|
x
ICO
|
x
CCO
|
x
MOCO
|
x
RCA
|
---|
 |  | 7 | 19 | 95 |
 |  | 2 | 18 | 99 |
x
ICO
| Â | 4 | 15 | 93 |
 |  | 5 | 22 | 99 |
 | 92 |  | 82 | 97 |
 | 96 |  | 93 | 100 |
x
CCO
| 96 | Â | 86 | 100 |
 | 93 |  | 89 | 99 |
 | 78 | 15 |  | 97 |
 | 74 | 5 |  | 100 |
x
MOCO
| 83 | 12 | Â | 99 |
 | 75 | 9 |  | 99 |
 | 5 | 2 | 3 |  |
 | 0 | 0 | 0 |  |
x
RCA
| 6 | 0 | 1 | Â |
 | 1 | 0 | 0 |  |
- For every gene, the p
M
of the optimal sequences generated by respective optimization approaches are compared pair-wise for each expression host. The numbers of tournament wins/losses by each approach for all the genes in each expression host are added up. The sequences generated by ICO, CCO, MOCO and RCA are indicated as xICO, xCCO, xMOCO and xRCA respectively. In each cell, the numbers from top-most to bottom-most corresponds to the data for E. coli, L. lactis, P. pastoris and S. cerevisiae, respectively.