Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30669991›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2019

Gene annotation errors are common in the mammalian mitochondrial genomes database.

Carlos F Prada, Jeffrey L Boore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Evolution ofPeerJ · 2022
    Article
  10. The complete mitochondrial genome of giant cricket,Mitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Molluscan mitochondrial genomes break the rules.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. PeerJ · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Carlos F PradaDepartamento de Biología, Facultad de ciencias, Universidad del Tolima, Barrio Santa Helena Parte Alta, Ibagué, Colombia. cfpradaq@ut.edu.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5201-9502
Jeffrey L BooreProvidence St. Joseph Health and Institute for Systems Biology, 401 Terry Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough animal mitochondrial DNA sequences are known to evolve rapidly, their gene arrangements often remain unchanged over long periods of evolutionary time. Therefore, comparisons of mitochondrial genomes may result in significant insights into the evolution both of organisms and of genomes. Mammalian mitochondrial genomes recently published in the GenBank database of NCBI show numerous rearrangements in various regions of the genome, from which it may be inferred that the mammalian mitochondrial genome is more dynamic than expected. However, it is alternatively possible that these are errors of annotation and, if so, are misleading our interpretations. In order to verify these possible errors of annotation, we performed a comparative genomic analysis of mammalian mitochondrial genomes available in the NCBI database.

resultsUsing a combination of bioinformatics methods to carefully examine the mitochondrial gene arrangements in 304 mammalian species, we determined that there are only two sets of gene arrangements, one that is shared by all of the marsupials and another that is shared by all of the monotremes and eutherians, with these two arrangements differing only by the positions of tRNA genes in the region commonly designated as "WANCY" for the genes it comprises. All of the 68 other cases of reported gene rearrangements are errors. We note that there are also numerous errors of impossibly short, incorrect gene annotations, cases where genomes that are reported as complete are actually missing portions of the sequence, and genes that are clearly present but were not annotated in these records.

conclusionsWe judge that the application of simple bioinformatic tools in the verification of gene annotation, particularly for organelle genomes, would be a very useful enhancement for the curation of genome sequences submitted to GenBank.

Indexed as

Databases, Nucleic AcidGenome, MitochondrialMolecular Sequence AnnotationSequence Analysis, DNAAnimalsHumansSequence AlignmentAnnotation errorsComparative genomic analysisGene annotationGene rearrangementMammalian mitochondrial genome

Identifiers

PMID30669991
PMCPMC6341679

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.