MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1736236789 · doi:10.1002/pmic.201500043

The path of no return—Truncated protein N‐termini and current ignorance of their genesis

2015· article· en· W1736236789 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolaus Fortelny, Paul Pavlidis, Christopher M. Overall

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsAnnotationProteomeBiologyComputational biologyHuman proteome projectProtein functionRNA splicingAlternative splicingCleavage (geology)ProteomicsGeneticsBioinformaticsGeneMessenger RNARNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Almost all regulatory processes in biology ultimately lead to or originate from modifications of protein function. However, it is unclear to which extent each mechanism of regulation actually affects proteins and thus phenotypes. We assessed the extent of N-terminal protein truncation in a global analysis of N-terminomics data and find that most proteins have N-terminally truncated proteoforms. Because N-terminomics analyses do not identify the process generating the identified N-termini, we compared identified termini to the three N-termini generating events: protein cleavage, alternative translation, and alternative splicing. Of these, we sought to identify the most likely cause of N-terminal protein truncations in the human proteome. We found that protease cleavage and alternative protein translation are the likely cause for most shortened proteoforms. However, the vast majority (about 90%) of N-termini remain unexplained by any of these processes identified to date, so revealing large gaps in our knowledge of protein termini and their genesis. Further analysis and annotation of terminomics data is required, to which end we have created the TopFIND database, a major systematic annotation effort for protein termini. We outline the new features in version 3.0 of the updated database and the new bioinformatics tools available and encourage submission of generated data to fill current knowledge gaps.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207