Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Technical Note
  • Open Access

SigWin-detector: a Grid-enabled workflow for discovering enriched windows of genomic features related to DNA sequences

  • 1,
  • 2,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 3,
  • 2 and
  • 1Email author
BMC Research Notes20081:63

https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-1-63

©  Inda et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2008

  • Received: 25 April 2008
  • Accepted: 08 August 2008
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

Chromosome location is often used as a scaffold to organize genomic information in both the living cell and molecular biological research. Thus, ever-increasing amounts of data about genomic features are stored in public databases and can be readily visualized by genome browsers. To perform in silico experimentation conveniently with this genomics data, biologists need tools to process and compare datasets routinely and explore the obtained results interactively. The complexity of such experimentation requires these tools to be based on an e-Science approach, hence generic, modular, and reusable. A virtual laboratory environment with workflows, workflow management systems, and Grid computation are therefore essential.

Findings

Here we apply an e-Science approach to develop SigWin-detector, a workflow-based tool that can detect significantly enriched windows of (genomic) features in a (DNA) sequence in a fast and reproducible way. For proof-of-principle, we utilize a biological use case to detect regions of increased and decreased gene expression (RIDGEs and anti-RIDGEs) in human transcriptome maps. We improved the original method for RIDGE detection by replacing the costly step of estimation by random sampling with a faster analytical formula for computing the distribution of the null hypothesis being tested and by developing a new algorithm for computing moving medians. SigWin-detector was developed using the WS-VLAM workflow management system and consists of several reusable modules that are linked together in a basic workflow. The configuration of this basic workflow can be adapted to satisfy the requirements of the specific in silico experiment.

Conclusion

As we show with the results from analyses in the biological use case on RIDGEs, SigWin-detector is an efficient and reusable Grid-based tool for discovering windows enriched for features of a particular type in any sequence of values. Thus, SigWin-detector provides the proof-of-principle for the modular e-Science based concept of integrative bioinformatics experimentation.

Keywords

  • Input Sequence
  • Genomic Feature
  • Grid Resource
  • Virtual Laboratory
  • Uniform Resource Identifier

Findings

Genomic information is encoded in DNA and as such retained in a fairly steady configuration. In contrast to RNA, proteins, and metabolites, DNA is organized by a limited number of large chromosomes with relatively stable DNA sequences. Therefore, position in the DNA sequence, i.e., chromosome location, provides a convenient and essential scaffold for both the living cell and molecular biological research. In cells, for example, chromosomal organization is important for gene-transcription processes. Expression-profiling studies showed that gene expression is not only controlled at the level of individual genes, but also via autonomous regulation of chromosomal domains [1–5]. This suggests the existence of higher-order transcriptional regulatory mechanisms related to DNA organization or structures. The use of chromosomal organization in the life sciences is exemplified by the popularity of genome browsers that use chromosome location to map many genomic features, such as genes and their products, regulatory elements, gene expression, and epigenetic markers. The search for connections between genomic features is important in unraveling cellular mechanisms.

The pace at which omics experiments continuously keep producing large amounts of data about genomic features for an increasing number of sequenced genomes, creates a need for new high-throughput methods for identification of correlations between DNA related features [6–12]. Therefore, biologists would benefit from tools that could quickly identify enriched regions of genomic features. This would allow extensive, yet convenient in silico experimentation based on routinely processing and comparing multiple datasets. However, this requires these tools to be implemented in such a way that they deal with the many steps involved in this kind of experimentation. These include: acquiring the data from local or remote data repositories, converting it to the desired format, using it with the actual application that searches for the desired enrichment (possibly using Grid computation), visualizing the results, and comparing and/or integrating multiple datasets. Therefore, such a tool should be developed applying an e-Science approach [13–17]: it should be generic with respect to which data it can analyze, easy to adapt, and its parts should be reusable.

In an e-Science approach, a computational environment that provides transparent access to distributed data, adequate computational resources, as well as the necessary interfacing tools, is called a virtual laboratory (VL). Workflow management systems (WMSs, [18–21]) are an example of interfacing tooling that takes care of scheduling, keeps track of task executions, and provides the management framework necessary to develop applications inside a VL. WMSs can be used to design scientific workflows that automate in silico experimentation by providing a pipeline for streaming large quantities of data through various algorithms, applications and services.

