Cited by 382Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGene Regulatory Network Analysis

Evaluation of methods for modeling transcription factor sequence specificity

Open access
DREAM5 Consortium, Weirauch, Matthew T, Cote, Atina, Norel, Raquel, Annala, Matti, Zhao, Yue, Riley, Todd R, Saez-Rodriguez, Julio +8 more·2013·Nature Biotechnology

Abstract

Genomic analyses often involve scanning for potential transcription factor (TF) binding sites using models of the sequence specificity of DNA binding proteins. Many approaches have been developed to model and learn a protein's DNA-binding specificity, but these methods have not been systematically compared. Here we applied 26 such approaches to in vitro protein binding microarray data for 66 mouse TFs belonging to various families. For nine TFs, we also scored the resulting motif models on in vivo data, and found that the best in vitro-derived motifs performed similarly to motifs derived from the in vivo data. Our results indicate that simple models based on mononucleotide position weight matrices trained by the best methods perform similarly to more complex models for most TFs examined, but fall short in specific cases (<10% of the TFs examined here). In addition, the best-performing motifs typically have relatively low information content, consistent with widespread degeneracy in eukaryotic TF sequence preferences.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nbt.2486

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent observations indicate that inhibiting p300 catalytic activity stabilizes interactions with chromatin.

    “and is instead consistent with recent observations that inhibiting p300 catalytic activity actually stabilizes interactions with chromatin51,52.”

    From Single-molecule states link transcription factor binding to gene expression (2024) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Results section on in vivo binding discusses transcription-factor sequence specificity and motif models, not p300 inhibition. Searches for p300 catalytic activity and stabilized chromatin interactions found no passage addressing the claim in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DREAM5 Consortium, Weirauch, M. T., Cote, A., Norel, R., Annala, M., Zhao, Y., Riley, T. R., Saez-Rodriguez, J., Cokelaer, T., Vedenko, A., Talukder, S., Bussemaker, H. J., Morris, Q. D., Bulyk, M. L., Stolovitzky, G., & Hughes, T. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
  • Tampere University of Technology (FI)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • European Bioinformatics Institute (GB)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Hughes, Timothy R
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2013-01-27
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
126-134
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W2159324718
Cited by
381
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 21
FWCI
19.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Institutional Repository (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (R01HG003008, 0957573, 1022140)
  • March of Dimes Foundation
  • John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation
  • Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
  • Genome Canada
  • Ontario Genomics
  • Ontario Genomics Institute
  • European Commission (223575)
  • Academy of Finland (260403)
  • Israel Science Foundation (802/08)
  • Tel Aviv University
  • National Institutes of Health (U54-CA121852)
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-77721)
  • Simons Center for Quantitative Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG003985, R01HG003008)
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA121852)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (G12MD007591)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
Keywords
transcription factor binding sites, DNA binding specificity, position weight matrices, protein binding microarrays, information content
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, DNA-Binding Proteins, Transcription Factors, Genome, Computational Biology, Protein Array Analysis, Mice, Position-Specific Scoring Matrices, Nucleotide Motifs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review