Posts Tagged ‘encode’

Inferring chromatin-bound protein complexes from genome-wide binding assays – Genome Research

February 26, 2017

Inferring [w. NMF] chromatin-bound protein complexes [of TFs] from [ENCODE ChIP-seq] binding assays, by @ElementoLab

Giannopoulou E, Elemento O. 2013. Inferring chromatin-bound
protein complexes from genome-wide binding assays. Genome Research, Published in Advance April 3, 2013, doi: 10.1101/gr.149419.112.

This study uses nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) of ENCODE CHIP-seq data (transcription
factors and histone modifications) to predict complexes of
transcription factors that bind DNA
together; it then assesses how these predicted complexes regulate gene expression. It goes beyond
previous studies in that it attempts to treat the TFs as complexes rather than individuals. A handful of
the predicted complexes correspond to known regulatory complexes, e.g. PRC2, and overall, the
complexes were enriched for known protein-protein interactions. Linear regression and random forest
models were then used to predict the effects of the complexes on the expression of adjacent genes. In
both models, the complexes performed better than those predicted from a scrambled TF read count
matrix. Overall, this study provides a large set of hypotheses for combinations of TFs that may
function together, as well as potential new components of known complexes.

The dark side of the human genome : Nature : Nature Research

November 27, 2016

Dark side of the..genome QT: NextGen..has been..the tech engine of #ENCODE..but..hi-res livecell imaging [is coming]

Has figure from Khurana et al. Nat. Rev. Genet. (’16)

“Next-generation sequencing has been — and still is — the
technological engine of ENCODE. But looking ahead, researchers might be able to roll out high-resolution live-cell imaging on a large scale to watch the state of the genome change in real time using specific markers. This technology could be disruptive. “If we had a better microscope, we wouldn’t be sequencing anymore,” says

Species-Specific | The Scientist Magazine(R)

September 6, 2015

Scientists uncover striking differences between mouse and human gene expression across a variety of tissues.
By Jyoti Madhusoodanan | November 17, 2014

The results “go a little against the grain,” said bioinformatician Mark Gerstein of Yale University who was not involved in the study. “We might think that humans and mice are very similar [genetically], but when we compare their transcriptomes, they’re more different than we thought.”

Single-cell chromatin accessibility reveals principles of regulatory variation : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

August 28, 2015

#SingleCell chromatin accessibility >1.6k ATAC-seq expts; many on @ENCODE_NIH cell lines H1, GM12878 & K562

PLOS Genetics: 8.2% of the Human Genome Is Constrained: Variation in Rates of Turnover across Functional Element Classes in the Human Lineage

August 2, 2015

While enriched with ENCODE biochemical annotations, much of the short-lived constrained sequences we identify are not detected by models optimized for wider pan-mammalian conservation. Constrained DNase 1 hypersensitivity sites, promoters and untranslated regions have been more evolutionarily stable than long noncoding RNA loci which have turned over especially rapidly. By contrast, protein coding sequence has been highly stable, with an estimated half-life of over a billion years (d1/2 = 2.1–5.0). From extrapolations we estimate that 8.2% (7.1–9.2%) of the human genome is presently subject to negative selection and thus is likely to be functional, while only 2.2% has maintained constraint in both human and mouse since these species diverged.

Inferring gene regulatory logic from high-throughput measurements of thousands of systematically designed promoters : Nature Biotechnology : Nature Publishing Group

June 10, 2015

Segal cites: Measurements of 1000s of…designed promoters Num. binding sites correlated w/ expr., for 1st few #ICSG2015

Unraveling determinants of transcription factor binding outside the core binding site

June 8, 2015

Segal cites: Determinants of TF binding outside the core binding site Large-scale measurement of affinity #ICSG2015

Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation

May 16, 2015

Comparative #genomics reveals insights into avian…#evolution Less repeats & dups in birds; woodpecker, an exception

Science 12 December 2014:
Vol. 346 no. 6215 pp. 1311-1320
DOI: 10.1126/science.1251385

Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation

Guojie Zhang1,2,*,†,
Cai Li1,3,*,
Avian Genome Consortium§,
Erich D. Jarvis20,†,
M. Thomas P. Gilbert3,56,†,
Jun Wang1,55,57,58,59,†

My notes from ENCODE Consortium Meeting

March 23, 2015


CRE-Seq paper…

November 24, 2014

High-throughput functional testing of ENCODE segmentation
predictionsGenome Res. October 2014 24: 1595-1602; Published in Advance July 17, 2014,

that can be used for training predicted enhancers