This paper describes an e-Science based data integration and analysis tool: SigWin-detector. This application can detect clusters with increased (or decreased) density of a genomic feature in a DNA-related sequence in a fast and reproducible way. In the context of the development of a VL, our tool was implemented as a workflow running under WS-VLAM[20, 21], a Grid-enabled WMS. A biological use case shows its relevance for biological research. SigWin-detector is based on a method previously used by Versteeg and coworkers [4] to detect regions of increased and decreased gene expression (RIDGEs and anti-RIDGES) in human transcriptome maps (HTM). We improved the original method by i) deriving an analytical formula for computing the new hypothesis probability distribution, which replaces the costly step of estimation by random sampling and ii) developing a new algorithm for computing moving medians. While these improvements radically increase the intrinsic efficiency of the method, implementing SigWin-detector using a generic e-Science approach with access to Grid resources broadens its applicability and makes it amenable to a wide spectrum of experiments on genomic features or in fact on any sequence of values.

Significant windows and the mmFDR procedure

Versteeg et al. [4] identified clusters where the median expression level of the genes involved is significantly higher than expected (RIDGEs), using a moving median false discovery rate (mmFDR) procedure (Figure 1). The mmFDR procedure identifies RIDGEs by testing the input gene-expression against the null hypothesis that the position of the genes on the chromosomes does not affect their expression levels. This same procedure can be used to identify significant windows (i.e., windows in the input sequence that have a median value that deviates significantly from expected, if assumed that the ordering of the numbers in the input sequence is random) related to any genomic feature mapped to DNA sequences. In an even wider scope, it can also be used to identify significant windows in any sequence of numbers.
Figure 1
Figure 1

Using a mmFDR method to detect RIDGEs in a human transcriptome map. Schematic representation of the moving median false discovery rate (mmFDR) procedure identifying regions of high and low density of gene expression (RIDGEs and anti-RIDGEs, respectively) [4]. (A) Input sequence, a human transcriptome map (HTM), i.e., expression values of genes ordered by their chromosome location (cyan; chromosome 6). (B) mm(w), moving medians of the HTM for a given window size S. (C) Determination of the high and low mmFDR thresholds at a given level α: The high threshold m k is the smallest gene expression value for which the ∑ m ≥ m k f ( m ) / ∑ m ≥ m k g ( m ) ≤ α MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaagaart1ev2aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacPC6xNi=xH8viVGI8Gi=hEeeu0xXdbba9frFj0xb9qqpG0dXdb9aspeI8k8fiI+fsY=rqGqVepae9pg0db9vqaiVgFr0xfr=xfr=xc9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaaeqabiWaaaGcbaWaaabeaeaacqWGMbGzcqGGOaakcqWGTbqBcqGGPaqkcqGGVaWldaaeqaqaaiabdEgaNjabcIcaOiabd2gaTjabcMcaPiabgsMiJkabeg7aHbWcbaGaemyBa0MaeyyzImRaemyBa02aaSbaaWqaaiabdUgaRbqabaaaleqaniabggHiLdaaleaacqWGTbqBcqGHLjYScqWGTbqBdaWgaaadbaGaem4AaSgabeaaaSqab0GaeyyeIuoaaaa@48F1@ , here f(m) is the theoretical probability distribution of mm(w), and g(m) is the observed distribution of mm(w). (In [4], f(m) is estimated by simple sampling). Similarly, the low threshold m j is the largest gene expression value for which ∑ m ≤ m j f ( m ) / ∑ m ≤ m j g ( m ) ≤ α MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaagaart1ev2aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacPC6xNi=xH8viVGI8Gi=hEeeu0xXdbba9frFj0xb9qqpG0dXdb9aspeI8k8fiI+fsY=rqGqVepae9pg0db9vqaiVgFr0xfr=xfr=xc9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaaeqabiWaaaGcbaWaaabeaeaacqWGMbGzcqGGOaakcqWGTbqBcqGGPaqkcqGGVaWldaaeqaqaaiabdEgaNjabcIcaOiabd2gaTjabcMcaPiabgsMiJkabeg7aHbWcbaGaemyBa0MaeyizImQaemyBa02aaSbaaWqaaiabdQgaQbqabaaaleqaniabggHiLdaaleaacqWGTbqBcqGHKjYOcqWGTbqBdaWgaaadbaGaemOAaOgabeaaaSqab0GaeyyeIuoaaaa@48CB@ . (D) Selection of significant windows in chromosome 6: RIDGEs (in red) all windows for which the median gene expression is higher than or equal to m k ; anti-RIDGEs (in blue) all windows for which the median gene expression is lower than or equal to m j . (E) Output RIDGEOGRAM of chromosome 6. Each row (y-axis) in the RIDGEOGRAM represents a window size, ranging from S = 3 to S = M (the number of genes on the chromosome). Each column (x-axis) represents a sliding window number, ranging from w = S/2 to w = M-S/2 (hence the triangular form). Color is used to mark window medians significantly above (red) or below (blue) the genome-wide median. The scheme shows median expression data for window size S = 69 and FDR thresholds level α = 5%.

