- Open Access
antiCODE: a natural sense-antisense transcripts database
- Yifei Yin†1, 2,
- Yi Zhao†2,
- Jie Wang3, 4,
- Changning Liu2, 4,
- Shuguang Chen1,
- Runsheng Chen3Email author and
- Haitao Zhao1Email author
© Yin et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2007
- Received: 27 November 2006
- Accepted: 30 August 2007
- Published: 30 August 2007
Natural antisense transcripts (NATs) are endogenous RNA molecules that exhibit partial or complete complementarity to other RNAs, and that may contribute to the regulation of molecular functions at various levels. In recent years, large-scale NAT screens in several model organisms have produced much data, but there is no database to assemble all these data. AntiCODE intends to function as an integrated NAT database for this purpose.
This release of antiCODE contains more than 30,000 non-redundant natural sense-antisense transcript pairs from 12 eukaryotic model organisms. In order to provide an integrated NAT research platform, efficient browser, search and Blast functions have been included to enable users to easily access information through parameters such as species, accession number, overlapping patterns, coding potential etc. In addition to the collected information, antiCODE also introduces a simple classification system to facilitate the study of natural antisense transcripts.
Though a few similar databases also dealing with NATs have appeared lately, antiCODE is the most comprehensive among these, comprising almost all currently detected NAT pairs.
- Antisense Transcript
- Complementary Pair
- Sense Transcript
- Relevant Database
- Natural Antisense Transcript
Natural antisense transcripts (NATs) are endogenous RNA molecules that exhibit partial or complete complementarity to other transcripts, through which they may contribute to the regulation of molecular expression at various levels. Though many natural antisense transcripts were discovered through their regulatory function on the expression of mRNAs [1, 2], some global predictions of NATs in several species have also been published [3–10]. The first of these used mRNA data to predict natural antisense transcripts . With the appearance of more draft genomes and full length cDNA data, the scale of NATs predictions has been extended. Several datasets, mainly based on full length cDNAs, have been published for mouse [8, 11], rice  and Arabidopsis thaliana . Since 2006, the trend in NATs prediction has turned to multi-species comparisons [6, 13]. A number of published NATs have been validated by various experimental approaches, such as RT-PCR  and microarray , further confirming that antisense transcript is a common occurrence in eukaryote transcriptomes.
The background for the emergence of so much NAT data in recent years, is on the one hand the availability of more genomic and full length cDNA data, and on the other hand a growing realization of the important functions of natural antisense transcripts. Antisense RNAs may contribute regulatory activity at various levels, such as post-transcription [14, 15], splicing [16, 17], transport , and genomic imprinting[19, 20], and have been shown to be involved in the control of developmental processes , adaptation to various stresses , and viral infection [23, 24] through annealing to complementary sequences.
To facilitate research, previous publications have suggested a few classification systems for NATs. The most basic of these is the cis/trans system  in which an antisense transcript from the same genomic loci as the sense transcript is labelled a cis-NAT, whereas a trans-NAT is an antisense transcript expressed from a genomic locus different from that of the sense transcript. A second classification system is based on the overlapping position of the complementary pair, which will be divided into 5–6 categories according to their patterns of gene structure, e.g. depending on whether the pair overlaps at their 5' ends, 3' ends, completely, or in the introns [6, 7, 10, 11]. A third classification system considers the respective coding potential of the complementary pair, and includes the categories coding-coding, coding-noncoding and noncoding-noncoding [8, 13].
Up to present, a number of large-scale NAT data have been published and several functional studies of NATs have been carried out, however, thus far no database has been set up to collect and order all these transcripts. In order to serve the need of the NAT research, we have over the past two years built the antiCODE database. The purpose of the database is to collect the existing NAT data, and to provide a useful browsing and search platform for these data. This release of antiCODE contains more than 30,000 natural sense-antisense transcript pairs from the 12 model organisms Homo sapiens (human), Mus musculus (mouse), Rattus norvegicus (rat), Xenopus tropicalis (western clawed frog), Drosophila melanogaster (fruit fly), Caenorhabditis elegans (nematode), Ciona intestinalis (seasquirt), Gallus gallus (chicken), Danio rerio (zebrafish), Bos taurus (cow), Oryza sativa (rice) and Arabidopsis thaliana (thale cress).
