/opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.run1.p" and "/opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.run2.p":
Summaries are based on a total of 3002 samples from 2 runs.
Each run produced 2001 samples of which 1501 samples were included.
Parameter summaries saved to file "/opt/ADOPS1/pet1/Phyb_S7_17/batch/allfiles/mrbayes/input.fasta.fasta.mrb.pstat".

95% HPD Interval
--------------------
Parameter         Mean      Variance     Lower       Upper       Median    min ESS*  avg ESS    PSRF+
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TL{all}         3.265825    0.010945    3.060720    3.474241    3.265414   1131.84   1316.42    1.000
r(A<->C){all}   0.132530    0.000101    0.112495    0.151564    0.132369    940.63    977.04    1.000
r(A<->G){all}   0.281056    0.000215    0.253615    0.310926    0.280915    648.22    704.45    1.000
r(A<->T){all}   0.092113    0.000045    0.079208    0.105429    0.091953    782.52    865.58    1.000
r(C<->G){all}   0.132405    0.000142    0.107499    0.154393    0.132072    864.06    915.17    1.000
r(C<->T){all}   0.272875    0.000204    0.245572    0.300234    0.272632    510.47    588.85    1.000
r(G<->T){all}   0.089021    0.000053    0.075026    0.103275    0.088755   1063.52   1072.25    1.000
pi(A){all}      0.315042    0.000095    0.295826    0.333611    0.314910    813.48    992.23    1.000
pi(C){all}      0.170247    0.000053    0.156773    0.185549    0.170085    826.64    890.93    1.000
pi(G){all}      0.190637    0.000062    0.175602    0.206216    0.190515    666.66    779.83    1.000
pi(T){all}      0.324075    0.000097    0.304861    0.342008    0.324242    676.78    807.59    1.000
alpha{1,2}      1.207140    0.019957    0.936557    1.469855    1.196074   1114.91   1170.17    1.000
alpha{3}        4.667186    0.968614    2.958926    6.556642    4.548687   1183.10   1296.78    1.000
pinvar{all}     0.046080    0.000394    0.007189    0.083306    0.046066   1099.09   1144.42    1.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Convergence diagnostic (ESS = Estimated Sample Size); min and avg values
correspond to minimal and average ESS among runs.
ESS value below 100 may indicate that the parameter is undersampled.
+ Convergence diagnostic (PSRF = Potential Scale Reduction Factor; Gelman
and Rubin, 1992) should approach 1.0 as runs converge.


Setting sumt conformat to Simple



 --- CODEML SUMMARY

Model 1: NearlyNeutral	-11189.151276
Model 2: PositiveSelection	-11180.433629
Model 0: one-ratio	-11368.248896
Model 3: discrete	-11143.550911
Model 7: beta	-11176.030513
Model 8: beta&w>1	-11145.643265


Model 0 vs 1	358.1952399999973

Model 2 vs 1	17.435294000002614

Additional information for M1 vs M2:
Naive Empirical Bayes (NEB) analysis
Positively selected sites (*: P>95%; **: P>99%)
(amino acids refer to 1st sequence: 1_Phybrida_S7_FBX1_AB932986)

            Pr(w>1)     post mean +- SE for w

    50 T      0.888         2.009
    64 P      0.791         1.899
    66 G      0.946         2.076
    97 E      0.654         1.744
   118 E      0.895         2.017
   158 R      0.853         1.969
   177 Q      0.606         1.689
   196 T      0.512         1.582
   199 W      0.605         1.687
   215 D      0.578         1.657
   216 M      0.947         2.076
   239 G      0.872         1.991
   240 Y      0.891         2.012
   263 D      0.676         1.768
   348 S      0.648         1.736

Bayes Empirical Bayes (BEB) analysis (Yang, Wong & Nielsen 2005. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22:1107-1118)
Positively selected sites (*: P>95%; **: P>99%)
(amino acids refer to 1st sequence: 1_Phybrida_S7_FBX1_AB932986)

            Pr(w>1)     post mean +- SE for w

    50 T      0.861         2.287 +- 0.539
    64 P      0.739         2.104 +- 0.671
    66 G      0.937         2.399 +- 0.400
    97 E      0.526         1.780 +- 0.752
   118 E      0.873         2.304 +- 0.522
   158 R      0.816         2.219 +- 0.598
   216 M      0.942         2.407 +- 0.387
   239 G      0.856         2.279 +- 0.548
   240 Y      0.866         2.293 +- 0.533
   263 D      0.547         1.812 +- 0.749
   348 S      0.505         1.748 +- 0.750


Model 8 vs 7	60.77449599999818

Additional information for M7 vs M8:
Naive Empirical Bayes (NEB) analysis
Positively selected sites (*: P>95%; **: P>99%)
(amino acids refer to 1st sequence: 1_Phybrida_S7_FBX1_AB932986)

            Pr(w>1)     post mean +- SE for w

    50 T      0.991**       1.737
    64 P      0.975*        1.721
    66 G      0.997**       1.743
    97 E      0.966*        1.711
    98 Y      0.527         1.230
   100 V      0.856         1.594
   117 F      0.905         1.646
   118 E      0.992**       1.738
   119 V      0.633         1.347
   146 N      0.685         1.404
   148 G      0.911         1.652
   158 R      0.988*        1.734
   171 M      0.879         1.618
   174 D      0.536         1.247
   175 W      0.718         1.442
   177 Q      0.944         1.688
   196 T      0.904         1.645
   199 W      0.949         1.692
   200 L      0.889         1.628
   215 D      0.950*        1.695
   216 M      0.997**       1.743
   230 N      0.504         1.204
   239 G      0.988*        1.733
   240 Y      0.993**       1.739
   242 G      0.900         1.640
   261 F      0.929         1.672
   262 S      0.515         1.216
   263 D      0.963*        1.708
   266 T      0.909         1.650
   335 E      0.782         1.515
   348 S      0.957*        1.702

Bayes Empirical Bayes (BEB) analysis (Yang, Wong & Nielsen 2005. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22:1107-1118)
Positively selected sites (*: P>95%; **: P>99%)
(amino acids refer to 1st sequence: 1_Phybrida_S7_FBX1_AB932986)

            Pr(w>1)     post mean +- SE for w

    50 T      0.956*        2.024 +- 0.546
    64 P      0.904         1.962 +- 0.601
    66 G      0.980*        2.050 +- 0.519
    97 E      0.837         1.861 +- 0.647
   100 V      0.532         1.416 +- 0.696
   117 F      0.673         1.627 +- 0.717
   118 E      0.958*        2.027 +- 0.544
   148 G      0.647         1.580 +- 0.708
   158 R      0.943         2.009 +- 0.560
   171 M      0.570         1.465 +- 0.703
   177 Q      0.771         1.766 +- 0.686
   196 T      0.709         1.693 +- 0.716
   199 W      0.763         1.750 +- 0.685
   200 L      0.597         1.506 +- 0.710
   215 D      0.775         1.773 +- 0.678
   216 M      0.979*        2.050 +- 0.520
   239 G      0.946         2.016 +- 0.558
   240 Y      0.960*        2.028 +- 0.542
   242 G      0.629         1.554 +- 0.714
   261 F      0.654         1.581 +- 0.695
   263 D      0.834         1.858 +- 0.651
   266 T      0.616         1.529 +- 0.700
   348 S      0.813         1.827 +- 0.665