Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16135248›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2005

JACOP: a simple and robust method for the automated classification of protein sequences with modular architecture.

Peter Sperisen, Marco Pagni

Open access · goldAbstract 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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter SperisenSwiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Computational Cancer Genomics Group-ISREC, Ch. des Boveresses 155, 1066 Epalinges, Switzerland. peter.sperisen@isb-sib.ch
Marco Pagni
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole-genome sequencing projects are rapidly producing an enormous number of new sequences. Consequently almost every family of proteins now contains hundreds of members. It has thus become necessary to develop tools, which classify protein sequences automatically and also quickly and reliably. The difficulty of this task is intimately linked to the mechanism by which protein sequences diverge, i.e. by simultaneous residue substitutions, insertions and/or deletions and whole domain reorganisations (duplications/swapping/fusion).

resultsHere we present a novel approach, which is based on random sampling of sub-sequences (probes) out of a set of input sequences. The probes are compared to the input sequences, after a normalisation step; the results are used to partition the input sequences into homogeneous groups of proteins. In addition, this method provides information on diagnostic parts of the proteins. The performance of this method is challenged by two data sets. The first one contains the sequences of prokaryotic lyases that could be arranged as a multiple sequence alignment. The second one contains all proteins from Swiss-Prot Release 36 with at least one Src homology 2 (SH2) domain--a classical example for proteins with modular architecture.

conclusionThe outcome of our method is robust, highly reproducible as shown using bootstrap and resampling validation procedures. The results are essentially coherent with the biology. This method depends solely on well-established publicly available software and algorithms.

Indexed as

SoftwareAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisLyasesMolecular ProbesProkaryotic CellsReproducibility of ResultsSequence Analysis, Proteinsrc Homology DomainsLyasesMolecular Probes

Identifiers

PMID16135248
PMCPMC1208858
OpenAlexW2098913407

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.