Automatic annotation of protein function

Current Opinion in Structural Biology

Volumn 15, Issue 3 SPEC. ISS., 2005, Pages 267-274

  Valencia, Alfonso ^a  

^a CENTRO NACIONAL DE BIOTECNOLOGÍA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; CALIBRATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA BASE; ERROR; GENOMICS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FAMILY; PROTEIN FUNCTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PUBLICATION; RELIABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

EID: 20444456581     PISSN: 0959440X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2005.05.010     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. L. Stein Genome annotation: from sequence to biology Nat Rev Genet 2 2001 493 503
2. S. Brenner Errors in genome annotation Trends Genet 15 1999 132 133
3. M.Y. Galperin, and E.V. Koonin Sources of systematic error in functional annotation of genomes: domain rearrangement, non-orthologous gene displacement and operon disruption In Silico Biol 1 1998 55 67
4. C. Ouzounis, G. Casari, C. Sander, J. Tamames, and A. Valencia Computational comparisons of model genomes Trends Biotechnol 14 1996 280 285
5. I. Iliopoulos, S. Tsoka, M.A. Andrade, A.J. Enright, M. Carroll, P. Poullet, V. Promponas, T. Liakopoulos, G. Palaios, and C. Pasquier Evaluation of annotation strategies using an entire genome sequence Bioinformatics 19 2003 717 726 The authors describe a scale to quantify the discrepancies between systematic annotations provided by teams using different combinations of manual and automatic tools: false positive/over-prediction, false negative/under- prediction, domain definition errors, undefined source of annotation and typographical errors.
6. C. Ouzounis, and P. Karp The past, present and future of genome-wise re-annotation Genome Biol 3 2002 2001.1-2001.6
7. N.C. Kyrpides, and C.A. Ouzounis Errors in genome reviews Science 281 1998 1457
8. L.M. Iyer, L. Aravind, P. Bork, K. Hofmann, A.R. Mushegian, I.B. Zhulin, and E.V. Koonin Quoderat demonstrandum? The mystery of experimental validation of apparently erroneous computational analyses of protein sequences Genome Biol 2 2001 R51
9. M. Scharf, R. Schneider, G. Casari, P. Bork, A. Valencia, C. Ouzounis, and C. Sander GeneQuiz: a workbench for sequence analysis Proc Int Conf Intell Syst Mol Biol 2 1994 348 353
10. M.A. Andrade, N.P. Brown, C. Leroy, S. Hoersch, A. de Daruvar, C. Reich, A. Franchini, J. Tamames, A. Valencia, C. Ouzounis, and C. Sander Automated genome sequence analysis and annotation Bioinformatics 15 1999 391 412
11. J. Tamames, C. Ouzounis, G. Casari, C. Sander, and A. Valencia EUCLID: automatic classification of proteins in functional classes by their database annotations Bioinformatics 14 1998 542 543
12. N.J. Mulder, R. Apweiler, T.K. Attwood, A. Bairoch, A. Bateman, D. Binns, P. Bradley, P. Bork, P. Bucher, and L. Cerutti InterPro, progress and status indkjdot Nucleic Acids Res 33 2005 D201 D205 InterPro integrates information from several protein domain databases, in particular Pfam [13], providing the consensus identification of the corresponding domains and a basic annotation of the possible function.
13. A. Bateman, L. Coin, R. Durbin, R.D. Finn, V. Hollich, S. Griffiths-Jones, A. Khanna, M. Marshall, S. Moxon, and E.L. Sonnhammer The Pfam protein families database Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 D138 D141
14. M.A. Andrade Position-specific annotation of protein function based on multiple homologs Proc Int Conf Intell Syst Mol Biol 1999 28 33
15. ••,16 ] represent perhaps the most orthogonal approaches to the organization of sequence space. Protomap is a large system that organizes all the protein sequences in a hierarchical structure based on the structure of the corresponding pairwise similarities. The second system (Funcut [16]) addresses the problem of classifying sequences of protein families in subfamilies of closely related associations that could resemble orthologous relations.
