Analyses of deep mammalian sequence alignments and constraint predictions for 1% of the human genome

Elliott H. Margulies(National Institutes of Health), Gregory M. Cooper(University of Washington), George Asimenos(Stanford University), Daryl J. Thomas(University of California, Santa Cruz), Colin N. Dewey(University of Wisconsin–Madison), Adam Siepel(University of California, Santa Cruz), Ewan Birney(European Bioinformatics Institute), Damian Keefe(European Bioinformatics Institute), Ariel Schwartz(University of California, Berkeley), Minmei Hou(Pennsylvania State University), James Taylor(Pennsylvania State University), Sergey I. Nikolaev(University of Geneva), Juan I. Montoya‐Burgos(University of Geneva), Ari Löytynoja(European Bioinformatics Institute), Simon Whelan(European Bioinformatics Institute), Fabio Pardi(European Bioinformatics Institute), Tim Massingham(European Bioinformatics Institute), James Brown(University of California, Berkeley), Peter J. Bickel(University of California, Berkeley), Ian Holmes(University of California, Berkeley), James C. Mullikin(Baylor College of Medicine), Abel Ureta‐Vidal(European Bioinformatics Institute), Benedict Paten(European Bioinformatics Institute), Eric A. Stone(Stanford University), Kate R. Rosenbloom(University of California, Santa Cruz), W. James Kent(University of California, Santa Cruz), Gerard G. Bouffard, Xiaobin Guan, Nancy F. Hansen, Jacquelyn R. Idol, Valerie V. Maduro, Baishali Maskeri, Jennifer C. McDowell, Morgan Park, Pamela J. Thomas(University of California, Santa Cruz), Alice Young, Robert W. Blakesley, Donna M. Muzny, Erica Sodergren, David A. Wheeler(University of California, Santa Cruz), Kim C. Worley, Huaiyang Jiang, George M. Weinstock, Richard A. Gibbs, Tina Graves, Robert S. Fulton, Elaine R. Mardis, Richard K. Wilson, Michèle Clamp, James Cuff(Baylor College of Medicine), Sante Gnerre, David B. Jaffe, Jean L. Chang, Kerstin Lindblad‐Toh, Eric S. Lander(Stanford University), Angie S. Hinrichs, Heather Trumbower, Hiram Clawson, Ann S. Zweig, Robert M. Kuhn, Galt P Barber, Rachel Harte, Donna Karolchik, Matthew A. Field, Richard A. Moore, Carrie A. Matthewson, Jacqueline E. Schein, Marco A. Marra, Stylianos E. Antonarakis(University of Geneva), Serafim Batzoglou(Stanford University), Nick Goldman(European Bioinformatics Institute), Ross C. Hardison(Pennsylvania State University), David Haussler(University of California, Santa Cruz), Webb Miller(Pennsylvania State University), Lior Pachter(University of California, Berkeley), Eric D. Green(Baylor College of Medicine), Arend Sidow(Stanford University)
Genome Research
June 1, 2007
Cited by 220Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

A key component of the ongoing ENCODE project involves rigorous comparative sequence analyses for the initially targeted 1% of the human genome. Here, we present orthologous sequence generation, alignment, and evolutionary constraint analyses of 23 mammalian species for all ENCODE targets. Alignments were generated using four different methods; comparisons of these methods reveal large-scale consistency but substantial differences in terms of small genomic rearrangements, sensitivity (sequence coverage), and specificity (alignment accuracy). We describe the quantitative and qualitative trade-offs concomitant with alignment method choice and the levels of technical error that need to be accounted for in applications that require multisequence alignments. Using the generated alignments, we identified constrained regions using three different methods. While the different constraint-detecting methods are in general agreement, there are important discrepancies relating to both the underlying alignments and the specific algorithms. However, by integrating the results across the alignments and constraint-detecting methods, we produced constraint annotations that were found to be robust based on multiple independent measures. Analyses of these annotations illustrate that most classes of experimentally annotated functional elements are enriched for constrained sequences; however, large portions of each class (with the exception of protein-coding sequences) do not overlap constrained regions. The latter elements might not be under primary sequence constraint, might not be constrained across all mammals, or might have expendable molecular functions. Conversely, 40% of the constrained sequences do not overlap any of the functional elements that have been experimentally identified. Together, these findings demonstrate and quantify how many genomic functional elements await basic molecular characterization.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis