Literature DB >> 19855104

Annotation confidence score for genome annotation: a genome comparison approach.

Youngik Yang1, Donald Gilbert, Sun Kim.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: The massively parallel sequencing technology can be used by small research labs to generate genome sequences of their research interest. However, annotation of genomes still relies on the manual process, which becomes a serious bottleneck to the high-throughput genome projects. Recently, automatic annotation methods are increasingly more accurate, but there are several issues. One important challenge in using automatic annotation methods is to distinguish annotation quality of ORFs or genes. The availability of such annotation quality of genes can reduce the human labor cost dramatically since manual inspection can focus only on genes with low-annotation quality scores.
RESULTS: In this article, we propose a novel annotation quality or confidence scoring scheme, called Annotation Confidence Score (ACS), using a genome comparison approach. The scoring scheme is computed by combining sequence and textual annotation similarity using a modified version of a logistic curve. The most important feature of the proposed scoring scheme is to generate a score that reflects the excellence in annotation quality of genes by automatically adjusting the number of genomes used to compute the score and their phylogenetic distance. Extensive experiments with bacterial genomes showed that the proposed scoring scheme generated scores for annotation quality according to the quality of annotation regardless of the number of reference genomes and their phylogenetic distance. AVAILABILITY: http://microbial.informatics.indiana.edu/acs

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19855104     DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp613

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioinformatics        ISSN: 1367-4803            Impact factor:   6.937


  7 in total

1.  Whole-genome metabolic network reconstruction and constraint-based modeling.

Authors:  Charles R Haggart; Jennifer A Bartell; Jeffrey J Saucerman; Jason A Papin
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.600

2.  EnzymeDetector: an integrated enzyme function prediction tool and database.

Authors:  Susanne Quester; Dietmar Schomburg
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 3.169

3.  The language of gene ontology: a Zipf's law analysis.

Authors:  Leila Ranandeh Kalankesh; Robert Stevens; Andy Brass
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  Tracing evolutionary footprints to identify novel gene functional linkages.

Authors:  Yong Chen; Li Yang; Yunfeng Ding; Shuyan Zhang; Tong He; Fenglou Mao; Congyan Zhang; Huina Zhang; Chaoxing Huo; Pingsheng Liu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Genome-wide identification, characterization, interaction network and expression profile of GAPDH gene family in sweet orange (Citrus sinensis).

Authors:  Luke Miao; Chunli Chen; Li Yao; Jaclyn Tran; Hua Zhang
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  BEACON: automated tool for Bacterial GEnome Annotation ComparisON.

Authors:  Manal Kalkatawi; Intikhab Alam; Vladimir B Bajic
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  Functional coherence metrics in protein families.

Authors:  Hugo P Bastos; Lisete Sousa; Luka A Clarke; Francisco M Couto
Journal:  J Biomed Semantics       Date:  2016-06-23
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.