Determination and Inference of Eukaryotic Transcription Factor Sequence Specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcription factor (TF) DNA sequence preferences direct their regulatory activity, but are currently known for only ∼1% of eukaryotic TFs. Broadly sampling DNA-binding domain (DBD) types from multiple eukaryotic clades, we determined DNA sequence preferences for >1,000 TFs encompassing 54 different DBD classes from 131 diverse eukaryotes. We find that closely related DBDs almost always have very similar DNA sequence preferences, enabling inference of motifs for ∼34% of the ∼170,000 known or predicted eukaryotic TFs. Sequences matching both measured and inferred motifs are enriched in chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) peaks and upstream of transcription start sites in diverse eukaryotic lineages. SNPs defining expression quantitative trait loci in Arabidopsis promoters are also enriched for predicted TF binding sites. Importantly, our motif "library" can be used to identify specific TFs whose binding may be altered by human disease risk alleles. These data present a powerful resource for mapping transcriptional networks across eukaryotes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".