Transcriptomic analyses of murine resolution-phase macrophages.

Macrophages are either classically (M1) or alternatively-activated (M2). Whereas this nomenclature was generated from monocyte-derived macrophages treated in vitro with defined cytokine stimuli, the phenotype of in vivo-derived macrophages is less understood. We completed Affymetrix-based transcriptomic analysis of macrophages from the resolution phase of a zymosan-induced peritonitis. Compared with macrophages from hyperinflamed mice possessing a pro-inflammatory nature as well as naive macrophages from the uninflamed peritoneum, resolution-phase macrophages (rM) are similar to monocyte-derived dendritic cells (DCs), being CD209a positive but lacking CD11c. They are enriched for antigen processing/presentation (MHC class II [H2-Eb1, H2-Ab1, H2-Ob, H2-Aa], CD74, CD86), secrete T- and B-lymphocyte chemokines (Xcl1, Ccl5, Cxcl13) as well as factors that enhance macrophage/DC development, and promote DC/T cell synapse formation (Clec2i, Tnfsf4, Clcf1). rM are also enriched for cell cycle/proliferation genes as well as Alox15, Timd4, and Tgfb2, key systems in the termination of leukocyte trafficking and clearance of inflammatory cells. Finally, comparison with in vitro-derived M1/M2 shows that rM are neither classically nor alternatively activated but possess aspects of both definitions consistent with an immune regulatory phenotype. We propose that macrophages in situ cannot be rigidly categorized as they can express many shades of the inflammatory spectrum determined by tissue, stimulus, and phase of inflammation.

Access to immunology through the Gene Ontology.

The Gene Ontology (GO) is widely recognized as the premier tool for the organization and functional annotation of molecular aspects of cellular systems. However, for many immunologists the use of GO is a very foreign concept. Indeed, as a controlled vocabulary, GO can almost be considered a new language, and it can be difficult to appreciate the use and value of this approach for understanding the immune system. This review reflects on the application of GO to the field of immunology and explains the process of GO annotation. Finally, this review hopes to inspire immunologists to invest time and energy in improving both the content of the GO and the quality of GO annotations associated with genes of immunological interest.

Methods for gene ontology annotation.

The Gene Ontology (GO) is an established dynamic and structured vocabulary that has been successfully used in gene and protein annotation. Designed by biologists to improve data integration, GO attempts to replace the multiple nomenclatures used by specialised and large biological knowledgebases. This chapter describes the methods used by groups to create new GO annotations and how users can apply publicly available GO annotations to enhance their datasets.

AgBase: a functional genomics resource for agriculture.

BACKGROUND: Many agricultural species and their pathogens have sequenced genomes and more are in progress. Agricultural species provide food, fiber, xenotransplant tissues, biopharmaceuticals and biomedical models. Moreover, many agricultural microorganisms are human zoonoses. However, systems biology from functional genomics data is hindered in agricultural species because agricultural genome sequences have relatively poor structural and functional annotation and agricultural research communities are smaller with limited funding compared to many model organism communities. DESCRIPTION: To facilitate systems biology in these traditionally agricultural species we have established "AgBase", a curated, web-accessible, public resource http://www.agbase.msstate.edu for structural and functional annotation of agricultural genomes. The AgBase database includes a suite of computational tools to use GO annotations. We use standardized nomenclature following the Human Genome Organization Gene Nomenclature guidelines and are currently functionally annotating chicken, cow and sheep gene products using the Gene Ontology (GO). The computational tools we have developed accept and batch process data derived from different public databases (with different accession codes), return all existing GO annotations, provide a list of products without GO annotation, identify potential orthologs, model functional genomics data using GO and assist proteomics analysis of ESTs and EST assemblies. Our journal database helps prevent redundant manual GO curation. We encourage and publicly acknowledge GO annotations from researchers and provide a service for researchers interested in GO and analysis of functional genomics data. CONCLUSION: The AgBase database is the first database dedicated to functional genomics and systems biology analysis for agriculturally important species and their pathogens. We use experimental data to improve structural annotation of genomes and to functionally characterize gene products. AgBase is also directly relevant for researchers in fields as diverse as agricultural production, cancer biology, biopharmaceuticals, human health and evolutionary biology. Moreover, the experimental methods and bioinformatics tools we provide are widely applicable to many other species including model organisms.

The Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) Database: sharing knowledge in Uniprot with Gene Ontology.

The Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) database (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/GOA) aims to provide high-quality electronic and manual annotations to the UniProt Knowledgebase (Swiss-Prot, TrEMBL and PIR-PSD) using the standardized vocabulary of the Gene Ontology (GO). As a supplementary archive of GO annotation, GOA promotes a high level of integration of the knowledge represented in UniProt with other databases. This is achieved by converting UniProt annotation into a recognized computational format. GOA provides annotated entries for nearly 60,000 species (GOA-SPTr) and is the largest and most comprehensive open-source contributor of annotations to the GO Consortium annotation effort. By integrating GO annotations from other model organism groups, GOA consolidates specialized knowledge and expertise to ensure the data remain a key reference for up-to-date biological information. Furthermore, the GOA database fully endorses the Human Proteomics Initiative by prioritizing the annotation of proteins likely to benefit human health and disease. In addition to a non-redundant set of annotations to the human proteome (GOA-Human) and monthly releases of its GO annotation for all species (GOA-SPTr), a series of GO mapping files and specific cross-references in other databases are also regularly distributed. GOA can be queried through a simple user-friendly web interface or downloaded in a parsable format via the EBI and GO FTP websites. The GOA data set can be used to enhance the annotation of particular model organism or gene expression data sets, although increasingly it has been used to evaluate GO predictions generated from text mining or protein interaction experiments. In 2004, the GOA team will build on its success and will continue to supplement the functional annotation of UniProt and work towards enhancing the ability of scientists to access all available biological information. Researchers wishing to query or contribute to the GOA project are encouraged to email: goa@ebi.ac.uk.

The EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database.

The EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (aka EMBL-Bank; http://www.ebi.ac.uk/embl/) incorporates, organises and distributes nucleotide sequences from all available public sources. EMBL-Bank is located and maintained at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) near Cambridge, UK. In an international collaboration with DDBJ (Japan) and GenBank (USA), data are exchanged amongst the collaborating databases on a daily basis. Major contributors to the EMBL database are individual scientists and genome project groups. Webin is the preferred web-based submission system for individual submitters, whilst automatic procedures allow incorporation of sequence data from large-scale genome sequencing centres and from the European Patent Office (EPO). Database releases are produced quarterly. Network services allow free access to the most up-to-date data collection via FTP, email and World Wide Web interfaces. EBI's Sequence Retrieval System (SRS), a network browser for databanks in molecular biology, integrates and links the main nucleotide and protein databases plus many other specialized databases. For sequence similarity searching, a variety of tools (e.g. Blitz, Fasta, BLAST) are available which allow external users to compare their own sequences against the latest data in the EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database and SWISS-PROT. All resources can be accessed via the EBI home page at http://www.ebi.ac.uk.

The European Bioinformatics Institute's data resources.

As the amount of biological data grows, so does the need for biologists to store and access this information in central repositories in a free and unambiguous manner. The European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) hosts six core databases, which store information on DNA sequences (EMBL-Bank), protein sequences (SWISS-PROT and TrEMBL), protein structure (MSD), whole genomes (Ensembl) and gene expression (ArrayExpress). But just as a cell would be useless if it couldn't transcribe DNA or translate RNA, our resources would be compromised if each existed in isolation. We have therefore developed a range of tools that not only facilitate the deposition and retrieval of biological information, but also allow users to carry out searches that reflect the interconnectedness of biological information. The EBI's databases and tools are all available on our website at www.ebi.ac.uk.

