ReviewGenome biology2007
Gene prediction: compare and CONTRAST.
Review in Genome biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chromosome-level genome assembly and annotation of Zicaitai (Brassica rapa var. purpuraria).Scientific data · 2023Article
- Multi-Omics Approaches and Resources for Systems-Level Gene Function Prediction in the Plant Kingdom.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Whole-Genome Alignment and Comparative Annotation.Annual review of animal biosciences · 2019Review
- Coding sequence density estimation via topological pressure.Journal of mathematical biology · 2015Article
- Exploiting mid-range DNA patterns for sequence classification: binary abstraction Markov models.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
- Experimental Mapping of the Canine KCNJ2 and KCNJ12 Gene Structures and Functional Analysis of the Canine K(IR)2.2 ion Channel.Frontiers in physiology · 2012Article
- RNAcode: robust discrimination of coding and noncoding regions in comparative sequence data.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2011Article
- Exploring repetitive DNA landscapes using REPCLASS, a tool that automates the classification of transposable elements in eukaryotic genomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CONTRAST, a new gene-prediction algorithm that uses sophisticated machine-learning techniques, has pushed de novo prediction accuracy to new heights, and has significantly closed the gap between de novo and evidence-based methods for human genome 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.