Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025

High Sensitivity Measurement of Transcription Factor-DNA Binding Affinities by Competitive Titration Using Fluorescence Microscopy
Published on: February 7, 2019
Comparative analysis of models in predicting the effects of SNPs on TF-DNA binding using large-scale in vitro and in
Dongmei Han1, Yurun Li1, Linxiao Wang1
1CAS Key Laboratory of Computational Biology, Shanghai Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 320 Yueyang Road, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Abstract:
Non-coding variants associated with complex traits can alter the motifs of transcription factor (TF)-deoxyribonucleic acid binding. Although many computational models have been developed to predict the effects of non-coding variants on TF binding, their predictive power lacks systematic evaluation. Here we have evaluated 14 different models built on position weight matrices (PWMs), support vector machines, ordinary least squares and deep neural networks (DNNs), using large-scale in vitro (i.e. SNP-SELEX) and in vivo (i.e. allele-specific binding, ASB) TF binding data. Our results show that the accuracy of each model in predicting SNP effects in vitro significantly exceeds that achieved in vivo. For in vitro variant impact prediction, kmer/gkm-based machine learning methods (deltaSVM_HT-SELEX, QBiC-Pred) trained on in vitro datasets exhibit the best performance. For in vivo ASB variant prediction, DNN-based multitask models (DeepSEA, Sei, Enformer) trained on the ChIP-seq dataset exhibit relatively superior performance. Among the PWM-based methods, tRap demonstrates better performance in both in vitro and in vivo evaluations. In addition, we find that TF classes such as basic leucine zipper factors could be predicted more accurately, whereas those such as C2H2 zinc finger factors are predicted less accurately, aligning with the evolutionary conservation of these TF classes. We also underscore the significance of non-sequence factors such as cis-regulatory element type, TF expression, interactions and post-translational modifications in influencing the in vivo predictive performance of TFs. Our research provides valuable insights into selecting prioritization methods for non-coding variants and further optimizing such models.
More Related Videos
11:35Screening for Functional Non-coding Genetic Variants Using Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay EMSA and DNA-affinity Precipitation Assay DAPA
Published on: August 21, 2016
11:25Enhanced Yeast One-hybrid Screens To Identify Transcription Factor Binding To Human DNA Sequences
Published on: February 11, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation- ChIP
Types of ChIP
ChIP can be divided into two types - X-ChIP and N-ChIP. X-ChIP involves in vivo cross-linking of histones and regulatory proteins to DNA, fragmenting the DNA by sonication, and isolating the protein-DNA...
Conserved Binding Sites
Binding sites are often located in large pockets, and if their location on a protein’s surface is unknown, it can be predicted using various approaches. The energetic method computationally...