期刊文献+

Determination of specificity influencing residues for key transcription factor families

Determination of specificity influencing residues for key transcription factor families
原文传递
导出
摘要 Transcription factors (TFs) are major modulators of transcription and subsequent cellular processes. The binding of TFs to specific regulatory elements is governed by their specificity. Considering the gap between known TFs sequence and specificity, specificity prediction frameworks are highly desired. Key inputs to such frameworks are protein residues that modulate the specificity of TF under consideration. Simple measures like mutual information (MI) to delineate specificity influencing residues (SIRs) from alignment fail due to structural constraints imposed by the three-dimensional structure of protein. Structural restraints on the evolution of the amino-acid sequence lead to identification of false SIRs. In this manuscript we extended three methods (direct information, PSICOV and adjusted mutual information) that have been used to disentangle spurious indirect protein residue-residue contacts from direct contacts, to identify SIRs from joint alignments of amino-acids and specificity. We predicted SIRs for homeodomain (HI)), helix-loop-helix, LacI and GntR families of TFs using these methods and compared to MI. Using various measures, we show that the performance of these three methods is comparable but better than MI. Implication of these methods in specificity prediction framework is discussed. The methods are implemented as an R package and available along with the alignments at http://stormo.wustl.edu/SpecPred. Transcription factors (TFs) are major modulators of transcription and subsequent cellular processes. The binding of TFs to specific regulatory elements is governed by their specificity. Considering the gap between known TFs sequence and specificity, specificity prediction frameworks are highly desired. Key inputs to such frameworks are protein residues that modulate the specificity of TF under consideration. Simple measures like mutual information (MI) to delineate specificity influencing residues (SIRs) from alignment fail due to structural constraints imposed by the three-dimensional structure of protein. Structural restraints on the evolution of the amino-acid sequence lead to identification of false SIRs. In this manuscript we extended three methods (direct information, PSICOV and adjusted mutual information) that have been used to disentangle spurious indirect protein residue-residue contacts from direct contacts, to identify SIRs from joint alignments of amino-acids and specificity. We predicted SIRs for homeodomain (HI)), helix-loop-helix, LacI and GntR families of TFs using these methods and compared to MI. Using various measures, we show that the performance of these three methods is comparable but better than MI. Implication of these methods in specificity prediction framework is discussed. The methods are implemented as an R package and available along with the alignments at http://stormo.wustl.edu/SpecPred.
出处 《Frontiers of Electrical and Electronic Engineering in China》 CSCD 2015年第3期115-123,共9页 中国电气与电子工程前沿(英文版)
关键词 protein-DNA interactions residue co-variance MOTIFS CO-EVOLUTION feature selection direct information specificity determinants protein-DNA interactions residue co-variance motifs co-evolution feature selection direct information specificity determinants
  • 相关文献

参考文献43

  • 1Balwierz, P. J., Pachkov, M., Arnold, P., Gruber, A. J., Zavolan, M. and van Nimwegen, E. (2014) ISMARA: automated modeling of genomic signals as a democracy of regulatory motifs. Genome Res., 24, 869-884.
  • 2Khurana, E., Fu, Y., Colonna, V., Mu, X. J., Kang, H. M., Lappalainen, T., Sboner, A., Lochovsky, L., Chen, J., Harmanci, A., et al. (2013) Integrative annotation of variants from 1092 humans: application to cancer genomics. Science, 342, 1235587.
  • 3Wright, D. A., Li, T., Yang, B. and Spalding, M. H. (2014) TALENmediated genome editing: prospects and perspectives. Biochem. 1., 462, 15-24.
  • 4Mendenhall, E. M., Williamson, K. E., Reyon, D., Zou, J. Y., Ram, 0., Joung, J. K. and Bernstein, B. E. (2013) Locus-specific editing of histone modifications at endogenous enhancers. Nat. Biotechnol., 31, 1133-1136.
  • 5Lin, Y., Chomvong, K., Acosta-Sampson, L., Estrela, R., Galazka, J.M., Kim, S. R., Jin, Y. S. and Cate, J. H. (2014) Leveraging transcription factors to speed cellobiose fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol. Biofuels, 7, 126.
  • 6Cheng, C., Alexander, R., Min, R., Leng, J., Yip, K. Y., Rozowsky, J., Yan, K. K., Dong, X., DjebaJi, S., Ruan, Y., et al. (2012) Understanding transcriptional regulation by integrative analysis of transcription factor binding data. Genome Res., 22, 1658-1667.
  • 7Haynes, B. c., Maier, E. 1., Kramer, M. H., Wang, P. 1., Brown, H. and Brent, M. R. (2013) Mapping functional transcription factor networks from gene expression data. Genome Res., 23, 1319-1328.
  • 8Vaquerizas, J. M., Kummerfeld, S. K., Teichmann, S. A. and Luscombe, N. M. (2009) A census of human transcription factors: function, expression and evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet., 10,252-263.
  • 9Matthews, B. W. (1988) No code for recognition. Nature, 335, 294-295.
  • 10Benos, P. v., Lapedes, A. S. and Stormo, G. D. (2002) Probabilistic code for DNA recognition by proteins of the EGR family. J. Mol. Biol., 323, 701-727.

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部