Research article
Experimental-confirmation and functional-annotation of predicted proteins in the chicken genome
-
* Corresponding author: Fiona M McCarthy fmccarthy@cvm.msstate.edu
- † Equal contributors
1 Department of Basic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
2 Institute for Digital Biology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
3 Life Sciences and Biotechnology Institute, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
4 Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
BMC Genomics 2007, 8:425 doi:10.1186/1471-2164-8-425
Published: 19 November 2007Additional files
Additional file 1:
Proteins identified by DDF-MudPIT and their distribution by tissue type. Column 1 shows the RefSeq numbers of the identified chicken predicted proteins, column 2 indicates the corresponding predicted protein names (assigned by NCBI). Columns 3–8 shows the different types of tissue/cells used in this study and + and - indicate the presence or absence of the proteins in the specified tissue/cell, respectively.
Format: XLS Size: 1.7MB Download file
This file can be viewed with: Microsoft Excel Viewer
Additional file 2:
Database identifiers for the predicted proteins. RefSeq and gi identifiers (columns 1 & 2) are cross-referenced with other database identifiers for each of the identified chicken proteins.
Format: XLS Size: 1.3MB Download file
This file can be viewed with: Microsoft Excel Viewer
Additional file 3:
Chicken-human/mouse orthologs predicted by different tools. Using either the human or mouse orthologs shown in column 3, a standardized gene symbol and name (column 4 & 5) was assigned to 5,064 (65%) of the predicted proteins identified in this study. Columns 6–10 list the orthology prediction tools that were used to predict the human or mouse orthologs.
Format: XLS Size: 1.6MB Download file
This file can be viewed with: Microsoft Excel Viewer