4.8 Article

jMorp: Japanese Multi Omics Reference Panel

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 D1, 页码 D551-D557

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx978

关键词

-

资金

  1. Platform Program for Promotion of Genome Medicine from Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [16815713]
  2. Tohoku Medical Megabank Project of Ministry from Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
  3. Center of Innovation Program from Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17K07298] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We developed jMorp, a new database containing metabolome and proteome data for plasma obtained from >5000 healthy Japanese volunteers from the Tohoku Medical Megabank Cohort Study, which is available at https://jmorp.megabank.tohoku.ac.jp. Metabolome data were measured by proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS), while proteome data were obtained by nanoLC-MS. We released the concentration distributions of 37 metabolites identified by NMR, distributions of peak intensities of 257 characterized metabolites by LC-MS, and observed frequencies of 256 abundant proteins. Additionally, correlation networks for the metabolites can be observed using an interactive network viewer. Compared with some existing databases, jMorp has some unique features: (i) Metabolome data were obtained using a single protocol in a single institute, ensuring that measurement biases were significantly minimized; (ii) The database contains large-scale data for healthy volunteers with various health records and genome data and (iii) Correlations between metabolites can be easily observed using the graphical viewer. Metabolites data are becoming important intermediate markers for evaluating the health states of humans, and thus jMorp is an outstanding resource for a wide range of researchers, particularly those in the fields of medical science, applied molecular biology, and biochemistry.

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

4.8
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