4.7 Article

Improving Gene Annotation of the Peanut Genome by Integrated Proteogenomics Workflow

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 19, 期 6, 页码 2226-2235

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.9b00723

关键词

bioinformatics; proteogenomics; proteomics; gene annotation; RNA-seq

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31501246, 31271767]
  2. Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province [2015A030313565, 2015B020231006, 2017A030311007]
  3. Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System [CARS-13]
  4. Key Discipline Construction of the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences [201609]
  5. Special Foundation of President of the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences [201831]
  6. Open Fund of Guangdong Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic Improvement [2017B030314090]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is a staple crop in semiarid tropical and subtropical regions. Although the genome of peanut has been fully sequenced, the current gene annotations are still incomplete. New technologies in genomics and proteomics have resulted in the emergence of proteogenomics, which can integrate genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic data for improving gene annotation. In the present study, we collected RNA-seq and proteomic data from multiple tissues such as seed, shell, and gynophore of peanut and utilized a proteogenomic approach to improve the gene annotation of peanut based on these data. A total of 1 935 655 904 RNA-seq reads and 7 490 280 MS/MS spectra were collected. Ultimately, 13 767 annotated genes were found with evidence at the protein level, and seven novel protein-coding genes were found with both RNA-seq and proteomics evidence. In addition, 35 gene models were updated based on proteomics data. Proteogenomic approaches improved the gene annotation in certain aspects by integrating both RNA-seq and proteomic data. We expect that these approaches could help improve existing genome annotations of other species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据