Back

Exon Nomenclature and Classification of Transcripts (ENACT): Systematic framework to annotate exon attributes

Verma, P.; Thakur, D.; Pandit, S. B.

2024-06-09 bioinformatics
10.1101/2024.06.07.597685 bioRxiv
Show abstract

AbstractO_ST_ABSMotivationC_ST_ABSIsoform diversity is known to enhance a genes functional repertoire. Despite studies on transcriptome diversifying processes (Alternate splicing/transcription), their extent and correlated impact on proteome diversity remains rudimentarily understood. ResultsThe current study presents an innovative framework, "Exon Nomenclature and Annotation of Transcripts," that centralizes exonic loci while integrating protein sequence per entity with tracking and assessing splice site variability. The resulting annotation from framework enables exon features to be tractable, facilitating a systematic analysis of isoform diversity. Our findings and case studies unveil systemic exon inclusions roles in regulating diversity in CDS region. Availability and implementationAll data generated during this study are publicly available at www.iscbglab.in/enactdb/. Associated algorithmic procedures have been described in the methods section. Supplementary informationPDF file enclosing supplementary data attached.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.6%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 2%
9.4%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Frontiers in Genetics
○ 230 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.3%
Similar papers in this journal
4
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 1%
7.0%
Similar papers in this journal
5
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
6.5%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 4%
6.5%
7
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.3%
9
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.7%
10
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.2%
11
Genomics
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.1%
12
Journal of Molecular Biology
○ 232 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
13
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
14
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.4%
15
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
16
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.3%
17
Human Mutation
○ 34 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
18
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 66%
1.1%
19
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
188 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
21
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
22
BioData Mining
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
23
Database
◐ 61 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
24
Genome Research
● 468 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
25
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 43%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.