Back to Case Studies

Case study · Comparative protein genomics

Revised FOXP2 Protein Comparison Across 15 Vertebrates

A revised 772-column MAFFT alignment compares 14 complete FOXP2 proteins and one partial alligator sequence. The page separates corrected identity and substitution results from stale, conflicting statements retained later in the session PDF.

15 vertebratesFOXP2MAFFT772 alignment columnsRevised results

Original 14-page session report · PDF · 1.5 MB

At a glance

A corrected alignment analysis inside a report that also preserves stale legacy text

The opening revision and revised figures use the full 772-column alignment. Later PDF pages retain an older 706-column TrimAl analysis with conflicting counts and substitution claims; those legacy values are not mixed into the results below.

Sequences15 vertebrates
Alignment772 columns
Conserved726 positions (94.0%)
Variable46 positions (6.0%)
01 / Scientific context

How conserved is FOXP2 across selected mammals, birds, and reptiles?

FOXP2 is a transcription factor involved in motor learning and vocalization-related neural circuits. Sequence conservation can identify constrained positions, but it cannot by itself explain language or vocal learning.

Across the curated vertebrate sequence set, what are the pairwise identities, conserved and variable alignment positions, phylogenetic relationships, and candidate lineage-specific substitutions?
Sequence set14 complete proteins at least 700 aa plus one 693-aa alligator partial
AlignmentMAFFT, 772 columns, no TrimAl removal for revised statistics
IdentityComputed over comparable non-gap aligned positions
TreeApproximate maximum likelihood
Human-site reviewT303N and N325S checked across the revised set
02 / Analysis workflow

Curate sequences, align, quantify conservation, review substitutions, and infer a tree

Curate proteinsSelected 14 complete vertebrate FOXP2 proteins and retained one partial alligator sequence with an explicit flag.
Align all sequencesMAFFT produced a 772-column alignment used directly for revised identity and conservation statistics.
Calculate identityPairwise percentages were recomputed over comparable, gap-aware aligned positions.
Review variable sitesConserved columns, variable columns, and the reported T303N and N325S human-specific substitutions were inspected.
Infer phylogenyAn approximate maximum-likelihood tree summarized relationships within this single highly conserved protein.
Revision boundaryThe revised opening summary and first four generated figures supersede the stale legacy section later in the PDF. The generator records that conflict instead of blending the two analyses.
03 / Revised results

FOXP2 is highly conserved across the selected vertebrates

94.0% conserved

726 of 772 alignment columns were conserved in the revised analysis; 46 were variable.

Human–chimpanzee

99.72% pairwise identity in the revised matrix.

Human–zebra finch

98.87% pairwise identity despite deep evolutionary distance.

Candidate human sites

T303N and N325S were reported as human-specific within the revised sequence set.

Revised FOXP2 phylogenetic tree across 15 vertebrates
Figure 1. Revised FOXP2 tree. Very short branches reflect high sequence conservation; a single-protein tree is not a substitute for a species phylogeny.
Revised pairwise FOXP2 sequence identity heatmap
Figure 2. Pairwise identity matrix. Human–chimpanzee identity is 99.72%; all revised pairwise values are based on the full alignment protocol.
FOXP2 per-position conservation, variable sites, and identity-to-human summary
Figure 3. Conservation profile. Most columns are invariant, while variable positions include alignment-sensitive low-complexity regions.
04 / Limitations

Report conflicts and sequence scope limit biological inference

  • The PDF contains a revised opening analysis and a stale legacy body with a 706-column TrimAl alignment and 86 variable columns.
  • The legacy body says N325S is shared with dog, whereas the revised review reports both T303N and N325S as human-specific in the selected set.
  • The alligator sequence is partial; incomplete sequences and isoform choice can affect identities and alignment columns.
  • The selected taxa are not exhaustive and some expected vocal-learning lineages are absent.
  • The approximate tree lacks the bootstrap analysis expected for publication-quality phylogenetics.
  • High identity or a lineage-specific substitution does not establish a causal mechanism for human language or bird song.
Evidence status

Only the revised full-alignment results are presented as current. The contradictory legacy text remains visible in the PDF and should be removed in a future clean report.

05 / Reproducibility and outputs

Artifacts recorded for the revised analysis

revised_sequence_set.fastaCurated 15-sequence input
foxp2_alignment_full.fastaFull 772-column MAFFT alignment
identity_matrix_v2.tsvRecomputed pairwise identities
human_specific_review.tsvT303N and N325S cross-species review
fig1–fig4Revised tree, identity, conservation, and substitution figures
Original Pipette session report14-page PDF · 1.5 MB · generated February 25, 2026. The HTML article is the primary case study; the PDF is the preserved session record.

Run a traceable comparative-sequence analysis

Bring a curated sequence set and make completeness, isoform choice, alignment rules, and phylogenetic assumptions explicit.

Start in Pipette