Personal tools

Coexpression cluster:C4192

From FANTOM5_SSTAR

Revision as of 16:36, 26 November 2012 by Autoedit (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Full id: C4192_gastric_salivary_immature_signet_adenocarcinoma_small_tubular



Phase1 CAGE Peaks

Hg19::chr2:223289208..223289235,+p4@SGPP2
Hg19::chr2:223289239..223289272,+p1@SGPP2
Hg19::chr2:223289280..223289296,+p5@SGPP2


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
endo-epithelial cell1.58e-0842
kidney tubule cell5.96e-0710
nephron tubule epithelial cell5.96e-0710
Uber Anatomy
Ontology termp-valuen
adult organism4.72e-32114
neural tube9.29e-2156
neural rod9.29e-2156
future spinal cord9.29e-2156
neural keel9.29e-2156
regional part of nervous system5.31e-2053
regional part of brain5.31e-2053
regional part of forebrain3.51e-1641
forebrain3.51e-1641
anterior neural tube3.51e-1641
future forebrain3.51e-1641
neural plate2.78e-1382
presumptive neural plate2.78e-1382
brain5.72e-1368
future brain5.72e-1368
organ system subdivision6.04e-13223
cerebral hemisphere1.81e-1232
brain grey matter3.67e-1234
gray matter3.67e-1234
telencephalon6.02e-1234
ecto-epithelium6.42e-12104
neurectoderm8.30e-1286
regional part of telencephalon2.74e-1132
central nervous system3.86e-1181
organ7.32e-11503
nervous system9.03e-1189
regional part of cerebral cortex2.58e-1022
pre-chordal neural plate3.52e-1061
neocortex1.20e-0920
cerebral cortex6.27e-0925
pallium6.27e-0925
cavitated compound organ4.46e-0831
organ part4.84e-08218
multi-tissue structure1.88e-07342
anatomical conduit3.51e-07240
nephron tubule epithelium5.96e-0710
anatomical cluster6.33e-07373
ectoderm-derived structure8.03e-07171
ectoderm8.03e-07171
presumptive ectoderm8.03e-07171


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
CEBPB#105137.971147625824820.001974187055288560.0115475845347119
EBF1#187938.9064668465690.00141523283560980.00917078253510283
EGR1#195834.988179094810140.008056488137383440.0321419346237371
ZEB1#6935316.88843201754390.0002075486917327580.00243170045051352
ZNF143#7702313.50087655222790.0004062804962997170.00389816525062435



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.