Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Human reference sequence makes sense of names


Most journals, including Nature, require authors to annotate a new entity (a gene, protein or loci, for example) with references to a standard database. However, journals do not require references to standard databases for discoveries of functions or diseases associated with previously defined genes. Since most genes have more than one name, and many gene names refer to more than one gene, the choice of a name without reference to a common or standard database can inhibit the integration of results from transcriptomics, population studies or comparative genomics.

In this post-genomic era, researchers have to be able to make associations among many genes, which requires being able to correctly identify a gene and all its synonyms. The most obvious way to ensure this would be for journals to insist that genes in a publication should be identified with reference to the Human RefSeq (see In this way, genomic analyses are more likely to identify genes of common interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Crawford, D. Human reference sequence makes sense of names. Nature 447, 142 (2007).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing