4.5 Article

Dynamism in gene expression across multiple studies

Journal

PHYSIOLOGICAL GENOMICS
Volume 40, Issue 3, Pages 128-140

Publisher

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/physiolgenomics.90403.2008

Keywords

microarray; dynamics; housekeeping genes; meta-analysis

Funding

  1. National Library of Medicine [K22 LM-008261, T15 LM-007033]
  2. National Institute for General Medical Sciences [R01 GM-079719]
  3. Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Morgan AA, Dudley JT, Deshpande T, Butte AJ. Dynamism in gene expression across multiple studies. Physiol Genomics 40: 128-140, 2010. First published November 17, 2009; doi:10.1152/physiolgenomics.90403.2008.-In this study we develop methods of examining gene expression dynamics, how and when genes change expression, and demonstrate their application in a meta-analysis involving over 29,000 microarrays. By defining measures across many experimental conditions, we have a new way of characterizing dynamics, complementary to measures looking at changes in absolute variation or breadth of tissues showing expression. We show conservation in overall patterns of dynamism across three species (human, mouse, and rat) and show associations with known disease-related genes. We discuss the enriched functional properties of the sets of genes showing different patterns of dynamics and show that the differences in expression dynamics is associated with the variety of different transcription factor regulatory sites. These results can influence thinking about the selection of genes for microarray design and the analysis of measurements of mRNA expression variation in a global context of expression dynamics across many conditions, as genes that are rarely differentially expressed between experimental conditions may be the subject of increased scrutiny when they significantly vary in expression between experimental subsets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available