Previous Article |
Table of Contents
| Next Article
Vol. 95, Issue 25, 14863-14868, December 8, 1998
* Department of Genetics and Contributed by David Botstein, October 13, 1998
A system of cluster analysis for genome-wide expression data from
DNA microarray hybridization is described that uses standard statistical algorithms to arrange genes according to similarity in
pattern of gene expression. The output is displayed graphically, conveying the clustering and the underlying expression data
simultaneously in a form intuitive for biologists. We have found in the
budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae that clustering
gene expression data groups together efficiently genes of known similar
function, and we find a similar tendency in human data. Thus patterns
seen in genome-wide expression experiments can be interpreted as
indications of the status of cellular processes. Also, coexpression of
genes of known function with poorly characterized or novel genes may provide a simple means of gaining leads to the functions of many genes
for which information is not available currently.
The rapid advance of genome-scale sequencing has driven the
development of methods to exploit this information by characterizing biological processes in new ways. The knowledge of the coding sequences
of virtually every gene in an organism, for instance, invites
development of technology to study the expression of all of them at
once, because the study of gene expression of genes one by one has
already provided a wealth of biological insight. To this end, a variety
of techniques has evolved to monitor, rapidly and efficiently,
transcript abundance for all of an organism's genes (1-3). Within the
mass of numbers produced by these techniques, which amount to hundreds
of data points for thousands or tens of thousands of genes, is an
immense amount of biological information. In this paper we address the
problem of analyzing and presenting information on this genomic scale.
A natural first step in extracting this information is to examine the
extremes, e.g., genes with significant differential expression in two
individual samples or in a time series after a given treatment. This
simple technique can be extremely efficient, for example, in screens
for potential tumor markers or drug targets. However, such analyses do
not address the full potential of genome-scale experiments to alter our
understanding of cellular biology by providing, through an inclusive
analysis of the entire repertoire of transcripts, a continuing
comprehensive window into the state of a cell as it goes through a
biological process. What is needed instead is a holistic approach to
analysis of genomic data that focuses on illuminating order in the
entire set of observations, allowing biologists to develop an
integrated understanding of the process being studied.
A natural basis for organizing gene expression data is to group
together genes with similar patterns of expression. The first step to
this end is to adopt a mathematical description of similarity. For any
series of measurements, a number of sensible measures of similarity in
the behavior of two genes can be used, such as the Euclidean distance,
angle, or dot products of the two n-dimensional vectors
representing a series of n measurements. We have found that
the standard correlation coefficient (i.e., the dot product of two
normalized vectors) conforms well to the intuitive biological notion of
what it means for two genes to be "coexpressed;" this may be
because this statistic captures similarity in "shape" but places
no emphasis on the magnitude of the two series of measurements.
It is not the purpose of this paper to survey the various methods
available to cluster genes on the basis of their expression patterns,
but rather to illustrate how such methods can be useful to biologists
in the analysis of gene expression data. We aim to use these methods to
organize, but not to alter, tables containing primary data; we have
thus used methods that can be reduced, in the end, to a reordering of
lists of genes. Clustering methods can be divided into two general
classes, designated supervised and unsupervised clustering (4). In
supervised clustering, vectors are classified with respect to known
reference vectors. In unsupervised clustering, no predefined reference
vectors are used. As we have little a priori knowledge of
the complete repertoire of expected gene expression patterns for any
condition, we have favored unsupervised methods or hybrid (unsupervised
followed by supervised) approaches.
Although various clustering methods can usefully organize tables of
gene expression measurements, the resulting ordered but still massive
collection of numbers remains difficult to assimilate. Therefore, we
always combine clustering methods with a graphical representation of
the primary data by representing each data point with a color that
quantitatively and qualitatively reflects the original experimental
observations. The end product is a representation of complex gene
expression data that, through statistical organization and graphical
display, allows biologists to assimilate and explore the data in a
natural intuitive manner.
