Nucleic Acids Research Advance Access originally published online on November 4, 2007
Nucleic Acids Research 2008 36(Database issue):D1015-D1021; doi:10.1093/nar/gkm812
Nucleic Acids Research, 2008, Vol. 36, Database issue D1015-D1021
© 2007 The Author(s)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
PhosPhAt: a database of phosphorylation sites in Arabidopsis thaliana and a plant-specific phosphorylation site predictor
Joshua L. Heazlewood1,
Pawel Durek2,
Jan Hummel2,
Joachim Selbig2,
Wolfram Weckwerth3,
Dirk Walther2 and
Waltraud X. Schulze2,*
1ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley 6009, WA, Australia, 2Max Planck Institut für Molekulare Pflanzenphysiologie, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Golm and 3GoFORSYS, University of Potsdam, Institute of Biochemistry and Biology, c/o MPI-MP, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14424 Potsdam, Germany
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel: + 49 331 5678113; Fax: + 49 331 5678403; Email: wschulze{at}mpimp-golm.mpg.de
Received August 14, 2007. Revised September 18, 2007. Accepted September 18, 2007.
 |
ABSTRACT
|
|---|
The
PhosPhAt database provides a resource consolidating our
current knowledge of mass spectrometry-based identified phosphorylation
sites in
Arabidopsis and combines it with phosphorylation site
prediction specifically trained on experimentally identified
Arabidopsis phosphorylation motifs. The database currently contains
1187 unique tryptic peptide sequences encompassing 1053
Arabidopsis proteins. Among the characterized phosphorylation sites, there
are over 1000 with unambiguous site assignments, and nearly
500 for which the precise phosphorylation site could not be
determined. The database is searchable by protein accession
number, physical peptide characteristics, as well as by experimental
conditions (tissue sampled, phosphopeptide enrichment method).
For each protein, a phosphorylation site overview is presented
in tabular form with detailed information on each identified
phosphopeptide. We have utilized a set of 802 experimentally
validated serine phosphorylation sites to develop a method for
prediction of serine phosphorylation (pSer) in
Arabidopsis.
An analysis of the current annotated
Arabidopsis proteome yielded
in 27 782 predicted phosphoserine sites distributed across 17
035 proteins. These prediction results are summarized graphically
in the database together with the experimental phosphorylation
sites in a whole sequence context. The
Arabidopsis Protein Phosphorylation
Site Database (
PhosPhAt) provides a valuable resource to the
plant science community and can be accessed through the following
link
http://phosphat.mpimp-golm.mpg.de
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
Phosphorylation is the most studied post-translational modification
(PTM) involved in signaling. The principle of activation and
inactivation of proteins by phosphorylation as well as the function
of phosphorylated residues as docking sites for protein scaffolds
and complex assemblies has been well characterized in the field
of mammalian signal transduction (
1–4). In the field of
plant biology, the focus so far has been on the analysis of
phosphorylation of specific proteins and protein families (
5,
6)
and the study of very specific signaling pathways (
7,
8), mainly
using genetic tools.
In recent years, several techniques have been developed and optimized to allow more large scale and high throughput analyses of protein phosphorylation by mass spectrometry (9–11). In recent years, a number of global studies of plant protein phosphorylation sites have been carried out on various tissues and under a variety of biological conditions ranging from biotic and abiotic stresses to changing nutrient environments (12–15). These datasets were made available in large supplementary or printed tables with different specific information for each peptide, making these large tables difficult to handle in comparative analyses. There is currently no resource in the plant field that collects such information and makes it available to the community in a readily searchable format, thereby providing the possibility for added value through combined and comparative data interpretation.
