Difference between revisions of "FND-Homology"

From "A B C"
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 19: Line 19:
  
  
{{DEV}}
+
{{LIVE}}
  
 
{{Vspace}}
 
{{Vspace}}
Line 29: Line 29:
 
<section begin=abstract />
 
<section begin=abstract />
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "abstract" -->
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "abstract" -->
...
+
Homology is the most important concept for bioinformatics, since shared ancestry allows many inferences about the structure and function of proteins. This unit introduces the concept and explores MBP1_<YFO> relationships.
 
<section end=abstract />
 
<section end=abstract />
  
Line 48: Line 48:
 
<!-- included from "ABC-unit_components.wtxt", section: "notes-prerequisites" -->
 
<!-- included from "ABC-unit_components.wtxt", section: "notes-prerequisites" -->
 
You need to complete the following units before beginning this one:
 
You need to complete the following units before beginning this one:
*[[BIN-Sequence]]
+
*[[BIN-Storing_data|BIN-Storing_data (Storing Data)]]
*[[BIN-SX-Concepts]]
+
*[[BIN-Sequence|BIN-Sequence (Sequence)]]
 +
*[[BIN-SX-Concepts|BIN-SX-Concepts (Concepts of Molecular Structure)]]
  
 
{{Vspace}}
 
{{Vspace}}
Line 56: Line 57:
 
=== Objectives ===
 
=== Objectives ===
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "objectives" -->
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "objectives" -->
...
+
This unit will ...
 +
* ... introduce the concept of homology, define orthologues and paralogues and discuss reasons for and consequences of gene conservation;
 +
* ... explore public database resources to find orthologues by BLAST and in pre-annotated databases.
  
 
{{Vspace}}
 
{{Vspace}}
Line 63: Line 66:
 
=== Outcomes ===
 
=== Outcomes ===
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "outcomes" -->
 
<!-- included from "../components/FND-Homology.components.wtxt", section: "outcomes" -->
...
+
After working through this unit you ...
 +
* ... define "homology", "orthologue" and "paralogue", and use the terms correctly, and with a precise understanding of their meaning and implications;
 +
* ... are familar with issues around the definition of homologous genes and domains;
 +
* ... know about sequence similarity and other measures that can identify related proteins and be able to use this to define your own exploratory strategies;
 +
* ... have identified the RBM for the ''saccharomyces cerevisiae'' Mbp1 gene in YFO and explored other databses that make pre-annotated relatedness information available.
  
 
{{Vspace}}
 
{{Vspace}}
Line 95: Line 102:
  
 
{{Task|1=
 
{{Task|1=
* Read the introductory notes on {{ABC-PDF|FND-Homology|concepts about "homology" of genes}}.
+
* Read the introductory notes on {{ABC-PDF|FND-Homology|the concept of homology}}.
 
}}
 
}}
  
  
===Selecting the YFO "Mbp1"===
+
===Considerations for the YFO "Mbp1"===
 +
 
 +
{{Vspace}}
 +
 
 +
;Consider!
 +
 
 +
In the [[BIN-Storing_data]] unit you have found the protein of YFO that is most similar to yeast Mbp1, in YFO. Consider if this protein is homologous to the yeast protein. For most of these questions, you will probably not know the answer right now, but we will find out more in later units.
 +
 
 +
* Are the sequences similar?
 +
:Obviously you have found the YFO sequence as a result of a BLAST search and you probably known that BLAST finds similar sequences in large databases. But it will usually always find ''something'', and that could be a chance similarity. '''Significant''' similarity would be very high, would extend over the whole length of the protein, could be restricted to individual domains. When would you say: similar enough?
 +
 
 +
* Do the proteins have similar structures?
 +
:If your protein happens to have had a part of its structure analyzed by X-ray crystallography, you could compare the structures. However, this is unlikely for the Mbp1 relatives - except for the ankyrin domains. These are ubiquitous protein-protein interaction motifs and won't tell us much more than that. It's unlikely that other (parts of) the YFO protein structure are known.
 +
 
 +
* What about patterns of conserved residues?
 +
:We need more proteins to consider that - and we need to '''align''' them.
 +
 
 +
* Are the proteins known to perform similar functions?
 +
:That might require function prediction. There might be an annotation in the FASTA header of the YFO protein - but it's likely to be made based on homology to the yeast protein. Could be experimental evidence though - check carefully, just in case.
 +
 
 +
All of these considerations lead to bioinformatics queries that we will pursue in later units.
  
