Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29065853›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2017

An optimized approach for annotation of large eukaryotic genomic sequences using genetic algorithm.

Biswanath Chowdhury, Arnav Garai, Gautam Garai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Biswanath ChowdhuryDepartment of Biophysics, Molecular Biology and Bioinformatics, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, 700009, WB, India. bchowdhury2410@gmail.com.
Arnav GaraiUnit of Energy, Utilities, Communications and Services, Infosys Technologies Ltd., Bhubaneswar, 751024, Odisha, India.
Gautam GaraiComputational Sciences Division, Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata, 700064, WB, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDetection of important functional and/or structural elements and identification of their positions in a large eukaryotic genomic sequence are an active research area. Gene is an important functional and structural unit of DNA. The computation of gene prediction is, therefore, very essential for detailed genome annotation.

resultsIn this paper, we propose a new gene prediction technique based on Genetic Algorithm (GA) to determine the optimal positions of exons of a gene in a chromosome or genome. The correct identification of the coding and non-coding regions is difficult and computationally demanding. The proposed genetic-based method, named Gene Prediction with Genetic Algorithm (GPGA), reduces this problem by searching only one exon at a time instead of all exons along with its introns. This representation carries a significant advantage in that it breaks the entire gene-finding problem into a number of smaller sub-problems, thereby reducing the computational complexity. We tested the performance of the GPGA with existing benchmark datasets and compared the results with well-known and relevant techniques. The comparison shows the better or comparable performance of the proposed method. We also used GPGA for annotating the human chromosome 21 (HS21) using cross-species comparisons with the mouse orthologs.

conclusionIt was noted that the GPGA predicted true genes with better accuracy than other well-known approaches.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnimalsChromosomes, Human, Pair 21ExonsHumansMiceMolecular Sequence AnnotationOpen Reading FramesBioinformaticsCoding regionExon predictionGene identificationGenetic algorithm

Identifiers

PMID29065853
PMCPMC5655831

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.