While a number of phosphorylation databases are available, these are generally concentrated on studies undertaken in mammalian and prokaryotic systems. Phosida (16) contains large scale data from in house studies of Homo sapien and Bacillus subtilis; The Phosphorylation Site Database (http://vigen.biochem.vt.edu/xpd/xpd.htm) contains phosphorylation information from prokaryotic organisms; Phospho.ELM (http://phospho.elm.eu.org/) contains validated phosphorylation sites from eukaryotic systems but is heavily biased towards mammalian systems, while PhosphoSite (http://www.phosphosite.org/) is a curated site that focuses on vertebrate systems. The model plant Arabidopsis thaliana is a significant focus of international plant research (http://www.masc-proteomics.org/ for A. thaliana proteomics) and is currently only poorly represented by existing phosphorylation databases. Therefore, we believe that the PhosPhAt service combining experimental results with pSer prediction will be a valuable addition to current phosphorylation databases and to the plant research community in general.
|
DATABASE STRUCTURE AND DESIGN
|
|---|
The
PhosPhAt database uses a MySQL relational database operating
on a Linux based operating system. The web-based graphical user
interface allows the construction of SQL (structured query language)
queries through standard HTML forms. Complex database queries
are created with pull-down menus that retrieve data through
purpose-built PHP scripts that interact with the MySQL tables
in
PhosPhAt.
The database is comprised of two distinct tables (Figure 1): the first table (phosphat) contains the experimental phosphopeptide information and comprises data from several published large- and medium-scale phosphoproteomic analyses (9,12–15) as well as unpublished sites identified in authors’ labs. Each entry is a unique experimentally measured precursor ion (m/z) and not a composite entry. This is an important feature of the PhosPhAt database as it tracks each piece of experimental data, and provides links also to the actual experimental mass spectra deposited in PROMEX [http://promex.mpimp-golm.mpg.de; (17)]. With a link to this spectral library on the ‘Result Table’ users can download the precursor mass-to-charge ratio and the corresponding CID-spectrum. This data is crucial for the design of multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) experiments for targeted phosphopeptide-quantification on a triple quadrupole or ion trap mass spectrometer (10,18).
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
|
Figure 1. Schematic diagram outlining the structure of the PhosPhAt service illustrating the two main query entry points to query experimental data and pSer prediction information. Both services merge into a common output at the ‘Summary Page’ on which the prediction results are displayed on top of the page and all experimental phosphopeptides for the given AGI code are listed below. In instances where no experimental phosphopeptides are available, only the prediction result will be displayed. External links to published references at PubMed and MS/MS data at the ProMex mass spectral library (17) are also shown.
|
|
The second table, the prediction table (TAIR7pS), contains pSer
predictions for the entire
Arabidopsis annotated proteome comprising
31 921 proteins (release 7 from25 April 2007) available from
The Arabidopsis Information Resource [
www.arabidopsis.org; (
19)].
The prediction table contains precompiled pSer prediction scores
for total of 928 449 serine residues.
Currently, the experimental data table contains 1187 defined tryptic peptides matching 1053 distinct proteins from the model plant A. thaliana. Phosphorylation sites are marked as ‘defined’ if the precise location of the phosphorylated amino acid has been unambiguously determined by mass spectrometric analysis. This usually implies manual interpretation of mass spectra and additional scoring algorithms (16). These ‘defined’ sites are marked with brackets and a lowercase p, e.g. (pS), (pT), (pY). Phosphorylation sites marked as ‘undefined’ were not clearly resolved by the mass spectrometric experiments. These sites are marked as lowercase letters in brackets, e.g. (s), (t), (y). Often, the ‘undefined’ sites are two putatively phosphorylated amino acids in close proximity in the peptide and the difference between these options could not be interpreted based on the mass spectrum. The ‘undefined’ sites are often only a subset of the serines, threonines, or tyrosines in the tryptic peptide. If no statement can be made on the location of the phosphorylation site, the modified tryptic peptide sequence is displayed with the remark ‘site not determined’.
|
DATABASE OVERVIEW
|
|---|
The entry page of the
PhosPhAt database provides two general
search strategies: (i) browsing multiple instances of experimental
phosphorylation sites via the tab ‘Query Experimental
Data’, and (ii) displaying a summary of phosphorylation
site prediction of one locus with a concurrent display of experimental
sites via the tab ‘Query Prediction Data’.
