Identifying essential genes across eukaryotes by machine learning
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics, ISSN: 2631-9268, Vol: 3, Issue: 4, Page: lqab110
2021
- 12Citations
- 26Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations12
- Citation Indexes12
- 12
- CrossRef5
- Captures26
- Readers26
- 26
- Mentions1
- Blog Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent Blog
CLEARER – a machine learning approach for predicting essential genes across eukaryotes
Identifying essential genes on a genome scale is resource intensive and has been performed for only a few eukaryotes. For less studied organisms essentiality might be predicted by gene homology. However, this approach cannot be applied to non-conserved genes. Additionally, divergent essentiality information is obtained from studying single cells or whole, multi-cellular organisms, and particularly
Article Description
Identifying essential genes on a genome scale is resource intensive and has been performed for only a few eukaryotes. For less studied organisms essentiality might be predicted by gene homology. However, this approach cannot be applied to non-conserved genes. Additionally, divergent essentiality information is obtained from studying single cells or whole, multi-cellular organisms, and particularly when derived from human cell line screens and human population studies. We employed machine learning across six model eukaryotes and 60 381 genes, using 41 635 features derived from the sequence, gene function information and network topology. Within a leave-one-organism-out cross-validation, the classifiers showed high generalizability with an average accuracy close to 80% in the left-out species. As a case study, we applied the method to Tribolium castaneum and Bombyx mori and validated predictions experimentally yielding similar performances. Finally, using the classifier based on the studied model organisms enabled linking the essentiality information of human cell line screens and population studies.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85123225301&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqab110; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34859210; https://academic.oup.com/nargab/article/doi/10.1093/nargab/lqab110/6446500; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqab110; https://academic.oup.com/nargab/article/3/4/lqab110/6446500
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know