↓ Skip to main content

Sequence-based information-theoretic features for gene essentiality prediction

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sequence-based information-theoretic features for gene essentiality prediction
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1884-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dawit Nigatu, Patrick Sobetzko, Malik Yousef, Werner Henkel

Abstract

Identification of essential genes is not only useful for our understanding of the minimal gene set required for cellular life but also aids the identification of novel drug targets in pathogens. In this work, we present a simple and effective gene essentiality prediction method using information-theoretic features that are derived exclusively from the gene sequences. We developed a Random Forest classifier and performed an extensive model performance evaluation among and within 15 selected bacteria. In intra-organism predictions, where training and testing sets are taken from the same organism, AUC (Area Under the Curve) scores ranging from 0.73 to 0.90, 0.84 on average, were obtained. Cross-organism predictions using 5-fold cross-validation, pairwise, leave-one-species-out, leave-one-taxon-out, and cross-taxon yielded average AUC scores of 0.88, 0.75, 0.80, 0.82, and 0.78, respectively. To further show the applicability of our method in other domains of life, we predicted the essential genes of the yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe and obtained a similar accuracy (AUC 0.84). The proposed method enables a simple and reliable identification of essential genes without searching in databases for orthologs and demanding further experimental data such as network topology and gene-expression.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 27%
Student > Master 6 16%
Researcher 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Other 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 13 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,919,786
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#5,967
of 7,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,020
of 331,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#97
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,173 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.