The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Discovery and revision of Arabidopsis genes by proteogenomics
Open accessAbstract
Gene annotation underpins genome science. Most often protein coding sequence is inferred from the genome based on transcript evidence and computational predictions. While generally correct, gene models suffer from errors in reading frame, exon border definition, and exon identification. To ascertain the error rate of Arabidopsis thaliana gene models, we isolated proteins from a sample of Arabidopsis tissues and determined the amino acid sequences of 144,079 distinct peptides by tandem mass spectrometry. The peptides corresponded to 1 or more of 3 different translations of the genome: a 6-frame translation, an exon splice-graph, and the currently annotated proteome. The majority of the peptides (126,055) resided in existing gene models (12,769 confirmed proteins), comprising 40% of annotated genes. Surprisingly, 18,024 novel peptides were found that do not correspond to annotated genes. Using the gene finding program AUGUSTUS and 5,426 novel peptides that occurred in clusters, we discovered 778 new protein-coding genes and refined the annotation of an additional 695 gene models. The remaining 13,449 novel peptides provide high quality annotation (>99% correct) for thousands of additional genes. Our observation that 18,024 of 144,079 peptides did not match current gene models suggests that 13% of the Arabidopsis proteome was incomplete due to approximately equal numbers of missing and incorrect gene models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A chromosome-based draft sequence of the hexaploid bread wheat ( Triticum aestivum ) genome
The International Wheat Genome Sequencing Consortium (IWGSC), Mayer, K. F. X., Rogers, J., Doležel, J., Pozniak, C., Eversole, K., Feuillet, C., Gill, B., Friebe, B., Lukaszewski, A. J., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1251788 · Cited by 1,583
Protein Analysis by Shotgun/Bottom-up Proteomics
Zhang, Y., Fonslow, B. R., Shan, B., Baek, M.-C., & Yates, J. R. (2013) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr3003533 · Cited by 1,491
A novel hybrid gene prediction method employing protein multiple sequence alignments
Keller, O., Kollmar, M., Stanke, M., & Waack, S. (2011) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr010 · Cited by 587
Self-citationPaxdb, a database of protein abundance averages across all three domains of life
Wang, M., Weiss, M., Simonovic, M., Haertinger, G., Schrimpf, S. P., Hengartner, M. O., & von Mering, C. (2012) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.o111.014704 · Cited by 466
National Algal Biofuels Technology Roadmap
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), O. O. S. T. B. T. O. (., Ferrell, J., US Department of Energy (USDOE), W., & Sarisky-Reed, V. (2010) · doi:10.2172/1218560 · Cited by 470
Metadata
- Authors
- Castellana, N. E., Payne, S. H., Shen, Z., Stanke, M., Bafna, V., & Briggs, S. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2008-12-30
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 52
- Pages
- 21034-21038
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2019126169
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Discovery and revision of Arabidopsis genes by proteogenomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0811066106
- The paper
- Castellana, N. E., Payne, S. H., Shen, Z., Stanke, M., Bafna, V., & Briggs, S. P. (2008). Discovery and revision of Arabidopsis genes by proteogenomics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0811066106
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.