Avoiding permutations in the mmFDR procedure

Computationally, the most expensive step in the original mmFDR procedure is the repeated determination of medians over sliding windows of permutations of the input data to estimate the probability function corresponding to the null hypothesis. Our first improvement to the original method was to derive an exact formula for this distribution (see definitions and derivation in Additional file 1):

f ˆ ( r ) = ( r − 1 K ) ( N − r S − K − 1 ) ( N S ) = ( r − 1 ( S − 1 ) / 2 ) ( N − r ( S − 1 ) / 2 ) ( N S ) = S N ( r − 1 ( S − 1 ) / 2 ) ( N − r ( S − 1 ) / 2 ) ( N − 1 S − 1 ) . MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaagaart1ev2aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacPC6xNi=xI8qiVKYPFjYdHaVhbbf9v8qqaqFr0xc9vqFj0dXdbba91qpepeI8k8fiI+fsY=rqGqVepae9pg0db9vqaiVgFr0xfr=xfr=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@86DF@

This exact formula reduces the number of cycles of computing moving medians of an input sequence of approximately 25,000 entries from at least 5,000 to 1, giving SigWin-detector the efficiency it needs to be used routinely and for processing and comparing multiple datasets within minutes to hours, instead of days. This efficiency could not be if f(m) was estimated by sampling the permutation space E π , and counting the number of times m was the median value in any sliding window of size S.

Speeding up the computation of moving medians

Although we removed the need for computing moving medians over permutations of the input sequence, we still need to compute medians of windows sliding over the input sequence. We developed a new algorithm to compute those moving medians efficiently by exploiting the fact that moving medians for many window sizes must be computed simultaneously (Figure 2). This new algorithm is also suitable for computing any other order-statistics.
Figure 2
Figure 2

Computing moving medians for many window sizes. Description of our moving medians algorithm and data structures used. The figure illustrates a computation with input sequence size N = 7, and window sizes S = 3, 5, 7. (A) Rank data structure: used to store the input sequence. The Rank data structure gives access to the input sequence in its original and ranked order. It also allows fetching elements according to their rank. (B) Marker data structure: helps navigation through the sliding windows while keeping track of the median (or any other desired order-statistics). The Marker data structure is a Boolean array used to keep track of the elements that are inside a sliding window by means of crossing out the elements that are outside it. It also has a pointer that keeps track of the ith remaining element. This pointer is used to track the median. The Marker structure assumes the sequence is in ranked order. For example, if a sliding window of size 3 of a sequence of size 7 contains elements ranked 5, 1, and 6, the corresponding Marker structure has elements ranked 2, 3, 4, and 7 crossed out, and its median pointer points to element ranked 5. (C) Moving median algorithm for window size S. Our algorithm computes the moving medians for window sizes S = Smin, Smin+dS,..., Smin+n·dS, starting at S = S min . When the last sliding window of size S is reached, the algorithm proceeds to the next window size (S+dS) by inserting the elements that are in the first sliding window of size S+dS and crossing out the elements that were in the last sliding window of size S and setting the new position for the median pointer (which is element mm(S+dS) = (S+dS+1)/2). The algorithm stops after computing the medians for the largest window size.

Additional Figure A1 (Additional file 2) shows a graph comparing our moving medians algorithm with the commonly used Hardle and Steiger's algorithm [22]. While the execution time of their algorithm increases with window size (for a fixed sequence size), the execution time of our algorithm decreases with window size (Figure A1, upper panel). Because SigWin-detector needs to compute moving medians for many window sizes, our algorithm has a clear advantage over Hardle and Steiger's algorithm. In Figure A1, the break-even point of the cumulative computation is for S max around 400. The efficiency of our method can be further improved by using a mixed algorithm that uses Hardle and Steiger's algorithm for small window sizes and our algorithm for large window sizes, or by employing a divide-and-conquer approach. For example, a two-phase algorithm would start by dividing the input sequence into chunks of size 2M, with M ≥ 2S max , and applying the original algorithm to each chunk separately. Similarly, the second phase computes the medians for the missing sliding windows by dividing the sequence into chunks of the same size, but now using an offset M. This two-phase algorithm is also suitable for parallelization.

Designing a Grid-enabled generic workflow

To broaden the applicability of the mmFDR procedure, we implemented SigWin-detector using an e-Science approach by implementing a general, reusable, and adaptable tool with access to Grid resources using the WS-VLAM workflow management system[20, 21].

