ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015
Optimally choosing PWM motif databases and sequence scanning approaches based on ChIP-seq data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioinformatic Prediction and High Throughput In Vivo Screening to Identify Cis-Regulatory Elements for the Development of Algal Synthetic Promoters.ACS synthetic biology · 2024Article
- ePRINT: exonuclease assisted mapping of protein-RNA interactions.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Target Finder of Transcription Factor (TFoTF): a novel tool to predict transcription factor-targeted genes in cancer.Molecular oncology · 2023Article
- Regulation of host and viral promoters during human cytomegalovirus latency via US28 and CTCF.The Journal of general virology · 2021Article
- Parallel Accelerated Evolution in Distant Hibernators Reveals Candidate Cis Elements and Genetic Circuits Regulating Mammalian Obesity.Cell reports · 2019Article
- A Multireporter Bacterial 2-Hybrid Assay for the High-Throughput and Dynamic Assay of PDZ Domain-Peptide Interactions.ACS synthetic biology · 2019Article
- Integrated analysis of motif activity and gene expression changes of transcription factors.Genome research · 2018Article
- Taking promoters out of enhancers in sequence based predictions of tissue-specific mammalian enhancers.BMC medical genomics · 2017Article
- Negative selection maintains transcription factor binding motifs in human cancer.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- HOCOMOCO: expansion and enhancement of the collection of transcription factor binding sites models.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor many years now, binding preferences of Transcription Factors have been described by so called motifs, usually mathematically defined by position weight matrices or similar models, for the purpose of predicting potential binding sites. However, despite the availability of thousands of motif models in public and commercial databases, a researcher who wants to use them is left with many competing methods of identifying potential binding sites in a genome of interest and there is little published information regarding the optimality of different choices. Thanks to the availability of large number of different motif models as well as a number of experimental datasets describing actual binding of TFs in hundreds of TF-ChIP-seq pairs, we set out to perform a comprehensive analysis of this matter.
resultsWe focus on the task of identifying potential transcription factor binding sites in the human genome. Firstly, we provide a comprehensive comparison of the coverage and quality of models available in different databases, showing that the public databases have comparable TFs coverage and better motif performance than commercial databases. Secondly, we compare different motif scanners showing that, regardless of the database used, the tools developed by the scientific community outperform the commercial tools. Thirdly, we calculate for each motif a detection threshold optimizing the accuracy of prediction. Finally, we provide an in-depth comparison of different methods of choosing thresholds for all motifs a priori. Surprisingly, we show that selecting a common false-positive rate gives results that are the least biased by the information content of the motif and therefore most uniformly accurate.
conclusionWe provide a guide for researchers working with transcription factor motifs. It is supplemented with detailed results of the analysis and the benchmark datasets at http://bioputer.mimuw.edu.pl/papers/motifs/ .
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.