To illustrate this approach, we have applied pairwise average-linkage
cluster analysis (5) to gene expression data collected in our
laboratories. This method is a form of hierarchical clustering, familiar to most biologists through its application in sequence and
phylogenetic analysis. Relationships among objects (genes) are
represented by a tree whose branch lengths reflect the degree of
similarity between the objects, as assessed by a pairwise similarity function such as that described above. In sequence comparison, these
methods are used to infer the evolutionary history of sequences being
compared. Whereas no such underlying tree exists for expression patterns of genes, such methods are useful in their ability to represent varying degrees of similarity and more distant relationships among groups of closely related genes, as well as in requiring few
assumptions about the nature of the data. The computed trees can be
used to order genes in the original data table, so that genes or groups
of genes with similar expression patterns are adjacent. The ordered
table can then be displayed graphically, as above, with a
representation of the tree to indicate the relationships among genes.
Sources of Experimental Data.
Data analyzed here were
collected on spotted DNA microarrays (6, 7). Gene expression in the
budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae was studied during
the diauxic shift (8), the mitotic cell division cycle (9), sporulation
(10), and temperature and reducing shocks (P.T.S., P.O.B., and D.B.,
unpublished results) by using microarrays containing essentially every
ORF from this fully sequenced organism (8). Gene expression of primary
human fibroblasts stimulated with serum following serum starvation was studied by using a microarray with 9,800 cDNAs representing
approximately 8,600 distinct human transcripts (11). In all
experiments, RNA from experimental samples (taken at selected times
during the process) was labeled during reverse transcription with the
red-fluorescent dye Cy5 (Amersham) and was mixed with a reference
sample labeled in parallel with the green-fluorescent dye Cy3
(Amersham) (the reference sample was time 0 for all experiments, except
for the yeast cell cycle where asynchronous cells were used). After
hybridization and appropriate washing steps, separate images were
acquired for each fluor, and fluorescence intensity ratios were
obtained for all target elements.
Genetics
Cluster analysis and display of genome-wide expression patterns
, and
Department of Biochemistry and
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of
Medicine, 300 Pasteur Avenue, Stanford, CA 94305
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials & Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Metrics. The gene similarity metric we use is a form of correlation coefficient. Let Gi equal the (log-transformed) primary data for gene G in condition i. For any two genes X and Y observed over a series of N conditions, a similarity score can be computed as follows:
|
|
G becomes
the standard deviation of G, and S(X,
Y) is exactly equal to the Pearson correlation coefficient of the
observations of X and Y. Values of
Goffset which are not the average over
observations on G are used when there is an assumed
unchanged or reference state represented by the value of
Goffset, against which changes are to be
analyzed; in all of the examples presented here,
Goffset is set to 0, corresponding to a
fluorescence ratio of 1.0.
Hierarchical Clustering. The hierarchical clustering algorithm used is based closely on the average-linkage method of Sokal and Michener (5), which was developed for clustering correlation matrixes such as those used here. The object of this algorithm is to compute a dendrogram that assembles all elements into a single tree. For any set of n genes, an upper-diagonal similarity matrix is computed by using the metric described above, which contains similarity scores for all pairs of genes. The matrix is scanned to identify the highest value (representing the most similar pair of genes). A node is created joining these two genes, and a gene expression profile is computed for the node by averaging observation for the joined elements (missing values are omitted and the two joined elements are weighted by the number of genes they contain). The similarity matrix is updated with this new node replacing the two joined elements, and the process is repeated n-1 times until only a single element remains. Software implementation of this algorithm can be obtained from the authors at http://rana.stanford.edu/clustering.
Ordering of Data Tables.
For any dendrogram of n
elements, there are 2n
1 linear orderings
consistent with the structure of the tree (at each node, either of the
two elements joined by the node can be ordered ahead of the other). An
optimal linear ordering, one that maximizes the similarity of adjacent
elements in the ordering, is impractical to compute. However, to
consistently arrange nodes between analyses, we use simple methods of
weighting genes, such as average expression level, time of maximal
induction, or chromosomal position, and we place the element with the
lower average weight earlier in the final ordering.
Display.