 
{{Vspace}}
 
{{Vspace}}
  
{{task|1=
 
  
# Back at the [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/protein/NP_010227 Mbp1 protein page] follow the link to [http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PAGE=Proteins&PROGRAM=blastp&BLAST_PROGRAMS=blastp&QUERY=NP_010227.1&LINK_LOC=protein&PAGE_TYPE=BlastSearch Run BLAST...] under "Analyze this sequence".
+
==Defining orthologs==
# This allows you to perform a sequence similarity search. You need to set two parameters:
 
## As '''Database''', select '''Reference proteins (refseq_protein)''' from the drop down menu;
 
## In the '''Organism''' field, type the species you have selected as YFO and select the corresponding taxonomy ID.
 
# Click on '''Run BLAST''' to start the search. This should find a handful of genes, all of them in YFO. If you find none, or hundreds, or they are not all in the same species, you did something wrong. Ask on the mailing list and make sure to fix the problem.
 
# Look at the top "hit" in the '''Descriptions''' section. The rightmost column contains sequence IDs unter the '''Accession''' heading. The alignment and alignment score are shown in the '''Alignments''' section a bit further down the page. Look at the result.
 
# In the header information for each hit is a link to its database entry, right next to '''Sequence ID'''.  It says something like <code>ref&#124;NP_123456789.1</code> or <code>ref&#124;XP_123456789</code> ... follow that link.
 
# Note the RefSeq ID, and the search results %ID, E-value, whether one or more similar regions were found etc. in your Journal. We will refer to this sequence as "''YFO'' Mbp1" or similar in the future.
 
# Finally access the [http://www.uniprot.org/uploadlists/ UniProt ID mapping service] to retrieve the UniProt ID for the protein. Paste the RefSeq ID and choose '''RefSeq Protein''' as the '''From:''' option and '''UniProtKB''' as the '''To:''' option.
 
  
:<small>If the mapping works, the UniProt ID will be in the '''Entry:''' column of the table that is being returned. Click the link and have a look at the UniProt entry page while you're there.</small>
+
For functional inference between organisms, the key is to find orthologs.
  
<!-- What could go wrong? Sometimes the mapping does not work:
+
To be reasonably certain about orthology relationships, one needs to construct and analyze detailed evolutionary trees. This is computationally expensive and the results are not always unambiguous. But a number of different strategies are available that use approximations, or precomputed results to define orthologs. These are especially useful for large, cross genome surveys. They are less useful for detailed analysis of individual genes.
I don't know why the mapping for some sequences is not available.
 
If this happens, you can work around the problem as follows.
 
  
1. Load the RefSeq protein page
+
;Orthologs by RBM (Reciprocal Best Match)
2. View the protein as FASTA and copy the sequence.
+
:The RBM criterion is only an approximation to orthology, but computationally very tractable and usually correct. To find an RBM, first search for the best match of a gene in the target genome, then check whether that best match retrieves the original query when it used to serach in the source genome. You have already done the first step when you identified the best match of yeast Mbp1 in YFO. Now do the second step.
3. Open the UniProt BLAST page http://www.uniprot.org/blast/
 
  (Yes, UniProt runs its own BLAST version, and that searches UniProt databases, not Genbank)
 
4. Paste the sequence into the search form and run BLAST.
 
  
... if the sequence is in UniProt, you will get the top hit with 100% sequence identity. In your case it is:
+
Get the ID for the gene which you have identified and annotated as the best BLAST match for Mbp1 in YFO and confirm that this gene has Mbp1 as the most significant hit in the yeast proteome. <small>The results are unambiguous, but there may be residual doubt whether these two best-matching sequences are actually the most similar orthologs.</small>
  H1VQK3  ( http://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/H1VQK3 )
 
  
I.e. UniProt contains the sequence, but the mapping service does not know.
+
{{task|1=
-->
+
# Navigate to the BLAST homepage and access the protein BLAST page.
 +
# Copy the RefSeq identifier for MBP1_<YFO> from your journal into the search field (You can search directly with an NCBI identifier '''IF''' you want to search with the full-length sequence.)
 +
# Set the database to refseq;
 +
#  restrict the species to ''Saccharomyces cerevisiae''.
 +
# Run BLAST.
 +
# Keep the window open for the next task.
  
