↓ Skip to main content

On the comparison of regulatory sequences with multiple resolution Entropic Profiles

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
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
On the comparison of regulatory sequences with multiple resolution Entropic Profiles
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-0980-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matteo Comin, Morris Antonello

Abstract

Enhancers are stretches of DNA (100-1000 bp) that play a major role in development gene expression, evolution and disease. It has been recently shown that in high-level eukaryotes enhancers rarely work alone, instead they collaborate by forming clusters of cis-regulatory modules (CRMs). Although the binding of transcription factors is sequence-specific, the identification of functionally similar enhancers is very difficult and it cannot be carried out with traditional alignment-based techniques. The use of fast similarity measures, like alignment-free measures, to detect related regulatory sequences is crucial to understand functional correlation between two enhancers. In this paper we study the use of alignment-free measures for the classification of CRMs. However, alignment-free measures are generally tied to a fixed resolution k. Here we propose an alignment-free statistic, called [Formula: see text], that is based on multiple resolution patterns derived from the Entropic Profiles (EPs). The Entropic Profile is a function of the genomic location that captures the importance of that region with respect to the whole genome. As a byproduct we provide a formula to compute the exact variance of variable length word counts, a result that can be of general interest also in other applications. We evaluate several alignment-free statistics on simulated data and real mouse ChIP-seq sequences. The new statistic, [Formula: see text], is highly successful in discriminating functionally related enhancers and, in almost all experiments, it outperforms fixed-resolution methods. We implemented the new alignment-free measures, as well as traditional ones, in a software called EP-sim that is freely available: http://www.dei.unipd.it/~ciompin/main/EP-sim.html .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 44%
Researcher 6 33%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 50%
Computer Science 4 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 22%
Unknown 1 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,447,592
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,325
of 7,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,641
of 300,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#109
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,293 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 300,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.