Non-homology-based prediction of gene functions in maize (Zea mays ssp. mays).

Authors

Xiuru Dai, Zheng Xu, Zhikai Liang, Xiaoyu Tu, Silin Zhong, James C Schnable, Pinghua Li

Published in

The plant genome. Volume 13. Issue 2. Pages e20015. Epub Apr 29, 2020.

Abstract

Advances in genome sequencing and annotation have eased the difficulty of identifying new gene sequences. Predicting the functions of these newly identified genes remains challenging. Genes descended from a common ancestral sequence are likely to have common functions. As a result, homology is widely used for gene function prediction. This means functional annotation errors also propagate from one species to another. Several approaches based on machine learning classification algorithms were evaluated for their ability to accurately predict gene function from non-homology gene features. Among the eight supervised classification algorithms evaluated, random-forest-based prediction consistently provided the most accurate gene function prediction. Non-homology-based functional annotation provides complementary strengths to homology-based annotation, with higher average performance in Biological Process GO terms, the domain where homology-based functional annotation performs the worst, and weaker performance in Molecular Function GO terms, the domain where the accuracy of homology-based functional annotation is highest. GO prediction models trained with homology-based annotations were able to successfully predict annotations from a manually curated "gold standard" GO annotation set. Non-homology-based functional annotation based on machine learning may ultimately prove useful both as a method to assign predicted functions to orphan genes which lack functionally characterized homologs, and to identify and correct functional annotation errors which were propagated through homology-based functional annotations.

PMID:
33016608
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 13 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.