Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15901854›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2005

Prediction of functional modules based on comparative genome analysis and Gene Ontology application.

Hongwei Wu, Zhengchang Su, Fenglou Mao, Victor Olman, Ying Xu

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing 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

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Computational Methods for Identifying Similar Diseases.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2019
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Matrix factorization-based data fusion for gene function prediction in baker's yeast and slime mold.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2014
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Hongwei WuDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Georgia 120 Green Street, Athens, GA 30602-7229, USA.
Zhengchang Su
Fenglou Mao
Victor Olman
Ying Xu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a computational method for the prediction of functional modules encoded in microbial genomes. In this work, we have also developed a formal measure to quantify the degree of consistency between the predicted and the known modules, and have carried out statistical significance analysis of consistency measures. We first evaluate the functional relationship between two genes from three different perspectives--phylogenetic profile analysis, gene neighborhood analysis and Gene Ontology assignments. We then combine the three different sources of information in the framework of Bayesian inference, and we use the combined information to measure the strength of gene functional relationship. Finally, we apply a threshold-based method to predict functional modules. By applying this method to Escherichia coli K12, we have predicted 185 functional modules. Our predictions are highly consistent with the previously known functional modules in E.coli. The application results have demonstrated that our approach is highly promising for the prediction of functional modules encoded in a microbial genome.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialBayes TheoremComputational BiologyData Interpretation, StatisticalEscherichia coliGenomicsPhylogenyReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID15901854
PMCPMC1130488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.