Cited by 4Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFungal and yeast genetics research

Predicting gene expression using millions of yeast promoters reveals cis -regulatory logic

Open access
Dash, Tirtharaj, Bornelöv, Susanne·2024·Bioinformatics Advances

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Motivation: Gene regulation involves complex interactions between transcription factors. While early attempts to predict gene expression were trained using naturally occurring promoters, gigantic parallel reporter assays have vastly expanded potential training data. Despite this, it is still unclear how to best use deep learning to study gene regulation. Here, we investigate the association between promoters and expression using Camformer, a residual convolutional neural network that ranked fourth in the Random Promoter DREAM Challenge 2022. We present the original model trained on 6.7 million sequences and investigate 270 alternative models to find determinants of model performance. Finally, we use explainable AI to uncover regulatory signals. Results: Camformer accurately decodes the association between promoters and gene expression (r2=0.914 ± 0.003, ρ=0.962 ± 0.002) and provides a substantial improvement over previous state of the art. Using Grad-CAM and in silico mutagenesis, we demonstrate that our model learns both individual motifs and their hierarchy. For example, while an IME1 motif on its own increases gene expression, a co-occurring UME6 motif instead strongly reduces gene expression. Thus, deep learning models such as Camformer can provide detailed insights into cis-regulatory logic. Availability and implementation: Data and code are available at: https://github.com/Bornelov-lab/Camformer.

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 · 10.1093/bioadv/vbaf130

Cites

6 of 6 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

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

Authors
Dash, T., & Bornelöv, S.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Bornelöv, Susanne
Venue
Bioinformatics Advances
Published
2024-12-26
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
vbaf130-vbaf130
ISSN
2635-0041 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410942367
Cited by
4
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (226518/Z/22/Z)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
gene expression prediction, promoter, deep learning, transcription factor binding motifs, motif co-occurrence, explainable AI, Grad-CAM, in silico mutagenesis, Saccharomyces cerevisiae

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