Mitochondrial genome annotation with MFannot: a critical analysis of gene identification and gene model prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compared to nuclear genomes, mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes) are small and usually code for only a few dozen genes. Still, identifying genes and their structure can be challenging and time-consuming. Even automated tools for mitochondrial genome annotation often require manual analysis and curation by skilled experts. The most difficult steps are (i) the structural modelling of intron-containing genes; (ii) the identification and delineation of Group I and II introns; and (iii) the identification of moderately conserved, non-coding RNA (ncRNA) genes specifying 5S rRNAs, tmRNAs and RNase P RNAs. Additional challenges arise through genetic code evolution which can redefine the translational identity of both start and stop codons, thus obscuring protein-coding genes. Further, RNA editing can render gene identification difficult, if not impossible, without additional RNA sequence data. Current automated mito- and plastid-genome annotators are limited as they are typically tailored to specific eukaryotic groups. The MFannot annotator we developed is unique in its applicability to a broad taxonomic scope, its accuracy in gene model inference, and its capabilities in intron identification and classification. The pipeline leverages curated profile Hidden Markov Models (HMMs), covariance (CMs) and ERPIN models to better capture evolutionarily conserved signatures in the primary sequence (HMMs and CMs) as well as secondary structure (CMs and ERPIN). Here we formally describe MFannot, which has been available as a web-accessible service (https://megasun.bch.umontreal.ca/apps/mfannot/) to the research community for nearly 16 years. Further, we report its performance on particularly intron-rich mitogenomes and describe ongoing and future developments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".