Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9,301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification

Open access
Jones, Philip, Binns, David, Chang, Hsin-Yu, Fraser, Matthew, Li, Weizhong, McAnulla, Craig, McWilliam, Hamish, Maslen, John, Mitchell, Alex, Nuka, Gift, Pesseat, Sebastien, Quinn, Antony F., Sangrador-Vegas, Amaia, Scheremetjew, Maxim, Yong, Siew-Yit, Lopez, Rodrigo, Hunter, Sarah·2014·Bioinformatics
DOI 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Motivation: Robust large-scale sequence analysis is a major challenge in modern genomic science, where biologists are frequently trying to characterize many millions of sequences. Here, we describe a new Java-based architecture for the widely used protein function prediction software package InterProScan. Developments include improvements and additions to the outputs of the software and the complete reimplementation of the software framework, resulting in a flexible and stable system that is able to use both multiprocessor machines and/or conventional clusters to achieve scalable distributed data analysis. InterProScan is freely available for download from the EMBl-EBI FTP site and the open source code is hosted at Google Code. Availability and implementation: InterProScan is distributed via FTP at ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/software/unix/iprscan/5/ and the source code is available from http://code.google.com/p/interproscan/. Contact: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/support or interhelp@ebi.ac.uk or mitchell@ebi.ac.uk

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Attwood, 2012, The PRINTS database: a fine-grained protein sequence annotation and analysis resource–its status in 2012, Database, 2012, bas019, 10.1093/database/bas019 · DOI
  2. Bairoch, 2000, The ENZYME database in 2000, Nucleic Acids Res., 28, 304, 10.1093/nar/28.1.304 · DOI
  3. Bru, 2005, The ProDom database of protein domain families: more emphasis on 3D, Nucleic Acids Res., 33, D212, 10.1093/nar/gki034 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Eddy, 2009, A new generation of homology search tools based on probabilistic inference, Genome Inform., 23, 205
  5. Goujon, 2010, A new bioinformatics analysis tools framework at EMBL-EBI, Nucleic Acids Res., 38, W695, 10.1093/nar/gkq313 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Haft, 2012, TIGRFAMs and Genome Properties in 2013, Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D387, 10.1093/nar/gks1234 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Hunter, 2012, InterPro in 2011: new developments in the family and domain prediction database, Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D306, 10.1093/nar/gkr948 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Käll, 2004, A combined transmembrane topology and signal peptide prediction method, J. Mol. Biol., 338, 1027, 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.03.016 · DOI
  9. Kanehisa, 2013, Molecular network analysis of diseases and drugs in KEGG, Methods Mol. Biol., 939, 263, 10.1007/978-1-62703-107-3_17 · DOI
  10. Krogh, 2001, Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes, J. Mol. Biol., 305, 567, 10.1006/jmbi.2000.4315 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Lees, 2012, Gene3D: a domain-based resource for comparative genomics, functional annotation and protein network analysis, Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D465, 10.1093/nar/gkr1181 · DOI
  12. Letunic, 2012, SMART 7: recent updates to the protein domain annotation resource, Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D302, 10.1093/nar/gkr931 · DOI
  13. De Lima Morais, 2011, SUPERFAMILY 1.75 including a domain-centric gene ontology method, Nucleic Acids Res., 39, D427, 10.1093/nar/gkq1130 · DOI
  14. Mi, 2012, PANTHER in 2013: modeling the evolution of gene function, and other gene attributes, in the context of phylogenetic trees, Nucleic Acids Res., 41, D377, 10.1093/nar/gks1118 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Pedruzzi, 2012, HAMAP in 2013, new developments in the protein family classification and annotation system, Nucleic Acids Res., 41, D584, 10.1093/nar/gks1157 · DOI
  16. Punta, 2012, The Pfam protein families database, Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D290, 10.1093/nar/gkr1065 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Quevillon, 2005, InterProScan: protein domains identifier, Nucleic Acids Research, 33, W116, 10.1093/nar/gki442 · DOI
  18. Sato, 2011, Sequence analysis of the genome of an oil-bearing tree, Jatropha curcas L, DNA Res., 18, 65, 10.1093/dnares/dsq030 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Shulaev, 2011, The genome of woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca), Nat. Genet., 43, 109, 10.1038/ng.740 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Sigrist, 2012, New and continuing developments at PROSITE, Nucleic Acids Res., 41, D344, 10.1093/nar/gks1067 · DOI
  21. Suen, 2011, The genome sequence of the leaf-cutter ant Atta cephalotes reveals insights into its obligate symbiotic lifestyle, PLoS Genet., 7, e1002007, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002007 · DOI
  22. The UniProt Consortium, 2012, Reorganizing the protein space at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt), Nucleic Acids Res., 40, D71, 10.1093/nar/gkr981 · DOI
  23. Wu, 2004, PIRSF: family classification system at the Protein Information Resource, Nucleic Acids Res., 32, D112, 10.1093/nar/gkh097 · DOI

Cited by

Items 101–103 of 103

Metadata

Authors
Jones, P., Binns, D., Chang, H.-Y., Fraser, M., Li, W., McAnulla, C., McWilliam, H., Maslen, J., Mitchell, A., Nuka, G., Pesseat, S., Quinn, A. F., Sangrador-Vegas, A., Scheremetjew, M., Yong, S.-Y., Lopez, R., & Hunter, S.
Venue
Bioinformatics
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2014-01-29
Volume
30
Issue
9
Pages
1236-1240
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
DOI
10.1093/bioinformatics/btu031
OpenAlex
W2101291993
Cited by
9,301
References
3
FWCI
111.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (vor, 977 d)

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

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.