Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30709337›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2019

Probing transcription factor combinatorics in different promoter classes and in enhancers.

Jimmy Vandel, Océane Cassan, Sophie Lèbre, Charles-Henri Lecellier, Laurent Bréhélin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Advancing Regulatory Genomics With Machine Learning.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Histone ChIP-Seq identifies differential enhancer usage during chondrogenesis as critical for defining cell-type specificity.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jimmy VandelLIRMM, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, France.
Océane CassanLIRMM, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, France.
Sophie LèbreIBC, CNRS, Univ. Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Charles-Henri LecellierIBC, CNRS, Univ. Montpellier, Montpellier, France. charles.lecellier@igmm.cnrs.fr.
Laurent BréhélinLIRMM, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, France. brehelin@lirmm.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2582-2831
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

ANR ANR-11-BINF-0002CNRS LIA "miREGEN"INSERM-ITMO BIO2015-04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn eukaryotic cells, transcription factors (TFs) are thought to act in a combinatorial way, by competing and collaborating to regulate common target genes. However, several questions remain regarding the conservation of these combinations among different gene classes, regulatory regions and cell types.

resultsWe propose a new approach named TFcoop to infer the TF combinations involved in the binding of a target TF in a particular cell type. TFcoop aims to predict the binding sites of the target TF upon the nucleotide content of the sequences and of the binding affinity of all identified cooperating TFs. The set of cooperating TFs and model parameters are learned from ChIP-seq data of the target TF. We used TFcoop to investigate the TF combinations involved in the binding of 106 TFs on 41 cell types and in four regulatory regions: promoters of mRNAs, lncRNAs and pri-miRNAs, and enhancers. We first assess that TFcoop is accurate and outperforms simple PWM methods for predicting TF binding sites. Next, analysis of the learned models sheds light on important properties of TF combinations in different promoter classes and in enhancers. First, we show that combinations governing TF binding on enhancers are more cell-type specific than that governing binding in promoters. Second, for a given TF and cell type, we observe that TF combinations are different between promoters and enhancers, but similar for promoters of mRNAs, lncRNAs and pri-miRNAs. Analysis of the TFs cooperating with the different targets show over-representation of pioneer TFs and a clear preference for TFs with binding motif composition similar to that of the target. Lastly, our models accurately distinguish promoters associated with specific biological processes.

conclusionsTFcoop appears as an accurate approach for studying TF combinations. Its use on ENCODE and FANTOM data allowed us to discover important properties of human TF combinations in different promoter classes and in enhancers. The R code for learning a TFcoop model and for reproducing the main experiments described in the paper is available in an R Markdown file at address https://gite.lirmm.fr/brehelin/TFcoop .

Indexed as

Enhancer Elements, GeneticGene Expression RegulationPromoter Regions, GeneticBinding SitesComputational BiologyHumansTranscription FactorsTranscription FactorsComputational biologyEnhancerslncRNAmiRNAmRNAPromotersRegulatory genomicsTranscription factors

Identifiers

PMID30709337
PMCPMC6359851
OpenAlexW2922894427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.