ArticleBMC genomics2025
Chimeric mis-annotations of genes remain pervasive in eukaryotic non-model organisms.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. 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.
- Omics technologies in aquafeed: unlocking the black box towards systems biology.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Review
- Article
- Screening and functional analysis of a host membrane protein interacting with the structural protein VP1 of deformed wing virus.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate annotation of protein-coding genes is critical for genome analysis in non-model organisms. However, limited RNA-Seq data and incomplete protein resources can lead to errors, including chimeric gene mis-annotations, where two or more adjacent genes are incorrectly fused into a single model. These errors often persist due to annotation inertia, where mistakes are propagated and amplified through data sharing and reanalysis, and leads to cases where the mis-annotated model becomes favoured over the correct model. This complicates almost all downstream genomic analyses such as gene expression studies and comparative genomics.
resultsWe investigated chimeric mis-annotations across 30 recently annotated genomes spanning invertebrates, vertebrates, and plants, identifying 605 confirmed cases. The majority of these errors occurred in invertebrates and plants. Using structural prediction and splicing assessment, we demonstrated that utilising machine-learning annotation tools (such as Helixer) provides an approach which can identify mis-annotations.
conclusionsThis study highlights the prevalence of chimeric mis-annotations in genomic datasets and showcases the potential of machine-learning tools such as Helixer to refine gene models for highly variable gene families with mis-annotations present in databases. By addressing these annotation errors, we improve genomic data reliability and facilitate a deeper understanding of non-model organisms.
Indexed as
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.