The genome-wide NAT datasets in eukaryotic species
Species involved in the predictions
The number of transcripts
Human, mouse, rat, chicken, fruit fly, and nematode
Human, mouse, frog, cow, fruit fly, worm, zebra fish and sea squirt
We obtained accession numbers and clone IDs for the NAT pairs from the supplementary material of published articles and downloaded the annotation information and sequences from the NCBI and FANTOM websites. In the first step, we divided the NAT pairs to cis/trans classes according to information in referenced papers. The second step was to classify the NAT pairs according to the coding/noncoding system, thus, all NAT pairs were sorted as coding-coding, coding-noncoding and noncoding-noncoding. In the third step, Blat  was used to classify the NAT pairs according to the 5/3/c/o system. Finally, we have removed redundant NAT pairs derived from different datasets.
The three core functions of antiCODE database are browse, search and sequence alignment with Blast. Under the browse option, there are five sub-options – Pair ID, cis/trans, overlap, coding/noncoding, and species – by which users can browse all NAT pairs by pair ID, or NAT pair classes.
More specific lookups can be executed by the search function. Users can enter the exact gene accession number or clone ID to see whether a sequence of interest has a possible complementary transcript. If one is interested in NAT pairs relating to some particular condition, e.g. cancer, a relevant key word can be entered in the Text search frame under the search option.
After a NAT pairs of interest have been found, all information pertaining to the NAT pair, including annotation and map view links to other databases, affiliated classes, a simple description and references, will appear. More detailed annotations and comments can be obtained through the links to other relevant databases.
Recently, new technologies, such as microarray, SAGE, and MPSS have played prominent roles in the identification of NAT pairs. Before 2005 only EST (UniGene) and mRNAs had been used for NAT prediction. Later large scale full-length cDNA data emerged, based on which more than 1,000 rice NATs were first reported, closely followed by mouse [8, 11] and Arabidopsis  NATs. For NAT prediction in Arabidopsis  also MPSS data has been used, and in 2005, a new NAT dataset based on SAGE was reported in mouse . In 2007, data  from whole-genome arrays was employed for NAT prediction in Arabidopsis. It is expected that along with the improvement in array technology, more transcripts from tilling microarrays will be used for future NAT predictions, hopefully resulting in an accurate and exhaustive set of NAT data.
The most recently released NAT datasets [9, 26–28] have yet not been included in antiCODE, but will be included in the next release of the database. However, compared with other existing databases , antiCODE is presently the most comprehensive and integrated database for NAT pairs. The most distinctive features of antiCODE are as follows; (i) antiCODE includes almost all known natural antisense transcript (NAT) pairs from 12 eukaryotic model organisms, (ii) antiCODE provides substantial and compact information relating to NATs (e.g. accession number, clone ID, species, classification etc.), (iii) we have introduced a classification system based on the previous notions which should give users an immediate impression of the basic features of each NAT pair, (iv) a Blast service is provided, and (v) antiCODE provides a user-friendly interface and a convenient search option, allowing efficient investigation and verification of natural antisense pairs from different species.
This work was supported by grants from Youth Foundation of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (No. 2005 37A), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 30570393 and No. 30600729) and China Medical Board in New York (No.06837).
