↓ Skip to main content

Computational approach to predict species-specific type III secretion system (T3SS) effectors using single and multiple genomes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Computational approach to predict species-specific type III secretion system (T3SS) effectors using single and multiple genomes
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-3363-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher K. Hobbs, Vanessa L. Porter, Maxwell L. S. Stow, Bupe A. Siame, Herbert H. Tsang, Ka Yin Leung

Abstract

Many gram-negative bacteria use type III secretion systems (T3SSs) to translocate effector proteins into host cells. T3SS effectors can give some bacteria a competitive edge over others within the same environment and can help bacteria to invade the host cells and allow them to multiply rapidly within the host. Therefore, developing efficient methods to identify effectors scattered in bacterial genomes can lead to a better understanding of host-pathogen interactions and ultimately to important medical and biotechnological applications. We used 21 genomic and proteomic attributes to create a precise and reliable T3SS effector prediction method called Genome Search for Effectors Tool (GenSET). Five machine learning algorithms were trained on effectors selected from different organisms and a trained (voting) algorithm was then applied to identify other effectors present in the genome testing sets from the same (GenSET Phase 1) or different (GenSET Phase 2) organism. Although a select group of attributes that included the codon adaptation index, probability of expression in inclusion bodies, N-terminal disorder, and G + C content (filtered) were better at discriminating between positive and negative sets, algorithm performance was better when all 21 attributes (unfiltered) were used. Performance scores (sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve) from GenSET Phase 1 were better than those reported for six published methods. More importantly, GenSET Phase 1 ranked more known effectors (70.3%) in the top 40 ranked proteins and predicted 10-80% more effectors than three available programs in three of the four organisms tested. GenSET Phase 2 predicted 43.8% effectors in the top 40 ranked proteins when tested on four related or unrelated organisms. The lower prediction rates from GenSET Phase 2 may be due to the presence of different translocation signals in effectors from different T3SS families. The species-specific GenSET Phase 1 method offers an alternative approach to T3SS effector prediction that can be used with other published programs to improve effector predictions. Additionally, our approach can be applied to predict effectors of other secretion systems as long as these effectors have translocation signals embedded in their sequences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 42 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Unspecified 3 7%
Other 13 30%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 14%
Computer Science 3 7%
Unspecified 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 6 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2016.
All research outputs
#15,404,272
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,710
of 10,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,027
of 420,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#148
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,676 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.