ArticleBMC bioinformatics2007
MED: a new non-supervised gene prediction algorithm for bacterial and archaeal genomes.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utilizing Amino Acid Composition and Entropy of Potential Open Reading Frames to Identify Protein-Coding Genes.Microorganisms · 2021Article
- LncLocation: Efficient Subcellular Location Prediction of Long Non-Coding RNA-Based Multi-Source Heterogeneous Feature Fusion.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- DeepRibo: a neural network for precise gene annotation of prokaryotes by combining ribosome profiling signal and binding site patterns.Nucleic acids research · 2019Article
- A Novel Quality Measure and Correction Procedure for the Annotation of Microbial Translation Initiation Sites.PloS one · 2015Article
- Recognizing short coding sequences of prokaryotic genome using a novel iteratively adaptive sparse partial least squares algorithm.Biology direct · 2013Article
- Gene prediction in metagenomic fragments based on the SVM algorithm.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- DNA-energetics-based analyses suggest additional genes in prokaryotes.Journal of biosciences · 2012Article
- Exploration of multivariate analysis in microbial coding sequence modeling.BMC bioinformatics · 2012Article
- Leaderless genes in bacteria: clue to the evolution of translation initiation mechanisms in prokaryotes.BMC genomics · 2011Article
- Identification of prokaryotic small proteins using a comparative genomic approach.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2011Article
- A genomic survey of positive selection in Burkholderia pseudomallei provides insights into the evolution of accidental virulence.PLoS pathogens · 2010Article
- Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification.BMC bioinformatics · 2010Article
- Article
- Alliance of proteomics and genomics to unravel the specificities of Sahara bacterium Deinococcus deserti.PLoS genetics · 2009Article
- The Genome Reverse Compiler: an explorative annotation tool.BMC bioinformatics · 2009Article
- Bioinformatics in China: a personal perspective.PLoS computational biology · 2008Review
- Computational evaluation of TIS annotation for prokaryotic genomes.BMC bioinformatics · 2008Article
- Human Pol II promoter recognition based on primary sequences and free energy of dinucleotides.BMC bioinformatics · 2008Article
- ProTISA: a comprehensive resource for translation initiation site annotation in prokaryotic genomes.Nucleic acids research · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a remarkable success in the computational prediction of genes in Bacteria and Archaea, a lack of comprehensive understanding of prokaryotic gene structures prevents from further elucidation of differences among genomes. It continues to be interesting to develop new ab initio algorithms which not only accurately predict genes, but also facilitate comparative studies of prokaryotic genomes.
resultsThis paper describes a new prokaryotic genefinding algorithm based on a comprehensive statistical model of protein coding Open Reading Frames (ORFs) and Translation Initiation Sites (TISs). The former is based on a linguistic "Entropy Density Profile" (EDP) model of coding DNA sequence and the latter comprises several relevant features related to the translation initiation. They are combined to form a so-called Multivariate Entropy Distance (MED) algorithm, MED 2.0, that incorporates several strategies in the iterative program. The iterations enable us to develop a non-supervised learning process and to obtain a set of genome-specific parameters for the gene structure, before making the prediction of genes.
conclusionResults of extensive tests show that MED 2.0 achieves a competitive high performance in the gene prediction for both 5' and 3' end matches, compared to the current best prokaryotic gene finders. The advantage of the MED 2.0 is particularly evident for GC-rich genomes and archaeal genomes. Furthermore, the genome-specific parameters given by MED 2.0 match with the current understanding of prokaryotic genomes and may serve as tools for comparative genomic studies. In particular, MED 2.0 is shown to reveal divergent translation initiation mechanisms in archaeal genomes while making a more accurate prediction of TISs compared to the existing gene finders and the current GenBank annotation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.