Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21810204›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2011

Synergistic use of plant-prokaryote comparative genomics for functional annotations.

Svetlana Gerdes, Basma El Yacoubi, Marc Bailly, Ian K Blaby, Crysten E Blaby-Haas, Linda Jeanguenin, Aurora Lara-Núñez, Anne Pribat, Jeffrey C Waller, Andreas Wilke and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Complete Genome Sequence ofGenome announcements · 2017
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Captured metagenomics: large-scale targeting of genes based on 'sequence capture' reveals functional diversity in soils.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2015
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Svetlana GerdesFellowship for Interpretation of Genomes, Burr Ridge, IL, USA.
Basma El Yacoubi
Marc Bailly
Ian K Blaby
Crysten E Blaby-Haas
Linda Jeanguenin
Aurora Lara-Núñez
Anne Pribat
Jeffrey C Waller
Andreas Wilke
Ross Overbeek
Andrew D Hanson
Valérie de Crécy-Lagard
Indiana University Bloomington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdentifying functions for all gene products in all sequenced organisms is a central challenge of the post-genomic era. However, at least 30-50% of the proteins encoded by any given genome are of unknown or vaguely known function, and a large number are wrongly annotated. Many of these 'unknown' proteins are common to prokaryotes and plants. We set out to predict and experimentally test the functions of such proteins. Our approach to functional prediction integrates comparative genomics based mainly on microbial genomes with functional genomic data from model microorganisms and post-genomic data from plants. This approach bridges the gap between automated homology-based annotations and the classical gene discovery efforts of experimentalists, and is more powerful than purely computational approaches to identifying gene-function associations.

resultsAmong Arabidopsis genes, we focused on those (2,325 in total) that (i) are unique or belong to families with no more than three members, (ii) occur in prokaryotes, and (iii) have unknown or poorly known functions. Computer-assisted selection of promising targets for deeper analysis was based on homology-independent characteristics associated in the SEED database with the prokaryotic members of each family. In-depth comparative genomic analysis was performed for 360 top candidate families. From this pool, 78 families were connected to general areas of metabolism and, of these families, specific functional predictions were made for 41. Twenty-one predicted functions have been experimentally tested or are currently under investigation by our group in at least one prokaryotic organism (nine of them have been validated, four invalidated, and eight are in progress). Ten additional predictions have been independently validated by other groups. Discovering the function of very widespread but hitherto enigmatic proteins such as the YrdC or YgfZ families illustrates the power of our approach.

conclusionsOur approach correctly predicted functions for 19 uncharacterized protein families from plants and prokaryotes; none of these functions had previously been correctly predicted by computational methods. The resulting annotations could be propagated with confidence to over six thousand homologous proteins encoded in over 900 bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic genomes currently available in public databases.

Indexed as

ArabidopsisArabidopsis ProteinsBase SequenceConserved SequenceDatabases, GeneticDNA-Binding ProteinsEscherichia coli ProteinsGenes, BacterialGenetics, MicrobialGenome, PlantGenomicsMultigene FamilyPlant ProteinsProkaryotic CellsRNA-Binding ProteinsSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsArabidopsis ProteinsDNA-Binding ProteinsEscherichia coli ProteinsPlant ProteinsRNA-Binding ProteinsSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSUA5 protein, S cerevisiaeYrdC protein, E coli

Identifiers

PMID21810204
PMCPMC3223725
OpenAlexW1989733542

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.