Cargando…
Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations
Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis is ubiquitously used for interpreting high throughput molecular data and generating hypotheses about underlying biological phenomena of experiments. However, the two building blocks of this analysis — the ontology and the annotations — evolve rapidly. We used g...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5865181/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29572502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23395-2 |
_version_ | 1783308636677734400 |
---|---|
author | Tomczak, Aurelie Mortensen, Jonathan M. Winnenburg, Rainer Liu, Charles Alessi, Dominique T. Swamy, Varsha Vallania, Francesco Lofgren, Shane Haynes, Winston Shah, Nigam H. Musen, Mark A. Khatri, Purvesh |
author_facet | Tomczak, Aurelie Mortensen, Jonathan M. Winnenburg, Rainer Liu, Charles Alessi, Dominique T. Swamy, Varsha Vallania, Francesco Lofgren, Shane Haynes, Winston Shah, Nigam H. Musen, Mark A. Khatri, Purvesh |
author_sort | Tomczak, Aurelie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis is ubiquitously used for interpreting high throughput molecular data and generating hypotheses about underlying biological phenomena of experiments. However, the two building blocks of this analysis — the ontology and the annotations — evolve rapidly. We used gene signatures derived from 104 disease analyses to systematically evaluate how enrichment analysis results were affected by evolution of the GO over a decade. We found low consistency between enrichment analyses results obtained with early and more recent GO versions. Furthermore, there continues to be a strong annotation bias in the GO annotations where 58% of the annotations are for 16% of the human genes. Our analysis suggests that GO evolution may have affected the interpretation and possibly reproducibility of experiments over time. Hence, researchers must exercise caution when interpreting GO enrichment analyses and should reexamine previous analyses with the most recent GO version. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5865181 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58651812018-03-27 Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations Tomczak, Aurelie Mortensen, Jonathan M. Winnenburg, Rainer Liu, Charles Alessi, Dominique T. Swamy, Varsha Vallania, Francesco Lofgren, Shane Haynes, Winston Shah, Nigam H. Musen, Mark A. Khatri, Purvesh Sci Rep Article Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis is ubiquitously used for interpreting high throughput molecular data and generating hypotheses about underlying biological phenomena of experiments. However, the two building blocks of this analysis — the ontology and the annotations — evolve rapidly. We used gene signatures derived from 104 disease analyses to systematically evaluate how enrichment analysis results were affected by evolution of the GO over a decade. We found low consistency between enrichment analyses results obtained with early and more recent GO versions. Furthermore, there continues to be a strong annotation bias in the GO annotations where 58% of the annotations are for 16% of the human genes. Our analysis suggests that GO evolution may have affected the interpretation and possibly reproducibility of experiments over time. Hence, researchers must exercise caution when interpreting GO enrichment analyses and should reexamine previous analyses with the most recent GO version. Nature Publishing Group UK 2018-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5865181/ /pubmed/29572502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23395-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Tomczak, Aurelie Mortensen, Jonathan M. Winnenburg, Rainer Liu, Charles Alessi, Dominique T. Swamy, Varsha Vallania, Francesco Lofgren, Shane Haynes, Winston Shah, Nigam H. Musen, Mark A. Khatri, Purvesh Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title | Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title_full | Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title_fullStr | Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title_full_unstemmed | Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title_short | Interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the Gene Ontology and its annotations |
title_sort | interpretation of biological experiments changes with evolution of the gene ontology and its annotations |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5865181/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29572502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23395-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tomczakaurelie interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT mortensenjonathanm interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT winnenburgrainer interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT liucharles interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT alessidominiquet interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT swamyvarsha interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT vallaniafrancesco interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT lofgrenshane interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT hayneswinston interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT shahnigamh interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT musenmarka interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations AT khatripurvesh interpretationofbiologicalexperimentschangeswithevolutionofthegeneontologyanditsannotations |