Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Kenzie D. MacIsaac

dblp:56/936 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 4 · 4 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › sequence analysis
motif discovery
0.112006
A hypothesis-based approach for identifying the binding specificity of regulatory proteins from chromatin immunoprecipitation data · Bioinform. 2006
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene regulation
regulatory genomics
0.112006
A hypothesis-based approach for identifying the binding specificity of regulatory proteins from chromatin immunoprecipitation data · Bioinform. 2006
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene regulation
transcription factor binding site prediction
0.112006
A hypothesis-based approach for identifying the binding specificity of regulatory proteins from chromatin immunoprecipitation data · Bioinform. 2006
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics
ChIP-chip analysis
0.012006
A hypothesis-based approach for identifying the binding specificity of regulatory proteins from chromatin immunoprecipitation data · Bioinform. 2006

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

cross-validation · 0.1constrained local optimization · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 A Quantitative Model of Transcriptional Regulation Reveals the Influence of Binding Location on Expression
abstract
Understanding the mechanistic basis of transcriptional regulation has been a central focus of molecular biology since its inception. New high-throughput chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments have revealed that most regulatory proteins bind thousands of sites in mammalian genomes. However, the functional significance of these binding sites remains unclear. We present a quantitative model of transcriptional regulation that suggests the contribution of each binding site to tissue-specific gene expression depends strongly on its position relative to the transcription start site. For three cell types, we show that, by considering binding position, it is possible to predict relative expression levels between cell types with an accuracy approaching the level of agreement between different experimental platforms. Our model suggests that, for the transcription factors profiled in these cell types, a regulatory site's influence on expression falls off almost linearly with distance from the transcription start site in a 10 kilobase range. Binding to both evolutionarily conserved and non-conserved sequences contributes significantly to transcriptional regulation. Our approach also reveals the quantitative, tissue-specific role of individual proteins in activating or repressing transcription. These results suggest that regulator binding position plays a previously unappreciated role in influencing expression and blurs the classical distinction between proximal promoter and distal binding events.
Kenzie D. MacIsaac, Kinyui A. Lo, William Gordon, Shmulik Motola, Tali Mazor, Ernest Fraenkel
PLoS Comput. Biol.1
2006 A hypothesis-based approach for identifying the binding specificity of regulatory proteins from chromatin immunoprecipitation data
abstract
MOTIVATION: Genome-wide chromatin-immunoprecipitation (ChIP-chip) detects binding of transcriptional regulators to DNA in vivo at low resolution. Motif discovery algorithms can be used to discover sequence patterns in the bound regions that may be recognized by the immunoprecipitated protein. However, the discovered motifs often do not agree with the binding specificity of the protein, when it is known. RESULTS: We present a powerful approach to analyzing ChIP-chip data, called THEME, that tests hypotheses concerning the sequence specificity of a protein. Hypotheses are refined using constrained local optimization. Cross-validation provides a principled standard for selecting the optimal weighting of the hypothesis and the ChIP-chip data and for choosing the best refined hypothesis. We demonstrate how to derive hypotheses for proteins from 36 domain families. Using THEME together with these hypotheses, we analyze ChIP-chip datasets for 14 human and mouse proteins. In all the cases the identified motifs are consistent with the published data with regard to the binding specificity of the proteins.
Kenzie D. MacIsaac, D. Benjamin Gordon, Lena Nekludova, Duncan T. Odom, Joerg Schreiber, David K. Gifford, Richard A. Young, Ernest Fraenkel
Bioinform.1
2006 An improved map of conserved regulatory sites for Saccharomyces cerevisiae
abstract
BACKGROUND: The regulatory map of a genome consists of the binding sites for proteins that determine the transcription of nearby genes. An initial regulatory map for S. cerevisiae was recently published using six motif discovery programs to analyze genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation data for 203 transcription factors. The programs were used to identify sequence motifs that were likely to correspond to the DNA-binding specificity of the immunoprecipitated proteins. We report improved versions of two conservation-based motif discovery algorithms, PhyloCon and Converge. Using these programs, we create a refined regulatory map for S. cerevisiae by reanalyzing the same chromatin immunoprecipitation data. RESULTS: Applying the same conservative criteria that were applied in the original study, we find that PhyloCon and Converge each separately discover more known specificities than the combination of all six programs in the previous study. Combining the results of PhyloCon and Converge, we discover significant sequence motifs for 36 transcription factors that were previously missed. The new set of motifs identifies 636 more regulatory interactions than the previous one. The new network contains 28% more regulatory interactions among transcription factors, evidence of greater cross-talk between regulators. CONCLUSION: Combining two complementary computational strategies for conservation-based motif discovery improves the ability to identify the specificity of transcriptional regulators from genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation data. The increased sensitivity of these methods significantly expands the map of yeast regulatory sites without the need to alter any of the thresholds for statistical significance. The new map of regulatory sites reveals a more elaborate and complex view of the yeast genetic regulatory network than was observed previously.
Kenzie D. MacIsaac, D. Benjamin Gordon, David K. Gifford, Gary D. Stormo, Ernest Fraenkel
BMC Bioinform.1
2006 Practical Strategies for Discovering Regulatory DNA Sequence Motifs
abstract
Many functionally important regions of the genome can be recognized by searching for sequence patterns, or “motifs.” Aside from the genes themselves, examples include CpG islands, often present in promoter regions, and splice sites that denote intron/exon boundaries. Other motifs of great interest correspond to sites bound by regulatory proteins. Differential expression of genes in response to environmental and developmental cues depends on the action of these proteins, which are also known as transcription factors. Identifying the regulatory motifs bound by transcription factors can provide crucial insight into the mechanisms of transcriptional regulation. However, the search for these sites is challenging because a single regulatory protein will often recognize a variety of similar sequences. In this tutorial, we review computational techniques, termed “motif discovery,” to learn representations of regulatory motifs from sequence data. In Figure 1, we present an overview of the basic workflow in a motif discovery analysis and some practical strategies for successfully mining sequence data for biologically important regulatory motifs. In the remainder of this tutorial, we discuss the main challenges associated with motif discovery in detail, and we review recent developments for addressing these challenges. Figure 1 Motif Discovery Workflow
Kenzie D. MacIsaac, Ernest Fraenkel
PLoS Comput. Biol.1