ArticleComparative and functional genomics2011
Prediction and Characterization of Missing Proteomic Data in Desulfovibrio vulgaris.
Article in Comparative and functional genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An efficient ensemble method for missing value imputation in microarray gene expression data.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- A Review of Imputation Strategies for Isobaric Labeling-Based Shotgun Proteomics.Journal of proteome research · 2021Review
- Proteomics and phosphoproteomics in precision medicine: applications and challenges.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2019Review
- An integrative imputation method based on multi-omics datasets.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- Review, evaluation, and discussion of the challenges of missing value imputation for mass spectrometry-based label-free global proteomics.Journal of proteome research · 2015Review
- Integrated analysis of transcriptomic and proteomic data.Current genomics · 2013Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proteomic datasets are often incomplete due to identification range and sensitivity issues. It becomes important to develop methodologies to estimate missing proteomic data, allowing better interpretation of proteomic datasets and metabolic mechanisms underlying complex biological systems. In this study, we applied an artificial neural network to approximate the relationships between cognate transcriptomic and proteomic datasets of Desulfovibrio vulgaris, and to predict protein abundance for the proteins not experimentally detected, based on several relevant predictors, such as mRNA abundance, cellular role and triple codon counts. The results showed that the coefficients of determination for the trained neural network models ranged from 0.47 to 0.68, providing better modeling than several previous regression models. The validity of the trained neural network model was evaluated using biological information (i.e. operons). To seek understanding of mechanisms causing missing proteomic data, we used a multivariate logistic regression analysis and the result suggested that some key factors, such as protein instability index, aliphatic index, mRNA abundance, effective number of codons (N(c)) and codon adaptation index (CAI) values may be ascribed to whether a given expressed protein can be detected. In addition, we demonstrated that biological interpretation can be improved by use of imputed proteomic datasets.
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.