Cited by 5,707Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksChromosomal and Genetic Variations

OrthoMCL: Identification of Ortholog Groups for Eukaryotic Genomes

Open access
Li, Li, Stoeckert, Christian J., Roos, David S.·2003·Genome Research

Abstract

The identification of orthologous groups is useful for genome annotation, studies on gene/protein evolution, comparative genomics, and the identification of taxonomically restricted sequences. Methods successfully exploited for prokaryotic genome analysis have proved difficult to apply to eukaryotes, however, as larger genomes may contain multiple paralogous genes, and sequence information is often incomplete. OrthoMCL provides a scalable method for constructing orthologous groups across multiple eukaryotic taxa, using a Markov Cluster algorithm to group (putative) orthologs and paralogs. This method performs similarly to the INPARANOID algorithm when applied to two genomes, but can be extended to cluster orthologs from multiple species. OrthoMCL clusters are coherent with groups identified by EGO, but improved recognition of “recent” paralogs permits overlapping EGO groups representing the same gene to be merged. Comparison with previously assigned EC annotations suggests a high degree of reliability, implying utility for automated eukaryotic genome annotation. OrthoMCL has been applied to the proteome data set from seven publicly available genomes (human, fly, worm, yeast, Arabidopsis, the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum , and Escherichia coli ). A Web interface allows queries based on individual genes or user-defined phylogenetic patterns ( http://www.cbil.upenn.edu/gene-family ). Analysis of clusters incorporating P. falciparum genes identifies numerous enzymes that were incompletely annotated in first-pass annotation of the parasite genome.

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 · 10.1101/gr.1224503

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Graph-based methods cluster genes into pairs or groups of orthologs based on pairwise sequence similarity such as reciprocal best alignment hits.

    “Graph-based methods cluster genes into pairs or groups of orthologs based on pairwise sequence similarity such as (reciprocal) best alignment hits (8–12).”
  • Heuristic analysis of pairwise sequence similarity scores is based on the premise that higher scoring sequence pairs are likely to have diverged more recently than lower scoring sequence pairs.

    “The central premise underlying their use is that higher scoring sequence pairs are likely to have diverged more recently than lower scoring sequence pairs.”

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: 3

  1. Kissinger, J.C., Brunk, B.P., Crabtree, J., Fraunholz, M.J., Gajria, B., Milgram, A.J., Pearson, D.S., Schug, J., Bahl, A., Diskin, S.J., et al. 2002. The Plasmodium genome database. Nature 419: 490-492.
  2. Shi, J. and Malik, J. 1997. Normalized cuts and image segmentation. Proc. IEEE Conf. Comp. Vision Pattern Recognit. 731-737.
  3. Van Dongen, S. 2000. "Graph clustering by flow simulation." Ph.D thesis, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, L., Stoeckert, C. J., & Roos, D. S.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2003-09
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
2178-2189
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2008856488
Cited by
5,707
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 122 · 2025: 199 · 2024: 279 · 2023: 277 · 2022: 397 · 2021: 511 · 2020: 523 · 2019: 463 · 2018: 448 · 2017: 455 · 2016: 408 · 2015: 324 · 2014: 301 · 2013: 246 · 2012: 193
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
Keywords
ortholog identification, orthogroups, eukaryotic genomes, Markov cluster algorithm, paralogs, genome annotation, comparative genomics, gene family clustering, Plasmodium falciparum, ego, InParanoid, enzyme annotation
MeSH terms
Animals, Drosophila melanogaster, Eukaryotic Cells, Humans, Plasmodium falciparum, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid, Software, Genome, Genome, Fungal, Caenorhabditis elegans, Arabidopsis, Genome, Protozoan, Genome, Plant, Computational Biology, Internet

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