Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.When orthologs diverge between human and mouse
Walid H. Gharib et al.
BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS (2011)
The Mouse Genome Database (MGD): premier model organism resource for mammalian genomics and genetics
Judith A. Blake et al.
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH (2011)
Testing the Ortholog Conjecture with Comparative Functional Genomic Data from Mammals
Nathan L. Nehrt et al.
PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY (2011)
The Gene Ontology in 2010: extensions and refinements The Gene Ontology Consortium
Tanya Z. Berardini et al.
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH (2010)
Protein Evolution by Molecular Tinkering: Diversification of the Nuclear Receptor Superfamily from a Ligand-Dependent Ancestor
Jamie T. Bridgham et al.
PLOS BIOLOGY (2010)
The GOA database in 2009-an integrated Gene Ontology Annotation resource
Daniel Barrell et al.
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH (2009)
How confident can we be that orthologs are similar, but paralogs differ?
Romain A. Studer et al.
TRENDS IN GENETICS (2009)
Gene Ontology annotations: what they mean and where they come from
David P. Hill et al.
BMC BIOINFORMATICS (2008)
The 3′ ends of mature transcripts are generated by a processosome complex in fission yeast mitochondria
Bastian Hoffmann et al.
JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY (2008)
Control of a kinesin-cargo linkage mechanism by JNK pathway kinases
Dal Horiuchi et al.
CURRENT BIOLOGY (2007)
Evolution of hormone-receptor complexity by molecular exploitation
JT Bridgham et al.
SCIENCE (2006)
Estrogen receptors and human disease
BJ Deroo et al.
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION (2006)
A novel DNA damage recognition protein in Schizosaccharomyces pombe
Steven J. Pearson et al.
NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH (2006)
Share Paper
