Genome annotation assessment in Drosophila melanogaster
- PMID: 10779488
- PMCID: PMC310877
- DOI: 10.1101/gr.10.4.483
Genome annotation assessment in Drosophila melanogaster
Abstract
Computational methods for automated genome annotation are critical to our community's ability to make full use of the large volume of genomic sequence being generated and released. To explore the accuracy of these automated feature prediction tools in the genomes of higher organisms, we evaluated their performance on a large, well-characterized sequence contig from the Adh region of Drosophila melanogaster. This experiment, known as the Genome Annotation Assessment Project (GASP), was launched in May 1999. Twelve groups, applying state-of-the-art tools, contributed predictions for features including gene structure, protein homologies, promoter sites, and repeat elements. We evaluated these predictions using two standards, one based on previously unreleased high-quality full-length cDNA sequences and a second based on the set of annotations generated as part of an in-depth study of the region by a group of Drosophila experts. Although these standard sets only approximate the unknown distribution of features in this region, we believe that when taken in context the results of an evaluation based on them are meaningful. The results were presented as a tutorial at the conference on Intelligent Systems in Molecular Biology (ISMB-99) in August 1999. Over 95% of the coding nucleotides in the region were correctly identified by the majority of the gene finders, and the correct intron/exon structures were predicted for >40% of the genes. Homology-based annotation techniques recognized and associated functions with almost half of the genes in the region; the remainder were only identified by the ab initio techniques. This experiment also presents the first assessment of promoter prediction techniques for a significant number of genes in a large contiguous region. We discovered that the promoter predictors' high false-positive rates make their predictions difficult to use. Integrating gene finding and cDNA/EST alignments with promoter predictions decreases the number of false-positive classifications but discovers less than one-third of the promoters in the region. We believe that by establishing standards for evaluating genomic annotations and by assessing the performance of existing automated genome annotation tools, this experiment establishes a baseline that contributes to the value of ongoing large-scale annotation projects and should guide further research in genome informatics.
Figures







Comment in
-
A biologist's view of the Drosophila genome annotation assessment project.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):391-3. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.391. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779478 Review. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Genie--gene finding in Drosophila melanogaster.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):529-38. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.529. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779493 Free PMC article.
-
Drosophila genomic sequence annotation using the BLOCKS+ database.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):543-6. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.543. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779495 Free PMC article.
-
MAGPIE/EGRET annotation of the 2.9-Mb Drosophila melanogaster Adh region.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):502-10. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.502. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779489 Free PMC article.
-
EGASP: the human ENCODE Genome Annotation Assessment Project.Genome Biol. 2006;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S2.1-31. doi: 10.1186/gb-2006-7-s1-s2. Epub 2006 Aug 7. Genome Biol. 2006. PMID: 16925836 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A biologist's view of the Drosophila genome annotation assessment project.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):391-3. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.391. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779478 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
EGASP: Introduction.Genome Biol. 2006;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S1.1-3. doi: 10.1186/gb-2006-7-s1-s1. Epub 2006 Aug 7. Genome Biol. 2006. PMID: 16925831 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Performance assessment of promoter predictions on ENCODE regions in the EGASP experiment.Genome Biol. 2006;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3.1-13. doi: 10.1186/gb-2006-7-s1-s3. Epub 2006 Aug 7. Genome Biol. 2006. PMID: 16925837 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Using database matches with for HMMGene for automated gene detection in Drosophila.Genome Res. 2000 Apr;10(4):523-8. doi: 10.1101/gr.10.4.523. Genome Res. 2000. PMID: 10779492 Free PMC article.
-
Evidence-based gene predictions in plant genomes.Genome Res. 2009 Oct;19(10):1912-23. doi: 10.1101/gr.088997.108. Epub 2009 Jun 18. Genome Res. 2009. PMID: 19541913 Free PMC article.
-
An automated annotation tool for genomic DNA sequences using GeneScan and BLAST.J Genet. 2001 Apr;80(1):9-16. doi: 10.1007/BF02811413. J Genet. 2001. PMID: 11910119
References
-
- Agarwal P, States DJ. Comparative accuracy of methods for protein sequence similarity search. Bioinformatics. 1998;14:40–47. - PubMed
-
- Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215:403–410. - PubMed
-
- Ashburner, M. 2000. A biologist's view of the Drosophila genome annotation assessment. Genome Res. (this issue). - PubMed
-
- Ashburner M, Bork P, Durbin R, Guigó R, Hubbard TJ. GASP1 assessment meeting. Heidelberg, Germany: EMBL; 1999a.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Molecular Biology Databases
Research Materials