From WormBaseWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Currently, genes or proteins mentioned in the abstracts get associated with papers. (This was not always the case.)

Are abstracts enough? Here's the data:

Number WBPaper ID Genes associated via abstract Genes associated via curator (done or in theory) Percentage overlap
1 00032891 cnc-2, dbl-1 cnc-1, cnc-2, cnc-3, cnc-4, cnc-5, daf-3, daf-4, dbl-1, lon-2, mpk-1, pmk-1, sma-2, sma-3, sma-4, sma-6, sma-9, tir-1, tol-1, cnc-11 10.5%
2 00032488 none 50+ (mostly in two different Figures, only ~15-20% mentioned in the text) 0%
3 00032489 ain-1, ain-2, let-7, lin-4 cog-1, daf-12, hbl-1, let-7, lin-4, lin-14, lin-28, lin-41, ain-2, ain-1 40%
4 00032508 none maybe myo-2 as a marker for their assay 0%
5 00032509 lgg-1, sepa-1
6 00032506 unc-5, unc-6, unc-40, unc-129
7 00034710 0
8 00035402 lin-42
9 00031936 cnb-1, npr-1, tax-2, tax-4, tax-6
10 00030829 (tons of supplemental files) che-1
11 00030846 0 aha-1, cky-1 0%
12 00035489 eat-16, egl-10 eat-16, egl-10, WBGene00011531 (rsbp-1)

Back to Associating genes with papers

Back to Paper Pipeline