Personal tools

Coexpression cluster:C1322

From FANTOM5_SSTAR

Revision as of 14:49, 26 November 2012 by Autoedit (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Full id: C1322_Eosinophils_Basophils_CD14_Mast_Neutrophils_CD34_Peripheral



Phase1 CAGE Peaks

Hg19::chr10:81046569..81046581,+p@chr10:81046569..81046581
+
Hg19::chr14:55770665..55770674,-p@chr14:55770665..55770674
-
Hg19::chr1:19923760..19923771,+p@chr1:19923760..19923771
+
Hg19::chr3:5058332..5058341,-p@chr3:5058332..5058341
-
Hg19::chr4:185214760..185214771,-p@chr4:185214760..185214771
-
Hg19::chr5:142183048..142183059,-p@chr5:142183048..142183059
-


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>


Cell Type
Ontology termp-valuen
classical monocyte2.52e-10142
CD14-positive, CD16-negative classical monocyte2.52e-10142
myeloid leukocyte3.83e-8872
defensive cell1.83e-8748
phagocyte1.83e-8748
macrophage dendritic cell progenitor1.11e-7761
granulocyte monocyte progenitor cell2.58e-7767
monopoietic cell5.20e-7259
monocyte5.20e-7259
monoblast5.20e-7259
promonocyte5.20e-7259
myeloid lineage restricted progenitor cell1.51e-7066
leukocyte3.24e-66136
myeloid cell4.09e-61108
common myeloid progenitor4.09e-61108
hematopoietic stem cell1.53e-53168
angioblastic mesenchymal cell1.53e-53168
nongranular leukocyte8.65e-51115
hematopoietic lineage restricted progenitor cell1.64e-50120
hematopoietic cell3.18e-50177
hematopoietic oligopotent progenitor cell1.80e-47161
hematopoietic multipotent progenitor cell1.80e-47161
stuff accumulating cell5.59e-4487
intermediate monocyte2.33e-229
CD14-positive, CD16-positive monocyte2.33e-229
mesenchymal cell4.26e-19354
connective tissue cell1.73e-18361
motile cell2.39e-16386
granulocyte4.60e-168
stem cell1.20e-14441
multi fate stem cell9.94e-14427
somatic stem cell2.29e-13433
basophil5.74e-123
blood cell1.81e-1111
natural killer cell9.75e-113
pro-NK cell9.75e-113
single nucleate cell1.08e-103
mononuclear cell1.08e-103
CD1a-positive Langerhans cell6.42e-082
immature CD1a-positive Langerhans cell6.42e-082
Uber Anatomy
Ontology termp-valuen
bone marrow1.77e-7076
bone element1.28e-6482
hematopoietic system4.68e-6498
blood island4.68e-6498
skeletal element5.19e-5890
hemolymphoid system3.70e-57108
immune system8.02e-5693
skeletal system3.20e-51100
musculoskeletal system1.33e-26167
lateral plate mesoderm2.30e-25203
connective tissue1.16e-17371
mesoderm1.73e-12315
mesoderm-derived structure1.73e-12315
presumptive mesoderm1.73e-12315


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
SPI1#668845.469549005681820.00269730053614140.0148397708841633
ZBTB33#10009210.55490834332710.01374250737140590.0483787955425981



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.