Benchmarking Hayai-Annotation Plants: A Re-evaluation Using Standard Evaluation Metrics is a research paper. On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0.104. It has been cited 1 time.
Abstract The rapid growth of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology has led to a surge in the determination of whole genome sequences in plants. This has created a need for functional annotation of newly predicted gene sequences in the assembled genomes. To address this, “Hayai-Annotation Plants” was developed as a gene functional annotation tool for plant species. In this report, we compared Hayai-Annotation Plants with Blast2GO and TRAPID, focusing on the three primary gene-ontology (GO) domains: Biological Process (BP), Molecular Function (MF), and Cellular Component (CC). Using the Arabidopsis thaliana GO annotation as a benchmark, we evaluated each tool using two approaches: the area under the precision-recall curve (AUC-PR) and the metrics used at the critical assessment of functional annotation (CAFA). In the latter case, a CAFA-evaluator, was used to determine the F-score, weighted F-score, and S-score for each domain. Hayai-Annotation Plants showed better performances in all three GO domains. Our results thus reaffirm the effectiveness of Hayai-Annotation Plants for functional gene annotation in plant species. In this era of extensive whole genome sequencing, Hayai-Annotation Plants will serve as a valuable tool that facilitates simplified and accurate gene function annotation for numerous users, thereby making a significant contribution to plant research.
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
Base Score Contribution
0.104
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0
Citation network not refreshed for this result
This paper's DataRank is currently driven only by its base citation score. Citation network data was not refreshed for this result.
Learn more about DataRank methodology →DataRank blends this paper's own citation count with the influence of the papers that cite it. Here, roughly 100% comes from its base citations and 0% from the citation network.
Citers are pulled from OpenAlex sorted by cited_by_count:descand capped per paper, so when the cap binds we keep the highest-signal references and the score is reproducible across reruns.