First we split the procedure into a collection of workflow components (called modules), each module performing a specific task that may be fine-tuned using parameters. The modules exchange data with each other by means of input and output ports. We then can choose the appropriate modules and compose a workflow suited to our specific needs [16]. Figure 3 describes a basic workflow configuration of SigWin-detector.
Figure 3
Figure 3

SigWin-Detector basic workflow using the WS-VLAM workflow composer. Upper: A snapshot of the workflow. Lower: Short description of the functionality of each module, port connections, and output ports. The ports are named by an abbreviation of the module name followed by 'i' or 'o' (input or output respectively) and the port number. Input ports are colored in blue and output ports in red. The ports are numbered in the same order they appear in the workflow.

The SigWin-detector Config-Basic1 workflow was tested on a Grid computer cluster composed of geographically distributed computational nodes: Distributed ASCI Supercomputer 3 (DAS-3, [23]). Additional Figure A2 (Additional file 2) presents wall clock execution times of the SigWin-detector Config-Basic1 workflow (Figure 3) for input sequences of various sizes.

The basic workflow can be altered by substituting, deleting, or adding modules. For example, we can extend the workflow to get the input sequence from a remote uniform resource identifier (URI)and then put the resulting SigWin-map back into it. We can modify the workflow to generate one SigWin-map per logical subsequence of the input sequence, instead of a single SigWin-map for the complete sequence [16]. We can also expand our workflow by computing significant windows for high median values (e.g., RIDGEs) and significant windows for low median values (e.g., anti-RIDGEs) simultaneously. The SigWin-detector workflow itself can be made into a "composite module" for more complex workflows. Furthermore, interconnection of WS-VLAM with the TAVERNA workbench [19] will permit the use of the existing TAVERNA components in connection with SigWin-detector. At the moment, Grid authentication prevents WS-VLAM workflows being used outside the Grid without the extra step of Grid certification. However, we are working on a Taverna workflow that encapsulates the SigWin detector, to be made available through the myExperiment webpage [24].

Biological application: finding RIDGES in a human transcriptome map

Once we finished our basic SigWin-detector, we modified it (Additional file 3) for application in our biological use case that aims to find (anti-)RIDGES in transcriptome maps. Figures 4 and 5 show a series of RIDGEOGRAMS for gene expression data for a recent version of the human transcriptome map (HTM) based on the UCSC release hg18 [4], and Table 1 summarizes some RIDGE statistics. Each RIDGEOGRAM displays both RIDGEs (red-shades) and anti-RIDGEs (blue-shades), the different color shades representing different mmFDR threshold levels. The size of the resulting RIDGEOGRAMS is proportional to the number of genes on a chromosome. We determined i) genome-wide (anti-)RIDGEs, i.e., windows for which the median expression is significantly higher (lower) than expected by considering the whole genome gene expression profile in the mmFDR procedure (Figure 4), and ii) chromosome specific (anti-)RIDGEs, i.e., the same analysis, but considering only the specific chromosome gene expression profile (Figure 5). This distinction has a major effect on the outcome. If the expression values of the genes on a certain chromosome are typically significantly higher than the genome-wide values, then there are less chromosome specific than genome-wide RIDGEs (e.g., chromosome 19 in Figures 4 and 5 and Table 1). Conversely, if the expression values of the genes on a chromosome are typically significantly smaller than the genome-wide values, then there are more chromosome specific RIDGEs (e.g., chromosome 6 in Table 1 and Figures 4 and 5). In the case of anti-RIDGEs the opposite holds (e.g., chromosomes 17 in Table 1 and Figures 4 and 5). This example shows the importance of choosing the right sequence to compute the null hypothesis distribution. Based on the fact that chromosomes are separate molecules in a cell, one may favor the results from the individual chromosome SigWin-detector analysis to investigate potential higher-order gene expression regulatory mechanisms.
Table 1

HTM statistical data

    

RIDGEs

anti-RIDGEs

    

