ArticleBMC microbiology2011
Proteome driven re-evaluation and functional annotation of the Streptococcus pyogenes SF370 genome.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- LTQ-XL mass spectrometry proteome analysis expands the Pseudomonas aeruginosa AmpR regulon to include cyclic di-GMP phosphodiesterases and phosphoproteins, and identifies novel open reading frames.Journal of proteomics · 2014Article
- Re-annotation of protein-coding genes in 10 complete genomes of Neisseriaceae family by combining similarity-based and composition-based methods.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2013Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe genome data of Streptococcus pyogenes SF370 has been widely used by many researchers and provides a vast array of interesting findings. Nevertheless, approximately 40% of genes remain classified as hypothetical proteins, and several coding sequences (CDSs) have been unrecognized. In this study, we attempted a shotgun proteomic analysis with a six-frame database that was independent of genome annotation.
resultsNine proteins encoded by novel ORFs were found by shotgun proteomic analysis, and their specific mRNAs were verified by reverse transcriptional PCR (RT-PCR). We also provided functional annotations for hypothetical genes using proteomic analysis from three different culture conditions that were separated into three fractions: supernatant, soluble, and insoluble. Consequently, we identified 567 proteins on re-evaluation of the proteomic data using an in-house database comprising 1,697 annotated and nine non-annotated CDSs. We provided functional annotations for 126 hypothetical proteins (18.9% out of the 668 hypothetical proteins) based on their cellular fractions and expression profiles under different culture conditions.
conclusionsThe list of amino acid sequences that were annotated by genome analysis contains outdated information and unrecognized protein-coding sequences. We suggest that the six-frame database derived from actual DNA sequences be used for reliable proteomic analysis. In addition, the experimental evidence from functional proteomic analysis is useful for the re-evaluation of previously sequenced genomes.
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.