The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automatic annotation of eukaryotic genes, pseudogenes and promoters
Open accessAbstract
Background: The ENCODE gene prediction workshop (EGASP) has been organized to evaluate how well state-of-the-art automatic gene finding methods are able to reproduce the manual and experimental gene annotation of the human genome. We have used Softberry gene finding software to predict genes, pseudogenes and promoters in 44 selected ENCODE sequences representing approximately 1% (30 Mb) of the human genome. Predictions of gene finding programs were evaluated in terms of their ability to reproduce the ENCODE-HAVANA annotation. Results: The Fgenesh++ gene prediction pipeline can identify 91% of coding nucleotides with a specificity of 90%. Our automatic pseudogene finder (PSF program) found 90% of the manually annotated pseudogenes and some new ones. The Fprom promoter prediction program identifies 80% of TATA promoters sequences with one false positive prediction per 2,000 base-pairs (bp) and 50% of TATA-less promoters with one false positive prediction per 650 bp. It can be used to identify transcription start sites upstream of annotated coding parts of genes found by gene prediction software. Conclusion: We review our software and underlying methods for identifying these three important structural and functional genome components and discuss the accuracy of predictions, recent advances and open problems in annotating genomic sequences. We have demonstrated that our methods can be effectively used for initial automatic annotation of the eukaryotic genome.
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
Cites
Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs
Altschul, S. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389 · Cited by 73,302
A vision for the future of genomics research
Collins, F. S., Green, E. D., Guttmacher, A. E., Guyer, M. S., & on behalf of the US National Human Genome Research Institute (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01626 · Cited by 1,752
Cited by
The genome of the domesticated apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.)
Velasco, R., Zharkikh, A., Affourtit, J., Dhingra, A., Cestaro, A., Kalyanaraman, A., Fontana, P., Bhatnagar, S. K., Troggio, M., Pruss, D., et al. (2010) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.654 · Cited by 2,075
Ji, Y., Zhou, Z., Liu, H., & Davuluri, R. V. (2021) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btab083 · Cited by 1,303
The Galaxy platform for accessible, reproducible, and collaborative data analyses: 2024 update
Community, T. G., Abueg, L. A. L., Afgan, E., Allart, O., Awan, A. H., Bacon, W. A., Baker, D., Bassetti, M., Batut, B., Bernt, M., et al. (2024) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkae410 · Cited by 936
Spatiotemporal transcriptomic divergence across human and macaque brain development
Zhu, Y., Sousa, A. M. M., Gao, T., Skarica, M., Li, M., Santpere, G., Esteller-Cucala, P., Juan, D., Ferrández-Peral, L., Gulden, F. O., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aat8077 · Cited by 414
Genome sequence of the date palm Phoenix dactylifera L
Al-Mssallem, I. S., Hu, S., Zhang, X., Lin, Q., Liu, W., Tan, J., Yu, X., Liu, J., Pan, L., Zhang, T., et al. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms3274 · Cited by 320
Metadata
- Authors
- Solovyev, V., Kosarev, P., Seledsov, I., & Vorobyev, D.
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2006-08-07
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- S10.1-12
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- OpenAlex
- W2117179531
- Cited by
- 920
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Automatic annotation of eukaryotic genes, pseudogenes and promoters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/gb-2006-7-s1-s10
- The paper
- Solovyev, V., Kosarev, P., Seledsov, I., & Vorobyev, D. (2006). Automatic annotation of eukaryotic genes, pseudogenes and promoters. Genome Biology. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2006-7-s1-s10
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.