Biology subjects

Gota Morota

Publications and source records attributed to Gota Morota.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2016

Medical subject heading (MeSH) annotations illuminate maize genetics and evolution

High-density marker panels and/or whole-genome sequencing,coupled with advanced phenotyping pipelines and sophisticated statistical methods, have dramatically increased our ability to generate lists of candidate genes or regions that are putatively associated with phenotypes or processes of interest. However, the speed with which we can validate genes, or even make reasonable biological interpretations about the principles underlying them, has not kept pace. A promising approach that runs parallel to explicitly validating individual genes is analyzing a set of genes together and assessing the biological similarities among them. This is often achieved via gene ontology (GO) analysis, a powerful tool that involves evaluating publicly available gene annotations. However, additional tools such as Medical Subject Headings (MeSH terms) can also be used to evaluate sets of genes to make biological interpretations. In this manuscript, wedescribe utilizing MeSH terms to make biological interpretations in maize. MeSH terms are assigned to PubMed-indexed manuscripts by the National Library of Medicine, and can be directly mapped to genes to develop gene annotations. Once mapped, these terms can be evaluated for enrichment in sets of genes or similarity between gene sets to provide biological insights. Here, we implement MeSH analyses in five maize datasets to demonstrate how MeSH can be leveraged by the maize and broader crop-genomics community.

Genomics↗

bioRxiv2015

MeSH-informed enrichment analysis and MeSH-guided semantic similarity among functional terms and gene products in chicken

Biomedical vocabularies and ontologies aid in recapitulating biological knowledge. The annotation of gene products is mainly accelerated by Gene Ontology (GO) and more recently by Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Here we report a suite of MeSH packages for chicken in Bioconductor and illustrate some features of different MeSH-based analyses, including MeSH-informed enrichment analysis and MeSH-guided semantic similarity among terms and gene products, using two lists of chicken genes available in public repositories. The two published datasets that were employed represent (i) differentially expressed genes and (ii) candidate genes under selective sweep or epistatic selection. The comparison of MeSH with GO overrepresentation analyses suggested not only that MeSH supports the findings obtained from GO analysis but also that MeSH is able to further enrich the representation of biological knowledge and often provide more interpretable results. Based on the hierarchical structures of MeSH and GO, we computed semantic similarities among vocabularies as well as semantic similarities among selected genes. These yielded the similarity levels between significant functional terms, and the annotation of each gene yielded the measures of gene similarity. Our findings show the benefits of using MeSH as an alternative choice of annotation in order to draw biological inferences from a list of genes of interest. We argue that the use of MeSH in conjunction with GO will be instrumental in facilitating the understanding of the genetic basis of complex traits.

Genetics↗

bioRxiv2013

The causal meaning of genomic predictors and how it affects the construction and comparison of genome-enabled selection models

The additive genetic effect is arguably the most important quantity inferred in animal and plant breeding analyses. The term effect indicates that it represents causal information, which is different from standard statistical concepts as regression coefficient and association. The process of inferring causal information is also different from standard statistical learning, as the former requires causal (i.e. non-statistical) assumptions and involves extra complexities. Remarkably, the task of inferring genetic effects is largely seen as a standard regression/prediction problem, contradicting its label. This widely accepted analysis approach is by itself insufficient for causal learning, suggesting that causality is not the point for selection. Given this incongruence, it is important to verify if genomic predictors need to represent causal effects to be relevant for selection decisions, especially because applying regression studies to answer causal questions may lead to wrong conclusions. The answer to this question defines if genomic selection models should be constructed aiming maximum genomic predictive ability or aiming identifiability of genetic causal effects. Here, we demonstrate that selection relies on a causal effect from genotype to phenotype, and that genomic predictors are only useful for selection if they distinguish such effect from other sources of association. Conversely, genomic predictors capturing non-causal signals provide information that is less relevant for selection regardless of the resulting predictive ability. Focusing on covariate choice decision, simulated examples are used to show that predictive ability, which is the criterion normally used to compare models, may not indicate the quality of genomic predictors for selection. Additionally, we propose using alternative criteria to construct models aiming for the identification of the genetic causal effects.

Genomics↗