MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4223592946 · doi:10.1101/2022.04.08.487641

MOCCS profile analysis clarifies the cell type dependency of transcription factor-binding sequences and cis-regulatory SNPs in humans

2022· preprint· en· W4223592946 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Saeko Tahara, Takaho Tsuchiya, Hirotaka Matsumoto, Haruka Ozaki

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMoonshot Research and Development ProgramJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceResearch Organization of Information and SystemsInstitute of GeneticsUniversity of TokyoJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsComputational biologyBiologyTranscription factorDNA binding siteGeneGeneticsSequence motifSingle-nucleotide polymorphismDNACoding regionENCODEGene expressionPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transcription factors (TFs) show heterogeneous DNA-binding specificities in individual cells and whole organisms in natural conditions): de novo motif discovery usually provides multiple motifs even from a single ChIP-seq sample. Despite the accumulation of ChIP-seq data and ChIP-seq-derived motifs, the diversity of DNA-binding specificities across different TFs and cell types remains largely unexplored. Here, we propose MOCCS profiles, the new representation of DNA-binding specificity of TFs, which describes a ChIP-seq sample as a profile of TF-binding specificity scores (MOCCS2scores) for every k -mer sequence. Using our k -mer-based motif discovery method MOCCS2, we systematically computed MOCCS profiles for >10,000 human TF ChIP-seq samples across diverse TFs and cell types. Comparison of MOCCS profiles revealed the global distributions of DNA-binding specificities, and found that one-third of the analyzed TFs showed differences in DNA-binding specificities across cell types. Moreover, we showed that the differences in MOCCS2scores (ΔMOCCS2scores) predicted the effect of variants on TF binding, validated by in vitro and in vivo assay datasets. We also demonstrate ΔMOCCS2scores can be used to interpret non-coding GWAS-SNPs as TF-affecting SNPs and provide their candidate responsible TFs and cell types. Our study provides the basis for investigating gene expression regulation and non-coding disease-associated variants in humans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics→French-language works237,207→