Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: remove genes not found in S288C annotation #129

Closed
3 tasks done
BenjaSanchez opened this issue Jun 27, 2018 · 7 comments · Fixed by #213
Closed
3 tasks done

fix: remove genes not found in S288C annotation #129

BenjaSanchez opened this issue Jun 27, 2018 · 7 comments · Fixed by #213
Assignees
Labels
fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release

Comments

@BenjaSanchez
Copy link
Contributor

Description of the issue:

I was contacted by @snmendoz who pointed out that 2 of the current genes in the model cannot be found in the annotation of strain S288C, according to NCBI: YAR069W-A and YHR214W-F. @hongzhonglu do you see these genes in any of the newly added annotations? If so, are the annotations of those genes publicly available somewhere?

I hereby confirm that I have:

  • Done this analysis in the master branch of the repository
  • Checked that a similar issue does not exist already
  • If needed, asked first in the Gitter chat room about the issue
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added question ideas/feedback from other people would be appreciated curation labels Jun 27, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added the help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! label Jun 27, 2018
@hongzhonglu
Copy link
Collaborator

@BenjaSanchez
These two genes could be found from SGD
https://www.yeastgenome.org/locus/S000125021
https://www.yeastgenome.org/locus/S000029723
They are not belong to S288c, but also for the yeast. These two genes are from iSce926.

@BenjaSanchez
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hongzhonglu should then be removed? We should only keep genes belonging to the strain of the model I think.

@hongzhonglu
Copy link
Collaborator

@BenjaSanchez As we discussed in last meeting, the present yeast-GEM will be developed as pan-model of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The strain specific model will be obtained based on yeast-GEM. In this case, it is OK to include these two genes.

@edkerk
Copy link
Member

edkerk commented Jun 28, 2018

@BenjaSanchez @hongzhonglu The general yeast-GEM consensus model should describe one species also due to strain-specific gapfilling and curation, and s288c has been the standard for S .cerevisiae models. We schould schedule a meeting to brainstorm and formalize how to deal with non-S288c genes and reactions, I already have some ideas, and then decide on how to deal with these two genes and similar instances.

@hongzhonglu
Copy link
Collaborator

@edkerk @BenjaSanchez Great! We are also thinking about it. So when are you free?

@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez removed the help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! label Jun 28, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez removed the question ideas/feedback from other people would be appreciated label Jul 10, 2018
@edkerk
Copy link
Member

edkerk commented Jul 11, 2018

During our offline discussion on Monday we decided that yeast-GEM should remain S288c-specific, to stick with the long-running consensus that the S. cerevisiae GEMs are based on this strain. So non-S288c genes should be removed from this model.

@snmendoz
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks a lot, @edkerk, @BenjaSanchez and @hongzhonglu . Now, my life is easier.

@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez changed the title 2 genes not found in S288C annotation fix: remove genes not found in S288C annotation Jul 11, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added the help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! label Nov 1, 2018
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added wip work in progress and removed help wanted feel free to help us solving this issue! labels May 22, 2019
BenjaSanchez added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 31, 2020
As discussed in #129, YAR069W-A and YHR214W-F are not from the s288c strain and therefore are here removed
@BenjaSanchez BenjaSanchez added fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release and removed wip work in progress labels Apr 1, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
fixed in devel this issue is already fixed in devel and will be closed after the next release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants