Both databases are protein databases containing large amount of data on protein domains & families displayed in the form of HMM, multiple sequence alignments, patterns, etc..
Is it possible that there is a huge overlap between the data found in the two databases ? and which one of the two has more coverage of data?
2 answers
In short Pfam produces global alignments via HMMs wheras "classic" PROSITE was built on regular expressions derived from generaly shorter aligned sections. This means Pfam will recognise homologues from an extended enzyme family but by checking the active site motif via the local residue pattern PROSITE can indicate which are likely to be active, or could be "dead" if they do not not match the regular expression.
As said above InterPro is the best source of further information
Log in to answer this question.
-
pfam functional redundancy
written by timothy.kirkwood •
-
How a protein sequence is classified in a HMM
written by cirooliveira3 •
-
Domain coordinates from InterPro to Ensembl transcripts
written by svet.sidorov
-
how to get genomic position from protein pdb ID+AA residue position within the protein
written by lait
-
Forum: Clustering proteins by Pfam annotation
written by konstantinkul
-
Is there a way to perform a multiple sequence alignment in HMMER (hmmalign) using multiple profiles?
written by marinaga •
-
Dubious Pfam Domain Annotation Of A Protein
written by Pappu
-
How To Check Protein Converage By Assembled Contig To A Close Reference:
written by HG
-
Overlapping Protein Domain Detection In Tumor-Normal Variant Calling
written by tommivat
-
What Is The Largest Collection Of Multiple Alignments?
written by Aleksandr Levchuk
Pfam has better coverage.