1. Computational and Systems Biology
  2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
Download icon

Thousands of novel translated open reading frames in humans inferred by ribosome footprint profiling

  1. Anil Raj  Is a corresponding author
  2. Sidney H Wang
  3. Heejung Shim
  4. Arbel Harpak
  5. Yang I Li
  6. Brett Engelmann
  7. Matthew Stephens
  8. Yoav Gilad
  9. Jonathan K Pritchard
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. University of Chicago, United States
  3. Purdue University, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 40
  • Views 5,336
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e13328 doi: 10.7554/eLife.13328

Abstract

Accurate annotation of protein coding regions is essential for understanding how genetic information is translated into function. We describe riboHMM, a new method that uses ribosome footprint data to accurately infer translated sequences. Applying riboHMM to human lymphoblastoid cell lines, we identified 7,273 novel coding sequences, including 2,442 translated upstream open reading frames. We observed an enrichment of footprints at inferred initiation sites after drug-induced arrest of translation initiation, validating many of the novel coding sequences. The novel proteins exhibit significant selective constraint in the inferred reading frames, suggesting that many are functional. Moreover, ~40% of bicistronic transcripts showed negative correlation in the translation levels of their two coding sequences, suggesting a potential regulatory role for these novel regions. Despite known limitations of mass spectrometry to detect protein expressed at low level, we estimated a 14% validation rate. Our work significantly expands the set of known coding regions in humans.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Anil Raj

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    rajanil@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Sidney H Wang

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Heejung Shim

    Department of Statistics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Arbel Harpak

    Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Yang I Li

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Brett Engelmann

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Matthew Stephens

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Yoav Gilad

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jonathan K Pritchard

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Nicholas T Ingolia, University of California, Berkeley, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: November 25, 2015
  2. Accepted: May 26, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 27, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 11, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: July 12, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Raj et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,336
    Page views
  • 1,394
    Downloads
  • 40
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Andreas Hofmann et al.
    Research Article Updated
    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Tung D Phan et al.
    Research Article Updated