Transcription factor binding site clusters identify target genes with similar tissue-wide expression and buffer against mutations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Background:</ns4:bold> The distribution and composition of <ns4:italic>cis</ns4:italic> -regulatory modules composed of transcription factor (TF) binding site (TFBS) clusters in promoters substantially determine gene expression patterns and TF targets. TF knockdown experiments have revealed that TF binding profiles and gene expression levels are correlated. We use TFBS features within accessible promoter intervals to predict genes with similar tissue-wide expression patterns and TF targets. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold> Genes with correlated expression patterns across 53 tissues and TF targets were respectively identified from Bray-Curtis Similarity and TF knockdown experiments. Corresponding promoter sequences were reduced to DNase I-accessible intervals; TFBSs were then identified within these intervals using information theory-based position weight matrices for each TF (iPWMs) and clustered. Features from information-dense TFBS clusters predicted these genes with machine learning classifiers, which were evaluated for accuracy, specificity and sensitivity. Mutations in TFBSs were analyzed to <ns4:italic>in silico</ns4:italic> examine their impact on cluster densities and the regulatory states of target genes. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Results:</ns4:bold> We initially chose the glucocorticoid receptor gene ( <ns4:italic>NR3C1</ns4:italic> ), whose regulation has been extensively studied, to test this approach. <ns4:italic>SLC25A32</ns4:italic> and <ns4:italic>TANK</ns4:italic> were found to exhibit the most similar expression patterns to <ns4:italic>NR3C1</ns4:italic> . A Decision Tree classifier exhibited the largest area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve in detecting such genes. Target gene prediction was confirmed using siRNA knockdown of TFs, which was found to be more accurate than those predicted after CRISPR/CAS9 inactivation. <ns4:italic>In-silico</ns4:italic> mutation analyses of TFBSs also revealed that one or more information-dense TFBS clusters in promoters are required for accurate target gene prediction. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Conclusions</ns4:bold> : Machine learning based on TFBS information density, organization, and chromatin accessibility accurately identifies gene targets with comparable tissue-wide expression patterns. Multiple information-dense TFBS clusters in promoters appear to protect promoters from effects of deleterious binding site mutations in a single TFBS that would otherwise alter regulation of these genes. </ns4:p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".