Personal tools

Coexpression cluster:C4513

From FANTOM5_SSTAR

Revision as of 16:00, 19 October 2012 by Autoedit (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Full id: C4513_immature_Small_thymus_Mast_CD4_squamous_esophagus



Phase1 CAGE Peaks

Hg19::chr5:66300419..66300431,+p9@MAST4
Hg19::chr5:66300446..66300463,+p5@MAST4
Hg19::chr5:66300464..66300505,+p1@MAST4


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><br>uberon_data<br><br>


Uber Anatomy
Ontology termp-valuen
circulatory system3.45e-09112
cardiovascular system5.63e-09109
adult organism3.01e-08114
anatomical conduit4.36e-08240
vasculature8.96e-0878
vascular system8.96e-0878
anatomical cluster2.87e-07373
epithelium4.07e-07306
anterior region of body4.10e-0762
craniocervical region4.10e-0762
cell layer6.01e-07309
organism subdivision8.27e-07264
orifice9.27e-0736


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#90536.336201576962630.003930750035764890.0190905693352515
ELF1#199734.258097958807540.01295179875054610.0464500844651036
EP300#203336.77394172622320.003216880500103790.0168177295164609
ETS1#211339.728760922202340.001085840092584840.00764487349531264
GABPB1#255337.067683836182170.002832212825417420.0154703700456993
GATA1#2623313.56030814380040.0004009615963782630.0038918241788243
GATA2#2624312.7449317335540.0004829527704283790.00438600907745822
HDAC2#3066313.41562023662630.0004140761399857210.00392928384371876
IRF1#365937.63716375356390.002244692747297240.0128611732408919
JUND#372736.994663941871030.002921845042734990.0157474751996181
RAD21#5885310.35503389545630.0009004912073565420.00667516510789338
SIN3A#2594235.408884726815140.006318961977991520.0277965660019988
TAL1#6886329.86861667744023.75103522793067e-050.000721861743449145
TCF7L2#6934310.77017656313730.0008003181298398380.00616631686922485
TRIM28#10155318.59052504526250.0001555969297255280.00197765458727082
ZBTB7A#5134137.35190930787590.002516255860282270.014076557169212



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.