Cited by 6,372Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase in 2021

Open access
The UniProt Consortium, Bateman, Alex, Martin, Maria-Jesus, Orchard, Sandra, Magrane, Michele, Agivetova, Rahat, Ahmad, Shadab, Alpi, Emanuele +126 more·2021·Nucleic Acids Research

Abstract

The aim of the UniProt Knowledgebase is to provide users with a comprehensive, high-quality and freely accessible set of protein sequences annotated with functional information. In this article, we describe significant updates that we have made over the last two years to the resource. The number of sequences in UniProtKB has risen to approximately 190 million, despite continued work to reduce sequence redundancy at the proteome level. We have adopted new methods of assessing proteome completeness and quality. We continue to extract detailed annotations from the literature to add to reviewed entries and supplement these in unreviewed entries with annotations provided by automated systems such as the newly implemented Association-Rule-Based Annotator (ARBA). We have developed a credit-based publication submission interface to allow the community to contribute publications and annotations to UniProt entries. We describe how UniProtKB responded to the COVID-19 pandemic through expert curation of relevant entries that were rapidly made available to the research community through a dedicated portal. UniProt resources are available under a CC-BY (4.0) license via the web at https://www.uniprot.org/.

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/nar/gkaa1100

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only 35% of human proteins map to a PDB entry, and in many cases the structure covers only a fragment of the sequence.

    “Despite this intensive study, only 35% of human proteins map to a PDB entry, and in many cases the structure covers only a fragment of the sequence6.”

    From Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome (2021) · cites this paper as [6]

    The Data Integration section discusses mapping datasets to protein sequences, but not the proportion of human proteins with PDB entries or how much of each sequence a structure covers. Searches for “35% of human proteins,” “PDB,” and fragmentary structure coverage found no passage addressing either claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Although the number of known genes involved in ATG is increasing, a systematic experimental method for identifying ATG-related genes has yet to be established.

    “Although the number of known genes involved in ATG is increasing (71), a systematic experimental method for identifying ATG-related genes has yet to be established (72).”

    From Artificial Intelligence for Drug Discovery: Are We There Yet? (2024) · cites this paper as [71]

    The citation is attached to the assertion that no systematic experimental method for identifying ATG-related genes has been established. The paper’s “Automatic annotation” section discusses computational annotation of proteins, but neither it nor the passages retrieved for ATG and autophagy-related gene discovery address that assertion. The supplied copy gives no page number for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • UniProt archives almost 220 million unique protein sequences.

    “However, while the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt) archives almost 220 million unique protein sequences, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) holds only just over 180 000 3D structures for over 55 000 distinct proteins, thus severely limiting the coverage of the sequence space to support biomolecular research globally (5–7).”
  • The coverage of the sequence space by experimental structures is severely limited.

    “thus severely limiting the coverage of the sequence space to support biomolecular research globally (5–7).”
  • The PDB holds just over 180,000 3D structures for over 55,000 distinct proteins.

    “However, while the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt) archives almost 220 million unique protein sequences, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) holds only just over 180 000 3D structures for over 55 000 distinct proteins, thus severely limiting the coverage of the sequence space to support biomolecular research globally (5–7).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [14]Morgat A., Lombardot T., Axelsen K.B., Aimo L., Niknejad A., Hyka-Nouspikel N., Coudert E., Pozzato M., Pagni M., Moretti S. et al. Updates in Rhea - an expert curated resource of biochemical reactions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017; 45: 4279. 27980062 PMC5397180
  2. [46]Bastian F., Parmentier G., Roux J., Moretti S., Laudet V., Robinson-Rechavi M. Bgee: integrating and comparing heterogeneous transcriptome data among species. in DILS: Data integration in life sciences. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2008; 5109: 124– 131.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
The UniProt Consortium, Bateman, A., Martin, M.-J., Orchard, S., Magrane, M., Agivetova, R., Ahmad, S., Alpi, E., Bowler-Barnett, E. H., Britto, R., Bursteinas, B., Bye-A-Jee, H., Coetzee, R., Cukura, A., Da Silva, A., Denny, P., Dogan, T., Ebenezer, T., Fan, J., Castro, L. G., Garmiri, P., Georghiou, G., Gonzales, L., Hatton-Ellis, E., Hussein, A., Ignatchenko, A., Insana, G., Ishtiaq, R., Jokinen, P., Joshi, V., Jyothi, D., Lock, A., Lopez, R., Luciani, A., Luo, J., Lussi, Y., MacDougall, A., Madeira, F., Mahmoudy, M., Menchi, M., Mishra, A., Moulang, K., Nightingale, A., Oliveira, C. S., Pundir, S., Qi, G., Raj, S., Rice, D., Lopez, M. R., Saidi, R., Sampson, J., Sawford, T., Speretta, E., Turner, E., Tyagi, N., Vasudev, P., Volynkin, V., Warner, K., Watkins, X., Zaru, R., Zellner, H., Bridge, A., Poux, S., Redaschi, N., Aimo, L., Argoud-Puy, G., Auchincloss, A., Axelsen, K., Bansal, P., Baratin, D., Blatter, M.-C., Bolleman, J., Boutet, E., Breuza, L., Casals-Casas, C., de Castro, E., Echioukh, K. C., Coudert, E., Cuche, B., Doche, M., Dornevil, D., Estreicher, A., Famiglietti, M. L., Feuermann, M., Gasteiger, E., Gehant, S., Gerritsen, V., Gos, A., Gruaz-Gumowski, N., Hinz, U., Hulo, C., Hyka-Nouspikel, N., Jungo, F., Keller, G., Kerhornou, A., Lara, V., Le Mercier, P., Lieberherr, D., Lombardot, T., Martin, X., Masson, P., Morgat, A., Neto, T. B., Paesano, S., Pedruzzi, I., Pilbout, S., Pourcel, L., Pozzato, M., Pruess, M., Rivoire, C., Sigrist, C., Sonesson, K., Stutz, A., Sundaram, S., Tognolli, M., Verbregue, L., Wu, C. H., Arighi, C. N., Arminski, L., Chen, C., Chen, Y., Garavelli, J. S., Huang, H., Laiho, K., McGarvey, P., Natale, D. A., Ross, K., Vinayaka, C. R., Wang, Q., Wang, Y., Yeh, L.-S., Zhang, J., Ruch, P., & Teodoro, D.
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2020-11-25
Volume
49
Issue
D1
Pages
D480-D489
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W3112376646
Cited by
6,372
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 328 · 2025: 607 · 2024: 1076 · 2023: 1718 · 2022: 1963 · 2021: 663 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
360.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ArODES (HES-SO (https://www.hes-so.ch/)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Eye Institute
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
  • National Cancer Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (U24HG007822)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U41HG002273)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM080646, P20GM103446)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/T010541/1)
  • British Heart Foundation (RG/13/5/30112)
  • Open Targets
  • Swiss Federal Government
  • European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
protein sequence annotation, automatic annotation, expert curation, COVID-19 pandemic, protein databases
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Humans, User-Computer Interface, Viral Proteins, Computational Biology, Internet, Proteome, Databases, Protein, Proteomics, Knowledge Bases, Pandemics, Molecular Sequence Annotation, Data Curation

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