Get ready to GO! A biologist's guide to the Gene Ontology

The Gene Ontology (GO) project provides a controlled vocabulary to facilitate high-quality functional gene annotation for all species. Genes in biological databases are linked to GO terms, allowing biologists to ask questions about gene function in a manner independent of species. This tutorial provides an introduction for biologists to the GO resources and covers three of the most common methods of querying GO: by individual gene, by gene function and by using a list of genes. [For the sake of brevity, the term 'gene' is used throughout this paper to refer to genes and their products (proteins and RNAs). GO annotations are always based on the characteristics of gene products, even though it may be the gene that is cited in the annotation.].     

Phylogenetic-based propagation of functional annotations within the Gene Ontology consortium

The goal of the Gene Ontology (GO) project is to provide a uniform way to describe the functions of gene products from organisms across all kingdoms of life and thereby enable analysis of genomic data. Protein annotations are either based on experiments or predicted from protein sequences. Since most sequences have not been experimentally characterized, most available annotations need to be based on predictions. To make as accurate inferences as possible, the GO Consortium's Reference Genome Project is using an explicit evolutionary framework to infer annotations of proteins from a broad set of genomes from experimental annotations in a semi-automated manner. Most components in the pipeline, such as selection of sequences, building multiple sequence alignments and phylogenetic trees, retrieving experimental annotations and depositing inferred annotations, are fully automated. However, the most crucial step in our pipeline relies on software-assisted curation by an expert biologist. This curation tool, Phylogenetic Annotation and INference Tool (PAINT) helps curators to infer annotations among members of a protein family. PAINT allows curators to make precise assertions as to when functions were gained and lost during evolution and record the evidence (e.g. experimentally supported GO annotations and phylogenetic information including orthology) for those assertions. In this article, we describe how we use PAINT to infer protein function in a phylogenetic context with emphasis on its strengths, limitations and guidelines. We also discuss specific examples showing how PAINT annotations compare with those generated by other highly used homology-based methods.     

Ontology annotation: mapping genomic regions to biological function

With numerous whole genomes now in hand, and experimental data about genes and biological pathways on the increase, a systems approach to biological research is becoming essential. Ontologies provide a formal representation of knowledge that is amenable to computational as well as human analysis, an obvious underpinning of systems biology. Mapping function to gene products in the genome consists of two, somewhat intertwined enterprises: ontology building and ontology annotation. Ontology building is the formal representation of a domain of knowledge; ontology annotation is association of specific genomic regions (which we refer to simply as 'genes', including genes and their regulatory elements and products such as proteins and functional RNAs) to parts of the ontology. We consider two complementary representations of gene function: the Gene Ontology (GO) and pathway ontologies. GO represents function from the gene's eye view, in relation to a large and growing context of biological knowledge at all levels. Pathway ontologies represent function from the point of view of biochemical reactions and interactions, which are ordered into networks and causal cascades. The more mature GO provides an example of ontology annotation: how conclusions from the scientific literature and from evolutionary relationships are converted into formal statements about gene function. Annotations are made using a variety of different types of evidence, which can be used to estimate the relative reliability of different annotations.     

Functional modelling of an equine bronchoalveolar lavage fluid proteome provides experimental confirmation and functional annotation of equine genome sequences

The equine genome sequence enables the use of high-throughput genomic technologies in equine research, but accurate identification of expressed gene products and interpreting their biological relevance require additional structural and functional genome annotation. Here, we employ the equine genome sequence to identify predicted and known proteins using proteomics and model these proteins into biological pathways, identifying 582 proteins in normal cell-free equine bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF). We improved structural and functional annotation by directly confirming the in vivo expression of 558 (96%) proteins, which were computationally predicted previously, and adding Gene Ontology (GO) annotations for 174 proteins, 108 of which lacked functional annotation. Bronchoalveolar lavage is commonly used to investigate equine respiratory disease, leading us to model the associated proteome and its biological functions. Modelling of protein functions using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis identified carbohydrate metabolism, cell-to-cell signalling, cellular function, inflammatory response, organ morphology, lipid metabolism and cellular movement as key biological processes in normal equine BALF. Comparative modelling of protein functions in normal cell-free bronchoalveolar lavage proteomes from horse, human, and mouse, performed by grouping GO terms sharing common ancestor terms, confirms conservation of functions across species. Ninety-one of 92 human GO categories and 105 of 109 mouse GO categories were conserved in the horse. Our approach confirms the utility of the equine genome sequence to characterize protein networks without antibodies or mRNA quantification, highlights the need for continued structural and functional annotation of the equine genome and provides a framework for equine researchers to aid in the annotation effort.     

