Characteristics of functional enrichment and gene expression level of human putative transcriptional target genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcriptional target genes show functional enrichment of genes. However, how many and how significantly transcriptional target genes include functional enrichments are still unclear. To address these issues, I predicted human transcriptional target genes using open chromatin regions, ChIP-seq data and DNA binding sequences of transcription factors in databases, and examined functional enrichment and gene expression level of putative transcriptional target genes. RESULTS: Gene Ontology annotations showed four times larger numbers of functional enrichments in putative transcriptional target genes than gene expression information alone, independent of transcriptional target genes. To compare the number of functional enrichments of putative transcriptional target genes between cells or search conditions, I normalized the number of functional enrichment by calculating its ratios in the total number of transcriptional target genes. With this analysis, native putative transcriptional target genes showed the largest normalized number of functional enrichments, compared with target genes including 5-60% of randomly selected genes. The normalized number of functional enrichments was changed according to the criteria of enhancer-promoter interactions such as distance from transcriptional start sites and orientation of CTCF-binding sites. Forward-reverse orientation of CTCF-binding sites showed significantly higher normalized number of functional enrichments than the other orientations. Journal papers showed that the top five frequent functional enrichments were related to the cellular functions in the three cell types. The median expression level of transcriptional target genes changed according to the criteria of enhancer-promoter assignments (i.e. interactions) and was correlated with the changes of the normalized number of functional enrichments of transcriptional target genes. CONCLUSIONS: Human putative transcriptional target genes showed significant functional enrichments. Functional enrichments were related to the cellular functions. The normalized number of functional enrichments of human putative transcriptional target genes changed according to the criteria of enhancer-promoter assignments and correlated with the median expression level of the target genes. These analyses and characters of human putative transcriptional target genes would be useful to examine the criteria of enhancer-promoter assignments and to predict the novel mechanisms and factors such as DNA binding proteins and DNA sequences of enhancer-promoter interactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".