An evaluation of GO annotation retrieval for BioCreAtIvE and GOA.

BACKGROUND: The Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) database http://www.ebi.ac.uk/GOA aims to provide high-quality supplementary GO annotation to proteins in the UniProt Knowledgebase. Like many other biological databases, GOA gathers much of its content from the careful manual curation of literature. However, as both the volume of literature and of proteins requiring characterization increases, the manual processing capability can become overloaded. Consequently, semi-automated aids are often employed to expedite the curation process. Traditionally, electronic techniques in GOA depend largely on exploiting the knowledge in existing resources such as InterPro. However, in recent years, text mining has been hailed as a potentially useful tool to aid the curation process. To encourage the development of such tools, the GOA team at EBI agreed to take part in the functional annotation task of the BioCreAtIvE (Critical Assessment of Information Extraction systems in Biology) challenge. BioCreAtIvE task 2 was an experiment to test if automatically derived classification using information retrieval and extraction could assist expert biologists in the annotation of the GO vocabulary to the proteins in the UniProt Knowledgebase. GOA provided the training corpus of over 9000 manual GO annotations extracted from the literature. For the test set, we provided a corpus of 200 new Journal of Biological Chemistry articles used to annotate 286 human proteins with GO terms. A team of experts manually evaluated the results of 9 participating groups, each of which provided highlighted sentences to support their GO and protein annotation predictions. Here, we give a biological perspective on the evaluation, explain how we annotate GO using literature and offer some suggestions to improve the precision of future text-retrieval and extraction techniques. Finally, we provide the results of the first inter-annotator agreement study for manual GO curation, as well as an assessment of our current electronic GO annotation strategies. RESULTS: The GOA database currently extracts GO annotation from the literature with 91 to 100% precision, and at least 72% recall. This creates a particularly high threshold for text mining systems which in BioCreAtIvE task 2 (GO annotation extraction and retrieval) initial results precisely predicted GO terms only 10 to 20% of the time. CONCLUSION: Improvements in the performance and accuracy of text mining for GO terms should be expected in the next BioCreAtIvE challenge. In the meantime the manual and electronic GO annotation strategies already employed by GOA will provide high quality annotations.

The impact of focused Gene Ontology curation of specific mammalian systems.

UNLABELLED: The Gene Ontology (GO) resource provides dynamic controlled vocabularies to provide an information-rich resource to aid in the consistent description of the functional attributes and subcellular locations of gene products from all taxonomic groups (www.geneontology.org). System-focused projects, such as the Renal and Cardiovascular GO Annotation Initiatives, aim to provide detailed GO data for proteins implicated in specific organ development and function. Such projects support the rapid evaluation of new experimental data and aid in the generation of novel biological insights to help alleviate human disease. This paper describes the improvement of GO data for renal and cardiovascular research communities and demonstrates that the cardiovascular-focused GO annotations, created over the past three years, have led to an evident improvement of microarray interpretation. The reanalysis of cardiovascular microarray datasets confirms the need to continue to improve the annotation of the human proteome. AVAILABILITY: GO ANNOTATION DATA IS FREELY AVAILABLE FROM: ftp://ftp.geneontology.org/pub/go/gene-associations/

GOAnnotator: linking protein GO annotations to evidence text.

BACKGROUND: Annotation of proteins with gene ontology (GO) terms is ongoing work and a complex task. Manual GO annotation is precise and precious, but it is time-consuming. Therefore, instead of curated annotations most of the proteins come with uncurated annotations, which have been generated automatically. Text-mining systems that use literature for automatic annotation have been proposed but they do not satisfy the high quality expectations of curators. RESULTS: In this paper we describe an approach that links uncurated annotations to text extracted from literature. The selection of the text is based on the similarity of the text to the term from the uncurated annotation. Besides substantiating the uncurated annotations, the extracted texts also lead to novel annotations. In addition, the approach uses the GO hierarchy to achieve high precision. Our approach is integrated into GOAnnotator, a tool that assists the curation process for GO annotation of UniProt proteins. CONCLUSION: The GO curators assessed GOAnnotator with a set of 66 distinct UniProt/SwissProt proteins with uncurated annotations. GOAnnotator provided correct evidence text at 93% precision. This high precision results from using the GO hierarchy to only select GO terms similar to GO terms from uncurated annotations in GOA. Our approach is the first one to achieve high precision, which is crucial for the efficient support of GO curators. GOAnnotator was implemented as a web tool that is freely available at http://xldb.di.fc.ul.pt/rebil/tools/goa/.

A procedure for assessing GO annotation consistency.

MOTIVATION: The Gene Ontology (GO) is widely used to annotate molecular attributes of genes and gene products. Multiple groups undertaking functional annotations of genomes contribute their annotation sets to the GO database resource and these data are subsequently used in comparative functional analysis research. Although GO curators adhere to the same protocols and standards while assigning GO annotations, the specific procedure followed by each annotation group can vary. Since differences in application of annotation standards would dilute the effectiveness of comparative analysis, methods for assessing annotation consistency are essential. The development of methodologies that are broadly applicable for the assessment of GO annotation consistency is an important issue for the comparative genomics community. RESULTS: We have developed a methodology for assessing the consistency of GO annotations provided by different annotation groups. The method is completely general and can be applied to compare any two sets of GO annotations. This is the first attempt to assess cross-species GO annotation consistency. Our method compares annotation sets utilizing the hierarchical structure of the GO to compare GO annotations between orthologous gene pairs. The method produces a report on the annotation consistency and inconsistency for each orthologous pair. We present results obtained by comparing GO annotations for mouse and human gene sets. AVAILABILITY: The complete current MGI_GOA GO annotation consistency report is available online at http://www.spatial.maine.edu/~mdolan/

Who tangos with GOA?-Use of Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) for biological interpretation of '-omics' data and for validation of automatic annotation tools.

The number of large-scale experimental datasets generated from high-throughput technologies has grown rapidly. Biological knowledge resources such as the Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) database, which provides high-quality functional annotation to proteins within the UniProt Knowledgebase, can play an important role in the analysis of such data. The integration of GOA with analytical tools has proved to aid the clustering, annotation and biological interpretation of such large expression datasets. GOA is also useful in the development and validation of automated annotation tools, in particular text-mining systems. The increasing interest in GOA highlights the great potential of this freely available resource to assist both the biological research and bioinformatics communities.

The Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) project: implementation of GO in SWISS-PROT, TrEMBL, and InterPro.

Gene Ontology Annotation (GOA) is a project run by the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) that aims to provide assignments of terms from the Gene Ontology (GO) resource to gene products in a number of its databases (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/GOA). In the first stage of this project, GO assignments have been applied to a data set representing the complete human proteome by a combination of electronic mappings and manual curation. This vocabulary has also been applied to the nonredundant proteome sets for all other completely sequenced organisms as well as to proteins from a wide range of organisms where the proteome is not yet complete.

Applications of InterPro in protein annotation and genome analysis.

The applications of InterPro span a range of biologically important areas that includes automatic annotation of protein sequences and genome analysis. In automatic annotation of protein sequences InterPro has been utilised to provide reliable characterisation of sequences, identifying them as candidates for functional annotation. Rules based on the InterPro characterisation are stored and operated through a database called RuleBase. RuleBase is used as the main tool in the sequence database group at the EBI to apply automatic annotation to unknown sequences. The annotated sequences are stored and distributed in the TrEMBL protein sequence database. InterPro also provides a means to carry out statistical and comparative analyses of whole genomes. In the Proteome Analysis Database, InterPro analyses have been combined with other analyses based on CluSTr, the Gene Ontology (GO) and structural information on the proteins.