Combining evidence, biomedical literature and statistical dependence: new insights for functional annotation of gene sets

2006

New Method for Annotating Gene Functions

Sample size: 7397 publication Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Aubry Marc, Monnier Annabelle, Chicault Celine, de Tayrac Marie, Galibert Marie-Dominique, Burgun Anita, Mosser Jean

Primary Institution: CNRS UMR 6061 Génétique et Développement, Université de Rennes 1

Can combining evidence and literature improve functional annotation of gene sets?

Combining evidence and literature mining provides a more informative functional annotation than using either method alone.

The combination of evidence and literature mining retrieved more terms per gene than evidence alone.
The literature annotation provided more than twice as many terms for a given gene than the evidence annotation.
Statistical analyses showed significant differences in the quality of annotations between methods.

This study shows that using both scientific evidence and literature helps us understand what genes do better than just using one or the other.

The study used a combination of the Gene Ontology Annotation database and the PubGene biomedical literature index to annotate gene clusters.

Potential biases may arise from the reliance on existing literature and the limitations of automated text mining.

The study relies on the completeness of the databases used and the accuracy of the literature mining.

p<0.01

p<0.05

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website