Using any ordering, the primary data table is
represented graphically by coloring each cell on the basis of the
measured fluorescence ratio. Cells with log ratios of 0 (ratios of
1.0
genes unchanged) are colored black, increasingly positive
log ratios with reds of increasing intensity, and increasingly negative
log ratios with greens of increasing intensity. A representation of the
dendrogram is appended to the colored table to indicate the nature of
the computed relationship among genes in the table.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We applied this method to two sets of data, a single time course (Fig. 1) of a canonical model of the growth response in human cells (11) and an aggregation of data from experiments on the budding yeast S. cerevisiae (Fig. 2), including time courses of the mitotic cell division cycle (9), sporulation (10), the diauxic shift (8), and shock responses (P.T.S., P.O.B., and D.B., unpublished results). A striking property of the clustered images in Figs. 1 and 2 is the presence of large contiguous patches of color representing groups of genes that share similar expression patterns over multiple conditions. To verify that this structure is of biological origin and is not an artifact of the clustering procedure, the initial data from the human growth response experiment were randomized in three different ways and were clustered by using the same procedure (Fig. 3). No similar structure resulted from any of these randomized data sets, indicating that the patterns seen in Figs. 1 and 2 depict biological order in the gene expression response of the organism during the studied processes.
|
|
|
A central feature of Figs. 1 and 2 is that one can look at such images, identify patterns of interest, and readily zoom in on the detailed expression patterns and identities of the genes contributing to these patterns. An important test of the value of this approach comes when we examine the identity of the clustered genes at varying levels of identity.
Redundant Representations of Genes Cluster Together. At the finest level, we have found repeatedly that genes represented by more than one array element or genes with high degrees of sequence identity are clustered next to, or in the immediate vicinity of, each other. Thus the exact representation of a gene on the array (alternate cDNA clones of differing length in the case of human arrays or highly homologous genes in S. cerevisiae) makes little difference in the observed pattern of gene expression. Moreover, even though groups of genes may show very similar patterns of expression, as is seen in Figs. 1 and 2, in general individual genes can be distinguished from all other genes on the basis of subtle differences in their regulation. Finally, this result also indicates that noise present in single observations does not contribute significantly when genes are compared across even a relatively small number of nonidentical conditions. Therefore, when designing experiments, it may be more valuable to sample a wide variety of conditions than to make repeat observations on identical conditions.
Genes of Similar Function Cluster Together. A far more striking result is found when larger groups of clustered genes are examined, where we observe a strong tendency for these genes to share common roles in cellular processes. This relationship is clearest in data from experiments on the budding yeast S. cerevisiae, where arrays representing essentially all of the genes from this organism are available (8) and for which a large fraction of the identified genes (more than 35%) have been studied in some detail. Fig. 2A represents a clustering analysis of 2,467 genes, all the genes that currently have a functional annotation in the Saccharomyces Genome Database (12). As can be seen in Fig. 2 B-K, numerous groups of coexpressed genes representing diverse expression patterns across the sampled conditions are involved in common cellular processes. Although one might be concerned about the possibility of crosshybridization, it is clear in the examples below that genes of unrelated sequence but similar function cluster tightly together.
