Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20687929›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2010

A proteogenomic update to Yersinia: enhancing genome annotation.

Samuel H Payne, Shih-Ting Huang, Rembert Pieper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Expanding the Vocabulary of Peptide Signals inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2019
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Reannotation of Yersinia pestis Strain 91001 Based on Omics Data.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Peppy: proteogenomic search software.Journal of proteome research · 2013
    Article
  14. How many signal peptides are there in bacteria?Environmental microbiology · 2013
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Omics strategies for revealing Yersinia pestis virulence.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2012
    Review
  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

3 authors.

Samuel H PayneJ Craig Venter Institute, 9704 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, USA. spayne@jcvi.org
Shih-Ting Huang
Rembert Pieper

Funding

NIAID NIH HHS N01-AI15447PHS HHS HHSN266200400038C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundModern biomedical research depends on a complete and accurate proteome. With the widespread adoption of new sequencing technologies, genome sequences are generated at a near exponential rate, diminishing the time and effort that can be invested in genome annotation. The resulting gene set contains numerous errors in even the most basic form of annotation: the primary structure of the proteins.

resultsThe application of experimental proteomics data to genome annotation, called proteogenomics, can quickly and efficiently discover misannotations, yielding a more accurate and complete genome annotation. We present a comprehensive proteogenomic analysis of the plague bacterium, Yersinia pestis KIM. We discover non-annotated genes, correct protein boundaries, remove spuriously annotated ORFs, and make major advances towards accurate identification of signal peptides. Finally, we apply our data to 21 other Yersinia genomes, correcting and enhancing their annotations.

conclusionsIn total, 141 gene models were altered and have been updated in RefSeq and Genbank, which can be accessed seamlessly through any NCBI tool (e.g. blast) or downloaded directly. Along with the improved gene models we discover new, more accurate means of identifying signal peptides in proteomics data.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialAmino Acid SequenceBacterial ProteinsGenomicsMolecular Sequence DataOpen Reading FramesProteomicsYersiniaBacterial Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20687929
PMCPMC3091656

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.