Cargando…
Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools
Tools for genomic island prediction use strategies for genomic comparison analysis and sequence composition analysis. The goal of comparative analysis is to identify unique regions in the genomes of related organisms, whereas sequence composition analysis evaluates and relates the composition of spe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6315130/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30631340 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00619 |
_version_ | 1783384218309492736 |
---|---|
author | da Silva Filho, Antonio Camilo Raittz, Roberto Tadeu Guizelini, Dieval De Pierri, Camilla Reginatto Augusto, Diônata Willian dos Santos-Weiss, Izabella Castilhos Ribeiro Marchaukoski, Jeroniza Nunes |
author_facet | da Silva Filho, Antonio Camilo Raittz, Roberto Tadeu Guizelini, Dieval De Pierri, Camilla Reginatto Augusto, Diônata Willian dos Santos-Weiss, Izabella Castilhos Ribeiro Marchaukoski, Jeroniza Nunes |
author_sort | da Silva Filho, Antonio Camilo |
collection | PubMed |
description | Tools for genomic island prediction use strategies for genomic comparison analysis and sequence composition analysis. The goal of comparative analysis is to identify unique regions in the genomes of related organisms, whereas sequence composition analysis evaluates and relates the composition of specific regions with other regions in the genome. The goal of this study was to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate extant genomic island predictors. We chose tools reported to produce significant results using sequence composition prediction, comparative genomics, and hybrid genomics methods. To maintain diversity, the tools were applied to eight complete genomes of organisms with distinct characteristics and belonging to different families. Escherichia coli CFT073 was used as a control and considered as the gold standard because its islands were previously curated in vitro. The results of predictions with the gold standard were manually curated, and the content and characteristics of each predicted island were analyzed. For other organisms, we created GenBank (GBK) files using Artemis software for each predicted island. We copied only the amino acid sequences from the coding sequence and constructed a multi-FASTA file for each predictor. We used BLASTp to compare all results and generate hits to evaluate similarities and differences among the predictions. Comparison of the results with the gold standard revealed that GIPSy produced the best results, covering ~91% of the composition and regions of the islands, followed by Alien Hunter (81%), IslandViewer (47.8%), Predict Bias (31%), GI Hunter (17%), and Zisland Explorer (16%). The tools with the best results in the analyzes of the set of organisms were the same ones that presented better performance in the tests with the gold standard. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6315130 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63151302019-01-10 Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools da Silva Filho, Antonio Camilo Raittz, Roberto Tadeu Guizelini, Dieval De Pierri, Camilla Reginatto Augusto, Diônata Willian dos Santos-Weiss, Izabella Castilhos Ribeiro Marchaukoski, Jeroniza Nunes Front Genet Genetics Tools for genomic island prediction use strategies for genomic comparison analysis and sequence composition analysis. The goal of comparative analysis is to identify unique regions in the genomes of related organisms, whereas sequence composition analysis evaluates and relates the composition of specific regions with other regions in the genome. The goal of this study was to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate extant genomic island predictors. We chose tools reported to produce significant results using sequence composition prediction, comparative genomics, and hybrid genomics methods. To maintain diversity, the tools were applied to eight complete genomes of organisms with distinct characteristics and belonging to different families. Escherichia coli CFT073 was used as a control and considered as the gold standard because its islands were previously curated in vitro. The results of predictions with the gold standard were manually curated, and the content and characteristics of each predicted island were analyzed. For other organisms, we created GenBank (GBK) files using Artemis software for each predicted island. We copied only the amino acid sequences from the coding sequence and constructed a multi-FASTA file for each predictor. We used BLASTp to compare all results and generate hits to evaluate similarities and differences among the predictions. Comparison of the results with the gold standard revealed that GIPSy produced the best results, covering ~91% of the composition and regions of the islands, followed by Alien Hunter (81%), IslandViewer (47.8%), Predict Bias (31%), GI Hunter (17%), and Zisland Explorer (16%). The tools with the best results in the analyzes of the set of organisms were the same ones that presented better performance in the tests with the gold standard. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-12-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6315130/ /pubmed/30631340 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00619 Text en Copyright © 2018 da Silva Filho, Raittz, Guizelini, De Pierri, Augusto, dos Santos-Weiss and Marchaukoski. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Genetics da Silva Filho, Antonio Camilo Raittz, Roberto Tadeu Guizelini, Dieval De Pierri, Camilla Reginatto Augusto, Diônata Willian dos Santos-Weiss, Izabella Castilhos Ribeiro Marchaukoski, Jeroniza Nunes Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title | Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title_full | Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title_fullStr | Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title_short | Comparative Analysis of Genomic Island Prediction Tools |
title_sort | comparative analysis of genomic island prediction tools |
topic | Genetics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6315130/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30631340 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00619 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dasilvafilhoantoniocamilo comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT raittzrobertotadeu comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT guizelinidieval comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT depierricamillareginatto comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT augustodionatawillian comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT dossantosweissizabellacastilhosribeiro comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools AT marchaukoskijeronizanunes comparativeanalysisofgenomicislandpredictiontools |