Proteogenomics: needs and roles to be filled by proteomics in genome annotation

While genome sequencing efforts reveal the basic building blocksof life, a genome sequence alone is insufficient for elucidatingbiological function. Genome annotation—the process ofidentifying genes and assigning function to each gene in a genomesequence—provides the means to elucidate biological functionfrom sequence. Current state-of-the-art high-throughput genomeannotation uses a combination of comparative (sequence similaritydata) and non-comparative (ab initio gene prediction algorithms)methods to identify protein-coding genes in genome sequences.Because approaches used to validate the presence of predictedprotein-coding genes are typically based on expressed RNA sequences,they cannot independently and unequivocally determine whethera predicted protein-coding gene is translated into a protein.With the ability to directly measure peptides arising from expressedproteins, high-throughput liquid chromatography-tandem massspectrometry-based proteomics approaches can be used to verifycoding regions of a genomic sequence. Here, we highlight severalways in which high-throughput tandem mass spectrometry-basedproteomics can improve the quality of genome annotations andsuggest that it could be efficiently applied during the genecalling process so that the improvements are propagated throughthe subsequent functional annotation process.      

GOing from functional genomics to biological significance

The chicken genome is sequenced and this, together with microarray and other functional genomics technologies, makes post-genomic research possible in the chicken. At this time, however, such research is hindered by a lack of genomic structural and functional annotations. Bio-ontologies have been developed for different annotation requirements, as well as to facilitate data sharing and computational analysis, but these are not yet optimally utilized in the chicken. Here we discuss genomic annotation and bio-ontologies. We focus specifically on the Gene Ontology (GO), chicken GO annotations and how these can facilitate functional genomics in the chicken. The GO is the most developed and widely used bio-ontology. It is the de facto standard for functional annotation. Despite its critical importance in analyzing microarray and other functional genomics data, relatively few chicken gene products have any GO annotation. When these are available, the average quality of chicken gene products annotations (defined using evidence code weight and annotation depth) is much less than in mouse. Moreover, tools allowing chicken researchers to easily and rapidly use the GO are either lacking or hard to use. To address all of these problems we developed ChickGO and AgBase. Chicken GO annotations are provided by complementary work at MSU-AgBase and EBI-GOA. The GO tools pipeline at AgBase uses GO to derive functional and biological significance from microarray and other functional genomics data. Not only will improved genomic annotation and tools to use these annotations benefit the chicken research community but they will also facilitate research in other avian species and comparative genomics.     

An application of MeSH enrichment analysis in livestock

An integral part of functional genomics studies is to assess the enrichment of specific biological terms in lists of genes found to be playing an important role in biological phenomena. Contrasting the observed frequency of annotated terms with those of the background is at the core of overrepresentation analysis (ORA). Gene Ontology (GO) is a means to consistently classify and annotate gene products and has become a mainstay in ORA. Alternatively, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) offers a comprehensive life science vocabulary including additional categories that are not covered by GO. Although MeSH is applied predominantly in human and model organism research, its full potential in livestock genetics is yet to be explored. In this study, MeSH ORA was evaluated to discern biological properties of identified genes and contrast them with the results obtained from GO enrichment analysis. Three published datasets were employed for this purpose, representing a gene expression study in dairy cattle, the use of SNPs for genome‐wide prediction in swine and the identification of genomic regions targeted by selection in horses. We found that several overrepresented MeSH annotations linked to these gene sets share similar concepts with those of GO terms. Moreover, MeSH yielded unique annotations, which are not directly provided by GO terms, suggesting that MeSH has the potential to refine and enrich the representation of biological knowledge. We demonstrated that MeSH can be regarded as another choice of annotation to draw biological inferences from genes identified via experimental analyses. When used in combination with GO terms, our results indicate that MeSH can enhance our functional interpretations for specific biological conditions or the genetic basis of complex traits in livestock species.     

