ArticleBiomolecules2011
Exploring the optimal strategy to predict essential genes in microbes.
Article in Biomolecules, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacterial genome reductions: Tools, applications, and challenges.Frontiers in genome editing · 2022Review
- Article
- Multi-Color Spectral Transcript Analysis (SPECTRA) for Phenotypic Characterization of Tumor Cells.Biomolecules · 2013Article
- A statistical framework for improving genomic annotations of prokaryotic essential genes.PloS one · 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurately predicting essential genes is important in many aspects of biology, medicine and bioengineering. In previous research, we have developed a machine learning based integrative algorithm to predict essential genes in bacterial species. This algorithm lends itself to two approaches for predicting essential genes: learning the traits from known essential genes in the target organism, or transferring essential gene annotations from a closely related model organism. However, for an understudied microbe, each approach has its potential limitations. The first is constricted by the often small number of known essential genes. The second is limited by the availability of model organisms and by evolutionary distance. In this study, we aim to determine the optimal strategy for predicting essential genes by examining four microbes with well-characterized essential genes. Our results suggest that, unless the known essential genes are few, learning from the known essential genes in the target organism usually outperforms transferring essential gene annotations from a related model organism. In fact, the required number of known essential genes is surprisingly small to make accurate predictions. In prokaryotes, when the number of known essential genes is greater than 2% of total genes, this approach already comes close to its optimal performance. In eukaryotes, achieving the same best performance requires over 4% of total genes, reflecting the increased complexity of eukaryotic organisms. Combining the two approaches resulted in an increased performance when the known essential genes are few. Our investigation thus provides key information on accurately predicting essential genes and will greatly facilitate annotations of microbial genomes.
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.