Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30917779›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

GO functional similarity clustering depends on similarity measure, clustering method, and annotation completeness.

Meng Liu, Paul D Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. More Agility to Semantic Similarities Algorithm Implementations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  17. 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.

Meng LiuDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA.
Paul D ThomasDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA. pdthomas@usc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9074-3507

Funding

Resource ProjectU41HG002273 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI THOMAS, PAUL D. · 2012 to 2021
$34.7M
National Human Genome Research Institute U41HG002273NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG002273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiological knowledge, and therefore Gene Ontology annotation sets, for human genes is incomplete. Recent studies have reported that biases in available GO annotations result in biased estimates of functional similarities of genes, but it is still unclear what the effect of incompleteness itself may be, even in the absence of bias. Pairwise gene similarities are used in a number of contexts, including gene "functional similarity" clustering and the related problem of functional ontology structure inference, but it is not known how different similarity measures or clustering methods perform on this task, and how the clusters are affected by annotation completeness.

resultsWe developed representations of both "complete" and "incomplete" GO annotation datasets based on experimentally-supported annotations from the GO database-specifically designed to model the incompleteness of human gene annotations-and computed semantic similarities for each set using a variety of different published measures. We then assessed the clusters derived from these measures using two different clustering methods: hierarchical clustering, and the CliXO algorithm. We find the CliXO algorithm, combined with appropriate measures, performs better than hierarchical clustering in reconstructing GO both when the data are complete, and incomplete. Some measures, particularly those that create a pairwise gene similarity by averaging over all pairwise annotation similarities, had consistently poor performance, and a few measures, such as Lin best-matched average and Relevance maximum, were generally among the best performers for a broad range in annotation completeness and types of GO classes. Finally, we show that for semantic similarity-based clustering, the multicellular organism process branch of the GO biological process ontology is more challenging to represent than the cellular process branch.

conclusionsWe assessed the effects of annotation completeness on the distribution of pairwise gene semantic similarity scores, and subsequent effects on the clusters derived from these scores. Our results suggest combinations of semantic similarity measures, gene-level scoring methods and clustering method that perform best for functional gene clustering using annotation sets of varying completeness. Overall, our results underscore the importance of increasing the completeness of GO annotations to for supporting computational analyses of gene function.

Indexed as

Gene OntologyMolecular Sequence AnnotationAlgorithmsArea Under CurveCluster AnalysisComputational BiologyHumansSemanticsannotation completenessDirected Acyclic Graphic clusteringGene Ontologyhierarchical clusteringinformation contentleast-diverged human orthologssemantic similarity

Identifiers

PMID30917779
PMCPMC6437941

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.