Annotation Landscape Analysis with Genecards Arye Harel*1, Aron Inger, Gil Stelzer1, Liora Strichman-Almashanu1, Irina Dalah1, Marilyn Safran1,2 and Doron Lancet1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BMC Bioinformatics BioMed Central Research article Open Access GIFtS: annotation landscape analysis with GeneCards Arye Harel*1, Aron Inger, Gil Stelzer1, Liora Strichman-Almashanu1, Irina Dalah1, Marilyn Safran1,2 and Doron Lancet1 Address: 1Department of Molecular Genetics, Weizmann Institute of Science Rehovot 76100, Israel and 2Department of Biological Services (Bioinformatics Unit), Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel Email: Arye Harel* - [email protected]; Aron Inger - [email protected]; Gil Stelzer - [email protected]; Liora Strichman-Almashanu - [email protected]; Irina Dalah - [email protected]; Marilyn Safran - [email protected]; Doron Lancet - [email protected] * Corresponding author Published: 23 October 2009 Received: 22 February 2009 Accepted: 23 October 2009 BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:348 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-348 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/10/348 © 2009 Harel et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract Background: Gene annotation is a pivotal component in computational genomics, encompassing prediction of gene function, expression analysis, and sequence scrutiny. Hence, quantitative measures of the annotation landscape constitute a pertinent bioinformatics tool. GeneCards® is a gene-centric compendium of rich annotative information for over 50,000 human gene entries, building upon 68 data sources, including Gene Ontology (GO), pathways, interactions, phenotypes, publications and many more. Results: We present the GeneCards Inferred Functionality Score (GIFtS) which allows a quantitative assessment of a gene's annotation status, by exploiting the unique wealth and diversity of GeneCards information. The GIFtS tool, linked from the GeneCards home page, facilitates browsing the human genome by searching for the annotation level of a specified gene, retrieving a list of genes within a specified range of GIFtS value, obtaining random genes with a specific GIFtS value, and experimenting with the GIFtS weighting algorithm for a variety of annotation categories. The bimodal shape of the GIFtS distribution suggests a division of the human gene repertoire into two main groups: the high-GIFtS peak consists almost entirely of protein-coding genes; the low- GIFtS peak consists of genes from all of the categories. Cluster analysis of GIFtS annotation vectors provides the classification of gene groups by detailed positioning in the annotation arena. GIFtS also provide measures which enable the evaluation of the databases that serve as GeneCards sources. An inverse correlation is found (for GIFtS>25) between the number of genes annotated by each source, and the average GIFtS value of genes associated with that source. Three typical source prototypes are revealed by their GIFtS distribution: genome-wide sources, sources comprising mainly highly annotated genes, and sources comprising mainly poorly annotated genes. The degree of accumulated knowledge for a given gene measured by GIFtS was correlated (for GIFtS>30) with the number of publications for a gene, and with the seniority of this entry in the HGNC database. Conclusion: GIFtS can be a valuable tool for computational procedures which analyze lists of large set of genes resulting from wet-lab or computational research. GIFtS may also assist the scientific community with identification of groups of uncharacterized genes for diverse applications, such as delineation of novel functions and charting unexplored areas of the human genome. Page 1 of 11 (page number not for citation purposes) BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:348 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/10/348 Background In the quest for revealing the function of DNA sequences, 100000 scientists have used a variety of approaches, from molecu- lar techniques targeting specific genes, to systematic anal- yses of thousands of functional units encompassed by the transcriptome, proteome, and metabolome. This hetero- 10000 geneous mass of knowledge is time-dependent, with new information constantly arising from a variety of sources. Thus, a quantitative tool for assessing annotation depth is important for directing ongoing research and for analyz- 1000 ing the emerging results. Efforts in this field have included the Genome Annotation Scores (GAS) algorithm [1], which demonstrates a quantitative methodology of Source size Source size (number of genes) assigning annotations scores at the whole genome level, 100 the GO Annotation Quality (GAQ) score, which gives a quantitative measure of GO annotations [2], and the Gene Characterization Index (GCI), which scores the extent to which a gene's functionality is described, based 10 largely on the quantification of human perception, and 0204060 applied only to protein-encoding genes [3]. We now Source rank introduce the GeneCards Inferred Functionality Scores (GIFtS) tool [4], which utilizes the wealth of gene annota- SourceFigure size1 tion within GeneCards [5] to quantify the degree of func- Source size. The number of human gene entries in each tional knowledge about >50,000 GeneCards entries. one of the sources contributing to the GIFtS score. Sources GeneCards is a comprehensive gene-centric compendium are shown by their rank according to their size (see addi- of annotative information about human genes, automati- tional file 1: Table S1). A source's size is defined to be the cally mined from nearly 70 data sources [6-12]. Thus, number of GeneCards entries containing annotations from GIFtS can provide quantitative annotation estimates for a this source. very large number of genes, and at a significant depth, made possible by the exploitation of dozens of annota- tion resources. To study the effect of overlap between sources, we gener- ated a pairwise overlap matrix for all 68 data sources (see Results additional file 2, 3, 4: Tables S2, S3 and Fig. S1-A). For this GIFtS definition and applications we utilized a parameter (see Methods) which assesses the We devised the GeneCards Inferred Functionality Score overlap by gene set sharing. The rational is that if, for (GIFtS) which allows a quantitative assessment of a gene's example, all information about a set of genes, such as annotation status, with potential relevance to the degree microRNAs, is imported from one source to another, it of relevant functional knowledge. A GIFtS value for a gene will result in an overlap in gene sets. Based on the overlap is defined as the number of GeneCards sources, out of a matrix, we proceeded to select the 20 source pairs with the total of 68 (see additional file 1: Table S1), that include highest overlap (≥0.8), and eliminated (typically) one information about this gene (see Methods). Data sources source of each pair. Fig. 1S-B (see additional file 3: Fig.S1) have heterogeneous sizes, as estimated by the number of shows that the exclusion of overlapping sources has only human gene entries for which the source contains infor- a minor effect on the overall shape of the distribution, mation (Fig. 1), having an average of 11,404 ± 10,970 hence, by inference, on the relative positions of the major- entries per source. One of GeneCards' main aims is to ity of genes on the GIFtS scale. This may suggest that hav- incorporate overlapping sources, and perform integration ing an overlap among sources does not impose an adverse of data for different annotation fields. Considerable atten- effect on proposed functionality scale. While such a find- tion is also directed to conflicts among sources, one clear ing could be interpreted as suggesting over-representation example being the GeneLoc [8] member of the GeneCards of information items, we believe that source redundancy suite, which handles conflicts in genomic coordinates also has its advantages, as pointed out below. from Ensembl [13] and NCBI [14]. The overlap problem is particularly applicable for data extracted from genome- We also asked whether overlap might exert an advanta- wide sources such as Entrez Gene, Ensembl, GO [15], Uni- geous effect. For this, we comparatively analysed the GCI Prot [16] and InterPro [17] which are all closely linked scale with 6 data sources, i.e. having a lower (but not neg- and share some of the information presented, which may ligible) degree of source overlap, and GIFtS, which has 68 introduce a degree of redundancy. sources and a considerably higher extent of source over- Page 2 of 11 (page number not for citation purposes) BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:348 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/10/348 lap. Focusing on the 489 genes with highest functionality sequence similarity), but also many genes that are not eas- scores in GCI, all having the same score of 10.0, we note ily defined by their symbols, such as non protein-coding that the same genes span a rather broad range of GIFtS val- genes. ues, from 51 to 84 (see additional file 5: Fig. S2-A). Thus, for the most well-annotated genes, the GIFtS scale dis- We asked what might distinguish genes with extremely plays a fine resolution not seen in GCI. We suspect that high GIFtS score (>75, right tail of the high-GIFtS peak) as this may actually arise from the diversity of overlapping compared to those at the top of the same peak (genes with sources in GIFtS. That this