 +
The top hit should be yeast Mbp1 (NP_010227). Discuss on the list if it is not.
  
 +
If the top hit is NP_010227, you have confirmed the '''RBM''' or '''BBM''' criterion (Reciprocal Best Match or Bidirectional Best Hit, respectively).
  
 
}}
 
}}
  
{{Vspace}}
 
  
 +
;Orthology by annotation
 +
:The NCBI precomputes gropus of related genes and makes them available via the HomoloGene dtatabase from the RefSeq database entry for your protein.
  
 +
{{task|1=
 +
# Navigate to the RefSeq protein page for MBP1_<YFO>. (There should be a link from the query identifier in your BLAST result page).
 +
# Follow the '''Homologene''' link in the right-hand menu under '''Related information'''.
  
==Defining orthologs==
+
You should see a number of genes that are considered homologous other fungi, but there is no way to tell whether these are orthologues, and the links to proteins with shared domains shows you that there are several that share (non-specific) ankyrin domains, and only a few that also have the (highly specific) Kila-N (or APSES) domain.
 +
}}
  
To be reasonably certain about orthology relationships, we would need to construct and analyze detailed evolutionary trees. This is computationally expensive and the results are not always unambiguous either, as we will see in a later assignment. But a number of different strategies are available that use precomputed results to define orthologs. These are especially useful for large, cross genome surveys. They are less useful for detailed analysis of individual genes. Pay the sites a visit and try a search.
 
  
  
 
;Orthologs by eggNOG
 
;Orthologs by eggNOG
:The [http://eggnog.embl.de/ '''eggNOG'''] (evolutionary genealogy of genes: Non-supervised Orthologous Groups) database contains orthologous groups of genes at the EMBL. It seems to be continuously updtaed, the search functionality is reasonable and the results for yeast Mbp1 show many genes from several fungi. Importantly, there is only one gene annotated for each species. Alignments and trees are also available, as are database downloads for algorithmic analysis.
+
:The [http://eggnog.embl.de/ '''eggNOG'''] (evolutionary genealogy of genes: Non-supervised Orthologous Groups) database contains orthologous groups of genes at the EMBL. It seems to be continuously updated, and the search functionality is reasonable. Try the search with the MBP1_<YFO> refseq identifier. What I see are orthologs annotated in non-fungi but to the '''ankyrin domain''', which is a meaningless relationship. Alignments and trees are also available, as are database downloads for algorithmic analysis.
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
&nbsp;
 
&nbsp;
Line 159: Line 182:
  
 
;Orthologs at OrthoDB
 
;Orthologs at OrthoDB
:[http://www.orthodb.org/ '''OrthoDB'''] includes a large number of species, among them all of our protein-sequenced fungi. However the search function (by keyword) retrieves many paralogs together with the orthologs, for example, the yeast Soc2 and Phd1 proteins are found in the same orthologous group these two are clearly paralogs.
+
:[http://www.orthodb.org/ '''OrthoDB'''] includes a large number of species, among them all of our protein-sequenced fungi. However the search function (by keyword - try "Mbp1") retrieves many paralogs together with the orthologs, for example, the yeast Soc2 and Phd1 proteins are found in the same orthologous group these two are clearly paralogs and again results focus on ankyrin-domain containing proteins.
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
&nbsp;
 
&nbsp;
Line 171: Line 194:
  
