Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15705189›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2005

Integrating alternative splicing detection into gene prediction.

Sylvain Foissac, Thomas Schiex

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. EuGène-maize: a web site for maize gene prediction.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2010
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sylvain FoissacUnité de Biométrie et Intelligence Artificielle, INRA, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France. foissac@toulouse.inra.fr
Thomas Schiex

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlternative splicing (AS) is now considered as a major actor in transcriptome/proteome diversity and it cannot be neglected in the annotation process of a new genome. Despite considerable progresses in term of accuracy in computational gene prediction, the ability to reliably predict AS variants when there is local experimental evidence of it remains an open challenge for gene finders.

resultsWe have used a new integrative approach that allows to incorporate AS detection into ab initio gene prediction. This method relies on the analysis of genomically aligned transcript sequences (ESTs and/or cDNAs), and has been implemented in the dynamic programming algorithm of the graph-based gene finder EuGENE. Given a genomic sequence and a set of aligned transcripts, this new version identifies the set of transcripts carrying evidence of alternative splicing events, and provides, in addition to the classical optimal gene prediction, alternative optimal predictions (among those which are consistent with the AS events detected). This allows for multiple annotations of a single gene in a way such that each predicted variant is supported by a transcript evidence (but not necessarily with a full-length coverage).

conclusionsThis automatic combination of experimental data analysis and ab initio gene finding offers an ideal integration of alternatively spliced gene prediction inside a single annotation pipeline.

Indexed as

Alternative SplicingDatabases, GeneticAlgorithmsArabidopsisCodonComputer GraphicsDatabases, Nucleic AcidDatabases, ProteinDNA, ComplementaryExonsExpressed Sequence TagsGene Expression ProfilingGenes, PlantGenomeGenome, HumanGenomicsCodonDNA, ComplementaryRNA Splice Sites

Identifiers

PMID15705189
PMCPMC550657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.