Untitled

Abstract

Many computational methods aim to improve the prediction and recognition of transcription elements in prokaryotes. Despite this, the natural features of those elements make their prediction and recognition remain as an open field of research. In this paper, we compared the open-access tools BacPP, BPROM, bTSSfinder, CNNPromoter_b, iPro70-PseZNC, NNPP2, PePPer, and PromPredict. First, we listed the overall functionalities of each tool and the resources available on their web pages. Later, we carried out a comparison of prediction results using 206 intergenic regions. When evaluating the prediction using intergenic regions containing a single promoter within each, NNPP2 and BacPP obtained >90% correct predictions, with NNPP2 obtaining the highest values of match between predicted promoter location and location indicated by RegulonDB. Overall, many discrepancies were observed among the results. They may be explained by the differences in the methodologies that each tool applies for promoter prediction, not excluding the natural features of promoters as a factor as well. In any case, the results highlight the necessity to continue the efforts to improve promoter prediction, perhaps combining multiple approaches. Through said efforts, some of the challenges of the postgenomic era may be tackled as well.