 
;Orthologs at OMA
 
;Orthologs at OMA
[http://omabrowser.org/ '''OMA'''] (the Orthologous Matrix) maintained at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology contains a large number of orthologs from sequenced genomes. Searching with <code>MBP1_YEAST</code> (this is the Swissprot ID) as a "Group" search finds the correct gene in EREGO, KLULA, CANGL and SACCE. But searching with the sequence of the ''Ustilago maydis'' ortholog does not find the yeast protein, but the orthologs in YARLI, SCHPO, LACCBI, CRYNE and USTMA. Apparently the orthologous group has been split into several subgroups across the fungi. However as a whole the database is carefully constructed and available for download and API access; a large and useful resource.
+
[http://omabrowser.org/ '''OMA'''] (the Orthologous Matrix) maintained at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology contains a large number of orthologs from sequenced genomes. Searching with the refseq identifier of MBP1_<YFO> will probably retrieve hits that you can access via the "Orthologs" tab. As a whole this database is well constructed, the output is useful, and data is available for download and API access; this would be the resource of my first choice for pre-computed orthology queries.
 +
 
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="more..." data-collapsetext="less" style="width:800px">
 
&nbsp;
 
&nbsp;
Line 184: Line 208:
  
 
;Orthologs by syntenic gene order conservation
 
;Orthologs by syntenic gene order conservation
:We will revisit this when we explore the UCSC genome browser.
+
:OMA also provides synteny information, one hallmark of an orthologous relationship (Why?).
  
  
;Orthologs by RBM
 
:Defining it yourself. RBM (or: Reciprocal Best Match) is easy to compute and half of the work you have already done in [[BIO_Assignment_Week_3|Assignment 3]]. Get the ID for the gene which you have identified and annotated as the best BLAST match for Mbp1 in YFO and confirm that this gene has Mbp1 as the most significant hit in the yeast proteome. <small>The results are unambiguous, but there may be residual doubt whether these two best-matching sequences are actually the most similar orthologs.</small>
 
  
{{task|1=
 
# Navigate to the BLAST homepage.
 
# Paste the YFO RefSeq sequence identifier into the search field. (You don't have to search with sequences&ndash;you can search directly with an NCBI identifier '''IF''' you want to search with the full-length sequence.)
 
# Set the database to refseq, and restrict the species to ''Saccharomyces cerevisiae''.
 
# Run BLAST.
 
# Keep the window open for the next task.
 
 
The top hit should be yeast Mbp1 (NP_010227). E mail me your sequence identifiers if it is not.
 
If it is, you have confirmed the '''RBM''' or '''BBM''' criterion (Reciprocal Best Match or Bidirectional Best Hit, respectively).
 
 
<small>Technically, this is not perfectly true since you have searched with the APSES domain in one direction, with the full-length sequence in the other. For this task I wanted you to try the ''search-with-accession-number''. Therefore the procedural laxness, I hope it is permissible. In fact, performing the reverse search with the YFO APSES domain should actually be more stringent, i.e. if you find the right gene with the longer sequence, you are even more likely to find the right gene with the shorter one.</small>
 
}}
 
 
 
;Orthology by annotation
 
:The NCBI precomputes BLAST results and makes them available at the RefSeq database entry for your protein.
 
 
{{task|1=
 
# In your BLAST result page, click on the RefSeq link for your query to navigate to the RefSeq database entry for your protein.
 
# Follow the '''Blink''' link in the right-hand column under '''Related information'''.
 
# Restrict the view RefSeq under the "Display options" and to Fungi.
 
 
You should see a number of genes with low E-values and high coverage in other fungi - however this search is problematic since the full length gene across the database finds mostly Ankyrin domains.
 
}}
 
 
 
You will find that '''all''' of these approaches yield '''some''' of the orthologs. But none finds them all. The take home message is: precomputed results are good for large-scale survey-type investigations, where you can't humanly process the information by hand. But for more detailed questions, careful manual searches are still indsipensable.
 
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="Expand for crowdsourcing" data-collapsetext="Collapse">
 
;Orthology by crowdsourcing
 
:Luckily a crowd of willing hands has prepared the necessary sequences for you: in the section below you will find a link to the annotated and verified Mbp1 orthologs from last year's course  :-)
 
 
<div class="mw-collapsible-content">
 
We could call this annotation by many hands {{WP|Crowdsourcing|"crowdsourcing"}} - handing out small parcels of work to many workers, who would typically allocate only a small share of their time, but here the strength is in numbers and especially projects that organize via the Internet can tally up very impressive manpower, for free, or as {{WP|Microwork}}. These developments have some interest for bioinformatics: many of our more difficult tasks  can not be easily built into an algorithm, language related tasks such as text-mining, or pattern matching tasks come to mind. Allocating this to a large number of human contributors may be a viable alternative to computation. A marketplace where this kind of work is already a reality is {{WP|Amazon Mechanical Turk|Amazon's "Mechanical Turk" Marketplace}}: programmers&ndash;"requesters"&ndash; use an open interface to post tasks for payment, "providers" from all over the world can engage in these. Tasks may include matching of pictures, or evaluating the aesthetics of competing designs. A quirky example I came across recently was when information designer David McCandless had 200 "Mechanical Turks" draw a small picture of their soul for his collection.
 