The query via ‘Experimental Data’ provides access to the experimentally verified phosphorylation sites by physical parameters of the peptide (charge state, number of modifications, mass accuracy), methodological aspects (enrichment method, digesting enzyme, mass analyzer), biological context (tissue, cellular compartment, experimental condition), or research group (published datasets, research groups). A list of proteins of interest can also be submitted using the AGI gene code format. The user will then be directed to the ‘Result Table’ (Figure 1) on which, depending on the query, all experimentally identified phosphorylated peptides are displayed for every protein in a tabular form. Each AGI code in the ‘Result Table’ provides a link to the ‘Summary Page’ outlining all experimental information for that locus as well as pSer prediction.
The ‘Summary Page’ details experimentally validated/identified peptides for a given AGI code with each phosphopeptide displayed in its own table. The database has been specifically designed to capture as much information as possible for each experimentally identified phosphopeptide and thus a 'composite' entry for each site has not been used. In many cases, site level redundancy in the form of multiple experimental phosphopeptide entries for one phosphorylation site can be observed on this page. Each phosphopeptide entry provides a link to MS/MS spectra housed in the ProMEX (17) database (if available; http://promex.mpimp-golm.mpg.de) as well as a link to the PubMed reference (if data published).
The ‘Query Prediction Data’ tab also serves as entry point to the database and allows queries using single AGI codes. This tab provides a direct link to the ‘Summary Page’ (Figure 1) where experimental and pSer predictions for the AGI code entry are outlined for the amino acid sequence of the retrieved entry. As outlined above, this page also provides a detailed breakdown of all phosphorylation modification data (if available) for this locus.
|
USING THE PhosPhAt DATABASE
|
|---|
To query experimental data, a series of pull down menus are
available to access most of the data in the phosphat data table.
The default setting for this query form will pull all entries
(>3000) from the database. A more targeted query is the intended
purpose of this form. For example, retrieving phosphopeptide
data from a previously-published paper using a delta mass cut-off
(a mass difference produced when data originally matched) and
a matching score cut-off (score obtained for original match)
is possible using the following steps:
- Select a publication of interest from the ‘Published Reference’ pull-down menu, e.g. Niittylä et.al. (14).
Note: if the ‘Query Database’ button at the bottom of the form is selected now, this query alone will produce 97 hits.
- Instigate a delta mass cut-off for this publication set, e.g. a relatively stringent range would be ±0.01 Da.
Note: using the ‘Query Database’ button now in combination with step (i) will produce 27 hits.
- Choose a MOWSE score cut-off produced by the MS interrogation program Mascot (20) when the data was originally matched, e.g. 40 (a higher score is more stringent).
Hitting the ‘Query Database’ button at the bottom of the form for the final query component will produce six hits.
A more powerful and useful analysis of the data can be undertaken through the use of the experimental form selectors. The redundancy in phosphorylation site entries in the phosphat table allows the user to address information about phosphorylation sites experimentally identified under different biological conditions or in different tissues. For example, phosphopeptides sets for nitrate starvation and re-supply, phosphate starvation and re-supply, as well as carbon starvation and sucrose re-supply be obtained through the query form and compared (Figure 2). Such comparative analyses may help to assign biological functions to specific phosphorylation sites.
View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
|
Figure 2. Venn diagram of experimental phosphorylation sites retrieved from the PhosPhAt database for different nutrient stress experiments. The overlap between different experiments comprises mainly plasma membrane proton ATPases and aquaporins, the proteins unique for each condition include transporters and kinases among others. Nitrate: nitrate starvation and resupply; Phosphate: phosphate starvation and resupply; Carbon: carbon starvation and sucrose re-supply.
|
|
|
ARABIDOPSIS pSer PREDICTION
|
|---|
Protein phosphorylation is of paramount importance for understanding
biochemical regulation. Because of restricted experimental approaches
for
in vivo-site determination, the computational prediction
of phosphorylation sites is a complementary and helpful tool.