A particularly dramatic example is the extensive cluster (shown in Fig. 2I) of 126 genes strongly down-regulated in response to stress (after each of the shocks, at the latter stages of the diauxic shift where glucose levels are diminished, and after transfer to nutrient-limited sporulation media), and which covary throughout the cell cycle. This cluster is dominated by genes encoding ribosomal proteins (112 genes) and other proteins involved in translation (initiation and elongation factors and tRNA synthetases). It has been reported that yeast responds to favorable growth conditions by increasing the production of ribosomes (13) through transcriptional regulation of genes encoding ribosomal proteins (14). Mitochondrial protein synthesis genes were also expressed concordantly along with a number of genes involved in respiration (Fig. 2F) in a pattern roughly similar to a large cluster of coexpressed genes involved in ATP synthesis (predominantly members of the F1F0 ATPase complex) and oxidative phosphorylation (Fig. 2G). Oxygen-related transcriptional regulation of genes involved in oxygen utilization has been characterized extensively (15). The genes encoding the bulk of the components of the proteasome (Fig. 2C) and the mini-chromosome maintenance DNA replication complex (Fig. 2J) are also coexpressed. In addition, there are many examples of coexpressed genes that share a common or related function but are not members of large protein complexes, such as genes encoding numerous glycolytic enzymes (Fig. 2E), genes involved in the tricarboxylic acid cycle and oxidative phosphorylation (Fig. 2K), and genes involved in mating (not shown). These examples emphasize that the observed coregulation occurs primarily at the level of cellular function and not only with the exact protein function (e.g., enzymic reaction catalyzed) of the gene product. Finally, there is an extremely tight cluster of eight histone genes (duplicates of each of histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4). It is well known that these genes are coregulated and are transcribed at a particular point in the cell cycle (16). In human data sets, relationships among the functions of genes in clusters are obscured somewhat by the less complete functional annotation of human gene sequences. Nonetheless, when the composition of the clusters is examined, they are often found to contain genes known to share a common role in the cell. This observation is well illustrated in the data from the response of human tissue culture cells to serum after serum starvation (Fig. 1). When available functional information on the genes studied in this experiment was examined, keeping in mind the often poor state of annotation of the human genome, the clusters of genes indicated by colored branches were found to generally contain genes involved in cholesterol biosynthesis (cluster A), the cell cycle (cluster B), the immediate-early response (cluster C), signaling and angiogenesis (cluster D), and tissue remodeling and wound healing (cluster E); a detailed description of these observations is contained in ref. 11.| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Microarray-based genomic surveys and other high-throughput approaches (ranging from genomics to combinatorial chemistry) are becoming increasingly important in biology and chemistry. As a result, we need to develop our ability to "see" the information in the massive tables of quantitative measurements that these approaches produce. Our approach to this problem can be generalized as follows. First, we use a common-sense approach to organize the data, based on order inherent in the data. Next, recognizing that the rate-limiting step in exploring and searching large tables of numerical data is a trivial one: reading the numbers (human brains are not well adapted to assimilating quantitative data by reading digits), we represent the quantitative values in the table by using a naturalistic color scale rather than numbers. This alternative encoding preserves all the quantitative information, but transmits it to our brains by way of a much higher-bandwidth channel than the "number-reading" channel.
A natural way of viewing complex data sets is first to scan and survey the large-scale features and then to focus in on the interesting details. What we have found to be the most valuable feature of the approach described here is that it allows this natural and intuitive process to be applied to genomic data sets. The approach is a general one, with no inherent specificity to the particular method used to acquire data or even to gene-expression data. It is therefore likely that very similar approaches may be applied to many other kinds of very large data sets. In each case, it may be necessary to find alternative algorithms and computation methods to bring out inherent structures in the data, and, equally important, to find dense naturalistic visual representations that convey the quantitative information effectively. We recognize that the particular clustering algorithm we used is not the only, or even the best, method available. We have used and are actively exploring alternatives such as parametric ordering of genes (9) and supervised clustering methods based on representative hand-picked or computer-generated expression profiles (10). The success of these very simple approaches has given us confidence to face the coming flood of functional genomic data.
The examples presented here demonstrate a feature of gene expression that makes these methods particularly useful, namely the tendency of expression data to organize genes into functional categories. It is, of course, not very surprising that genes that are expressed together share common functions. Nonetheless, the extent to which gene expression patterns suffice to separate genes into functional categories across a relatively small and redundant collection of conditions is surprising. It seems likely that the addition of more and diverse conditions can only enhance these observations. When the clustering analysis described here is applied to all of the approximately 6,200 genes of S. cerevisiae, the clusters of functionally related genes are maintained, but are usually expanded with the addition of uncharacterized genes (the results of this analysis will be the subject of a subsequent report). On the basis of our observations here, it is probable that many of these genes will also share common functions. While not based on biological necessity, similarity of pattern of expression may be the easiest available means of making at least provisional attribution of function on a genomic scale.
