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    

use of Uniprot accession Vs GenBank Accession in With column

Valerie Wood val at
Wed Jan 31 04:04:09 PST 2007

That might be what you would expect but in my experience these can  
change (and disappear) over time, although I'm sure all of the old IDs 
are available in some archive. When TremblNew existed and things moved 
into Trembl, the old IDs became untraceable (this may have changed now 
Tremblnew no longer exists)?.

I just checked a couple of sequences which were revised at some point 
and they have IDs with a .1 extension implying that new PIDs were 
created for these. From a recent conversation I think these may be lost 
unless the original submitter puts the IDs into their EMBL entry (which 
I don't, does anybody else?). Also for various other reasons (sequence 
merges in contig boundaries). Is this right? Anybody at EBI know?


Michael Ashburner (Genetics) wrote:

>Am I being thick or not ? It seems as if the obvious object to refer
>to, if Uniprot ID is not available, is the PID contained within GenBank
>EMBL records. This is shared between GB, EMBL and DDBJ. It is versioned
>and gets over the problem that Val points to:
>'it may be a problem to refer 
>to the Genbank/EMBL accession number as this will often be a cosmid or 
>contig and contain multiple CDS- in these cases you can't refer to the 
>gene/protein uniquely  with an EMBL ID.'

Valerie Wood			 Tel: 01223 496909
S. pombe Genome Project		 Fax: 01223 494919 		       
Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute	 email: val at
Wellcome Trust Genome Campus 
Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1HH

More information about the go-discuss mailing list