all window sizes

window sizes 19–59

all window sizes

window sizes 19–59

chr

median

size

N

gw-R

chr-R

gw-R

chr-R

gw-aR

chr-aR

gw-aR

chr-aR

Y

11

57772954

96

0

28

0

9

212

0

54

0

21

15

46944323

318

0

0

0

0

6957

0

266

0

18

16

76117153

488

0

8

0

0

23329

27

521

0

13

19

114142980

553

0

2

0

0

32667

10123

853

190

4

23

191273063

1172

0

323

0

0

121113

0

5

0

6

26

170899992

1406

28327

175351

873

1803

73404

12884

223

0

8

26

146274826

1067

213

61

32

0

83720

3110

176

20

10

26

135374737

1123

165

36813

9

0

9239

611

453

379

20

26.5

62435964

738

978

1350

292

538

4171

0

7

0

2

29

242951149

1908

1801

22546

247

52

2871

376

34

2

5

29

180857866

1276

722

8875

146

303

35406

10231

298

234

3

30

199501827

1581

47644

97097

806

1491

77920

85262

123

89

X

30

154913754

893

141

946

106

694

0

3667

0

0

genome

33

3080419480

26740

1115947

767239

2511

9406

545680

554438

4832

6844

1

34

247249719

2659

165349

154517

1611

1734

68461

271099

75

88

12

34

132349534

1382

1161

541

348

492

853

1262

530

661

7

35

158821424

1273

10549

19690

615

693

3614

5125

388

479

15

36

100338915

859

232

29110

0

0

0

0

0

0

11

38

134452384

1472

225772

150844

1508

814

0

14777

0

0

9

39

140273252

1103

62730

50105

214

571

7

27055

7

3

14

39

106368585

834

817

102

170

75

210

5968

186

489

17

44

78774742

1439

67267

0

1236

0

841

72325

434

1405

16

47

88827254

1075

107253

1388

1293

82

504

15676

63

1248

22

48

49691432

580

34220

0

255

0

12

242

12

219

19

52

63811651

1445

360606

17542

2748

55

169

14618

124

1338

chr: chromosome, median: median expression of all genes on a chromosome, size: chromosome size in base pairs, N: number of genes in chromosome, gw-R: number of genome-wide RIDGEs in a chromosome, chr-R: number of chromosome-specific RIDGEs in a chromosome, gw-aR: number of genome-wide anti-RIDGEs in a chromosome, chr-aR: number of chromosome-specific anti-RIDGEs in a chromosome.

Figure 4
Figure 4

Genome-wide RIDGES in a human transcriptome map (HTM). Genome-wide RIDGEOGRAMS per chromosome for the HTM based on the UCSC release hg18 [4]. The expression levels are mapped to gene number. Each RIDGEOGRAM displays a composite of both RIDGES (red-shades) and anti-RIDGEs (blue-shades) for different mmFDR rate levels: 10% (lighter shade), 5%, 1%, and 0.5% (darker shade). All the different window sizes are depicted because they give different specific results. In general, small windows suffer from noise and large windows suffer from lack of detail.

Figure 5
Figure 5

Chromosome-specific RIDGES in a human transcriptome map (HTM). Chromosome-specific RIDGEOGRAMS per chromosome for the HTM based on the UCSC release hg18 [4]. The expression levels are mapped to gene number. Each RIDGEOGRAM displays a composite of both RIDGES (red-shades) and anti-RIDGEs (blue-shades) for different mmFDR rate levels: 10% (lighter shade), 5%, 1%, and 0.5% (darker shade).

The RIDGEOGRAMS shown in Figures 4 and 5 only take the ordering of the genes into account, and not their actual physical position in the chromosome. However, from a biological perspective it is likely that the higher order gene-expression mechanisms that underlie RIDGEs relate to an actual section of the chromosome rather than a cluster of genes just ordered by their chromosome location. So we used our SigWin-detector to take the physical gene position into account by subdividing the chromosomes in stretches of constant value (250 kb). If a stretch contains the beginning of one or more genes, their average expression value is assigned to that stretch of DNA. For this analysis we used the SigWin-detector Config-Sub2 with preprocessed HTM data and adapted parameters. The resulting RIDGEOGRAMS are proportional to the chromosome's size (Additional Figure A3, Additional file 2). The anti-RIDGEs show a lower cut-off caused by the many 0 values in the HTM. The results from the SigWin-detector analysis using chromosome position are substantially different to those using chromosome ordering. This application demonstrated that SigWin-detector is an e-Science tool that allows convenient in-silico experimentation. To prove that this tool is generic, we used our workflow to examine a simple sequential data set: an extended time series of hourly ground level ozone concentration measurements (Additional file 4).

Availability and requirements

  • Project name: SigWin-detector

  • Project home page: http://mad-db.science.uva.nl/projects/sigwin/

  • Programming language: C++

  • Other requirements: SigWin-detector needs the WS-VLAM workflow management system. WS-VLAM has a client distribution and site distribution.

i. WS-VLAM client distribution: The WS-VLAM composer, a graphical interface used for creating, modifying, and submitting workflows. Needs Java virtual machine (version1.5 or higher).

ii. WS-VLAM site distribution: The WS-VLAM engine, which is needed for running the workflows in a Grid. The WS-VLAM engine needs a GLOBUS GT4 (4.0.3) installation.

