2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3743-1_14
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gene Ontology: Pitfalls, Biases, and Remedies

Abstract: The Gene Ontology (GO) is a formidable resource, but there are several considerations about it that are essential to understand the data and interpret it correctly. The GO is suffi ciently simple that it can be used without deep understanding of its structure or how it is developed, which is both a strength and a weakness. In this chapter, we discuss some common misinterpretations of the ontology and the annotations. A better understanding of the pitfalls and the biases in the GO should help users make the mos… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
86
1
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 123 publications
(89 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
86
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…An additional "sliding window analysis," where a window of a certain length slides along the genotypes, checks whether SNPs under selection cluster in certain genomic regions (Tajima, 1991). After obtaining the regions under selection and the genes located there, we conduct a gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis to explore which functional groups (GO terms) are over-represented for a specific gene set (Gaudet & Dessimoz, 2017;Primmer, Papakostas, Leder, Davis, & Ragan, 2013). In GO databases, the genes are assigned to predefined functional groups.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An additional "sliding window analysis," where a window of a certain length slides along the genotypes, checks whether SNPs under selection cluster in certain genomic regions (Tajima, 1991). After obtaining the regions under selection and the genes located there, we conduct a gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis to explore which functional groups (GO terms) are over-represented for a specific gene set (Gaudet & Dessimoz, 2017;Primmer, Papakostas, Leder, Davis, & Ragan, 2013). In GO databases, the genes are assigned to predefined functional groups.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, despite the efforts, at times the association of ontology and terms with genes is incomplete. This inherent incompleteness hinders the evaluation of computational methods and should be acknowledged when using the database . In our case, this means that some elements under GO:0003700 could include genes not specifically classified as TFs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, our enrichment stats might still be biased by the chosen approach. Nevertheless, since GO annotations are dynamic and always biased by database representation 62 , we have chosen to keep the same methodological approach for both species. In this manner, if the enrichment test is biased it will be equally biased in both species facilitating comparisons.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%