 
The name {{WP|The Turk|"Mechanical Turk"}} by the way relates to a famous ruse, when a Hungarian inventor and adventurer toured the imperial courts of 18<sup>th</sup> century Europe with an automaton, dressed in turkish robes and turban, that played chess at the grandmaster level against opponents that included Napoleon Bonaparte and Benjamin Franklin. No small mechanical feat in any case, it was only in the 19<sup>th</sup> century that it was revealed that the computational power was actually provided by a concealed human.
 
 
Are you up for some "Turking"? Before the next quiz, edit [http://biochemistry.utoronto.ca/steipe/abc/students/index.php/BCH441_2014_Assignment_7_RBM '''the Mbp1 RBM page on the Student Wiki] and include the RBM for Mbp1, for a 10% bonus on the next quiz.
 
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
  
  

Revision as of 13:24, 30 September 2017

Abstract

Homology is the most important concept for bioinformatics, since shared ancestry allows many inferences about the structure and function of proteins. This unit introduces the concept and explores MBP1_<YFO> relationships.


 


This unit ...

Prerequisites

You need the following preparation before beginning this unit. If you are not familiar with this material from courses you took previously, you need to prepare yourself from other information sources:

  • Biomolecules: The molecules of life; nucleic acids and amino acids; the genetic code; protein folding; post-translational modifications and protein biochemistry; membrane proteins; biological function.
  • The Central Dogma: Regulation of transcription and translation; protein biosynthesis and degradation; quality control.
  • Evolution: Theory of evolution; variation, neutral drift and selection.

You need to complete the following units before beginning this one:


 


Objectives

This unit will ...

  • ... introduce the concept of homology, define orthologues and paralogues and discuss reasons for and consequences of gene conservation;
  • ... explore public database resources to find orthologues by BLAST and in pre-annotated databases.


 


Outcomes

After working through this unit you ...

  • ... define "homology", "orthologue" and "paralogue", and use the terms correctly, and with a precise understanding of their meaning and implications;
  • ... are familar with issues around the definition of homologous genes and domains;
  • ... know about sequence similarity and other measures that can identify related proteins and be able to use this to define your own exploratory strategies;
  • ... have identified the RBM for the saccharomyces cerevisiae Mbp1 gene in YFO and explored other databses that make pre-annotated relatedness information available.


 


Deliverables

  • Time management: Before you begin, estimate how long it will take you to complete this unit. Then, record in your course journal: the number of hours you estimated, the number of hours you worked on the unit, and the amount of time that passed between start and completion of this unit.
  • Journal: Document your progress in your Course Journal. Some tasks may ask you to include specific items in your journal. Don't overlook these.
  • Insights: If you find something particularly noteworthy about this unit, make a note in your insights! page.


 


Evaluation

Evaluation: NA

This unit is not evaluated for course marks.


 


Contents

Task:


Considerations for the YFO "Mbp1"

 
Consider!

In the BIN-Storing_data unit you have found the protein of YFO that is most similar to yeast Mbp1, in YFO. Consider if this protein is homologous to the yeast protein. For most of these questions, you will probably not know the answer right now, but we will find out more in later units.

  • Are the sequences similar?
Obviously you have found the YFO sequence as a result of a BLAST search and you probably known that BLAST finds similar sequences in large databases. But it will usually always find something, and that could be a chance similarity. Significant similarity would be very high, would extend over the whole length of the protein, could be restricted to individual domains. When would you say: similar enough?
  • Do the proteins have similar structures?
If your protein happens to have had a part of its structure analyzed by X-ray crystallography, you could compare the structures. However, this is unlikely for the Mbp1 relatives - except for the ankyrin domains. These are ubiquitous protein-protein interaction motifs and won't tell us much more than that. It's unlikely that other (parts of) the YFO protein structure are known.
  • What about patterns of conserved residues?
We need more proteins to consider that - and we need to align them.
  • Are the proteins known to perform similar functions?
That might require function prediction. There might be an annotation in the FASTA header of the YFO protein - but it's likely to be made based on homology to the yeast protein. Could be experimental evidence though - check carefully, just in case.

All of these considerations lead to bioinformatics queries that we will pursue in later units.


 


Defining orthologs

For functional inference between organisms, the key is to find orthologs.

To be reasonably certain about orthology relationships, one needs to construct and analyze detailed evolutionary trees. This is computationally expensive and the results are not always unambiguous. But a number of different strategies are available that use approximations, or precomputed results to define orthologs. These are especially useful for large, cross genome surveys. They are less useful for detailed analysis of individual genes.

Orthologs by RBM (Reciprocal Best Match)
The RBM criterion is only an approximation to orthology, but computationally very tractable and usually correct. To find an RBM, first search for the best match of a gene in the target genome, then check whether that best match retrieves the original query when it used to serach in the source genome. You have already done the first step when you identified the best match of yeast Mbp1 in YFO. Now do the second step.

Get the ID for the gene which you have identified and annotated as the best BLAST match for Mbp1 in YFO and confirm that this gene has Mbp1 as the most significant hit in the yeast proteome. The results are unambiguous, but there may be residual doubt whether these two best-matching sequences are actually the most similar orthologs.

Task:

  1. Navigate to the BLAST homepage and access the protein BLAST page.
  2. Copy the RefSeq identifier for MBP1_<YFO> from your journal into the search field (You can search directly with an NCBI identifier IF you want to search with the full-length sequence.)
  3. Set the database to refseq;
  4. restrict the species to Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
  5. Run BLAST.
  6. Keep the window open for the next task.

The top hit should be yeast Mbp1 (NP_010227). Discuss on the list if it is not.

If the top hit is NP_010227, you have confirmed the RBM or BBM criterion (Reciprocal Best Match or Bidirectional Best Hit, respectively).


Orthology by annotation
The NCBI precomputes gropus of related genes and makes them available via the HomoloGene dtatabase from the RefSeq database entry for your protein.

Task:

  1. Navigate to the RefSeq protein page for MBP1_<YFO>. (There should be a link from the query identifier in your BLAST result page).
  2. Follow the Homologene link in the right-hand menu under Related information.

You should see a number of genes that are considered homologous other fungi, but there is no way to tell whether these are orthologues, and the links to proteins with shared domains shows you that there are several that share (non-specific) ankyrin domains, and only a few that also have the (highly specific) Kila-N (or APSES) domain.


Orthologs by eggNOG
The eggNOG (evolutionary genealogy of genes: Non-supervised Orthologous Groups) database contains orthologous groups of genes at the EMBL. It seems to be continuously updated, and the search functionality is reasonable. Try the search with the MBP1_<YFO> refseq identifier. What I see are orthologs annotated in non-fungi but to the ankyrin domain, which is a meaningless relationship. Alignments and trees are also available, as are database downloads for algorithmic analysis.

 

Powell et al. (2014) eggNOG v4.0: nested orthology inference across 3686 organisms. Nucleic Acids Res 42:D231-9. (pmid: 24297252)

PubMed ] [ DOI ] With the increasing availability of various 'omics data, high-quality orthology assignment is crucial for evolutionary and functional genomics studies. We here present the fourth version of the eggNOG database (available at http://eggnog.embl.de) that derives nonsupervised orthologous groups (NOGs) from complete genomes, and then applies a comprehensive characterization and analysis pipeline to the resulting gene families. Compared with the previous version, we have more than tripled the underlying species set to cover 3686 organisms, keeping track with genome project completions while prioritizing the inclusion of high-quality genomes to minimize error propagation from incomplete proteome sets. Major technological advances include (i) a robust and scalable procedure for the identification and inclusion of high-quality genomes, (ii) provision of orthologous groups for 107 different taxonomic levels compared with 41 in eggNOGv3, (iii) identification and annotation of particularly closely related orthologous groups, facilitating analysis of related gene families, (iv) improvements of the clustering and functional annotation approach, (v) adoption of a revised tree building procedure based on the multiple alignments generated during the process and (vi) implementation of quality control procedures throughout the entire pipeline. As in previous versions, eggNOGv4 provides multiple sequence alignments and maximum-likelihood trees, as well as broad functional annotation. Users can access the complete database of orthologous groups via a web interface, as well as through bulk download.