Finally, the functional concordance of coexpressed genes imparts biological significance to the broad patterns seen in images like those of Figs. 1 and 2. For example, the representation of the transcriptional response of human fibroblasts to serum shown in Fig. 1 is not simply a list of genes and their associated expression patterns, nor is it an arbitrary structure that is being seen, but rather it is a comprehensive representation of the state of the cell throughout its response to serum. Likewise, for yeast experiments, information on the state of many cellular processes can be inferred quickly by combining and comparing new experiments with the data presented here.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank J. De Risi for excellent technical assistance and many useful suggestions and the staff of the Saccharomyces Genome Database. We also thank J. Cuoczo and C. Kaiser for the use of unpublished results. This work was supported by a grants from the National Institutes of Health (GM 46406, HG 00983, and CA77097). P.O.B. is an associate investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. P.T.S. was supported by a training grant from the National Eye Institute (Bethesda, MD). M.B.E. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Alfred E. Sloan Foundation (New York, NY).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
To whom reprint requests should be addressed. e-mail:
botstein{at}genome.stanford.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Schena, M., Shalon, D., Davis, R. W. & Brown, P. O.
(1995)
Science
270,
467-470
|
| 2. |
Velculescu, V. E., Zhang, L., Vogelstein, B. & Kinzler, K. W.
(1995)
Science
270,
484-487
|
| 3. | Lockhart, D. J., Dong, H., Byrne, M. C., Follettie, M. T., Gallo, M. V., Chee, M. S., Mittmann, M., Wang, C., Kobayashi, M., Horton, H., et al. (1996) Nat. Biotechnol. 14, 1675-1680 [CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 4. | Kohonen, T. (1997) Self-Organizing Maps (Springer, New York). |
| 5. | Sokal, R. R. & Michener, C. D. (1958) Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 38, 1409-1438 . |
| 6. |
Schena, M., Shalon, D., Heller, R., Chai, A., Brown, P. O. & Davis, R. W.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93,
10614-10619
|
| 7. |
Shalon, D., Smith, S. J. & Brown, P. O.
(1996)
Genome Res.
6,
639-645
|
| 8. |
DeRisi, J. L., Iyer, V. R. & Brown, P. O.
(1997)
Science
278,
680-686
|
| 9. | Spellman, P. T., Sherlock, G., Iyer, V. R., Zhang, M., Anders, K., Eisen, M. B., Brown, P. O., Botstein, D. & Futcher, B. (1998). Mol. Biol. Cell, in press. |
| 10. |
Chu, S., DeRisi, J., Eisen, M., Mulholland, J., Botstein, D., Brown, P. O. & Herskowitz, I.
(1998)
Science
282,
699-705
|
| 11. | Iyer, V. R., Eisen, M. B., Ross, D. R., Schuler, G., Moore, T., Lee, J. C. F., Trent, J. M., Hudson, J., Boguski, M., Lashkari, D., et al. (1998) Science, in press. |
| 12. | Cherry, J. M., Ball, C., Weng, S., Juvik, G., Schmidt, R., Adler, C., Dunn, B., Dwight, S., Riles, L., Mortimer, R. K., et al. (1997) Nature (London) 387, 67-73 [CrossRef][Medline] . |
| 13. |
Kief, D. R. & Warner, J. R.