Using the gathered experimentally-verified data from our database
as a training set, we used a Support Vector Machine (SVM) approach
to classify candidate serine sites (Supplementary Table 1; for
detailed information on the prediction method, please refer
to the Supplementary material). Computed SVM decision values
greater than zero indicate a positive prediction of a phosphorylation
event, while negative values predict serine residues not to
be phosphorylated. Greater absolute decision values indicate
greater confidence in the prediction. In the ‘Summary
Page’, candidate serines are tagged with mouse-over information
pop-up-boxes of experimental evidence as well as prediction
results (SVM decision value). In the displayed sequence, serines
are colored red if experimentally verified and they are underlined
when positively predicted with a decision value > 0 by the
computational classifier.
The TAIR7pS table comprises a total of 928 449 serine site motifs in 31 921 protein sequences. Of those, 27 782 serines distributed in 17 035 proteins (14 339 unique genes) were predicted to be phosphorylated with high confidence (decision value >1), which makes up approximately half of the annotated Arabidopsis proteome. For 176 442 serines, medium confidence (0 <decision value <1) was predicted and for 435 231 serines, the computed decision value was below –1 indicative of high-confidence negative predictions; i.e. no phosphorylation.
A comparison of the prediction performance of the plant-specific pSer predictor and the generic NetPhos 2.0 (21) reveals a significant improvement of recall, precision, as well as Matthew's correlation coefficient (CC) for Arabidopsis proteins (Figure 3). The CC reached with our plant-specific pSer predictor was 0.46 and, thus, significantly better than the CC for NetPhos 2.0 (CC = 0.22). In a 10-fold cross-validation test, 69% of phosphorylated serine sites from the training set were correctly recognized (Supplementary Table 1) compared to 68% recall for the NetPhos 2.0 server. Of the predicted sites, 61% were experimentally verified phosphoserine sites while the precision achieved with NetPhos 2.0 was 43%. The comparison of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves revealed a highly significant improvement of the prediction performance with z-score of 24.1 according to the algorithm proposed by (22) corresponding to a P-value of 3.3E–128 in the limiting case of a normal distribution. The area under the ROC curve for the PhosPhAt plant-specific pSer predictor was 0.81 ± 0.01 and 0.67 ± 0.01 for NetPhos, respectively (Figure 4).
View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
|
Figure 3. Prediction performance of the pSer predictor in comparison to NetPhos 2.0 (21). The recall rate versus the associated precision is plotted. The curved lines indicate lines of equal correlation coefficient. In the diagram, improved classification performance is indicated for predictors falling into the upper right corner. Performance results for our classifier correspond to results obtained in the 10-fold cross-validation test (see Supplementary material for details.) The classifier NetPhos 2.0 was applied to our dataset without training; i.e. NetPhos 2.0 was applied to an independent dataset as it was technically not possible to perform a cross-validation for NetPhos 2.0. While the testing protocols differed, the results still suggest that a plant-specific predictor may yield better performance when applied to plant proteins than a generic predictor.
|
|
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
|
Figure 4. Receiver operating characteristics curves of the prediction by pSer predictor in comparison to NetPhos 2.0 (21) (see Supplementary material for details). In the diagram, improved classification performance is indicated for predictors with increased area under the ROC. The area under the ROC curve was A1 = 0.81 ± 0.01 for the pSer predictor and A2 = 0.67 ± 0.01 for NetPhos and was significantly better with a z-score = (A1–A2)/SE(A1–A2) of 24.1 corresponding to a P-value of 3.3E–128 in the limiting case of a normal distribution according to the algorithm proposed in (22).
|
|
In order to test for over- and under-representation of predicted
phosphorylation sites in different functional categories based
on GO annotations (
23), we applied the Fisher exact test to
the GO-term classified prediction result. Proteins involved
in regulatory and signaling processes are significantly overrepresented
in the set of highly confident phosphorylated proteins while
housekeeping and other enzymatic functions are underrepresented
(
Figure 5).
View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
|
Figure 5. Negative log(P-values) from Fisher exact test on the occurrences of GO: function terms associated with predicted phosphoproteins. P-values were corrected for multiple testing by using the False Discovery Rate (FDR) formalism (25). Overrepresented GO: terms are colored red, underrepresented blue. GO: terms were included if pFDR <0.001. GO annotations were taken from TAIR (19). To avoid training bias, phosphorylation sites used during the training of the classifier have been removed in the Fisher exact test. Only GO assignments with evidence categories: direct assay, mutant phenotype, physical and genetic interaction as well as sequence of structural similarity have been considered.
|
|
The predicted sites with highest decision values in combination
with the experimental phosphorylation sites provide a powerful
basis for further in-depth analysis of phosphorylation motifs
in orthologous and paralogous proteins also between different
organisms (
24). Thus, our dataset provides a rich resource for
computational biologists interested in the study of conservation
of phosphorylation sites and discovery of such conserved sites
across protein classes and plant species.
|
CONCLUSIONS
|
|---|
The
PhosPhAt database has been initiated to provide a resource
that consolidates our current knowledge of mass spectrometry-based
identified phosphorylation sites in the model plant
Arabidopsis.
It is combined with a phosphoserine site prediction tool specifically
trained on
Arabidopsis serine phosphorylation site motifs. Thus,
our database not only serves as a searchable knowledge base
for experimentally-identified phosphorylation sites, but in
addition also provides a powerful resource for the characterization
and annotation of yet unidentified phosphoserine sites in
Arabidopsis.
The value of the
PhosPhAt resource thus lies in the possibility
for comparative analysis of experimental sets (
Figure 2), confirmation
of experimental phosphorylation sites by providing evidence
from different published and unpublished sources, and in the
implementation of prediction where experimental evidence is
not (yet) available.
|
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
|---|
Supplementary Data are available at NAR Online.
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
|
|---|
We would like to thank Wolfgang Engelsberger for providing feedback
regarding the usability and design of the database. The authors
would also like to thank Robert Schmidt for the rapid implementation
of changes in the database website after review of the manuscript.
This work has been supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
through a Research Fellowship to J.L.H. and by the Australian
Research Council through a Postdoctoral Fellowship to J.L.H.
W.S. is supported by the Emmy-Noether Program of the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). Funding to pay the Open Access
publication charges for this article was provided by the Max
Planck Institute for Molecular Plant Physiology.
Conflict of interest statement. None declared.
|
REFERENCES
|
|---|
- Chung HJ, Sehnke PC, Ferl RJ. The 14-3-3 proteins: cellular regulators of plant metabolism. Trends Plant Sci. (1999) 4:367–371.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Yaffe MB. Phosphotyrosine-binding domains in signal transduction. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. (2002) 3:177–186.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Pawson T. Specificity in signal transduction: from phosphotyrosine-SH2 domain interactions to complex cellular systems. Cell (2004) 116:191–203.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Pawson T, Gish GD. SH2 and SH3 domains: from structure to function. Cell (1992) 71:359–362.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Camoni L, Iori V, Marra M, Aducci P. Phosphorylation-dependent interaction between plant plasma membrane H(+)ATPase and 14-3-3 proteins. J. Biol. Chem. (2000) 275:99919–99923.