To download these WS-VLAM distributions (Additional file 5) go to http://staff.science.uva.nl/~gvlam/wsvlam/, click the "Distributions" tab and follow the instructions in it.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Monajemi for assistance with the HTM data sets, R. H. Bisseling for checking the mathematics, L. O. Hertzberger for his constant support, and J. Batson for proofreading the paper. This work was carried out in the context of the Virtual Laboratory e-Science project http://www.vl-e.nl and BioRange program of the Netherlands Bioinformatics Centre (NBIC). VL-e is supported by a BSIK grant from the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OC&W) and the ICT innovation program of the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ). BioRange is supported by a BSIK grant through the Netherlands Genomics Initiative (NGI).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Integrative Bioinformatics Unit, Swammerdam Institute for Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 94062, 1090 GB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
(2)
Bioinformatics Laboratory, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
(3)
Institute of Informatics, Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands

References

  1. Spellman PT, Rubin GM: Evidence for large domains of similarly expressed genes in the Drosophila genome. J Biol. 2002, 1: 5-10.1186/1475-4924-1-5.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boutanaev AM, Kalmykova AI, Shevelyov YY, Nurminsky DI: Large clusters of co-expressed genes in the Drosophila genome. Nature. 2002, 420: 666-669. 10.1038/nature01216.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Roy PJ, Stuart JM, Lund J, Kim SK: Chromosomal clustering of muscle-expressed genes in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature. 2002, 418: 975-979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Versteeg R, van Schaik BD, van Batenburg MF, Roos M, Monajemi R, Caron H, Bussemaker HJ, van Kampen AH: The human transcriptome map reveals extremes in gene density, intron length, GC content, and repeat pattern for domains of highly and weakly expressed genes. Genome Res. 2003, 13: 1998-2004. 10.1101/gr.1649303.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Sabo PJ, Kuehn MS, Thurman R, Johnson BE, Johnson EM, Hua C, Man Y, Rosenzweig E, Goldy J, Haydock A, Weaver M, Shafer A, Lee K, Neri F, Humbert R, Singer MA, Richmond TA, O Dorschner M, McArthur M, Hawrylycz M, Green RD, Navas PA, Noble WS, Stamatoyannopoulos JA: Genome-scale mapping of DNase I sensitivity in vivo using tiling DNA microarrays. Nature Methods. 2006, 3: 511-518. 10.1038/nmeth890.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Birney E, Stamatoyannopoulos JA, Dutta A, Guigo R, Gingeras TR, Margulies EH, Weng ZP, Snyder M, Dermitzakis ET, Stamatoyannopoulos JA, Thurman RE, Kuehn MS, Taylor CM, Neph S, Koch CM, Asthana S, Malhotra A, Adzhubei I, Greenbaum JA, Andrews RM, Flicek P, Boyle PJ, Cao H, Carter NP, Clelland GK, Davis S, Day N, Dhami P, Dillon SC, Dorschner MO, Fiegler H, Giresi PG, Goldy J, Hawrylycz M, Haydock A, Humbert R, James KD, Johnson BE, Johnson EM, Frum TT, Rosenzweig ER, Karnani N, Lee K, Lefebvre GC, Navas PA, Neri F, Parker SCJ, Sabo PJ, Sandstrom R, Shafer A, Vetrie D, Weaver M, Wilcox S, Yu M, Collins FS, Dekker J, Lieb JD, Tullius TD, Crawford GE, Sunyaev S, Noble WS, Dunham I, Dutta A, Guigo R, Denoeud F, Reymond A, Kapranov P, Rozowsky J, Zheng DY, Castelo R, Frankish A, Harrow J, Ghosh S, Sandelin A, Hofacker IL, Baertsch R, Keefe D, Flicek P, Dike S, Cheng J, Hirsch HA, Sekinger EA, Lagarde J, Abril JF, Shahab A, Flamm C, Fried C, Hackermuller J, Hertel J, Lindemeyer M, Missal K, Tanzer A, Washietl S, Korbel J, Emanuelsson O, Pedersen JS, Holroyd N, Taylor R, Swarbreck D, Matthews N, Dickson MC, Thomas DJ, Weirauch MT, Gilbert J, Drenkow J, Bell I, Zhao X, Srinivasan KG, Sung WK, Ooi HS, Chiu KP, Foissac S, Alioto T, Brent M, Pachter L, Tress ML, Valencia A, Choo SW, Choo CY, Ucla C, Manzano