[Fwd: Re: [annotation] RNA trimethylguanosine cap binding query]

Alexander Diehl adiehl at informatics.jax.org
Thu Jan 17 06:41:44 PST 2008


Harold,

A quick google of "convalent binding" yields lots of hits, mostly of a 
scientific nature.  I think this is a not-uncommon usage, undergraduate 
chemistry be damned.

-- Alex


Harold Drabkin wrote:
> I don't believe there is such thing as "covalent binding". There is 
> covalent bonding.  Perhaps it is the term GPI anchor binding" that 
> needs to be obsoleted and a new term, not a child of binding,  be made 
> to properly describe whatever is going on.
>
> hd
>
> Alexander Diehl wrote:
>> Harold,
>>
>> It is true I have made a number of annotations to the term 'GPI 
>> anchor binding' for CD24a and Thy1.  I was always a bit uncomfortable 
>> about these annotations as they violated the idea of binding terms 
>> being for non-covalent bonds only, but in fact I was only following 
>> the precedent set by others in the GO for GPI-anchored proteins.  You 
>> see for as long as I have been in the GO, and perhaps for much 
>> longer, we have had the SwissProt Keyword mapping,
>>
>> SP_KW:KW-0336 GPI-anchor > GO:GPI anchor binding ; GO:0048503
>>
>> which basically means any protein identified by SwissProt curators as 
>> having a GPI-anchor has been mapped to 'GPI-anchor binding'.  Apart 
>> from CD24a and Thy1, all the other genes in MGI annotated to 'GPI 
>> anchor binding' are based on this keyword mapping.  Looking at Amigo, 
>> I believe that every single experimentally based annotation to 'GPI 
>> anchor binding' is for a GPI anchored protein, so clearly other 
>> annotators use this term in this way.  I would bet this term was put 
>> in the GO by someone who intended it to be used this way.  And, as 
>> Karen so conveniently pointed out, the definitions of GO binding 
>> terms, including GPI anchor binding, do not specifically exclude 
>> covalent binding, so logically the annotations stand.  I would also 
>> point out that neither the 'Annotation Guide' nor 'Molecular Function 
>> Ontology Guidelines' sections of the documentation on the Gene 
>> Ontology Consortium's official web pages exclude annotation of 
>> covalent binding or even mention it.  We don't even exclude 
>> annotation of covalent binding in the much stricter MGI GO annotation 
>> guidelines (the written ones).
>>
>> However, since I know that you are now at least driven halfway up the 
>> wall by my argumentation, I am may be willing to compromise and 
>> propose that in addition to eliminating the SwissProt keyword 
>> mapping, that we obsolete the term 'GPI-anchor binding ; GO:0048503' 
>> itself.  I know of no protein that binds GPI anchors specifically in 
>> a non-covalent way, although I agree it is a theoretical possibility, 
>> and the term clearly has only been a source of confusion to GO 
>> annotators, although the annotations are actually _useful_ for GO 
>> users, who might want to be able to easily find GPI-anchored proteins 
>> all at once.  But forget about the users -- with luck they may figure 
>> out that 'anchored to external side of plasma membrane ; GO:0031362' 
>> can be used to find some GPI anchored proteins, although there is no 
>> SwissProt mapping to this term and this term is less specific than 
>> 'GPI anchor binding'.
>>
>> Rest assured Harold, I do not routinely annotate covalent binding, 
>> except in the case of 'GPI anchor binding' where I felt I was 
>> following the precedent of others in the GO and providing quite 
>> useful information to our users.  Although I am open to doing so, I 
>> do not plan remove my experimentally correct annotations until 
>> further discussions of this issue have taken place.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> Harold Drabkin wrote:
>>> Alex can you please look at the GPI anchor binding annotations that 
>>> you made here. The term should only be used for non-covalent 
>>> binding, not covalent attachment. Since you recently looked at the 
>>> papers, you are more familiar with what they were trying to show.
>>>
>>> hjd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Return-Path:     <val at sanger.ac.uk>
>>> Received:     from smtp.sanger.ac.uk (smtp.sanger.ac.uk 
>>> [193.62.203.215]) by mirkwood.informatics.jax.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) 
>>> with ESMTP id m0GIBhtp026890 for <hjd at informatics.jax.org>; Wed, 16 
>>> Jan 2008 13:11:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from val at sanger.ac.uk)
>>> Received:     from intmail1b.internal.sanger.ac.uk ([172.17.56.130] 
>>> helo=smtp.sanger.ac.uk) by routemail.internal.sanger.ac.uk with 
>>> esmtp (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from <val at sanger.ac.uk>) id 
>>> 1JFCjl-0002W8-LF for hjd at informatics.jax.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 
>>> 18:11:41 +0000
>>> Received:     from deskpro16317.dynamic.sanger.ac.uk ([172.20.8.72]) 
>>> by intmail1b.internal.sanger.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 
>>> 1JFCjl-0003rb-Fm; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:11:41 +0000
>>> Received:     from localhost.sanger.ac.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by 
>>> deskpro16317.dynamic.sanger.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 
>>> 1JFCjl-0008GD-Ef; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:11:41 +0000
>>> Message-ID:     <478E48DD.1010503 at sanger.ac.uk>
>>> Date:     Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:11:41 +0000
>>> From:     Valerie Wood <val at sanger.ac.uk>
>>> User-Agent:     Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) 
>>> Gecko/20070113 Debian/1.7.8-1sarge10
>>> X-Accept-Language:     en
>>> MIME-Version:     1.0
>>> To:     hjd at informatics.jax.org
>>> CC:     Valerie Wood <val at sanger.ac.uk>
>>> Subject:     Re: [annotation] RNA trimethylguanosine cap binding query
>>> References:     <478E3631.2030208 at sanger.ac.uk> 
>>> <478E435E.30002 at informatics.jax.org>
>>> In-Reply-To:     <478E435E.30002 at informatics.jax.org>
>>> Content-Type:     text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding:     7bit
>>> X-PMX-Version:     5.4.0.320885, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.2.313940, 
>>> Antispam-Data: 2008.1.16.95857
>>> X-PerlMx-Spam:     Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='__CT 0, 
>>> __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, 
>>> __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __USER_AGENT 0'
>>> Content-Length:     2374
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Hi Harold,
>>>
>>> mouse
>>> Cd24a
>>> uses *PMID: 14707049 for what seems to be a covalent GPI-binding 
>>> doesn't it?
>>>
>>> i'm sure there is 'mixed usage'
>>>
>>> or is there some other data in there (I just did a search on GPI)
>>>
>>> Val
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Harold Drabkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Valerie Wood wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I recently used the term RNA trimethylguanosine cap binding  to 
>>>>> annotate pombe telomerase RNA and represent the fact that this is 
>>>>> trimethylguanosine capped, but on re-reading the definition  I'm 
>>>>> not sure if this is correct?
>>>>> Can I use this for the modification itself?  or is it for gene 
>>>>> products which interact with a capped product?
>>>>
>>>> It represents some gene product that binds to the triMeG cap 
>>>> present on an mRNA. Not the gene product that makes the cap. A 
>>>> binding term should never be used for a covalent bond. Binding 
>>>> implies a reversible reaction at STP, with a Ka and Kd.
>>>>
>>>> GPI anchor binding it meant to be used for something that binds the 
>>>> the GPI anchor and not covalently linked to it.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There do not appear to be any other annotations to this term 
>>>>> despite  the fact that many RNAs are capped which is another 
>>>>> reason which made me suspect my usage may be wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should  the binding terms should only be used for non-covalent 
>>>>> modifications (although this is only in some of the binding 
>>>>> defs?), and  does not represent the use of some terms. For 
>>>>> instance GPI anchor binding is used for a number of proteins which 
>>>>> are GPI anchored, in addition to proteins which bins the GPI 
>>>>> moiety during GPI anchor biosynthesis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Val
>>>>>
>>>>> Def:
>>>>> Interacting selectively with the trimethylguanosine 
>>>>> (m(3)(2,2,7)-GTP) moiety located at the 5' end of some RNA 
>>>>> molecules. Such trimethylated cap structures, generally produced 
>>>>> by posttranscriptional modification of a 7-methylguanosine cap, 
>>>>> are often found on snRNAs and snoRNAs transcribed by RNA 
>>>>> polymerase II, but have also be found on snRNAs transcribed by RNA 
>>>>> polymerase III. They have also been found on a subset of the mRNA 
>>>>> population in some species, e.g. C. elegans.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Alexander Diehl, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Curator
Mouse Genome Informatics
The Jackson Laboratory
600 Main Street
Bar Harbor, ME  04609

email:  adiehl at informatics.jax.org
work:  +1 (207) 288-6427
fax:  +1 (207) 288-6131




More information about the Annotation mailing list