↓ Skip to main content

Detecting false positive sequence homology: a machine learning approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Detecting false positive sequence homology: a machine learning approach
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-0955-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Stanley Fujimoto, Anton Suvorov, Nicholas O. Jensen, Mark J. Clement, Seth M. Bybee

Abstract

Accurate detection of homologous relationships of biological sequences (DNA or amino acid) amongst organisms is an important and often difficult task that is essential to various evolutionary studies, ranging from building phylogenies to predicting functional gene annotations. There are many existing heuristic tools, most commonly based on bidirectional BLAST searches that are used to identify homologous genes and combine them into two fundamentally distinct classes: orthologs and paralogs. Due to only using heuristic filtering based on significance score cutoffs and having no cluster post-processing tools available, these methods can often produce multiple clusters constituting unrelated (non-homologous) sequences. Therefore sequencing data extracted from incomplete genome/transcriptome assemblies originated from low coverage sequencing or produced by de novo processes without a reference genome are susceptible to high false positive rates of homology detection. In this paper we develop biologically informative features that can be extracted from multiple sequence alignments of putative homologous genes (orthologs and paralogs) and further utilized in context of guided experimentation to verify false positive outcomes. We demonstrate that our machine learning method trained on both known homology clusters obtained from OrthoDB and randomly generated sequence alignments (non-homologs), successfully determines apparent false positives inferred by heuristic algorithms especially among proteomes recovered from low-coverage RNA-seq data. Almost ~42 % and ~25 % of predicted putative homologies by InParanoid and HaMStR respectively were classified as false positives on experimental data set. Our process increases the quality of output from other clustering algorithms by providing a novel post-processing method that is both fast and efficient at removing low quality clusters of putative homologous genes recovered by heuristic-based approaches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 74 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 28%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 21%
Computer Science 10 13%
Engineering 4 5%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 13 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#2,416,975
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#686
of 7,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,096
of 301,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#25
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 301,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.