next up previous
Next: Good Example Up: Exchange Format Basics Previous: Components

Bad Examples

Consider this Genpept report from Entrez:

LOCUS       T41727        577 aa                    PLN       03-DEC-1999
DEFINITION  F-box domain protein Pof3p - fission yeast (Schizosaccharomyces
            pombe).
ACCESSION   T41727
PID         g7490551
VERSION     T41727  GI:7490551
DBSOURCE    pir: locus T41727;
            summary: #length 577 #molecular-weight 66238 #checksum 7366;
            genetic: #gene pof3; SPDB:SPCC338.16 #map_position 3;
            PIR dates: 03-Dec-1999 #sequence_revision 03-Dec-1999 #text_change
            03-Dec-1999.
KEYWORDS    .
SOURCE      fission yeast.
  ORGANISM  Schizosaccharomyces pombe
            Eukaryota; Fungi; Ascomycota; Schizosaccharomycetales;
            Schizosaccharomycetaceae; Schizosaccharomyces.
REFERENCE   1  (residues 1 to 577)
  AUTHORS   Lyne,M., Wood,V., Rajandream,M.A., Barrell,B.G., Murphy,L. and
            Harris,D.
  TITLE     Direct Submission
  JOURNAL   Submitted (??-JUN-1998) to the EMBL Data Library
FEATURES             Location/Qualifiers
     source          1..577
                     /organism="Schizosaccharomyces pombe"
                     /db_xref="taxon:4896"
     Protein         1..577
                     /product="F-box domain protein Pof3p"
ORIGIN      
        1 mnnyqvkaik ektqqylskr kfedaltfit ktieqepnpt idlfelraqv yeksgqysqa
       61 eldakrmihl narnargylr lgkllqldgf dkkadqlytq glrmvhkmdp lrpvlkkvsq
      121 rlnerilrtr pvldlfrilp revllcilqq lnfksivqcm qvckhwrdci kkepslfccl
      181 dfscasprsv nsrdrnvmav arysvyskdn iqeviglekl giltptkall rsvkslkvyk
      241 tisplhtqst dklytiwtpf selhyfycat pitfsiaski lscckklkqv elvdlipdli
      301 fdsmdwdklf naesvplalk sltfirnqkf pfhhkeqqfl kdllsaspyl eyleasyqsd
      361 lvaaikkyki nlrsliiide gvsntvkdla flpqslttli vkpcnpasti lcpylfptnv
      421 rmeslinlel flylrlsqnd idnvvkflts cyklkklvlh dslalaphff eifaslpele
      481 hleipdnval qnkhaihitd ccpnlkyvnf snsisldgsg fiavlrglke lkridiincd
      541 svsrdaidwa rskgmqvtva sslpnsqplg tkkirli
//

What are the lexical, logical, and semantics layers?
Is this exchange format well-designed?
What are its weaknesses

Consider this Medline ``abstract'' from Entrez:

1: Plant J 1999 Dec;20(6):641-52

The tomato I-box binding factor LeMYBI is a member of a novel class of myb-like
proteins.

Rose A, Meier I, Wienand U

Institut fur Allgemeine Botanik, Universitat Hamburg, Ohnhorststr. 18, D-22609
Hamburg, Germany.

The RBCS3A gene of tomato belongs to a small gene family consisting of five
members. Although the RBCS1, RBCS2 and RBCS3A promoters contain closely related
cis regulatory sequences, the expression patterns of the genes are different.
Whereas the RBCS1 and RBCS2 genes are expressed in both leaves and young fruit,
the RBCS3A promoter is highly active in leaves, but not in young fruit. This
lack of transcription could be due to a mutation in the RBCS3A promoter creating
the so-called F-box, a protein binding site located between the activating cis
elements, the I-box and G-box. In order to identify proteins that bind to the
RBCS3A I-box/F-box region, the yeast one-hybrid system was used. One clone,
LeMYBI was isolated which contains strong similarity to plant myb transcription
factors. The encoded LeMYBI protein is at least 188 amino acids in length and
contains two myb-like domains located at the amino terminus and close to the
carboxy terminus, separated by a negatively charged domain. The protein contains
a SHAQKYF amino acid signature motif in the second myb-like repeat, which is
highly conserved in a number of recently identified plant myb-related genes,
thus defining a new class of plant DNA-binding proteins. LeMYBI binds
specifically to the I-box sequence of the RBCS1, RBCS2 and RBCS3A promoters,
therefore representing the first cloned I-box binding factor. LeMYBI acts as a
transcriptional activator in yeast and plants, and binds to the I-box with a
DNA-binding domain located in the carboxyterminal domain.

PMID: 10652136, UI: 20117515

What are the lexical, logical, and semantics layers?
Is this exchange format well-designed?
What are its weaknesses



Wong Lim Soon
4/9/2000