C, Wyss C, Cheung E, Clark TG, Brown JB, Ganesh M, Patel S, Tammana H, Chrast J, Henrichsen CN, Kai C, Kawai J, Nagalakshmi U, Wu JQ, Lian Z, Lian J, Newburger P, Zhang XQ, Bickel P, Mattick JS, Carninci P, Hayashizaki Y, Weissman S, Dermitzakis ET, Margulies EH, Hubbard T, Myers RM, Rogers J, Stadler PF, Lowe TM, Wei CL, Ruan YJ, Snyder M, Birney E, Struhl K, Gerstein M, Antonarakis SE, Gingeras TR, Brown JB, Flicek P, Fu YT, Keefe D, Birney E, Denoeud F, Gerstein M, Green ED, Kapranov P, Karaoz U, Myers RM, Noble WS, Reymond A, Rozowsky J, Struhl K, Siepel A, Stamatoyannopoulos JA, Taylor CM, Taylor J, Thurman RE, Tullius TD, Washietl S, Zheng DY, Liefer LA, Wetterstrand KA, Good PJ, Feingold EA, Guyer MS, Collins FS, Margulies EH, Cooper GM, Asimenos G, Thomas DJ, Dewey CN, Siepel A, Birney E, Keefe D, Hou MM, Taylor J, Nikolaev S, Montoya-Burgos JI, Loytynoja A, Whelan S, Pardi F, Massingham T, Brown JB, Huang HY, Zhang NR, Bickel P, Holmes I, Mullikin JC, Ureta-Vidal A, Paten B, Seringhaus M, Church D, Rosenbloom K, Kent WJ, Stone EA, Gerstein M, Antonarakis SE, Batzoglou S, Goldman N, Hardison RC, Haussler D, Miller W, Pachter L, Green ED, Sidow A, Weng ZP, Trinklein ND, Fu YT, Zhang ZDD, Karaoz U, Barrera L, Stuart R, Zheng DY, Ghosh S, Flicek P, King DC, Taylor J, Ameur A, Enroth S, Bieda MC, Koch CM, Hirsch HA, Wei CL, Cheng J, Kim J, Bhinge AA, Giresi PG, Jiang N, Liu J, Yao F, Sung WK, Chiu KP, Vega VB, Lee CWH, Ng P, Shahab A, Sekinger EA, Yang A, Moqtaderi Z, Zhu Z, Xu XQ, Squazzo S, Oberley MJ, Inman D, Singer MA, Richmond TA, Munn KJ, Rada-Iglesias A, Wallerman O, Komorowski J, Clelland GK, Wilcox S, Dillon SC, Andrews RM, Fowler JC, Couttet P, James KD, Lefebvre GC, Bruce AW, Dovey OM, Ellis PD, Dhami P, Langford CF, Carter NP, Vetrie D, Kapranov P, Nix DA, Bell I, Patel S, Rozowsky J, Euskirchen G, Hartman S, Lian J, Wu JQ, Urban AE, Kraus P, Van Calcar S, Heintzman N, Kim TH, Wang K, Qu CX, Hon G, Luna R, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG, Aldred SF, Cooper SJ, Halees A, Lin JM, Shulha HP, Zhang XL, Xu MS, Haidar JNS, Yu Y, Birney E, Weissman S, Ruan YJ, Lieb JD, Iyer VR, Green RD, Gingeras TR, Wadelius C, Dunham I, Struhl K, Hardison RC, Gerstein M, Farnham PJ, Myers RM, Ren B, Snyder M, Thomas DJ, Rosenbloom K, Harte RA, Hinrichs AS, Trumbower H, Clawson H, Hillman-Jackson J, Zweig AS, Smith K, Thakkapallayil A, Barber G, Kuhn RM, Karolchik D, Haussler D, Kent WJ, Dermitzakis ET, Armengol L, Bird CP, Clark TG, Cooper GM, de Bakker PIW, Kern AD, Lopez-Bigas N, Martin JD, Stranger BE, Thomas DJ, Woodroffe A, Batzoglou S, Davydov E, Dimas A, Eyras E, Hallgrimsdottir IB, Hardison RC, Huppert J, Sidow A, Taylor J, Trumbower H, Zody MC, Guigo R, Mullikin JC, Abecasis GR, Estivill X, Birney E, Bouffard GG, Guan XB, Hansen NF, Idol JR, Maduro VVB, Maskeri B, McDowell JC, Park M, Thomas PJ, Young AC, Blakesley RW, Muzny DM, Sodergren E, Wheeler DA, Worley KC, Jiang HY, Weinstock GM, Gibbs RA, Graves T, Fulton R, Mardis ER, Wilson RK, Clamp M, Cuff J, Gnerre S, Jaffe DB, Chang JL, Lindblad-Toh K, Lander ES, Koriabine M, Nefedov M, Osoegawa K, Yoshinaga Y, Zhu BL, de Jong PJ: Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project. Nature. 2007, 447: 799-816. 10.1038/nature05874.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Eckhardt F, Lewin J, Cortese R, Rakyan VK, Attwood J, Burger M, Burton J, Cox TV, Davies R, Down TA, Haefliger C, Horton R, Howe K, Jackson DK, Kunde J, Koenig C, Liddle J, Niblett D, Otto T, Pettett R, Seemann S, Thompson C, West T, Rogers J, Olek A, Berlin K, Beck S: DNA methylation profiling of human chromosomes 6, 20 and 22. Nature Genetics. 2006, 38: 1378-1385. 10.1038/ng1909.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. van Steensel B: Mapping of genetic and epigenetic regulatory networks using microarrays. Nature Genetics. 2005, 37: S18-S24. 10.1038/ng1559.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Pollack JR, Perou CM, Alizadeh AA, Eisen MB, Pergamenschikov A, Williams CF, Jeffrey SS, Botstein D, Brown PO: Genome-wide analysis of DNA copy-number changes using cDNA microarrays. Nature Genetics. 