Blame the experimentalist
One of the puzzling, recurring utterances of bioinformaticians young and old are the complaints about experimental data sets. The remarks that are errors in most of the biological data we are dealing with are abound.
I recall the former physicist who complained about the change of a few genes in yeast and the Postdoc who complained about the mRNA expression data who made cheap jokes about his collaborator - and any conference data has at least three tables that discuss such issues too loudly.
Actually, they should rejoice that there are errors - if the data gets fairly clean, the failure of many bioinformatic predictions will again shift into focus. The precision in structural information on proteins has not solved the fold prediction problem and the nice and precise information on eukaryotic genomes has not made de novo gene finding a routine task.
I recall the former physicist who complained about the change of a few genes in yeast and the Postdoc who complained about the mRNA expression data who made cheap jokes about his collaborator - and any conference data has at least three tables that discuss such issues too loudly.
Actually, they should rejoice that there are errors - if the data gets fairly clean, the failure of many bioinformatic predictions will again shift into focus. The precision in structural information on proteins has not solved the fold prediction problem and the nice and precise information on eukaryotic genomes has not made de novo gene finding a routine task.
spitshine - 2005-04-19 17:20
Trackback URL:
https://binf.twoday.net/stories/637789/modTrackback