ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2011
Identification of prokaryotic small proteins using a comparative genomic approach.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- TSS-Captur: a user-friendly pipeline for characterizing unclassified RNA transcripts.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Integrated sequence and -omic features reveal novel small proteome ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Rescue ofeLife · 2023Article
- Small Proteins in Archaea, a Mainly Unexplored World.Journal of bacteriology · 2022Review
- Exploring the Peptide Potential of Genomes.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Hidden in plain sight: challenges in proteomics detection of small ORF-encoded polypeptides.microLife · 2022Article
- Article
- Small Protein Enrichment Improves Proteomics Detection of sORF Encoded Polypeptides.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Using AnABlast for intergenic sORF prediction in the Caenorhabditis elegans genome.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Review
- Alternative ORFs and small ORFs: shedding light on the dark proteome.Nucleic acids research · 2020Review
- Article
- Identifying New Small Proteins in Escherichia coli.Proteomics · 2018Article
- REPARATION: ribosome profiling assisted (re-)annotation of bacterial genomes.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Common and phylogenetically widespread coding for peptides by bacterial small RNAs.BMC genomics · 2017Article
- Complete Genome Sequence of Bifidobacterium longum GT15: Identification and Characterization of Unique and Global Regulatory Genes.Microbial ecology · 2015Article
- Defining a minimal cell: essentiality of small ORFs and ncRNAs in a genome-reduced bacterium.Molecular systems biology · 2015Article
- Identifying (non-)coding RNAs and small peptides: challenges and opportunities.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2015Review
- Estimating overannotation across prokaryotic genomes using BLAST+, UBLAST, LAST and BLAT.BMC research notes · 2014Article
- SearchDOGS bacteria, software that provides automated identification of potentially missed genes in annotated bacterial genomes.Journal of bacteriology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationAccurate prediction of genes encoding small proteins (on the order of 50 amino acids or less) remains an elusive open problem in bioinformatics. Some of the best methods for gene prediction use either sequence composition analysis or sequence similarity to a known protein coding sequence. These methods often fail for small proteins, however, either due to a lack of experimentally verified small protein coding genes or due to the limited statistical significance of statistics on small sequences. Our approach is based upon the hypothesis that true small proteins will be under selective pressure for encoding the particular amino acid sequence, for ease of translation by the ribosome and for structural stability. This stability can be achieved either independently or as part of a larger protein complex. Given this assumption, it follows that small proteins should display conserved local protein structure properties much like larger proteins. Our method incorporates neural-net predictions for three local structure alphabets within a comparative genomic approach using a genomic alignment of 22 closely related bacteria genomes to generate predictions for whether or not a given open reading frame (ORF) encodes for a small protein.
resultsWe have applied this method to the complete genome for Escherichia coli strain K12 and looked at how well our method performed on a set of 60 experimentally verified small proteins from this organism. Out of a total of 11 407 possible ORFs, we found that 6 of the top 10 and 27 of the top 100 predictions belonged to the set of 60 experimentally verified small proteins. We found 35 of all the true small proteins within the top 200 predictions. We compared our method to Glimmer, using a default Glimmer protocol and a modified small ORF Glimmer protocol with a lower minimum size cutoff. The default Glimmer protocol identified 16 of the true small proteins (all in the top 200 predictions), but failed to predict on 34 due to size cutoffs. The small ORF Glimmer protocol made predictions for all the experimentally verified small proteins but only contained 9 of the 60 true small proteins within the top 200 predictions. CONTACT: jsamayoa@jhu.edu
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.