* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Gene Finding
Epigenetics in learning and memory wikipedia , lookup
Genomic library wikipedia , lookup
RNA interference wikipedia , lookup
No-SCAR (Scarless Cas9 Assisted Recombineering) Genome Editing wikipedia , lookup
Oncogenomics wikipedia , lookup
Polycomb Group Proteins and Cancer wikipedia , lookup
Short interspersed nuclear elements (SINEs) wikipedia , lookup
Epitranscriptome wikipedia , lookup
Copy-number variation wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of diabetes Type 2 wikipedia , lookup
Public health genomics wikipedia , lookup
Genetic code wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of neurodegenerative diseases wikipedia , lookup
Metagenomics wikipedia , lookup
Genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding RNA wikipedia , lookup
Biology and consumer behaviour wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Transposable element wikipedia , lookup
Long non-coding RNA wikipedia , lookup
Ridge (biology) wikipedia , lookup
Genomic imprinting wikipedia , lookup
Pathogenomics wikipedia , lookup
Gene nomenclature wikipedia , lookup
Vectors in gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression programming wikipedia , lookup
Nutriepigenomics wikipedia , lookup
Point mutation wikipedia , lookup
Minimal genome wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding DNA wikipedia , lookup
Human genome wikipedia , lookup
History of genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Gene desert wikipedia , lookup
Primary transcript wikipedia , lookup
Genome (book) wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of human development wikipedia , lookup
Genome editing wikipedia , lookup
Gene expression profiling wikipedia , lookup
Site-specific recombinase technology wikipedia , lookup
Microevolution wikipedia , lookup
Therapeutic gene modulation wikipedia , lookup
Genome evolution wikipedia , lookup
Designer baby wikipedia , lookup
Gene Finding •Based partly on slides by Hedi Hegyi, Irene Liu 1 “The Central Dogma” Transcription Translation RNA Protein 2 Gene Finding in Prokaryotes 3 Reminder: The Genetic Code 1 start, 3 stop Codons 4 Finding Genes in Prokaryotes Gene structure High gene density – ~85% coding in E.coli => is every ORF a gene? 5 Finding ORFs Many more ORFs than genes – In E.Coli one finds 6500 ORFs while there are 4290 genes. In random DNA, one stop codon every 64/3=21 codons on average. Average protein is ~300 codons long. => search long ORFs. Problems: – Short genes – Overlapping long ORFs on opposite strands 6 Codon Frequencies Coding DNA is not random: – In random DNA, expect Leu : Ala : Trp ratio of 6:4:1 – In real proteins, 6.9 : 6.5 : 1 Different frequencies for different species. 7 Using Codon Frequencies/Usage Assume each codon is independent. For codon abc calculate frequency f(abc) in coding region. Given coding sequence a1b1c1,…, an+1bn+1cn+1 Calculate p1 f a b c f a b c ... f a b c 1 1 1 2 2 2 n n n p2 f b1c1a2 f b2c2a3 ... f bncnan 1 p3 f c1a2b2 f c2a3b3 ... f cnan 1bn 1 The probability that the ith reading pi frame is the coding region: Pi p1 p2 p3 8 C+G Content C+G content (“isochore”) has strong effect on gene density, gene length etc. – < 43% C+G : 62% of genome, 34% of genes – >57% C+G : 3-5% of genome, 28% of genes Gene density in C+G rich regions is 5 times higher than moderate C+G regions and 10 times higher than rich A+T regions – Amount of intronic DNA is 3 times higher for A+T rich regions. (Both intron length and number). – Etc… 9 RNA Transcription Not all ORFs are expressed. Transcription depends on regulatory regions. Common regulatory region – the promoter RNA polymerase binds tightly to a specific DNA sequence in the promoter called the binding site. 10 Prokaryotic Promoter One type of RNA polymerase. 11 Positional Weight Matrix For TATA box: 12 Gene Finding in Eukaryotes 13 Coding density 14 Eukaryote gene structure • • • • Gene length: 30kb, coding region: 1-2kb Binding site: ~6bp; ~30bp upstream of TSS Average of 6 exons, 150bp long Huge variance: - dystrophin: 2.4Mb long – Blood coagulation factor: 26 exons, 69bp to 3106bp; intron 22 contains another unrelated gene 15 Splicing Splicing: the removal of the introns. Performed by complexes called spliceosomes, containing both proteins and snRNA. The snRNA recognizes the splice sites through RNA-RNA base-pairing Recognition must be precise: a 1nt error can shift the reading frame making nonsense of its message. Many genes have alternative splicing which changes the protein created. 16 Splice Sites 17 Gene prediction programs Scan the sequence in all 6 reading frames: 1. Start and stop codons 2. Long ORF 3. Codon usage 4. GC content 5. Gene features: promotor, terminator, poly A sites, exons and introns, … Frame +1 Frame +2 Frame +3 18 Gene prediction programs Genscan: Predict location and gene features. Can handle few genes in one sequence http://genes.mit.edu/GENSCAN.htm• l 19 Gene prediction programs Results: 20 Genscan Burge and Karlin, Stanford, 1997 Before The Human Genome Project – No alignments available – Estimated human genes count was 100,000 First program to do well on realistic sequences – Long, multiple genes in both orientations Pretty good sensitivity but poor specificity – 70% Sn, 40% Sp GenScan Output 22 An end to ab initio prediction ab initio gene prediction is inaccurate. High false positive rates for most predictors. Rarely used as a final product • Human annotation runs multiple algorithms and scores exon predicted by multiple predictors. • Used as a starting point for refinement/verification 23 Comparative Genomics Use homologue sequences: 1. Annotated genes. 2. mRNA sequences. 3. Proteins sequences 4. ESTs 24 ESTs EST – Expressed Sequence Tags. Short sequences which are obtained from cDNA (mRNA). 25 Transcript-based prediction Align transcript data to genomic sequence using a pair-wise sequence comparison. Gene Model: EST cDNA 26 Comparative Gene Predictions Exons are more conserved than introns •From a study of 1196 genes: •exons: 84.6% •protein: 85.4% •introns: 35% •5’ UTRs: 67% •3’ UTRs: 69% Gene Prediction using expressed sequences Improvement over previously existing methods, in particular when predicting CDS: – there exists an increasing richer representation of the transcripts content of the human genome in public databases Improvements in the ability to call the coding bases, but in particular – in connecting exons into transcripts – in predicting alternative splice forms Dual genome predictors Use statistical inference and other ‘informant’ genomes: SLAM, DoubleScan, Twinscan, SGP-2, GenomeScan etc.. Exon prediction such as ExoFish. Twinscan Korf, Flicek, Duan, Brent, Washington University in St. Louis, 2001 Similar to GENSCAN, except it uses another informant sequence as comparison. – For Human, the informant is normally mouse Slightly more sensitive than GENSCAN, much more specific – Exon sensitivity/specificity about 75% Nature, 2005• Nature methods, 2005• Other predictions in UCSC 2009 N-SCAN – extension of TwinScan – Allows for more species (currently uses mouse) – A richer model of sequence evolution N-SCAN PASA-EST – Combines conservation with evidence based on ESTs 32 Other predictions in UCSC 2009 CONSTRAST (Stanford, 2007) – 11 informants (rhesus, mouse, cow,...,chicken) – Machine learning two-phase approach – first predict exons and then combine them 33 Start and stop codon classifier accuracy increases as informants are added. Splice site detection accuracy increases as informants are added. 34 Dark Matter in the Genome Tiling arrays for human chromosomes 20 and 22: 47% of positive probes outside exons What could they be? • Novel protein-coding genes • Novel non-coding genes • Antisense transcription • 22% in introns • Alternative isoforms • 25% in intergenic regions • Biological ‘artifacts’ • False positives Johnson et al. 2005 TRENDS in Genetics 21:93-102• Predicting non-coding RNA? The clues we used so far are useless! Not clear which properties can be exploited Sequence features such as promoters are too weak Histone modifications + conservation the key 36 37