EGASP: the human ENCODE Genome Annotation Assessment Project

Background: We present the results of EGASP, a community experiment to assess the state-ofthe-art in genome annotation within the ENCODE regions, which span 1% of the human genomesequence. The experiment had two major goals: the assessment of the accuracy of computationalmethods to predict protein coding genes; and the overall assessment of the completeness of thecurrent human genome annotations as represented in the ENCODE regions. For thecomputational prediction assessment, eighteen groups contributed gene predictions. Weevaluated these submissions against each other based on a ‘reference set’ of annotationsgenerated as part of the GENCODE project. These annotations were not available to theprediction groups prior to the submission deadline, so that their predictions were blind and anexternal advisory committee could perform a fair assessment.Results: The best methods had at least one gene transcript correctly predicted for close to 70%of the annotated genes. Nevertheless, the multiple transcript accuracy, taking into accountalternative splicing, reached only approximately 40% to 50% accuracy. At the coding nucleotidelevel, the best programs reached an accuracy of 90% in both sensitivity and specificity. Programsrelying on mRNA and protein sequences were the most accurate in reproducing the manuallycurated annotations. Experimental validation shows that only a very small percentage (3.2%) of the selected 221 computationally predicted exons outside of the existing annotation could beverified.Conclusions: This is the first such experiment in human DNA, and we have followed thestandards established in a similar experiment, GASP1, in Drosophila melanogaster. We believe theresults presented here contribute to the value of ongoing large-scale annotation projects and shouldguide further experimental methods when being scaled up to the entire human genome sequence.

What do outside experts bring to a committee? Evidence from the Bank of England

We test whether outside experts have information not available to insiders by usingthe voting record of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee. Memberswith more private information should vote more often against conventional wisdom,which we measure as the average belief of market economists about future interest rates. We find evidence that external members indeed have information notavailable to internals, but also use a quasi-natural experiment to show they mayexaggerate their expertise to obtain reappointment. This implies that an optimalcommittee, even outside monetary policy, should potentially include outsiders, butneeds to manage career concerns.

The use of non-animal alternatives in the safety evaluations of cosmetics ingredients by the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS)

In Europe, the safety evaluation of cosmetics is based on the safety evaluation of each individual ingredient. Article 3 of the Cosmetics Regulation specifies that a cosmetic product made available on the market is to be safe for human health when used normally or under reasonably foreseeable conditions. For substances that cause some concern with respect to human health (e.g. colorants, preservatives, UV-filters), safety is evaluated at the Commission level by a scientific committee, presently called the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS). According to the Cosmetics Regulations, in the EU, the marketing of cosmetics products and their ingredients that have been tested on animals for most of their human health effects, including acute toxicity, is prohibited. Nevertheless, any study dating from before this prohibition took effect is accepted for the safety assessment of cosmetics ingredients. The in vitro methods reported in the dossiers summited to the SCCS are here evaluated from the published reports issued by the scientific committee of the Directorate General of Health and Consumers (DG SANCO); responsible for the safety of cosmetics ingredients. The number of studies submitted to the SCCS that do not involve animals is still low and in general the safety of cosmetics ingredients is based on in vivo studies performed before the prohibition.