16. F. Abascal, and A. Valencia Clustering of proximal sequence space for the identification of protein families Bioinformatics 18 2002 908 921
17. R.L. Tatusov, N.D. Fedorova, J.D. Jackson, A.R. Jacobs, B. Kiryutin, E.V. Koonin, D.M. Krylov, R. Mazumder, S.L. Mekhedov, and A.N. Nikolskaya The COG database: an updated version includes eukaryotes BMC Bioinformatics 4 2003 41 COG is a database of potentially orthologous sequences across genomes. It is the most commonly used source of information about orthologous sequences, but is still evolving to cope with the avalanche of genomic sequences.
18. K.P. O'Brien, M. Remm, and E.L. Sonnhammer Inparanoid: a comprehensive database of eukaryotic orthologs Nucleic Acids Res 33 2005 D476 D480
19. T. Meinel, A. Krause, H. Luz, M. Vingron, and E. Staub The SYSTERS Protein Family Database in 2005 Nucleic Acids Res 33 2005 D226 D229
20. K. Sjolander Phylogenomic inference of protein molecular function: advances and challenges Bioinformatics 20 2004 170 179
21. F. Abascal, and A. Valencia Automatic annotation of protein function based on family identification Proteins 53 2003 683 692 This system extracts the consensus annotation for a protein family, considering the quality of the pairwise alignments and the database from which the annotations can be extracted.
22. M.L. Riley, T. Schmidt, C. Wagner, H.W. Mewes, and D. Frishman The PEDANT genome database in 2005 Nucleic Acids Res 33 2005 D308 D310 Perhaps the only one of the systems developed in the late 1990s [ 9,10,23,24 ] that is still alive, and incorporating additional features and functionalities.
23. T. Gaasterland, and C.W. Sensen Fully automated genome analysis that reflects user needs and preferences. A detailed introduction to the MAGPIE system architecture Biochimie 78 1996 302 310
24. C. Medigue, A. Viari, A. Henaut, and A. Danchin Colibri: a functional data base for the Escherichia coli genome Microbiol Rev 57 1993 623 654
25. L.G. Almeida, R. Paixao, R.C. Souza, G.C. Costa, D.F. Almeida, and A.T. Vasconcelos A new set of bioinformatics tools for genome projects Genet Mol Res 3 2004 26 52
26. E. Altermann, and T.R. Klaenhammer GAMOLA: a new local solution for sequence annotation and analyzing draft and finished prokaryotic genomes OMICS 7 2003 161 169
27. L.C. Bailey Jr., S. Fischer, J. Schug, J. Crabtree, M. Gibson, and G.C. Overton GAIA: framework annotation of genomic sequence Genome Res 8 1998 234 250
28. S. Bocs, A. Danchin, and C. Medigue Re-annotation of genome microbial coding-sequences: finding new genes and inaccurately annotated genes BMC Bioinformatics 3 2002 5
29. M.D. D'Ascenzo, A. Collmer, and G.B. Martin PeerGAD: a peer-review-based and community-centric web application for viewing and annotating prokaryotic genome sequences Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 3124 3135
30. A. Gattiker, K. Michoud, C. Rivoire, A.H. Auchincloss, E. Coudert, T. Lima, P. Kersey, M. Pagni, C.J. Sigrist, and C. Lachaize Automated annotation of microbial proteomes in SWISS-PROT Comput Biol Chem 27 2003 49 58
31. D. Huntley, H. Hummerich, D. Smedley, S. Kittivoravitkul, M. McCarthy, P. Little, and M. Sergot GANESH: software for customized annotation of genome regions Genome Res 13 2003 2195 2202
32. F. Meyer, A. Goesmann, A.C. McHardy, D. Bartels, T. Bekel, J. Clausen, J. Kalinowski, B. Linke, O. Rupp, R. Giegerich, and A. Puhler GenDB-an open source genome annotation system for prokaryote genomes Nucleic Acids Res 31 2003 2187 2195
