Using multiple alignments to improve gene prediction

Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 3500, Issue , 2005, Pages 374-388

  Gross, Samuel S ^a,b   Brent, Michael R ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS   (United States)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; PROTEINS; RATE CONSTANTS; DATA ACQUISITION; GENES; HUMAN ENGINEERING; INFORMATION ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR ORIENTATION; PROBLEM SOLVING;

HUMAN GENOME; INVERTEBRATES;

GENES; GENETIC ENGINEERING;

DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; GENE PREDICTION; GENOMIC SEQUENCES; N-SCAN;

EID: 26444466724     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/11415770_29     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. The MGC Project Team. 2004. The status, quality, and expansion of the NIH full-length cDNA project: The Mammalian Gene Collection (MGC). Genome Res., 14:2121-2127.
2. Waterston et al. 2002. Initial sequencing and comparative analysis of the mouse genome. Nature, 420:520-562.
3. C. Burge and S. Karlin. 1997. Prediction of complete gene structures in human genomic DNA. J. Mol. Biol., 268:78-94.
4. M. Alexandersson, S. Cawley, and L. Pachter. 2003. SLAM: Cross-species gene finding and alignment with a generalized pair hidden Markov model. Genome Res., 13:496-502.
5. G. Parra, P. Agarwal, J.F. Abril, T. Wiehe, J.W. Fickett, and R. Guigo. 2003. Comparative gene prediction in human and mouse. Genome Res., 13:108-117.
6. I. Korf, P. Flicek, D. Duan, and M.R. Brent. 2001. Integrating genomic homology into gene structure prediction. Bioinformatics, 17 Suppl. 1:8140-148.
7. P. Flicek, E. Keibler, P. Hu, I. Korf, and M.R. Brent. 2003. Leveraging the mouse genome for gene prediction in human: From whole-genome shotgun reads to a global synteny map. Genome Res., 13:46-54.
8. A.E. Tenney, R.H. Brown, C. Vaske, J.K. Lodge, T.L. Doering, and M.R. Brent. 2004. Gene prediction and verification in a compact genome with numerous small introns. Genome Res., in press.
9. A.C. Siepel and D. Haussler. 2004. Computational identification of evolutionary conserved exons. In RECOMB 2004.
10. J.D. McAuliffe, L. Pachter, and M.I. Jordan. 2003. Multiple-sequence functional annotation and the generalized hidden Markov phylogeny. Technical Report 647, Department of Statistics, University of California, Berkeley.
11. J.S. Pedersen and J. Hein. 2003. Gene finding with a hidden Markov model of genome structure and evolution. Bioinformatics, 19:219-227.
12. A. Siepel and D. Haussler. 2004. Phylogenetic estimation of context-dependent substitution rates by maximum likelihood. Mol. Biol. Evol., 21:468-448.
13. Felsenstein, J. 1981. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences. J. Mol. Evol., 17:368-376.
14. P. Lió and N. Goldman. 1998. Models of molecular evolution and phylogeny. Genome Res., 8:1233-1244.
15. M. Bulmer. 1986. Neighboring base effects on substitution rates in pseudogenes. Mol. Biol. Evol., 3:322-329.
16. R.H. Brown, S.S. Gross, and M.R. Brent. 2005. Begin at the beginning: predicting genes with 5′ UTRs. Submitted.
17. W.J. Kent, C.W. Sugnet, T.S. Furey, K.M. Roskin, T.H. Pringle, A.M. Zahler, and D. Haussler. 2003. The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res., 12:996-1006.
18. M. Blanchette, W.J. Kent, C. Riemer, L. Elnitski, A.F.A. Smith, K.M. Roskin, R. Baertsch, K. Rosenbloom, H. Clawson, E.D. Green, D. Haussler, and W. Miller. 2004. Aligning multiple genomic sequences with the threaded blockset aligner. Genome Res., 14:708-715.
19. SGP2 home page, (http://genome.imim.es/software/sgp2).