Orthologs at OrthoDB
OrthoDB includes a large number of species, among them all of our protein-sequenced fungi. However the search function (by keyword - try "Mbp1") retrieves many paralogs together with the orthologs, for example, the yeast Soc2 and Phd1 proteins are found in the same orthologous group these two are clearly paralogs and again results focus on ankyrin-domain containing proteins.

 

Waterhouse et al. (2013) OrthoDB: a hierarchical catalog of animal, fungal and bacterial orthologs. Nucleic Acids Res 41:D358-65. (pmid: 23180791)

PubMed ] [ DOI ] The concept of orthology provides a foundation for formulating hypotheses on gene and genome evolution, and thus forms the cornerstone of comparative genomics, phylogenomics and metagenomics. We present the update of OrthoDB-the hierarchical catalog of orthologs (http://www.orthodb.org). From its conception, OrthoDB promoted delineation of orthologs at varying resolution by explicitly referring to the hierarchy of species radiations, now also adopted by other resources. The current release provides comprehensive coverage of animals and fungi representing 252 eukaryotic species, and is now extended to prokaryotes with the inclusion of 1115 bacteria. Functional annotations of orthologous groups are provided through mapping to InterPro, GO, OMIM and model organism phenotypes, with cross-references to major resources including UniProt, NCBI and FlyBase. Uniquely, OrthoDB provides computed evolutionary traits of orthologs, such as gene duplicability and loss profiles, divergence rates, sibling groups, and now extended with exon-intron architectures, syntenic orthologs and parent-child trees. The interactive web interface allows navigation along the species phylogenies, complex queries with various identifiers, annotation keywords and phrases, as well as with gene copy-number profiles and sequence homology searches. With the explosive growth of available data, OrthoDB also provides mapping of newly sequenced genomes and transcriptomes to the current orthologous groups.


Orthologs at OMA

OMA (the Orthologous Matrix) maintained at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology contains a large number of orthologs from sequenced genomes. Searching with the refseq identifier of MBP1_<YFO> will probably retrieve hits that you can access via the "Orthologs" tab. As a whole this database is well constructed, the output is useful, and data is available for download and API access; this would be the resource of my first choice for pre-computed orthology queries.

 

Altenhoff et al. (2011) OMA 2011: orthology inference among 1000 complete genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 39:D289-94. (pmid: 21113020)

PubMed ] [ DOI ] OMA (Orthologous MAtrix) is a database that identifies orthologs among publicly available, complete genomes. Initiated in 2004, the project is at its 11th release. It now includes 1000 genomes, making it one of the largest resources of its kind. Here, we describe recent developments in terms of species covered; the algorithmic pipeline--in particular regarding the treatment of alternative splicing, and new features of the web (OMA Browser) and programming interface (SOAP API). In the second part, we review the various representations provided by OMA and their typical applications. The database is publicly accessible at http://omabrowser.org.

... see also the related articles, much innovative and carefully done work on automated orthologue definition by the Dessimoz group.


Orthologs by syntenic gene order conservation
OMA also provides synteny information, one hallmark of an orthologous relationship (Why?).





 


Further reading, links and resources

 


Notes


 


Self-evaluation

 



 




 

If in doubt, ask! If anything about this learning unit is not clear to you, do not proceed blindly but ask for clarification. Post your question on the course mailing list: others are likely to have similar problems. Or send an email to your instructor.



 

About ...
 
Author:

Boris Steipe <boris.steipe@utoronto.ca>

Created:

2017-08-05

Modified:

2017-08-05

Version:

0.1

Version history:

  • 0.1 First stub

CreativeCommonsBy.png This copyrighted material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Follow the link to learn more.