33. K. Michalickova, G.D. Bader, M. Dumontier, H. Lieu, D. Betel, R. Isserlin, and C.W. Hogue SeqHound: biological sequence and structure database as a platform for bioinformatics research BMC Bioinformatics 3 2002 32
34. C.J. Mungall, S. Misra, B.P. Berman, J. Carlson, E. Frise, N. Harris, B. Marshall, S. Shu, J.S. Kaminker, and S.E. Prochnik An integrated computational pipeline and database to support whole-genome sequence annotation Genome Biol 3 2002 R81
35. A. Prlic, F.S. Domingues, P. Lackner, and M.J. Sippl WILMA-automated annotation of protein sequences Bioinformatics 20 2004 127 128
36. P. Rouze, N. Pavy, and S. Rombauts Genome annotation: which tools do we have for it? Curr Opin Plant Biol 2 1999 90 95
37. S.M. Searle, J. Gilbert, V. Iyer, and M. Clamp The otter annotation system Genome Res 14 2004 963 970
38. Q. Yuan, S. Ouyang, J. Liu, B. Suh, F. Cheung, R. Sultana, D. Lee, J. Quackenbush, and C.R. Buell The TIGR rice genome annotation resource: annotating the rice genome and creating resources for plant biologists Nucleic Acids Res 31 2003 229 233
39. T. Hubbard, D. Barker, E. Birney, G. Cameron, Y. Chen, L. Clark, T. Cox, J. Cuff, V. Curwen, and T. Down The Ensembl genome database project Nucleic Acids Res 30 2002 38 41
40. •].
41. •].
42. • ]. They include gene-based features, rather than protein-based annotations.
43. W. Fleischmann, S. Moller, A. Gateau, and R. Apweiler A novel method for automatic functional annotation of proteins Bioinformatics 15 1999 228 233
44. S. Moller, U. Leser, W. Fleischmann, and R. Apweiler EDITtoTrEMBL: a distributed approach to high-quality automated protein sequence annotation Bioinformatics 15 1999 219 227
45. E. Kretschmann, W. Fleischmann, and R. Apweiler Automatic rule generation for protein annotation with the C4.5 data mining algorithm applied on SWISS-PROT Bioinformatics 17 2001 920 926
46. M. Biswas, J.F. O'Rourke, E. Camon, G. Fraser, A. Kanapin, Y. Karavidopoulou, P. Kersey, E. Kriventseva, V. Mittard, and N. Mulder Applications of InterPro in protein annotation and genome analysis Brief Bioinform 3 2002 285 295
47. W.R. Gilks, B. Audit, D. De Angelis, S. Tsoka, and C.A. Ouzounis Modeling the percolation of annotation errors in a database of protein sequences Bioinformatics 18 2002 1641 1649
48. A. Danchin The Delphic Boat: What Genomes Tell Us 2002 Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
49. J.M. Thornton, A.E. Todd, D. Milburn, N. Borkakoti, and C. Orengo From structure to function: approaches and limitations Nat Struct Biol 7 2000 991 994
50. J.S. Fetrow, N. Siew, J.A. Di Gennaro, M. Martinez-Yamout, H.J. Dyson, and J. Skolnick Genomic-scale comparison of sequence- and structure-based methods of function prediction: does structure provide additional insight? Protein Sci 10 2001 1005 1014
51. R.A. Laskowski, J.D. Watson, and J.M. Thornton From protein structure to biochemical function? J Struct Funct Genomics 4 2003 167 177
52. F. Pazos, and M.J.E. Sternberg Automated prediction of protein function and detection of functional sites from structure Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101 2004 14754 14759 This new method extracts three-dimensional profiles of conserved residues from the corresponding structural alignments and tags them with the functions extracted from the GO database.
53. •] describes a practical application of all possible methods for predicting the function of an orphan protein with a newly solved structure.
54. L.J. Jensen, R. Gupta, N. Blom, D. Devos, J. Tamames, C. Kesmir, H. Nielsen, H.H. Staerfeldt, K. Rapacki, and C. Workman Prediction of human protein function from post-translational modifications and localization features J Mol Biol 319 2002 1257 1265
55. R.D. King, P.H. Wise, and A. Clare Confirmation of data mining based predictions of protein function Bioinformatics 20 2004 1110 1118 The authors use an inductive logic programming data-mining system to combine evidence from amino acid properties, structure prediction and phylogenic patterns for the prediction of functional classes.
56. E.M. Marcotte Computational genetics: finding protein function by nonhomology methods Curr Opin Struct Biol 10 2000 359 365
57. A. Valencia, and F. Pazos Computational methods for the prediction of protein interactions Curr Opin Struct Biol 12 2002 368 373
58. E.M. Marcotte, M. Pellegrini, H.L. Ng, D.W. Rice, T.O. Yeates, and D. Eisenberg Detecting protein function and protein-protein interactions from genome sequences Science 285 1999 751 753
59. M. Huynen, B. Snel, W. Lathe III, and P. Bork Predicting protein function by genomic context: quantitative evaluation and qualitative inferences Genome Res 10 2000 1204 1210
60. C. von Mering, M. Huynen, D. Jaeggi, S. Schmidt, P. Bork, and B. Snel STRING: a database of predicted functional associations between proteins Nucleic Acids Res 31 2003 258 261 STRING is currently the most comprehensive system for the representation of features related to protein and gene associations.
61. P.M. Bowers, M. Pellegrini, M.J. Thompson, J. Fierro, T.O. Yeates, and D. Eisenberg Prolinks: a database of protein functional linkages derived from coevolution Genome Biol 5 2004 R35 This database combines the results of various protein interaction prediction methods in the framework of an easy to use graphical application.
62. J.C. Mellor, I. Yanai, K.H. Clodfelter, J. Mintseris, and C. DeLisi Predictome: a database of putative functional links between proteins Nucleic Acids Res 30 2002 306 309
63. I. Lee, S.V. Date, A.T. Adai, and E.M. Marcotte A probabilistic functional network of yeast genes Science 306 2004 1555 1558 The authors provide numerical likelihoods for the associations in gene and protein networks, allowing a first probabilistic estimate of their functional coupling.
64. M.P. Samanta, and S. Liang Predicting protein functions from redundancies in large-scale protein interaction networks Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100 2003 12579 12583
65. A. Vazquez, A. Flammini, A. Maritan, and A. Vespignani Global protein function prediction from protein-protein interaction networks Nat Biotechnol 21 2003 697 700 This paper describes some of the first full-scale evaluations of the potential transference of function based on the combined information from protein interaction and gene regulation networks.
66. M.L. Green, and P.D. Karp A Bayesian method for identifying missing enzymes in predicted metabolic pathway databases BMC Bioinformatics 5 2004 76 This approach combines classical homology and pathway reconstruction to identify candidates for filling pathway holes with the putative sequences. It is a pioneering approach in the use of the completeness of the genomes to improve functional annotations, for what is still a largely unsolved problem.
67. B. Boeckmann, A. Bairoch, R. Apweiler, M.C. Blatter, A. Estreicher, E. Gasteiger, M.J. Martin, K. Michoud, C. O'Donovan, and I. Phan The SWISS-PROT protein knowledgebase and its supplement TrEMBL in 2003 Nucleic Acids Res 31 2003 365 370
68. M.A. Harris, J. Clark, A. Ireland, J. Lomax, M. Ashburner, R. Foulger, K. Eilbeck, S. Lewis, B. Marshall, and C. Mungall Gene Ontology Consortium. The Gene Ontology (GO) database and informatics resource Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 D258 D261
69. E. Camon, M. Magrane, D. Barrell, V. Lee, E. Dimmer, J. Maslen, D. Binns, N. Harte, R. Lopez Rand, and R. Apweiler The Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) Database: sharing knowledge in Uniprot with Gene Ontology Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 D262 D266
70. C. Blaschke, L. Hirschman, and A. Valencia Information extraction in molecular biology Brief Bioinform 3 2002 154 165
71. Blaschke C, Leon EA, Krallinger M, Valencia A: Evaluation of BioCreAtIvE assessment of task 2. BMC Bioinformatics 2005, in press. BioCreAtIvE has provided the first large-scale assessment of the capacity of text-mining approaches to provide valuable annotations in a biologically relevant environment, in particular the task of identifying functional annotations (GO terms) in full text. This paper contains a critical evaluation of this task.
