Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Xiaoqiong Wei

dblp:277/0102 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
0000-0001-7576-4820ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein function prediction
gene ontology annotation
0.412020
Detecting Gene Ontology misannotations using taxon-specific rate ratio comparisons · Bioinform. 2020
Bioinformatics and computational biology
protein function prediction
0.412020
Detecting Gene Ontology misannotations using taxon-specific rate ratio comparisons · Bioinform. 2020
Bioinformatics and computational biology
comparative genomics
0.112020
Detecting Gene Ontology misannotations using taxon-specific rate ratio comparisons · Bioinform. 2020
Bioinformatics and computational biology › metagenomics
taxonomic analysis
0.112020
Detecting Gene Ontology misannotations using taxon-specific rate ratio comparisons · Bioinform. 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

statistical hypothesis testing · 0.4rate ratio comparison · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Detecting Gene Ontology misannotations using taxon-specific rate ratio comparisons
abstract
MOTIVATION: Many protein function databases are built on automated or semi-automated curations and can contain various annotation errors. The correction of such misannotations is critical to improving the accuracy and reliability of the databases. RESULTS: We proposed a new approach to detect potentially incorrect Gene Ontology (GO) annotations by comparing the ratio of annotation rates (RAR) for the same GO term across different taxonomic groups, where those with a relatively low RAR usually correspond to incorrect annotations. As an illustration, we applied the approach to 20 commonly studied species in two recent UniProt-GOA releases and identified 250 potential misannotations in the 2018-11-6 release, where only 25% of them were corrected in the 2019-6-3 release. Importantly, 56% of the misannotations are 'Inferred from Biological aspect of Ancestor (IBA)' which is in contradiction with previous observations that attributed misannotations mainly to 'Inferred from Sequence or structural Similarity (ISS)', probably reflecting an error source shift due to the new developments of function annotation databases. The results demonstrated a simple but efficient misannotation detection approach that is useful for large-scale comparative protein function studies. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/RAR. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Xiaoqiong Wei, Lydia Freddolino, Yang Zhang 0040, Zhiyong Lu
Bioinform.1