Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

'with' field contents for IPI annotations

Harold Drabkin hjd at informatics.jax.org
Wed Mar 1 06:56:12 PST 2006


And related to this
Some of our records, of course, are older; at the time the record was 
made, there was no UniProt record available.
I do periodically go through the IPI's that don't any protein id , or 
have non-Uniprot identifiers, and see if now I can supply one.



David Hill wrote:
> Not sure it this is out of our realm, but it would be really cool if 
> we could somehow notify SwissProt folks when we come across Trembl 
> records that represent isoforms. Then we could work together to get 
> the most precise info possible. In the end I think it would make both 
> resources better.
>
> David
>
> Evelyn Camon wrote:
>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> The main sequence does not always represent isoform 1 but it usually 
>> does. TrEMBL records create problems for us also and so we annotate 
>> isoforms only when they are Swiss-Prot records. I am ccing 
>> Michele/Eleanor to confirm. At the time you look at a TrEMBL record 
>> the sequence might represent a specific isoform...later it will be 
>> merged with other entries and a different perhaps longer sequence 
>> might be chosen as the representative sequence in the Swiss-Prot 
>> record. The TrEMBL identifier might then become secondary to this new 
>> accession I am not aware of a way of linking the new isoform ids to 
>> the old TrEMBL accessions but it may be possible???? Michele or 
>> Eleanor can confirm. I believe once an isoform ID is assigned it is 
>> stable??(Ele).
>>
>> Some minutes of our discussion on the topic for your information.
>>
>> Evelyn
>>
>> ****************
>> The information that is manually annotated to UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot 
>> record represents the characterisation of all splicing variants. 
>> However each splicing variant is designated a unique isoform id e.g 
>> (P12345.1)and it is possible using a script to separate the sequences 
>> into those that represent the individual isoforms.
>>
>> Up to Novemeber 2005 GOA had no method of annotating directly to 
>> splice variants and so all possible annotations were assigned to the 
>> main protein accession i.e P12345. This meant that it was impossible 
>> for biologists to extract the specific variant GO annotation. The 
>> ability to annotate to splice variants allows GOA also to 
>> experimentally validate the splicing variants as in UniProtKB they 
>> are not all experimentally verified.
>>
>> DECISION at GOA Meeting 7-11-2005
>>
>> If you know specific variant GO annotation then annotate to the 
>> variant/isoform accession(P12345.1).
>>
>> If you don't know which specific variant GO annotation should apply 
>> then annotate to the main entry(P12345). These are ok to generally 
>> transfer to other species by ISS.
>>
>> If you know specific isoform has a match in another species then can 
>> transfer by ISS from isoform to isoform (wait until David updates tool)
>> Notes: No need to try an summarise GO annotation to higher level 
>> terms from specific variants in main entry. Eleanor made point that 
>> isoform.1 is not always the sequence on display in UniProtKb.
>> ****************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> David Hill wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, if an author is looking at a specific isoform, it is 
>>> usually easy to tell which Uniprot-# it goes with by looking at the 
>>> sequence. The probelm I run across is when the isoform corresponds 
>>> to a Trembl record. Is that record just rolled into the generic 
>>> uniprot id or does it actually become associated with the correct 
>>> isoform?
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We will also accept UniProt Isoform Ids (P00001.1, P00001.2) if you 
>>>> can figure out which is the correct one in the paper and its has an 
>>>> id in UniProt..bit of an awkward one at the moment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>




More information about the go-discuss mailing list