72. C. Blaschke, and A. Valencia Can bibliographic pointers for known biological data be found automatically? Protein interactions as a case study Comp Funct Genomics 2 2001 196 206
73. M. Kanehisa, S. Goto, S. Kawashima, Y. Okuno, and M. Hattori The KEGG resource for deciphering the genome Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 D277 D280
74. I.M. Keseler, J. Collado-Vides, S. Gama-Castro, J. Ingraham, S. Paley, I.T. Paulsen, M. Peralta-Gil, and P.D. Karp EcoCyc: a comprehensive database resource for Escherichia coli Nucleic Acids Res 33 2005 D334 D337
75. B.E. Shakhnovich, N.V. Dokholyan, C. DeLisi, and E.I. Shakhnovich Functional fingerprints of folds: evidence for correlated structure-function evolution J Mol Biol 326 2003 1 9
76. J.W. Torrance, G.J. Bartlett, C.T. Porter, and J.M. Thornton Using a library of structural templates to recognise catalytic sites and explore their evolution in homologous families J Mol Biol 347 2005 565 581
77. P. Bork, C. Sander, and A. Valencia Convergent evolution of similar enzymatic function on different protein folds: the hexokinase, ribokinase, and galactokinase families of sugar kinases Protein Sci 2 1993 31 40
78. •] describe a recent experimental approach to the validation of a model of the broadening of functional specificity.
79. P. Aloy, H. Ceulemans, A. Stark, and R.B. Russell The relationship between sequence and interaction divergence in proteins J Mol Biol 332 2003 989 998 The authors present a first assessment of the relationship between domain pairs that interact in different complexes and their corresponding structural similarity. In this first analysis, close homologs almost invariably interact the same way, whereas proteins with a similar fold are rarely associated with a similarity in interaction.
80. R.P. Bahadur, P. Chakrabarti, F. Rodier, and J. Janin A dissection of specific and non-specific protein-protein interfaces J Mol Biol 336 2004 943 955 A systematic analysis of the properties of various types of protein complexes.
81. • ] are the most recent analyses of the properties of protein interfaces and their degree of conservation, facilitated by the availability of an increasing number of structures of protein complexes.
82. D. Devos, and A. Valencia Practical limits of function prediction Proteins 41 2000 98 107
83. D. Devos, and A. Valencia Intrinsic errors in genome annotation Trends Genet 17 2001 429 431
84. A.E. Todd, C.A. Orengo, and J.M. Thornton Evolution of function in protein superfamilies, from a structural perspective J Mol Biol 307 2001 1113 1143
85. C.A. Wilson, J. Kreychman, and M. Gerstein Assessing annotation transfer for genomics: quantifying the relations between protein sequence, structure and function through traditional and probabilistic scores J Mol Biol 297 2000 233 249
86. H. Hegyi, and M. Gerstein Annotation transfer for genomics: measuring functional divergence in multi-domain proteins Genome Res 11 2001 1632 1640
87. B. Rost Enzyme function less conserved than anticipated J Mol Biol 318 2002 595 608
88. C. Guda, S. Lu, E.D. Scheeff, P.E. Bourne, and I.N. Shindyalov CE-MC: a multiple protein structure alignment server Nucleic Acids Res 32 2004 W100 W103
89. P.C. Babbitt Definitions of enzyme function for the structural genomics era Curr Opin Chem Biol 7 2003 230 237
90. N. Kaplan, and M. Linial Automatic detection of false annotations via binary property clustering BMC Bioinformatics 6 2005 46
91. D. Wieser, E. Kretschmann, and R. Apweiler Filtering erroneous protein annotation Bioinformatics 20 suppl 1 2004 I342 I347