SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

CROPPER: a metagene creator resource for cross-platform and cross-species compendium studies.

BMC Bioinformatics · 2006-09-22

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-7-418PMID: 16995941

Open accessproduct-review; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundCurrent genomic research methods provide researchers with enormous amounts of data. Combining data from different high-throughput research technologies commonly available in biological databases can lead to novel findings and increase research efficiency. However, combining data from different heterogeneous sources is often a very arduous task. These sources can be different microarray technology platforms, genomic databases, or experiments performed on various species. Our aim was to develop a software program that could facilitate the combining of data from heterogeneous sources, and thus allow researchers to perform genomic cross-platform/cross-species studies and to use existing experimental data for compendium studies.ResultsWe have developed a web-based software resource, called CROPPER that uses the latest genomic information concerning different data identifiers and orthologous genes from the Ensembl database. CROPPER can be used to combine genomic data from different heterogeneous sources, allowing researchers to perform cross-platform/cross-species compendium studies without the need for complex computational tools or the requirement of setting up one's own in-house database. We also present an example of a simple cross-platform/cross-species compendium study based on publicly available Parkinson's disease data derived from different sources.ConclusionCROPPER is a user-friendly and freely available web-based software resource that can be successfully used for cross-species/cross-platform compendium studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.