Personal tools

Coexpression cluster:C4754

From FANTOM5_SSTAR

Revision as of 13:56, 5 September 2012 by Autoedit (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Full id: C4754_chronic_Reticulocytes_leukemia_blood_Whole_acute_CD4



Phase1 CAGE Peaks

Hg19::chr8:41655174..41655185,-p9@ANK1
Hg19::chr8:41655195..41655207,-p11@ANK1
Hg19::chr8:41655221..41655242,-p7@ANK1


Enriched pathways on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b><br>Canonical pathway gene sets were compiled from Reactome, Wikipathways and KEGG. For the major signaling pathways, the transcriptionally-regulated genes (downstream targets) were obtained from Netpath. Combined, the canonical pathways and downstream targets totaled 489 human gene sets. The corresponding M. musculus gene sets were inferred by homology using the HomoloGene database. Enrichment for each of the canonical 489 pathways and gene sets included in the co-expression cluster was assessed by the hypergeometric probability. The resulting P values were also then adjusted by the Benjamini-Hochberg method for multiple comparisons.<br><b>Analyst: </b>Emmanuel Dimont<br><br>link to source dataset<br>data


No results for this coexpression

Enriched Gene Ontology terms on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b> Results for GOStat analysis on co-expressed clusters. Each cluster with promoters mapping to at least two different genes was analysed with GOStat (PMID: 14962934) with default parameter. <br><b>Analyst:</b> Erik Arner<br><br>link to source dataset<br>data


No GOStat results

Enriched sample ontology terms on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b>To summarize promoter activities (expression profile of a TSS region) across ~1000 samples, we performed enrichment analysis based on FANTOM5 Sample Ontology (FF ontology). The question here is “in which type of samples the promoter is more active”. To answer this question, we compared expressions (TPMs) in the samples associated with a sample ontology term and the rest of the samples by using the Mann-Whitney rank sum test. To summarize ontologies enriched in this co-expression cluster, we ran the same analysis on an averaged expression profile of all promoters that make up. <b>Analyst:</b> Hideya Kawaji <br><br>links to source dataset<br><br>cell_data<br>uberon_data<br><br>


Uber Anatomy
Ontology termp-valuen
blood5.48e-1015
haemolymphatic fluid5.48e-1015
organism substance5.48e-1015
pigment epithelium of eye3.94e-0811
vasculature of eye6.84e-076
uvea6.84e-076


Overrepresented TFBS (DNA) motifs on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b>The values shown are the p-values for overrepresentation of the motif in this coexpression cluster. So a small p-value means a strong overrepresentation. <b>Analyst:</b> Michiel de Hoon <br><br>link to source data <br> Novel motifs <br>data <br><br> Jaspar motifs <br>data


Novel motifs



JASPAR motifs

Motifs-log10(p-value)

{{{tfbs_overrepresentation_jaspar}}}



ENCODE TF ChIP-seq peak enrichment analysis<b>Summary:</b> For each TF and each co-expression cluster, the number of promoters with ENCODE TF ChIP signal was compared with the rest of promoters from the robust set using Fisher's exact test. Clusters with significant ChIP enrichment (q <= 0.05) after Benjamini-Hochberg correction were retained. <br><b>Analyst:</b> Erik Arner<br><br>link to source dataset<br><br>data


(#promoters = Number of promoters in this coexpression cluster that have ChIP signal of the TF)

TF#promotersEnrichmentp-valueq-value
CCNT2#90536.336201576962630.003930750035764890.0191306026835011
E2F6#187635.017155731697390.00791769806886330.0324560981479713
EGR1#195834.988179094810140.008056488137383440.0322701374771876
EP300#203336.77394172622320.003216880500103790.0168582358648372
ETS1#211339.728760922202340.001085840092584840.0076572622167095
FOSL1#8061339.7135797163731.59554825631833e-050.000372874165007005
GABPB1#255337.067683836182170.002832212825417420.0154890022136341
GATA1#2623313.56030814380040.0004009615963782630.00389653188463287
GATA2#2624312.7449317335540.0004829527704283790.00439211985290574
GTF2F1#2962312.73966087675770.0004835525047438590.00436149408782658
HDAC2#3066313.41562023662630.0004140761399857210.00393787087816142
HMGN3#932438.178547723350590.001827766942164210.0109304942551929
MYC#460935.22228187160940.007020843755740150.0296226680000705
REST#597839.650028716128020.001112636247114590.00771700205952986
SIN3A#2594235.408884726815140.006318961977991520.027843476078789
SMARCA4#65973156.7659033078882.58908533335753e-071.34260915159149e-05
SRF#6722313.79717826216780.0003806615025800190.00376654729208476
TAL1#6886329.86861667744023.75103522793067e-050.000723194329277923
USF1#739136.361499277207960.00388404057290560.0191287990848669
ZBTB7A#5134137.35190930787590.002516255860282270.0141037538663672



Relative expression of the co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b>Co-expression clusters are compared against FANTOM5 samples to obtain relative expression. <br><b>Analyst:</b>NA<br><br>link to data source<br> data


This analysis result is provided for C0 - C305 clusters.