Hi everybody, I spotted a weird problem with the annotation in moe430a arrays. If you use getLL("1427131_s_at","moe430a") you get 11461 which correspond to actb gene (actib beta) But if you go to NetAffx and query for the same probeID you get a completely different gene (Riken) What's going on? Any idea? TIA,

>I spotted a weird problem with the annotation in moe430a arrays. >If you use > >getLL("1427131_s_at","moe430a") you get 11461 which correspond to actb >gene (actib beta) > >But if you go to NetAffx and query for the same probeID you get a >completely different gene (Riken) > >What's going on? Any idea? I will check this out. Thanks for reporting. > >TIA, > >_______________________________________________ >Bioconductor mailing list >Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch >https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor Jianhua Zhang Department of Biostatistics Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 44 Binney Street Boston, MA 02115-6084

>I spotted a weird problem with the annotation in moe430a arrays. >If you use > >getLL("1427131_s_at","moe430a") you get 11461 which correspond to actb >gene (actib beta) > >But if you go to NetAffx and query for the same probeID you get a >completely different gene (Riken) When I traced our mappings back to the source file, I noticed that Mm.data.gz file from Unigene has an entry "LOCUSLINK 320184; 11461" for the GenBank Accession number of the probe. Our system picks the smallest LocusLink id when there is are conflicts and if we do not know which one to trust more. That was how we ended up with 11461 rather than 320184, which is an RIKEN gene. I have writen to UniGene about the mapping and will see what we should do when I hear from them. Thanks > >What's going on? Any idea? > >TIA, > >_______________________________________________ >Bioconductor mailing list >Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch >https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor Jianhua Zhang Department of Biostatistics Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 44 Binney Street Boston, MA 02115-6084