1999, 23: 41-46. 10.1038/14385.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Su AI, Cooke MP, Ching KA, Hakak Y, Walker JR, Wiltshire T, Orth AP, Vega RG, Sapinoso LM, Moqrich A, Patapoutian A, Hampton GM, Schultz PG, Hogenesch JB: Large-scale analysis of the human and mouse transcriptomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2002, 99: 4465-4470. 10.1073/pnas.012025199.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Yanai I, Benjamin H, Shmoish M, Chalifa-Caspi V, Shklar M, Ophir R, Bar-Even A, Horn-Saban S, Safran M, Domany E, Lancet D, Shmueli O: Genome-wide midrange transcription profiles reveal expression level relationships in human tissue specification. Bioinformatics. 2005, 21: 650-659. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti042.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Halasz G, van Batenburg MF, Perusse J, Hua S, Lu XJ, White KP, Bussemaker HJ: Detecting transcriptionally active regions using genomic tiling arrays. Genome Biology. 2006, 7:Google Scholar
  13. Rauwerda H, Roos M, Hertzberger BO, Breit TM: The promise of a virtual lab in drug discovery. Drug Discovery Today. 2006, 11: 228-236. 10.1016/S1359-6446(05)03680-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Goble C: The low down on e-science and grids for biology. Comparative and Functional Genomics. 2001, 2: 365-370. 10.1002/cfg.115.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Oehmen CS, Straatsma TP, Anderson GA, Orr G, Webb-Robertson BJM, Taylor RC, Mooney RW, Baxter DJ, Jones DR, Dixon DA: New challenges facing integrative biological science in the post-genomic era. Journal of Biological Systems. 2006, 14: 275-293. 10.1142/S0218339006001805.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Inda MA, Belloum ASZ, Roos M, Vasunin D, de Laat C, Hertzberger LO, Breit TM: Interactive Workflows in a Virtual Laboratory for e-Bioscience: the SigWin-Detector Tool for Gene Expression Analysis. Proceedings of the e-Science 2006; Amsterdam. 2006, IEEE CS PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Post LJG, Roos M, Marshall MS, van Driel R, Breit TM: A semantic web approach applied to integrative bioinformatics experimentation: a biological use case with genomics data. Bioinformatics. 2007, 23: 3080-3087. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm461.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ludascher B, Altintas I, Berkley C, Higgins D, Jaeger E, Jones M, Lee EA, Tao J, Zhao Y: Scientific workflow management and the Kepler system. Concurrency and Computation-Practice & Experience. 2006, 18: 1039-1065. 10.1002/cpe.994.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Hull D, Wolstencroft K, Stevens R, Goble C, Pocock MR, Li P, Oinn T: Taverna: a tool for building and running workflows of services. Nucleic Acids Research. 2006, 34: W729-W732. 10.1093/nar/gkl320.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Korkhov V, Vasunin D, Wibisono A, Belloum ASZ, Inda MA, Roos M, Breit T, Hertzberger BLO: VLAM-G: Interactive Dataflow Driven Engine for Grid-enabled Resources. Scientific Programming. 2007, 15: 173-188.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. WS-VLAM. [http://www.science.uva.nl/~gvlam/wsvlam]
  22. Hardle W, Steiger W: Optimal Median Smoothing. Applied Statistics-Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C. 1995, 44: 258-264.Google Scholar
  23. DAS3, The Distributed ASCI Supercomputer 3. [http://www.cs.vu.nl/das3]
  24. Goble C, Roure DCD: myExperiment: social networking for workflow-using e-scientists. Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on Workflows in support of large-scale science; June 25, 2007; Monterey, California, USA. 2007, ACM Press, 1-2.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Inda et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2008

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement

BMC Research Notes

ISSN: 1756-0500

Contact us