(1981)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
1,
1007-1015
|
| 14. | Kraakman, L. S., Griffioen, G., Zerp, S., Groeneveld, P., Thevelein, J. M., Mager, W. H. & Planta, R. J. (1993) Mol. Gen. Genet. 239, 196-204 [Medline] . |
| 15. | Kwast, K. E., Burke, P. V. & Poyton, R. O. (1998) J. Exp. Biol. 201, 1177-1195 [Abstract]. |
| 16. | Hereford, L. M., Osley, M. A., Ludwig, T. R., 2nd. & McLaughlin, C. S. (1981) Cell 24, 367-375 [CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
Copyright © 1998 by The National Academy of Sciences 0027-8424/98/9514863-6$2.00/0
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:
![]() |
Y. Okada, C. Tashiro, K. Numata, K. Watanabe, H. Nakaoka, N. Yamamoto, K. Okubo, R. Ikeda, R. Saito, A. Kanai, et al. Comparative expression analysis uncovers novel features of endogenous antisense transcription Hum. Mol. Genet., June 1, 2008; 17(11): 1631 - 1640. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Kizer, D. J. Pitera, B. F. Pfleger, and J. D. Keasling Application of Functional Genomics to Pathway Optimization for Increased Isoprenoid Production Appl. Envir. Microbiol., May 15, 2008; 74(10): 3229 - 3241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. W. Kin, D. M. Crawford, J. Liu, T. W. Behrens, and J. F. Kearney DNA Microarray Gene Expression Profile of Marginal Zone versus Follicular B Cells and Idiotype Positive Marginal Zone B Cells before and after Immunization with Streptococcus pneumoniae J. Immunol., May 15, 2008; 180(10): 6663 - 6674. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Grundberg, H. Brandstrom, K. C. L. Lam, S. Gurd, B. Ge, E. Harmsen, A. Kindmark, O. Ljunggren, H. Mallmin, O. Nilsson, et al. Systematic assessment of the human osteoblast transcriptome in resting and induced primary cells Physiol Genomics, May 9, 2008; 33(3): 301 - 311. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.-H. Liu, X. Tian, Y.-J. Li, C.-A. Wu, and C.-C. Zheng Microarray-based analysis of stress-regulated microRNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana RNA, May 1, 2008; 14(5): 836 - 843. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Smid, Y. Wang, Y. Zhang, A. M. Sieuwerts, J. Yu, J. G.M. Klijn, J. A. Foekens, and J. W.M. Martens Subtypes of Breast Cancer Show Preferential Site of Relapse Cancer Res., May 1, 2008; 68(9): 3108 - 3114. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. R. Johnson, E. L. Brodie, A. E. Hubbard, G. L. Andersen, S. H. Zinder, and L. Alvarez-Cohen Temporal Transcriptomic Microarray Analysis of "Dehalococcoides ethenogenes" Strain 195 during the Transition into Stationary Phase Appl. Envir. Microbiol., May 1, 2008; 74(9): 2864 - 2872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Linder, N. N. Rasmussen, C. O. Samuelsen, E. Chatzidaki, V. Baraznenok, J. Beve, P. Henriksen, C. M. Gustafsson, and S. Holmberg Two conserved modules of Schizosaccharomyces pombe Mediator regulate distinct cellular pathways Nucleic Acids Res., May 1, 2008; 36(8): 2489 - 2504. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Mattapallil, A. Augello, C. Cheadle, D. Teichberg, K. G. Becker, C.-C. Chan, J. J. Mattapallil, G. Pennesi, and R. R. Caspi Differentially Expressed Genes in MHC-Compatible Rat Strains That Are Susceptible or Resistant to Experimental Autoimmune Uveitis Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2008; 49(5): 1957 - 1970. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Pew, M. Zou, D. R. Brickley, and S. D. Conzen Glucocorticoid (GC)-Mediated Down-Regulation of Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Expression via the Serum and GC Regulated Kinase-1/Forkhead Box O3a Pathway Endocrinology, May 1, 2008; 149(5): 2637 - 2645. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. I. Ferreira, J. F. Garcia, J. Suela, M. Mollejo, F. I. Camacho, A. Carro, S. Montes, M. A. Piris, and J. C. Cigudosa Comparative genome profiling across subtypes of low-grade B-cell lymphoma identifies type-specific and common aberrations that target genes with a role in B-cell neoplasia Haematologica, May 1, 2008; 93(5): 670 - 679. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. P. Petalidis, A. Oulas, M. Backlund, M. T. Wayland, L. Liu, K. Plant, L. Happerfield, T. C. Freeman, P. Poirazi, and V. P. Collins Improved grading and survival prediction of human astrocytic brain tumors by artificial neural network analysis of gene expression microarray data Mol. Cancer Ther., May 1, 2008; 7(5): 1013 - 1024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Horan, C. Jang, J. Bailey-Serres, R. Mittler, C. Shelton, J. F. Harper, J.-K. Zhu, J. C. Cushman, M. Gollery, and T. Girke Annotating Genes of Known and Unknown Function by Large-Scale Coexpression Analysis Plant Physiology, May 1, 2008; 147(1): 41 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Field and A. E. Osbourn Metabolic Diversification--Independent Assembly of Operon-Like Gene Clusters in Different Plants Science, April 25, 2008; 320(5875): 543 - 547. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Chen, S. A. Carney, R. E. Peterson, and W. Heideman Comparative genomics identifies genes mediating cardiotoxicity in the embryonic zebrafish heart Physiol Genomics, April 21, 2008; 33(2): 148 - 158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. Hill, D. A. Bell, W. Brintnell, D. Yue, B. Wehrli, A. M. Jevnikar, D. M. Lee, W. Hueber, W. H. Robinson, and E. Cairns Arthritis induced by posttranslationally modified (citrullinated) fibrinogen in DR4-IE transgenic mice J. Exp. Med., April 14, 2008; 205(4): 967 - 979. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Mochizuki, A. Nishiyama, M. K. Jang, A. Dey, A. Ghosh, T. Tamura, H. Natsume, H. Yao, and K. Ozato The Bromodomain Protein Brd4 Stimulates G1 Gene Transcription and Promotes Progression to S Phase J. Biol. Chem., April 4, 2008; 283(14): 9040 - 9048. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. R. Acharya, D. S. Hsu, C. K. Anders, A. Anguiano, K. H. Salter, K. S. Walters, R. C. Redman, S. A. Tuchman, C. A. Moylan, S. Mukherjee, et al. Gene Expression Signatures, Clinicopathological Features, and Individualized Therapy in Breast Cancer JAMA, April 2, 2008; 299(13): 1574 - 1587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Kendall, H. Anderson, A. K. Dunbier, A. Mackay, T. Dexter, A. Urruticoechea, C. Harper-Wynne, and M. Dowsett Impact of Estrogen Deprivation on Gene Expression Profiles of Normal Postmenopausal Breast Tissue In vivo Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2008; 17(4): 855 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. M. Kreizenbeck, A. J. Berger, A. Subtil, D. L. Rimm, and B. E. Gould Rothberg Prognostic Significance of Cadherin-Based Adhesion Molecules in Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2008; 17(4): 949 - 958. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Esguerra, J. Warringer, and A. Blomberg Functional importance of individual rRNA 2'-O-ribose methylations revealed by high-resolution phenotyping RNA, April 1, 2008; 14(4): 649 - 656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Worschech, M. Kmieciak, K. L. Knutson, H. D. Bear, A. A. Szalay, E. Wang, F. M. Marincola, and M. H. Manjili Signatures Associated with Rejection or Recurrence in HER-2/neu-Positive Mammary Tumors Cancer Res., April 1, 2008; 68(7): 2436 - 2446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Shivaswamy and V. R. Iyer Stress-Dependent Dynamics of Global Chromatin Remodeling in Yeast: Dual Role for SWI/SNF in the Heat Shock Stress Response Mol. Cell. Biol., April 1, 2008; 28(7): 2221 - 2234. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. W. Lee, E. R. Sharp, A. O'Mahony, M. G. Rosenberg, D. M. Israelski, G. P. Nolan, and D. F. Nixon Single-Cell, Phosphoepitope-Specific Analysis Demonstrates Cell Type- and Pathway-Specific Dysregulation of Jak/STAT and MAPK Signaling Associated with In Vivo Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection J. Virol., April 1, 2008; 82(7): 3702 - 3712. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Trinidad, A. Thalhammer, C. G. Specht, A. J. Lynn, P. R. Baker, R. Schoepfer, and A. L. Burlingame Quantitative Analysis of Synaptic Phosphorylation and Protein Expression Mol. Cell. Proteomics, April 1, 2008; 7(4): 684 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |