对人类蛋白质组功能注释的纵向分析显示出一贯的高偏差。

IF 3.4 4区 生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
An Phan, Parnal Joshi, Claus Kadelka, Iddo Friedberg
{"title":"对人类蛋白质组功能注释的纵向分析显示出一贯的高偏差。","authors":"An Phan, Parnal Joshi, Claus Kadelka, Iddo Friedberg","doi":"10.1093/database/baaf036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The resources required to study gene function are limited, especially when considering the number of genes in the human genome and the complexity of their function. Therefore, genes are prioritized for experimental studies based on many different considerations, including, but not limited to, perceived biomedical importance, such as disease-associated genes, or the understanding of biological processes, such as cell signalling pathways. At the same time, most genes are not studied or are under-characterized, which hampers our understanding of their function and potential effects on human health and wellness. Understanding function annotation disparity is a necessary first step toward understanding how much functional knowledge is gained from the human genome, and toward guidelines for better targeting future studies of the genes in the human genome effectively. Here, we present a comprehensive longitudinal analysis of the human proteome utilizing data analysis tools from economics and information theory. Specifically, we view the human proteome as a population of proteins within a knowledge economy: we treat the quantified knowledge of the protein's function as the analogue of wealth and examine the distribution of information in a population of proteins in the proteome in the same manner distribution of wealth is studied in societies. Our results show a highly skewed distribution of information about human proteins over the last decade, in which the inequality in the annotations given to the proteins remains high. Additionally, we examine the correlation between the knowledge about protein function as captured in databases and the interest in proteins as reflected by mentions in the scientific literature. We show a large gap between knowledge and interest and dissect the factors leading to this gap. In conclusion, our study shows that research efforts should be redirected to less studied proteins to mitigate the disparity among human proteins both in databases and literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":10923,"journal":{"name":"Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation","volume":"2025 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12060720/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A longitudinal analysis of function annotations of the human proteome reveals consistently high biases.\",\"authors\":\"An Phan, Parnal Joshi, Claus Kadelka, Iddo Friedberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/database/baaf036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The resources required to study gene function are limited, especially when considering the number of genes in the human genome and the complexity of their function. Therefore, genes are prioritized for experimental studies based on many different considerations, including, but not limited to, perceived biomedical importance, such as disease-associated genes, or the understanding of biological processes, such as cell signalling pathways. At the same time, most genes are not studied or are under-characterized, which hampers our understanding of their function and potential effects on human health and wellness. Understanding function annotation disparity is a necessary first step toward understanding how much functional knowledge is gained from the human genome, and toward guidelines for better targeting future studies of the genes in the human genome effectively. Here, we present a comprehensive longitudinal analysis of the human proteome utilizing data analysis tools from economics and information theory. Specifically, we view the human proteome as a population of proteins within a knowledge economy: we treat the quantified knowledge of the protein's function as the analogue of wealth and examine the distribution of information in a population of proteins in the proteome in the same manner distribution of wealth is studied in societies. Our results show a highly skewed distribution of information about human proteins over the last decade, in which the inequality in the annotations given to the proteins remains high. Additionally, we examine the correlation between the knowledge about protein function as captured in databases and the interest in proteins as reflected by mentions in the scientific literature. We show a large gap between knowledge and interest and dissect the factors leading to this gap. In conclusion, our study shows that research efforts should be redirected to less studied proteins to mitigate the disparity among human proteins both in databases and literature.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10923,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation\",\"volume\":\"2025 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12060720/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baaf036\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baaf036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究基因功能所需的资源是有限的,特别是考虑到人类基因组中基因的数量及其功能的复杂性。因此,基于许多不同的考虑因素,包括但不限于感知到的生物医学重要性,如疾病相关基因,或对生物过程的理解,如细胞信号传导途径,对实验研究的基因进行优先排序。与此同时,大多数基因没有被研究或特征不充分,这阻碍了我们对它们的功能和对人类健康的潜在影响的理解。了解功能注释差异是了解人类基因组功能知识的必要第一步,也是更好地针对人类基因组中基因的未来研究的指导方针。在这里,我们利用经济学和信息论的数据分析工具,对人类蛋白质组进行了全面的纵向分析。具体而言,我们将人类蛋白质组视为知识经济中的蛋白质群体:我们将蛋白质功能的量化知识视为财富的类似物,并以研究社会中财富分布的相同方式检查蛋白质组中蛋白质群体中的信息分布。我们的结果表明,在过去十年中,关于人类蛋白质的信息分布高度倾斜,其中给予蛋白质的注释中的不平等仍然很高。此外,我们研究了数据库中捕获的关于蛋白质功能的知识与科学文献中提到的对蛋白质的兴趣之间的相关性。我们展示了知识和兴趣之间的巨大差距,并剖析了导致这种差距的因素。总之,我们的研究表明,研究工作应该转向研究较少的蛋白质,以减轻数据库和文献中人类蛋白质之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A longitudinal analysis of function annotations of the human proteome reveals consistently high biases.

The resources required to study gene function are limited, especially when considering the number of genes in the human genome and the complexity of their function. Therefore, genes are prioritized for experimental studies based on many different considerations, including, but not limited to, perceived biomedical importance, such as disease-associated genes, or the understanding of biological processes, such as cell signalling pathways. At the same time, most genes are not studied or are under-characterized, which hampers our understanding of their function and potential effects on human health and wellness. Understanding function annotation disparity is a necessary first step toward understanding how much functional knowledge is gained from the human genome, and toward guidelines for better targeting future studies of the genes in the human genome effectively. Here, we present a comprehensive longitudinal analysis of the human proteome utilizing data analysis tools from economics and information theory. Specifically, we view the human proteome as a population of proteins within a knowledge economy: we treat the quantified knowledge of the protein's function as the analogue of wealth and examine the distribution of information in a population of proteins in the proteome in the same manner distribution of wealth is studied in societies. Our results show a highly skewed distribution of information about human proteins over the last decade, in which the inequality in the annotations given to the proteins remains high. Additionally, we examine the correlation between the knowledge about protein function as captured in databases and the interest in proteins as reflected by mentions in the scientific literature. We show a large gap between knowledge and interest and dissect the factors leading to this gap. In conclusion, our study shows that research efforts should be redirected to less studied proteins to mitigate the disparity among human proteins both in databases and literature.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation
Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY-
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
3.40%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Huge volumes of primary data are archived in numerous open-access databases, and with new generation technologies becoming more common in laboratories, large datasets will become even more prevalent. The archiving, curation, analysis and interpretation of all of these data are a challenge. Database development and biocuration are at the forefront of the endeavor to make sense of this mounting deluge of data. Database: The Journal of Biological Databases and Curation provides an open access platform for the presentation of novel ideas in database research and biocuration, and aims to help strengthen the bridge between database developers, curators, and users.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信