Distinguishing direct versus indirect transcription factor-DNA interactions

Transcriptional regulation is largely enacted by transcription factors (TFs) binding DNA. Large numbers of TF binding motifs have been revealed by ChIP-chip experiments followed by computational DNA motif discovery. However, the success of motif discovery algorithms has been limited when applied to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gordan, Raluca (Author), Hartemink, Alexander J. (Author), Bulyk, Martha L. (Contributor)
Other Authors: Harvard University- (Contributor)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2013-02-06T20:56:46Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Get fulltext
LEADER 02214 am a22002053u 4500
001 76758
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Gordan, Raluca  |e author 
100 1 0 |a Harvard University-  |e contributor 
100 1 0 |a Bulyk, Martha L.  |e contributor 
700 1 0 |a Hartemink, Alexander J.  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Bulyk, Martha L.  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Distinguishing direct versus indirect transcription factor-DNA interactions 
260 |b Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press,   |c 2013-02-06T20:56:46Z. 
856 |z Get fulltext  |u http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/76758 
520 |a Transcriptional regulation is largely enacted by transcription factors (TFs) binding DNA. Large numbers of TF binding motifs have been revealed by ChIP-chip experiments followed by computational DNA motif discovery. However, the success of motif discovery algorithms has been limited when applied to sequences bound in vivo (such as those identified by ChIP-chip) because the observed TF-DNA interactions are not necessarily direct: Some TFs predominantly associate with DNA indirectly through protein partners, while others exhibit both direct and indirect binding. Here, we present the first method for distinguishing between direct and indirect TF-DNA interactions, integrating in vivo TF binding data, in vivo nucleosome occupancy data, and motifs from in vitro protein binding microarray experiments. When applied to yeast ChIP-chip data, our method reveals that only 48% of the data sets can be readily explained by direct binding of the profiled TF, while 16% can be explained by indirect DNA binding. In the remaining 36%, none of the motifs used in our analysis was able to explain the ChIP-chip data, either because the data were too noisy or because the set of motifs was incomplete. As more in vitro TF DNA binding motifs become available, our method could be used to build a complete catalog of direct and indirect TF-DNA interactions. Our method is not restricted to yeast or to ChIP-chip data, but can be applied in any system for which both in vivo binding data and in vitro DNA binding motifs are available. 
520 |a National Science Foundation (U.S.). (CAREER Award 0347801) 
546 |a en_US 
655 7 |a Article 
773 |t Genome Research