On the Use of Gene Ontology Annotations to Assess Functional Similarity among Orthologs and Paralogs: A Short Report

A recent paper (Nehrt et al., PLoS Comput. Biol. 7:e1002073, 2011) has proposed a metric for the "functional similarity" between two genes that uses only the Gene Ontology (GO) annotations directly derived from published experimental results. Applying this metric, the authors concluded that paralogous genes within the mouse genome or the human genome are more functionally similar on average than orthologous genes between these genomes, an unexpected result with broad implications if true. We suggest, based on both theoretical and empirical considerations, that this proposed metric should not be interpreted as a functional similarity, and therefore cannot be used to support any conclusions about the "ortholog conjecture" (or, more properly, the "ortholog functional conservation hypothesis"). First, we reexamine the case studies presented by Nehrt et al. as examples of orthologs with divergent functions, and come to a very different conclusion: they actually exemplify how GO annotations for orthologous genes provide complementary information about conserved biological functions. We then show that there is a global ascertainment bias in the experiment-based GO annotations for human and mouse genes: particular types of experiments tend to be performed in different model organisms. We conclude that the reported statistical differences in annotations between pairs of orthologous genes do not reflect differences in biological function, but rather complementarity in experimental approaches. Our results underscore two general considerations for researchers proposing novel types of analysis based on the GO: 1) that GO annotations are often incomplete, potentially in a biased manner, and subject to an "open world assumption" (absence of an annotation does not imply absence of a function), and 2) that conclusions drawn from a novel, large-scale GO analysis should whenever possible be supported by careful, in-depth examination of examples, to help ensure the conclusions have a justifiable biological basis.     

IntelliGO: a new vector-based semantic similarity measure including annotation origin

Background  

The Gene Ontology (GO) is a well known controlled vocabulary describing the biological process, molecular function and cellular component aspects of gene annotation. It has become a widely used knowledge source in bioinformatics for annotating genes and measuring their semantic similarity. These measures generally involve the GO graph structure, the information content of GO aspects, or a combination of both. However, only a few of the semantic similarity measures described so far can handle GO annotations differently according to their origin (i.e. their evidence codes).     

Towards multidimensional genome annotation

Our information about the gene content of organisms continues to grow as more genomes are sequenced and gene products are characterized. Sequence-based annotation efforts have led to a list of cellular components, which can be thought of as a one-dimensional annotation. With growing information about component interactions, facilitated by the advancement of various high-throughput technologies, systemic, or two-dimensional, annotations can be generated. Knowledge about the physical arrangement of chromosomes will lead to a three-dimensional spatial annotation of the genome and a fourth dimension of annotation will arise from the study of changes in genome sequences that occur during adaptive evolution. Here we discuss all four levels of genome annotation, with specific emphasis on two-dimensional annotation methods.     

面向大规模人群的基因组注释系统

基因组注释是识别出基因组序列中功能组件的过程,其可以直接对序列赋予生物学意义,由此方便研究者探究和分析基因组功能.基因组注释可以帮助研究从三个层次上理解基因组,一种是在核苷酸水平的注释,主要确定DNA序列中基因、RNA、重复序列等组件的物理位置,包括转录起始,翻译起始,外显子边界等具体位置信息.同时可以注释得到变异在不...     

Evaluation of Three Automated Genome Annotations for Halorhabdus utahensis

Genome annotations are accumulating rapidly and depend heavily on automated annotation systems. Many genome centers offer annotation systems but no one has compared their output in a systematic way to determine accuracy and inherent errors. Errors in the annotations are routinely deposited in databases such as NCBI and used to validate subsequent annotation errors. We submitted the genome sequence of halophilic archaeon Halorhabdus utahensis to be analyzed by three genome annotation services. We have examined the output from each service in a variety of ways in order to compare the methodology and effectiveness of the annotations, as well as to explore the genes, pathways, and physiology of the previously unannotated genome. The annotation services differ considerably in gene calls, features, and ease of use. We had to manually identify the origin of replication and the species-specific consensus ribosome-binding site. Additionally, we conducted laboratory experiments to test H. utahensis growth and enzyme activity. Current annotation practices need to improve in order to more accurately reflect a genome''s biological potential. We make specific recommendations that could improve the quality of microbial annotation projects.     