- Billy E, Brondani V, Zhang H, Muller U, Filipowicz W: Specific interference with gene expression induced by long, double-stranded RNA in mouse embryonal teratocarcinoma cell lines. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001, 98(25):14428–14433. 10.1073/pnas.261562698PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Faghihi MA, Wahlestedt C: RNA interference is not involved in natural antisense mediated regulation of gene expression in mammals. Genome Biol 2006, 7(5):R38. 10.1186/gb-2006-7-5-r38PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Engstrom PG, Suzuki H, Ninomiya N, Akalin A, Sessa L, Lavorgna G, Brozzi A, Luzi L, Tan SL, Yang L, Kunarso G, Ng EL, Batalov S, Wahlestedt C, Kai C, Kawai J, Carninci P, Hayashizaki Y, Wells C, Bajic VB, Orlando V, Reid JF, Lenhard B, Lipovich L: Complex Loci in human and mouse genomes. PLoS Genet 2006, 2(4):e47. 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020047PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lehner B, Williams G, Campbell RD, Sanderson CM: Antisense transcripts in the human genome. Trends Genet 2002, 18(2):63–65. 10.1016/S0168-9525(02)02598-2View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yelin R, Dahary D, Sorek R, Levanon EY, Goldstein O, Shoshan A, Diber A, Biton S, Tamir Y, Khosravi R, Nemzer S, Pinner E, Walach S, Bernstein J, Savitsky K, Rotman G: Widespread occurrence of antisense transcription in the human genome. Nat Biotechnol 2003, 21(4):379–386. 10.1038/nbt808View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang Y, Liu XS, Liu QR, Wei L: Genome-wide in silico identification and analysis of cis natural antisense transcripts (cis-NATs) in ten species. Nucleic Acids Res 2006, 34(12):3465–3475. 10.1093/nar/gkl473PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wang XJ, Gaasterland T, Chua NH: Genome-wide prediction and identification of cis-natural antisense transcripts in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genome Biol 2005, 6(4):R30. 10.1186/gb-2005-6-4-r30PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- RIKEN Genome Exploration Research Group and Genome Science Group (Genome Network Project Core Group) and the FANTOM Consortium, Katayama S, Tomaru Y, Kasukawa T, Waki K, Nakanishi M, Nakamura M, Nishida H, Yap CC, Suzuki M, Kawai J, Suzuki H, Carninci P, Hayashizaki Y, Wells C, Frith M, Ravasi T, Pang KC, Hallinan J, Mattick J, Hume DA, Lipovich L, Batalov S, Engstrom PG, Mizuno Y, Faghihi MA, Sandelin A, Chalk AM, Mottagui-Tabar S, Liang Z, Lenhard B, Wahlestedt C: Antisense Transcription in the Mammalian Transcriptome10.1126/science.1112009. Science 2005, 309(5740):1564–1566. 10.1126/science.1112009View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Li YY, Qin L, Guo ZM, Liu L, Xu H, Hao P, Su J, Shi Y, He WZ, Li YX: In silico discovery of human natural antisense transcripts. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7: 18. 10.1186/1471-2105-7-18PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chen J, Sun M, Kent WJ, Huang X, Xie H, Wang W, Zhou G, Shi RZ, Rowley JD: Over 20% of human transcripts might form sense-antisense pairs. Nucleic Acids Res 2004, 32(16):4812–4820. 10.1093/nar/gkh818PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kiyosawa H, Yamanaka I, Osato N, Kondo S, Hayashizaki Y: Antisense transcripts with FANTOM2 clone set and their implications for gene regulation. Genome Res 2003, 13(6B):1324–1334. 10.1101/gr.982903PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Osato N, Yamada H, Satoh K, Ooka H, Yamamoto M, Suzuki K, Kawai J, Carninci P, Ohtomo Y, Murakami K, Matsubara K, Kikuchi S, Hayashizaki Y: Antisense transcripts with rice full-length cDNAs. Genome Biol 2003, 5(1):R5. 10.1186/gb-2003-5-1-r5PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sun M, Hurst LD, Carmichael GG, Chen J: Evidence for variation in abundance of antisense transcripts between multicellular animals but no relationship between antisense transcriptionand organismic complexity. Genome Res 2006, 16(7):922–933. 10.1101/gr.5210006PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Luther HP: Role of endogenous antisense RNA in cardiac gene regulation. J Mol Med 2005, 83(1):26–32. 10.1007/s00109-004-0613-5View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hastings ML, Ingle HA, Lazar MA, Munroe SH: Post-transcriptional regulation of thyroid hormone receptor expression by cis-acting sequences and a naturally occurring antisense RNA. J Biol Chem 2000, 275(15):11507–11513. 10.1074/jbc.275.15.11507View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Enerly E, Sheng Z, Li KB: Natural antisense as potential regulator of alternative initiation, splicing and termination. In Silico Biol 2005, 5(4):367–377.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Munroe SH: Antisense RNA inhibits splicing of pre-mRNA in vitro. Embo J 1988, 7(8):2523–2532.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Werner A, Preston-Fayers K, Dehmelt L, Nalbant P: Regulation of the NPT gene by a naturally occurring antisense transcript. Cell Biochem Biophys 2002, 36(2–3):241–252. 10.1385/CBB:36:2-3:241View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sleutels F, Barlow DP, Lyle R: The uniqueness of the imprinting mechanism. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2000, 10(2):229–233. 10.1016/S0959-437X(00)00062-9View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rougeulle C, Heard E: Antisense RNA in imprinting: spreading silence through Air. Trends Genet 2002, 18(9):434–437. 10.1016/S0168-9525(02)02749-XView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Coudert AE, Pibouin L, Vi-Fane B, Thomas BL, Macdougall M, Choudhury A, Robert B, Sharpe PT, Berdal A, Lezot F: Expression and regulation of the Msx1 natural antisense transcript during development. Nucleic Acids Res 2005, 33(16):5208–5218. 10.1093/nar/gki831PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Borsani O, Zhu J, Verslues PE, Sunkar R, Zhu JK: Endogenous siRNAs derived from a pair of natural cis-antisense transcripts regulate salt tolerance in Arabidopsis. Cell 2005, 123(7):1279–1291. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.11.035PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Michael NL, Vahey MT, d'Arcy L, Ehrenberg PK, Mosca JD, Rappaport J, Redfield RR: Negative-strand RNA transcripts are produced in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected cells and patients by a novel promoter downregulated by Tat. J Virol 1994, 68(2):979–987.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Briquet S, Richardson J, Vanhee-Brossollet C, Vaquero C: Natural antisense transcripts are detected in different cell lines and tissues of cats infected with feline immunodeficiency virus. Gene 2001, 267(2):157–164. 10.1016/S0378-1119(01)00404-8View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kent WJ: BLAT--the BLAST-like alignment tool. Genome Res 2002, 12(4):656–664. 10.1101/gr.229202. Article published online before March 2002PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Siddiqui AS, Khattra J, Delaney AD, Zhao Y, Astell C, Asano J, Babakaiff R, Barber S, Beland J, Bohacec S, Brown-John M, Chand S, Charest D, Charters AM, Cullum R, Dhalla N, Featherstone R, Gerhard DS, Hoffman B, Holt RA, Hou J, Kuo BY, Lee LL, Lee S, Leung D, Ma K, Matsuo C, Mayo M, McDonald H, Prabhu AL, Pandoh P, Riggins GJ, de Algara TR, Rupert JL, Smailus D, Stott J, Tsai M, Varhol R, Vrljicak P, Wong D, Wu MK, Xie YY, Yang G, Zhang I, Hirst M, Jones SJ, Helgason CD, Simpson EM, Hoodless PA, Marra MA: A mouse atlas of gene expression: large-scale digital gene-expression profiles from precisely defined developing C57BL/6J mouse tissues and cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005, 102(51):18485–18490. 10.1073/pnas.0509455102PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yamada K, Lim J, Dale JM, Chen H, Shinn P, Palm CJ, Southwick AM, Wu HC, Kim C, Nguyen M, Pham P, Cheuk R, Karlin-Newmann G, Liu SX, Lam B, Sakano H, Wu T, Yu G, Miranda M, Quach HL, Tripp M, Chang CH, Lee JM, Toriumi M, Chan MM, Tang CC, Onodera CS, Deng JM, Akiyama K, Ansari Y, Arakawa T, Banh J, Banno F, Bowser L, Brooks S, Carninci P, Chao Q, Choy N, Enju A, Goldsmith AD, Gurjal M, Hansen NF, Hayashizaki Y, Johnson-Hopson C, Hsuan VW, Iida K, Karnes M, Khan S, Koesema E, Ishida J, Jiang PX, Jones T, Kawai J, Kamiya A, Meyers C, Nakajima M, Narusaka M, Seki M, Sakurai T, Satou M, Tamse R, Vaysberg M, Wallender EK, Wong C, Yamamura Y, Yuan S, Shinozaki K, Davis RW, Theologis A, Ecker JR: Empirical analysis of transcriptional activity in the Arabidopsis genome. Science 2003, 302(5646):842–846. 10.1126/science.1088305View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wang H, Chua NH, Wang XJ: Prediction of trans-antisense transcripts in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genome Biol 2006, 7(10):R92. 10.1186/gb-2006-7-10-r92PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang Y, Li J, Kong L, Gao G, Liu QR, Wei L: NATsDB: Natural Antisense Transcripts DataBase. Nucleic Acids Res 2006.Google Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.