ArticleStandards in genomic sciences2011
Solving the Problem: Genome Annotation Standards before the Data Deluge.
Article in Standards in genomic sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond blast: enabling microbiologists to better extract literature, taxonomic distributions and gene neighbourhood information for protein families.Microbial genomics · 2024Article
- Beyond Blast: Enabling Microbiologists to Better Extract Literature, Taxonomic Distributions and Gene Neighborhood Information for Protein Families.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Evolution of guanylate binding protein genes shows a remarkable variability within bats (Chiroptera).Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Evolution of five environmentally responsive gene families in a pine-feeding sawfly,Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- StandEnA: a customizable workflow for standardized annotation and generating a presence-absence matrix of proteins.Bioinformatics advances · 2023Article
- Green plant genomes: What we know in an era of rapidly expanding opportunities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Integrative OMICS Data-Driven Procedure Using a Derivatized Meta-Analysis Approach.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Probiotics beyond the farm: Benefits, costs, and considerations of using antibiotic alternatives in livestock.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2022Review
- Mantis: flexible and consensus-driven genome annotation.GigaScience · 2021Article
- Non-essential ribosomal proteins in bacteria and archaea identified using COGs.Journal of bacteriology · 2021Article
- Novel Enzymes From the Red Sea Brine Pools: Current State and Potential.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Review
- Review on the Computational Genome Annotation of Sequences Obtained by Next-Generation Sequencing.Biology · 2020Review
- Genome mining of biosynthetic and chemotherapeutic gene clusters in Streptomyces bacteria.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Carprofen-induced depletion of proton motive force reverses TetK-mediated doxycycline resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- A Toxicity Screening Approach to Identify Bacteriophage-Encoded Anti-Microbial Proteins.Viruses · 2019Article
- Article
- FDA-ARGOS is a database with public quality-controlled reference genomes for diagnostic use and regulatory science.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Gene Tags Assessment by Comparative Genomics (GTACG): A User-Friendly Framework for Bacterial Comparative Genomics.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Secondary metabolite production and the safety of industrially important members of the Bacillus subtilis group.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2018Review
- Approximate, simultaneous comparison of microbial genome architectures via syntenic anchoring of quiver representations.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The promise of genome sequencing was that the vast undiscovered country would be mapped out by comparison of the multitude of sequences available and would aid researchers in deciphering the role of each gene in every organism. Researchers recognize that there is a need for high quality data. However, different annotation procedures, numerous databases, and a diminishing percentage of experimentally determined gene functions have resulted in a spectrum of annotation quality. NCBI in collaboration with sequencing centers, archival databases, and researchers, has developed the first international annotation standards, a fundamental step in ensuring that high quality complete prokaryotic genomes are available as gold standard references. Highlights include the development of annotation assessment tools, community acceptance of protein naming standards, comparison of annotation resources to provide consistent annotation, and improved tracking of the evidence used to generate a particular annotation. The development of a set of minimal standards, including the requirement for annotated complete prokaryotic genomes to contain a full set of ribosomal RNAs, transfer RNAs, and proteins encoding core conserved functions, is an historic milestone. The use of these standards in existing genomes and future submissions will increase the quality of databases, enabling researchers to make accurate biological discoveries.
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.