eggNOG-mapper v2: Functional Annotation, Orthology Assignments, and Domain Prediction at the Metagenomic Scale

Even though automated functional annotation of genes represents a fundamental step in most genomic and metagenomic workflows, it remains challenging at large scales. Here, we describe a major upgrade to eggNOG-mapper, a tool for functional annotation based on precomputed orthology assignments, now optimized for vast (meta)genomic data sets. Improvements in version 2 include a full update of both the genomes and functional databases to those from eggNOG v5, as well as several efficiency enhancements and new features. Most notably, eggNOG-mapper v2 now allows for: (i) de novo gene prediction from raw contigs, (ii) built-in pairwise orthology prediction, (iii) fast protein domain discovery, and (iv) automated GFF decoration. eggNOG-mapper v2 is available as a standalone tool or as an online service at http://eggnog-mapper.embl.de.

eggNOG-mapper v2: Functional Annotation, Orthology Assignments, and Domain Prediction at the Metagenomic Scale

Even though automated functional annotation of genes represents a fundamental step in most genomic and metagenomic workflows, it remains challenging at large scales. Here, we describe a major upgrade to eggNOG-mapper, a tool for functional annotation based on precomputed orthology assignments, now optimized for vast (meta)genomic data sets. Improvements in version 2 include a full update of both the genomes and functional databases to those from eggNOG v5, as well as several efficiency enhancements and new features. Most notably, eggNOG-mapper v2 now allows: (i) de novo gene prediction from raw contigs, (ii) built-in pairwise orthology prediction, (iii) fast protein domain discovery, and (iv) automated GFF decoration. eggNOG-mapper v2 is available as a standalone tool or as an online service at http://eggnog-mapper.embl.de.

Coexpression reveals conserved mechanisms of transcriptional cell identity

ABSTRACTWhat makes a mouse a mouse, and not a hamster? The answer lies in the genome, and more specifically, in differences in gene regulation between the two organisms: where and when each gene is expressed. To quantify differences, a typical study will either compare functional genomics data from homologous tissues, limiting the approach to closely related species; or compare gene repertoires, limiting the resolution of the analysis to gross correlations between phenotypes and gene family size. As an alternative, gene coexpression networks provide a basis for studying the evolution of gene regulation without these constraints. By incorporating data from hundreds of independent experiments, meta-analytic coexpression networks reflect the convergent output of species-specific transcriptional regulation.In this work, we develop a measure of regulatory evolution based on gene coexpression. Comparing data from 14 species, we quantify the conservation of coexpression patterns 1) as a function of evolutionary time, 2) across orthology prediction algorithms, and 3) with reference to cell- and tissue-specificity. Strikingly, we uncover deeply conserved patterns of gradient-like expression across cell types from both the animal and plant kingdoms. These results suggest that ancient genes contribute to transcriptional cell identity through mechanisms that are independent of duplication and divergence.

Systematic errors in orthology inference: a bug or a feature for evolutionary analyses?

Introductory paragraphThe availability of complete sets of genes from many organisms makes it possible to identify genes unique to (or lost from) certain clades. This information is used to reconstruct phylogenetic trees; to identify genes involved in the evolution of clade specific novelties; and for phylostratigraphy - identifying ages of genes in a given species. These investigations rely on accurately predicted orthologs. Here we use simulation to produce sets of orthologs which experience no gains or losses. We show that errors in identifying orthologs increase with higher rates of evolution. We use the predicted sets of orthologs, with errors, to reconstruct phylogenetic trees; to count gains and losses; and for phylostratigraphy. Our simulated data, containing information only from errors in orthology prediction, closely recapitulate findings from empirical data. We suggest published downstream analyses must be informed to a large extent by errors in orthology prediction which mimic expected patterns of gene evolution.