ArticleBMC bioinformatics2010
Annotation of gene promoters by integrative data-mining of ChIP-seq Pol-II enrichment data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- The transcription factor Bcl11b promotes both canonical and adaptive NK cell differentiation.Science immunology · 2021Article
- Tumor-Based Genetic Testing and Familial Cancer Risk.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2020Review
- Novel promoters and coding first exons in DLG2 linked to developmental disorders and intellectual disability.Genome medicine · 2017Article
- A novel sequence and context based method for promoter recognition.Bioinformation · 2014Article
- Genomics and proteomics in solving brain complexity.Molecular bioSystems · 2013Review
- Isoform level expression profiles provide better cancer signatures than gene level expression profiles.Genome medicine · 2013Article
- Identification of regulatory regions of bidirectional genes in cervical cancer.BMC medical genomics · 2013Article
- POLYPHEMUS: R package for comparative analysis of RNA polymerase II ChIP-seq profiles by non-linear normalization.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
- Integrative genome-wide chromatin signature analysis using finite mixture models.BMC genomics · 2012Article
- Alternative transcription exceeds alternative splicing in generating the transcriptome diversity of cerebellar development.Genome research · 2011Article
- Integration of genome-wide computation DRE search, AhR ChIP-chip and gene expression analyses of TCDD-elicited responses in the mouse liver.BMC genomics · 2011Article
- Clcn4-2 genomic structure differs between the X locus in Mus spretus and the autosomal locus in Mus musculus: AT motif enrichment on the X.Genome research · 2011Article
- The use of classification trees for bioinformatics.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Data mining and knowledge discovery · 2011Article
- Genome-wide mapping of RNA Pol-II promoter usage in mouse tissues by ChIP-seq.Nucleic acids research · 2011Article
- MPromDb update 2010: an integrated resource for annotation and visualization of mammalian gene promoters and ChIP-seq experimental data.Nucleic acids research · 2011Article
- Human SHBG mRNA translation is modulated by alternative 5'-non-coding exons 1A and 1B.PloS one · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUse of alternative gene promoters that drive widespread cell-type, tissue-type or developmental gene regulation in mammalian genomes is a common phenomenon. Chromatin immunoprecipitation methods coupled with DNA microarray (ChIP-chip) or massive parallel sequencing (ChIP-seq) are enabling genome-wide identification of active promoters in different cellular conditions using antibodies against Pol-II. However, these methods produce enrichment not only near the gene promoters but also inside the genes and other genomic regions due to the non-specificity of the antibodies used in ChIP. Further, the use of these methods is limited by their high cost and strong dependence on cellular type and context.
methodsWe trained and tested different state-of-art ensemble and meta classification methods for identification of Pol-II enriched promoter and Pol-II enriched non-promoter sequences, each of length 500 bp. The classification models were trained and tested on a bench-mark dataset, using a set of 39 different feature variables that are based on chromatin modification signatures and various DNA sequence features. The best performing model was applied on seven published ChIP-seq Pol-II datasets to provide genome wide annotation of mouse gene promoters.
resultsWe present a novel algorithm based on supervised learning methods to discriminate promoter associated Pol-II enrichment from enrichment elsewhere in the genome in ChIP-chip/seq profiles. We accumulated a dataset of 11,773 promoter and 46,167 non-promoter sequences, each of length 500 bp, generated from RNA Pol-II ChIP-seq data of five tissues (Brain, Kidney, Liver, Lung and Spleen). We evaluated the classification models in building the best predictor and found that Bagging and Random Forest based approaches give the best accuracy. We implemented the algorithm on seven different published ChIP-seq datasets to provide a comprehensive set of promoter annotations for both protein-coding and non-coding genes in the mouse genome. The resulting annotations contain 13,413 (4,747) protein-coding (non-coding) genes with single promoters and 9,929 (1,858) protein-coding (non-coding) genes with two or more alternative promoters, and a significant number of unassigned novel promoters.
conclusionOur new algorithm can successfully predict the promoters from the genome wide profile of Pol-II bound regions. In addition, our algorithm performs significantly better than existing promoter prediction methods and can be applied for genome-wide predictions of Pol-II promoters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.