MCL coexpression mm9:358
From FANTOM5_SSTAR
Phase1 CAGE Peaks
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
| GO ID | GO name | FDR corrected p-value |
|---|---|---|
| GO:0005923 | tight junction | 0.00195887011784764 |
| GO:0043296 | apical junction complex | 0.00195887011784764 |
| GO:0016327 | apicolateral plasma membrane | 0.00195887011784764 |
| GO:0005911 | intercellular junction | 0.00408132352187767 |
| GO:0016338 | calcium-independent cell-cell adhesion | 0.0107773595554197 |
| GO:0030054 | cell junction | 0.017508089013351 |
| GO:0006749 | glutathione metabolic process | 0.0243513269385111 |
| GO:0004364 | glutathione transferase activity | 0.0257847023406538 |
Relative expression of the co-expression cluster over median <br>Analyst:
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>
| Ontology term | p-value | n |
|---|---|---|
| epithelial cell | 7.76e-14 | 25 |
| intestinal epithelial cell | 2.32e-11 | 9 |
| epithelial cell of alimentary canal | 2.32e-11 | 9 |
| endo-epithelial cell | 2.47e-11 | 15 |
| columnar/cuboidal epithelial cell | 3.74e-09 | 7 |
| endodermal cell | 4.92e-09 | 20 |
| brush border epithelial cell | 3.00e-08 | 6 |
| gut absorptive cell | 3.00e-08 | 6 |
| absorptive cell | 3.00e-08 | 6 |
| enterocyte | 3.00e-08 | 6 |
| Ontology term | p-value | n |
|---|---|---|
| intestine | 1.79e-29 | 31 |
| gastrointestinal system | 1.84e-26 | 47 |
| mucosa | 1.67e-19 | 15 |
| intestinal mucosa | 1.06e-16 | 13 |
| anatomical wall | 1.06e-16 | 13 |
| wall of intestine | 1.06e-16 | 13 |
| gastrointestinal system mucosa | 1.06e-16 | 13 |
| simple columnar epithelium | 5.07e-13 | 11 |
| organ component layer | 7.82e-12 | 24 |
| epithelium of mucosa | 2.32e-11 | 9 |
| gastrointestinal system epithelium | 2.32e-11 | 9 |
| intestinal epithelium | 2.32e-11 | 9 |
| digestive system | 2.39e-11 | 116 |
| digestive tract | 2.39e-11 | 116 |
| primitive gut | 2.39e-11 | 116 |
| endoderm-derived structure | 6.11e-11 | 118 |
| endoderm | 6.11e-11 | 118 |
| presumptive endoderm | 6.11e-11 | 118 |
| subdivision of digestive tract | 6.57e-10 | 114 |
| small intestine | 5.65e-07 | 4 |
TFBS overrepresentation<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}}} |
