Search for: All records

Abstract Transcription by RNA polymerases is an exquisitely regulated step of the central dogma. Transcription is the primary determinant of cell-state, and most cellular perturbations impact transcription by altering polymerase activity. Thus, detecting changes in polymerase activity yields insight into most cellular processes. Nascent run-on sequencing provides a direct readout of polymerase activity, but no tools exist to model all aspects of this activity at genes. We focus on RNA polymerase II—responsible for transcribing protein-coding genes. We present the first model to capture the complete process of gene transcription. For individual genes, this model parameterizes each distinct stage of transcription—loading, initiation, elongation, and termination, hence LIET—in a biologically interpretable Bayesian mixture, which is applied to nascent run-on data. Our improved modeling of loading/initiation demonstrates these stages are characteristically different between sense and antisense strands. Applying LIET to 24 human cell-types, our analysis indicates the position of dissociation (the last step of termination) appears to be highly consistent, indicative of a tightly regulated process. Furthermore, by applying LIET to perturbation experiments, we demonstrate its ability to detect specific changes in pausing (5′ end), strand-bias, and dissociation location (3′ end)—opening the door to differential assessment of transcription at individual stages of individual genes. 

Background A variety of protocols exist for producing whole genome run-on transcription datasets. However, little is known about how differences between these protocols affect the signal within the resulting libraries. Results Using run-on transcription datasets generated from the same biological system, we show that a variety of GRO- and PRO-seq preparation methods leave identifiable signatures within each library. Specifically we show that the library preparation method results in differences in quality control metrics, as well as differences in the signal distribution at the 5 ′ end of transcribed regions. These shifts lead to disparities in eRNA identification, but do not impact analyses aimed at inferring the key regulators involved in changes to transcription. Conclusions Run-on sequencing protocol variations result in technical signatures that can be used to identify both the enrichment and library preparation method of a particular data set. These technical signatures are batch effects that limit detailed comparisons of pausing ratios and eRNAs identified across protocols. However, these batch effects have only limited impact on our ability to infer which regulators underlie the observed transcriptional changes. 

Abstract Detecting changes in the activity of a transcription factor (TF) in response to a perturbation provides insights into the underlying cellular process. Transcription Factor Enrichment Analysis (TFEA) is a robust and reliable computational method that detects positional motif enrichment associated with changes in transcription observed in response to a perturbation. TFEA detects positional motif enrichment within a list of ranked regions of interest (ROIs), typically sites of RNA polymerase initiation inferred from regulatory data such as nascent transcription. Therefore, we also introducemuMerge, a statistically principled method of generating a consensus list of ROIs from multiple replicates and conditions. TFEA is broadly applicable to data that informs on transcriptional regulation including nascent transcription (eg. PRO-Seq), CAGE, histone ChIP-Seq, and accessibility data (e.g., ATAC-Seq). TFEA not only identifies the key regulators responding to a perturbation, but also temporally unravels regulatory networks with time series data. Consequently, TFEA serves as a hypothesis-generating tool that provides an easy, rigorous, and cost-effective means to broadly assess TF activity yielding new biological insights.