- Hrabak EM, Chan CW, Gribskov M, Harper JF, Choi JH, Halford N, Kudla J, Luan S, Nimmo HG, et al. The Arabidopsis CDPK-SnRK superfamily of protein kinases. Plant Physiol. (2003) 132:666–680.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Wang X, Goshe MB, Sonderblom EJ, Phinney BS, Kuchar JA, Li J, Asami T, Yoshida S, Huber SC, et al. Identification and functional analysis of in vivo phosphorylation sites of the Arabidopsis Brassinosteroid-insesnitive 1 receptor kinase. Plant Cell (2005) 17:1685–1703.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Yoshida S, Parniske M. Regulation of plant symbiosis receptor kinase through serine and threonine phosphorylation. J. Biol. Chem. (2005) 280:9203–9209.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Wolschin F, Weckwerth W. Combining metal oxide affinity chromatography (MOAC) and selective mass spectrometry for robust identification of in vivo protein phosphorylation sites. Plant Methods (2005) 1:1–10.[CrossRef][Medline]
- Wolschin F, Lehmann U, Glinski M, Weckwerth W. An integrated strategy for identification and relative quantification of site-specific protein phosphorylation using liquid chromatography coupled to MS2/MS3. Rapid Commun. Mass Sp. (2005) 19:3626–3632.[CrossRef]
- Nühse TS, Stensballe A, Jensen ON, Peck J. Large-scale analysis of in vivo phosphorylated membrane proteins by immobilized metal ion affinity chromatography and mass spectrometry. Mol. Cell. Proteomics (2003) 2:1234–1243.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Nühse TS, Stensballe A, Jensen ON, Peck SC. Phosphoproteomics of the Arabidopsis plasma membrane and a new phosphorylation site database. Plant Cell (2004) 16:2394–23405.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Benschop JJ, Mohammed S, O'Flaherty M, Heck AJ, Slijper M, Menke FL. Quantitative phospho-proteomics of early elicitor signalling in Arabidopsis. Mol. Cell. Proteomics (2007) 6:1705–1713.
- Niittylä T, Fuglsang AT, Palmgren MG, Frommer WB, Schulze WX. Temporal analysis of sucrose-induced phosphorylation changes in plasma membrane proteins of Arabidopsis. Mol. Cell. Proteomics (2007) 6:1711–1726.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- de la Fuente van Bentem S, Anrather D, Roitinger E, Djamei A, Hufnagl T, Barta A, Csaszar E, Dohnal I, Lecourieux D, et al. Phosphoproteomics reveals extensive in vivo phosphorylation of Arabidopsis proteins involved in RNA metabolism. Nucleic Acids Res. (2006) 34:3267–3278.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Olsen JV, Blagoev B, Gnad F, Macek B, Kumar C, Mortensen P, Mann M. Global, in vivo, and site-specific phosphorylation dynamics in signaling networks. Cell (2006) 127:635–648.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Hummel J, Niemann M, Wienkoop S, Schulze W, Steinhauser D, Selbig J, Walther D, Weckwerth W. ProMEX: a mass spectral reference database for proteins and protein phosphorylation sites. BMC Bioinformatics (2007) 8:216.[CrossRef][Medline]
- Glinski M, Weckwerth W. Differential multisite phosphorylation of the trehalose-6-phosphate synthase gene family in Arabidopsis thaliana: a mass spectrometry-based process for multiparallel peptide library phosphorylation analysis. Mol. Cell. Proteomics (2005) 4:1614–1625.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Huala E, Dickerman AW, Garcia-Hernandez M, Weems D, Reiser L, LaFond F, Hanley D, Kiphart D, Zhuang M, et al. The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR): a comprehensive database and web-based information retrieval, analysis, and visualization system for a model plant. Nucleic Acids Res. (2001) 29:102–105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Perkins DN, Pappin D.JC, Creasy DM, Cottrell JS. Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data. Electrophoresis (1999) 20:3551–3567.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Blom N, Gammeltoft S, Brunak S. Sequence- and structure-based prediction of eucaryotic protein phosphorylation sites. J. Mol. Biol. (1999) 294:1351–1362.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology (1983) 3:3.[Medline]
- Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet. (2000) 25:25–29.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Weckwerth W, Selbig J. Scoring and identifying organism-specific functional patterns and putative phosphorylation sites in protein sequences using mutual information. Biochem. Bioph. Res. Co. (2003) 307:516–521.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B (1995) 57:289–300.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION