MOTIVATION: A rapidly increasing number of microbial genomes are sequenced by organizations worldwide and are eventually included into various public genome data resources. The quality of the annotations depends largely on the original dataset providers, with erroneous or incomplete annotations often carried over into the public resources and difficult to correct. RESULTS: We have developed an Expert Review (ER) version of the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG) system, with the goal of supporting systematic and efficient revision of microbial genome annotations. IMG ER provides tools for the review and curation of annotations of both new and publicly available microbial genomes within IMG's rich integrated genome framework. New genome datasets are included into IMG ER prior to their public release either with their native annotations or with annotations generated by IMG ER's annotation pipeline. IMG ER tools allow addressing annotation problems detected with IMG's comparative analysis tools, such as genes missed by gene prediction pipelines or genes without an associated function. Over the past year, IMG ER was used for improving the annotations of about 150 microbial genomes.
MOTIVATION: A rapidly increasing number of microbial genomes are sequenced by organizations worldwide and are eventually included into various public genome data resources. The quality of the annotations depends largely on the original dataset providers, with erroneous or incomplete annotations often carried over into the public resources and difficult to correct. RESULTS: We have developed an Expert Review (ER) version of the Integrated Microbial Genomes (IMG) system, with the goal of supporting systematic and efficient revision of microbial genome annotations. IMG ER provides tools for the review and curation of annotations of both new and publicly available microbial genomes within IMG's rich integrated genome framework. New genome datasets are included into IMG ER prior to their public release either with their native annotations or with annotations generated by IMG ER's annotation pipeline. IMG ER tools allow addressing annotation problems detected with IMG's comparative analysis tools, such as genes missed by gene prediction pipelines or genes without an associated function. Over the past year, IMG ER was used for improving the annotations of about 150 microbial genomes.
Authors: Jozef I Nissimov; Charlotte A Worthy; Paul Rooks; Johnathan A Napier; Susan A Kimmance; Matthew R Henn; Hiroyuki Ogata; Michael J Allen Journal: J Virol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Michael D Barton; Michael Petronio; Juan G Giarrizzo; Bethany V Bowling; Hazel A Barton Journal: J Bacteriol Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 3.490
Authors: Sheila Podell; Joanne B Emerson; Claudia M Jones; Juan A Ugalde; Sue Welch; Karla B Heidelberg; Jillian F Banfield; Eric E Allen Journal: ISME J Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 10.302
Authors: Ave Tooming-Klunderud; Hanne Sogge; Trine Ballestad Rounge; Alexander J Nederbragt; Karin Lagesen; Gernot Glöckner; Paul K Hayes; Thomas Rohrlack; Kjetill S Jakobsen Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Laura A Sauder; Katja Engel; Chien-Chi Lo; Patrick Chain; Josh D Neufeld Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Priya Narasingarao; Sheila Podell; Juan A Ugalde; Céline Brochier-Armanet; Joanne B Emerson; Jochen J Brocks; Karla B Heidelberg; Jillian F Banfield; Eric E Allen Journal: ISME J Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 10.302
Authors: Frank O Aylward; Kristin E Burnum-Johnson; Susannah G Tringe; Clotilde Teiling; Daniel M Tremmel; Joseph A Moeller; Jarrod J Scott; Kerrie W Barry; Paul D Piehowski; Carrie D Nicora; Stephanie A Malfatti; Matthew E Monroe; Samuel O Purvine; Lynne A Goodwin; Richard D Smith; George M Weinstock; Nicole M Gerardo; Garret Suen; Mary S Lipton; Cameron R Currie Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 4.792