Integrating 'omic' information: a bridge between genomics and systems biology

The availability of genome sequences for several organisms, including humans, and the resulting first-approximation lists of genes, have allowed a transition from molecular biology to 'modular biology'. In modular biology, biological processes of interest, or modules, are studied as complex systems of functionally interacting macromolecules. Functional genomic and proteomic ('omic') approaches can be helpful to accelerate the identification of the genes and gene products involved in particular modules, and to describe the functional relationships between them. However, the data emerging from individual omic approaches should be viewed with caution because of the occurrence of false-negative and false-positive results and because single annotations are not sufficient for an understanding of gene function. To increase the reliability of gene function annotation, multiple independent datasets need to be integrated. Here, we review the recent development of strategies for such integration and we argue that these will be important for a systems approach to modular biology.     

A new measure for functional similarity of gene products based on Gene Ontology

Background  

Gene Ontology (GO) is a standard vocabulary of functional terms and allows for coherent annotation of gene products. These annotations provide a basis for new methods that compare gene products regarding their molecular function and biological role.     

The what, where, how and why of gene ontology--a primer for bioinformaticians

With high-throughput technologies providing vast amounts of data, it has become more important to provide systematic, quality annotations. The Gene Ontology (GO) project is the largest resource for cataloguing gene function. Nonetheless, its use is not yet ubiquitous and is still fraught with pitfalls. In this review, we provide a short primer to the GO for bioinformaticians. We summarize important aspects of the structure of the ontology, describe sources and types of functional annotations, survey measures of GO annotation similarity, review typical uses of GO and discuss other important considerations pertaining to the use of GO in bioinformatics applications.     

一种新的基因注释语义相似度计算方法

基因本体(GO)数据库为基因提供了统一的注释,有效地解决了不同数据库描述相同基因的不一致问题。但是,根据基因注释如何比较基因的功能相似性,这个问题仍然没有得到有效解决。本文提出一种新的基因注释语义相似度计算方法,这种方法在本质上是基于基因的生物学特性,其特点在于结点的语义相似度与结点所在集合无关,只与结点在GO图的位置有关,语义相似度可被重复利用。它既考虑了基因所映射的GO结点深度,又考虑了两GO结点之间所有路径对结点语义相似度的影响。文中以酵母菌的异亮氨酸降解代谢通路和谷氨酸合成代谢通路为实验,实验结果表明这种算法能准确地计算基因注释语义相似度。     

Genome assembly has a major impact on gene content: a comparison of annotation in two Bos taurus assemblies

Gene and SNP annotation are among the first and most important steps in analyzing a genome. As the number of sequenced genomes continues to grow, a key question is: how does the quality of the assembled sequence affect the annotations? We compared the gene and SNP annotations for two different Bos taurus genome assemblies built from the same data but with significant improvements in the later assembly. The same annotation software was used for annotating both sequences. While some annotation differences are expected even between high-quality assemblies such as these, we found that a staggering 40% of the genes (>9,500) varied significantly between assemblies, due in part to the availability of new gene evidence but primarily to genome mis-assembly events and local sequence variations. For instance, although the later assembly is generally superior, 660 protein coding genes in the earlier assembly are entirely missing from the later genome''s annotation, and approximately 3,600 (15%) of the genes have complex structural differences between the two assemblies. In addition, 12–20% of the predicted proteins in both assemblies have relatively large sequence differences when compared to their RefSeq models, and 6–15% of bovine dbSNP records are unrecoverable in the two assemblies. Our findings highlight the consequences of genome assembly quality on gene and SNP annotation and argue for continued improvements in any draft genome sequence. We also found that tracking a gene between different assemblies of the same genome is surprisingly difficult, due to the numerous changes, both small and large, that occur in some genes. As a side benefit, our analyses helped us identify many specific loci for improvement in the Bos taurus genome assembly.