MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392716163 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.06.583826

Inference of Transcriptional Regulation From STARR-seq Data

2024· preprint· en· W4392716163 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Safaeesirat, Hoda Taeb, Emirhan Tekoglu, Tunc Morova, Nathan A. Lack, Eldon Emberly

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnhancerComputational biologyRegulatory sequenceBiologyContext (archaeology)InferenceTranscriptional regulationTranscription factorBinding siteGeneGeneticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One of the primary regulatory processes in cells is transcription, during which RNA polymerase II (Pol-II) transcribes DNA into RNA. The binding of Pol-II to its site is regulated through interactions with transcription factors (TFs) that bind to DNA at enhancer cis-regulatory elements. Measuring the enhancer activity of large libraries of distinct DNA sequences is now possible using Massively Parallel Reporter Assays (MPRAs), and computational methods have been developed to identify the dominant statistical patterns of TF binding within these large datasets. Such methods are global in their approach and may overlook important regulatory sites which function only within the local context. Here we introduce a method for inferring functional regulatory sites (their number, location and width) within an enhancer sequence based on measurements of its transcriptional activity from an MPRA method such as STARR-seq. The model is based on a mean-field thermodynamic description of Pol-II binding that includes interactions with bound TFs. Our method applied to simulated STARR-seq data for a variety of enhancer architectures shows how data quality impacts the inference and also how it can find local regulatory sites that may be missed in a global approach. We also apply the method to recently measured STARR-seq data on androgen receptor (AR) bound sequences, a TF that plays an important role in the regulation of prostate cancer. The method identifies key regulatory sites within these sequences which are found to overlap with binding sites of known co-regulators of AR. 1 Author Summary We present an inference method for identifying regulatory sites within a putative DNA enhancer sequence, given only the measured transcriptional output of a set of overlapping sequences using an assay like STARR-seq. It is based on a mean-field thermodynamic model that calculates the binding probability of Pol-II to its promoter and includes interactions with sites in the DNA sequence of interest. By maximizing the likelihood of the data given the model, we can infer the number of regulatory sites, their locations, and their widths. Since it is a local model, it can in principle find regulatory sites that are important within a local context that may get missed in a global fit. We test our method on simulated data of simple enhancer architectures and show that it is able to find only the functional sites. We also apply our method to experimental STARR-seq data from 36 androgen receptor bound DNA sequences from a prostate cancer cell line. The inferred regulatory sites overlap known important regulatory motifs and their ChIP-seq data in these regions. Our method shows potential at identifying locally important functional regulatory sites within an enhancer given only its measured transcriptional output.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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