Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19099578›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2008

nGASP--the nematode genome annotation assessment project.

Avril Coghlan, Tristan J Fiedler, Sheldon J McKay, Paul Flicek, Todd W Harris, Darin Blasiar, nGASP Consortium, Lincoln D Stein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. T2T genomes ofGenome research · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Whole-Genome Annotation with BRAKER.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

8 authors.

Avril CoghlanWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK. alc@sanger.ac.uk
Tristan J Fiedler
Sheldon J McKay
Paul Flicek
Todd W Harris
Darin Blasiar
nGASP Consortium
Lincoln D Stein

Funding

Wormbase SupplementP41HG002223 · NHGRI · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI STERNBERG, PAUL WARREN · 2000 to 2012
$32.0M
NHGRI NIH HHS P41 HG002223NHGRI NIH HHS P41 HG02223Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the C. elegans genome is extensively annotated, relatively little information is available for other Caenorhabditis species. The nematode genome annotation assessment project (nGASP) was launched to objectively assess the accuracy of protein-coding gene prediction software in C. elegans, and to apply this knowledge to the annotation of the genomes of four additional Caenorhabditis species and other nematodes. Seventeen groups worldwide participated in nGASP, and submitted 47 prediction sets across 10 Mb of the C. elegans genome. Predictions were compared to reference gene sets consisting of confirmed or manually curated gene models from WormBase.

resultsThe most accurate gene-finders were 'combiner' algorithms, which made use of transcript- and protein-alignments and multi-genome alignments, as well as gene predictions from other gene-finders. Gene-finders that used alignments of ESTs, mRNAs and proteins came in second. There was a tie for third place between gene-finders that used multi-genome alignments and ab initio gene-finders. The median gene level sensitivity of combiners was 78% and their specificity was 42%, which is nearly the same accuracy reported for combiners in the human genome. C. elegans genes with exons of unusual hexamer content, as well as those with unusually many exons, short exons, long introns, a weak translation start signal, weak splice sites, or poorly conserved orthologs posed the greatest difficulty for gene-finders.

conclusionThis experiment establishes a baseline of gene prediction accuracy in Caenorhabditis genomes, and has guided the choice of gene-finders for the annotation of newly sequenced genomes of Caenorhabditis and other nematode species. We have created new gene sets for C. briggsae, C. remanei, C. brenneri, C. japonica, and Brugia malayi using some of the best-performing gene-finders.

Indexed as

Genome, HelminthAnimalsCaenorhabditisCaenorhabditis elegansComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticDNAGenes, HelminthGenomicsDNA

Identifiers

PMID19099578
PMCPMC2651883

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.