Cited by 248Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies

A critical assessment of Mus musculusgene function prediction using integrated genomic evidence

Open access
Peña-Castillo, Lourdes, Tasan, Murat, Myers, Chad L, Lee, Hyunju, Joshi, Trupti, Zhang, Chao, Guan, Yuanfang, Leone, Michele +32 more·2008·Genome Biology

Abstract

Background: Several years after sequencing the human genome and the mouse genome, much remains to be discovered about the functions of most human and mouse genes. Computational prediction of gene function promises to help focus limited experimental resources on the most likely hypotheses. Several algorithms using diverse genomic data have been applied to this task in model organisms; however, the performance of such approaches in mammals has not yet been evaluated. Results: In this study, a standardized collection of mouse functional genomic data was assembled; nine bioinformatics teams used this data set to independently train classifiers and generate predictions of function, as defined by Gene Ontology (GO) terms, for 21,603 mouse genes; and the best performing submissions were combined in a single set of predictions. We identified strengths and weaknesses of current functional genomic data sets and compared the performance of function prediction algorithms. This analysis inferred functions for 76% of mouse genes, including 5,000 currently uncharacterized genes. At a recall rate of 20%, a unified set of predictions averaged 41% precision, with 26% of GO terms achieving a precision better than 90%. Conclusion: We performed a systematic evaluation of diverse, independently developed computational approaches for predicting gene function from heterogeneous data sources in mammals. The results show that currently available data for mammals allows predictions with both breadth and accuracy. Importantly, many highly novel predictions emerge for the 38% of mouse genes that remain uncharacterized.

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 · 10.1186/gb-2008-9-s1-s2

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Even gold-standard expression datasets perform relatively poorly under GBA in benchmarking exercises.

    “Even 'gold-standard' expression datasets perform relatively poorly under GBA when assessed in benchmarking exercises (e.g. the Mousefunc competition for genome-wide gene function prediction- Pena-Castillo et al., 2008).”

    From Guidance for RNA-seq co-expression network construction and analysis: safety in numbers (2015) · cites this paper as Pena-Castillo et al., 2008

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: 4

  1. Shenouda EAMA Morris Q Bonner AJ King I, Wang J, Chan L, Wang DL Connectionist approaches for predicting mouse gene function from gene expression. Neural Information Processing: 13th International Conference, ICONIP 2006, Hong Kong, China, October 3-6, 2006, Proceedings 2006 Heidelberg, Berlin; Springer 280 289
  2. Oltvai ZN Barabasi AL Systems biology. Life's complexity pyramid. Science 2002 298 763 764 12399572
  3. Kittler J Hatef M Duin RPW Matas J On combining classifiers. IEEE Trans Pattern Analysis Machine Intelligence 1998 20 226 239
  4. Davis J Goadrich M Cohen WW, Moore A The relationship between Precision-Recall and ROC curves. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning: June 25-29, 2006; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 2006 New York: ACM Press 233 240

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peña-Castillo, L., Tasan, M., Myers, C. L., Lee, H., Joshi, T., Zhang, C., Guan, Y., Leone, M., Pagnani, A., Kim, W. K., Krumpelman, C., Tian, W., Obozinski, G., Qi, Y., Mostafavi, S., Lin, G. N., Berriz, G. F., Gibbons, F. D., Lanckriet, G., Qiu, J., Grant, C., Barutcuoglu, Z., Hill, D. P., Warde-Farley, D., Grouios, C., Ray, D., Blake, J. A., Deng, M., Jordan, M. I., Noble, W. S., Morris, Q., Klein-Seetharaman, J., Bar-Joseph, Z., Chen, T., Sun, F., Troyanskaya, O. G., Marcotte, E. M., Xu, D., Hughes, T. R., & Roth, F. P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • Institute for Scientific Interchange (IT)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Jackson Laboratory (US)
  • Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit (GB)
  • Peking University (CN)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
  • Hughes, Timothy R
  • Roth, Frederick P
Venue
Genome Biology
Published
2008-06-27
Volume
9
Issue
S1
Pages
S2-S2
ISSN
  • 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-760X
OpenAlex
W2147461734
Cited by
248
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 24
FWCI
12.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PORTO@Iris (submittedVersion)
  • The Mouseion at the JAXlibrary (Jackson Laboratory) (submittedVersion)
  • PORTO Publications Open Repository TOrino (Politecnico di Torino) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0225656, 0513552, CC044917, 0407204, 0225636, 0241102, P50 GM071508, CAREER, CAREER CC044917)
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • W. M. Keck Foundation
  • Microsoft Research
  • Genome Canada
  • Ontario Genomics
  • Ontario Genomics Institute
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (30570425, CAREER)
  • Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology
  • National Institutes of Health (CAREER CC044917, 2p41hg002273-07, EIA0225636, NIH P50, HG002273, GM071508)
  • Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
  • Microsoft Research Asia
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (HG004233)
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL81341, U01HL081341)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U41HG002273, HG004233, HG004098, R33HG003070, HG 002273, HG0017115, F32HG004098, R01HG003224, HG003224, P50HG002790, P50HG004233, R01HG002273, P41-HG002273)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM071508, R01GM071966, GM071966, P50GM071508)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (LM07994-01, R01LM007994)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • 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
Keywords
gene function prediction, Mus musculus, mouse genes, Gene Ontology, functional genomic data, classifier comparison, uncharacterized genes
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Proteins, Mice

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