columns are ' id' , 'ncbi_taxa_id' , 'common_names' , 'lineage_string' , 'genus' , 'species' , 'parent_id' , 'left_value' , 'right_value' , 'taxonomic_rank'.
Export PNG
Views: 1205
Created: 3rd Feb 2021 at 16:56
Last updated: 3rd Feb 2021 at 16:56
This item has not yet been tagged.
None
Version History
Version 1 (earliest) Created 3rd Feb 2021 at 16:56 by Yi Chen
No revision comments
Related items
Projects: Consensus Hallmark Annotation, FAIR Functional Enrichment, The evolution of Gene Ontology
Institutions: University of Leiden, LIACS
Projects: Consensus Hallmark Annotation, The evolution of Gene Ontology
Web page: Not specified
Data and experimental methods to support the work in the following paper:
Establishing Consensus Annotation for the Hallmarks of Cancer, 2020, Yi Chen, F.J.Verbeek and K.Wolstencroft, in submission
Programme: Hallmarks of cancer
Public web page: Not specified
Organisms: Homo sapiens
The hallmarks of cancer provide a highly cited and well-used conceptual framework for describing the processes involved in cancer cell development. However, methods for translating these high-level concepts into data-level associations between hallmarks and genes (for high throughput analysis), vary widely between studies. In this investigation we compare cancer hallmark mapping strategies from different studies, based on Gene Ontology and biological pathway annotation. By analysing the semantic ...
Submitter: Katy Wolstencroft
Studies: Comparing Cancer Hallmark Descriptions, Evolution of Gene Ontology Terms, Prognostic and Hallmark Gene Networks
Assays: Analysing Changes to GO Biological Process, Annotation Consensus and GO Consensus, Hub genes of modules and enriched GO terms, Jaccard Index Prognostic Hallmark Genes, WGCNA Prognostic Hallmark Genes
Snapshots: No snapshots
The hallmarks mapping schemes under comparison were developed over the period of 7 years and therefore were developed using different versions of the Gene Ontology and associated annotation. Understanding which differences between mapping schemes were the result of topological or annotation changes to GO could therefore help to further refine consensus and make results and conclusions more comparable between studies.
Submitter: Katy Wolstencroft
Investigation: Cancer Hallmark Consensus
Snapshots: No snapshots
Submitter: Katy Wolstencroft
Biological problem addressed: Biological Network Analysis
Investigation: Cancer Hallmark Consensus
Organisms: No organisms
Models: No Models
SOPs: No SOPs
Data files: Edge data of GO terms in 2012, Edge data of GO terms in 2016, GO hierarchical network comparison between methods, Gene product count of GO terms in June 2012., Species data in June,2012, Term description and ID in June 2016, Term description and ID in June,2012, The number of annotations belongs to selected G..., species data in June, 2016, species data of GO in 2016, species data of GO in 2016
Snapshots: No snapshots