↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating tools for transcription factor binding site prediction

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
335 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating tools for transcription factor binding site prediction
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1298-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Narayan Jayaram, Daniel Usvyat, Andrew C. R. Martin

Abstract

Binding of transcription factors to transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) is key to the mediation of transcriptional regulation. Information on experimentally validated functional TFBSs is limited and consequently there is a need for accurate prediction of TFBSs for gene annotation and in applications such as evaluating the effects of single nucleotide variations in causing disease. TFBSs are generally recognized by scanning a position weight matrix (PWM) against DNA using one of a number of available computer programs. Thus we set out to evaluate the best tools that can be used locally (and are therefore suitable for large-scale analyses) for creating PWMs from high-throughput ChIP-Seq data and for scanning them against DNA. We evaluated a set of de novo motif discovery tools that could be downloaded and installed locally using ENCODE-ChIP-Seq data and showed that rGADEM was the best-performing tool. TFBS prediction tools used to scan PWMs against DNA fall into two classes - those that predict individual TFBSs and those that identify clusters. Our evaluation showed that FIMO and MCAST performed best respectively. Selection of the best-performing tools for generating PWMs from ChIP-Seq data and for scanning PWMs against DNA has the potential to improve prediction of precise transcription factor binding sites within regions identified by ChIP-Seq experiments for gene finding, understanding regulation and in evaluating the effects of single nucleotide variations in causing disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 335 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 330 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 77 23%
Researcher 56 17%
Student > Master 54 16%
Student > Bachelor 47 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 4%
Other 26 8%
Unknown 61 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 131 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 20%
Computer Science 19 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 4%
Engineering 10 3%
Other 32 10%
Unknown 64 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2019.
All research outputs
#13,792,745
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,464
of 7,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,306
of 311,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#51
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.