MOTIVATION: The computational investigation of DNA binding motifs from binding sites is one of the classic tasks in bioinformatics and a prerequisite for understanding gene regulation as a whole. Due to the development of sequencing technologies and the increasing number of available genomes, approaches based on phylogenetic footprinting become increasingly attractive. Phylogenetic footprinting requires phylogenetic trees with attached substitution probabilities for quantifying the evolution of binding sites, but these trees and substitution probabilities are typically not known and cannot be estimated easily. RESULTS: Here, we investigate the influence of phylogenetic trees with different substitution probabilities on the classification performance of phylogenetic footprinting using synthetic and real data. For synthetic data we find that the classification performance is highest when the substitution probability used for phylogenetic footprinting is similar to that used for data generation. For real data, however, we typically find that the classification performance of phylogenetic footprinting surprisingly increases with increasing substitution probabilities and is often highest for unrealistically high substitution probabilities close to one. This finding suggests that choosing realistic model assumptions might not always yield optimal predictions in general and that choosing unrealistically high substitution probabilities close to one might actually improve the classification performance of phylogenetic footprinting. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The proposed PF is implemented in JAVA and can be downloaded from https://github.com/mgledi/PhyFoo. CONTACT: : [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

BACKGROUND: Transcriptional gene regulation is a fundamental process in nature, and the experimental and computational investigation of DNA binding motifs and their binding sites is a prerequisite for elucidating this process. Approaches for de-novo motif discovery can be subdivided in phylogenetic footprinting that takes into account phylogenetic dependencies in aligned sequences of more than one species and non-phylogenetic approaches based on sequences from only one species that typically take into account intra-motif dependencies. It has been shown that modeling (i) phylogenetic dependencies as well as (ii) intra-motif dependencies separately improves de-novo motif discovery, but there is no approach capable of modeling both (i) and (ii) simultaneously. RESULTS: Here, we present an approach for de-novo motif discovery that combines phylogenetic footprinting with motif models capable of taking into account intra-motif dependencies. We study the degree of intra-motif dependencies inferred by this approach from ChIP-seq data of 35 transcription factors. We find that significant intra-motif dependencies of orders 1 and 2 are present in all 35 datasets and that intra-motif dependencies of order 2 are typically stronger than those of order 1. We also find that the presented approach improves the classification performance of phylogenetic footprinting in all 35 datasets and that incorporating intra-motif dependencies of order 2 yields a higher classification performance than incorporating such dependencies of only order 1. CONCLUSION: Combining phylogenetic footprinting with motif models incorporating intra-motif dependencies leads to an improved performance in the classification of transcription factor binding sites. This may advance our understanding of transcriptional gene regulation and its evolution.

BACKGROUND: For three decades, sequence logos are the de facto standard for the visualization of sequence motifs in biology and bioinformatics. Reasons for this success story are their simplicity and clarity. The number of inferred and published motifs grows with the number of data sets and motif extraction algorithms. Hence, it becomes more and more important to perceive differences between motifs. However, motif differences are hard to detect from individual sequence logos in case of multiple motifs for one transcription factor, highly similar binding motifs of different transcription factors, or multiple motifs for one protein domain. RESULTS: Here, we present DiffLogo, a freely available, extensible, and user-friendly R package for visualizing motif differences. DiffLogo is capable of showing differences between DNA motifs as well as protein motifs in a pair-wise manner resulting in publication-ready figures. In case of more than two motifs, DiffLogo is capable of visualizing pair-wise differences in a tabular form. Here, the motifs are ordered by similarity, and the difference logos are colored for clarity. We demonstrate the benefit of DiffLogo on CTCF motifs from different human cell lines, on E-box motifs of three basic helix-loop-helix transcription factors as examples for comparison of DNA motifs, and on F-box domains from three different families as example for comparison of protein motifs. CONCLUSIONS: DiffLogo provides an intuitive visualization of motif differences. It enables the illustration and investigation of differences between highly similar motifs such as binding patterns of transcription factors for different cell types, treatments, and algorithmic approaches.