A Novel Bayesian DNA Motif Comparison Method for Clustering and Retrieval
Figure 7
Comparison to previous analysis methods.
Comparing our discovered set of motifs to the ones learned by Harbison et al. [13] and MacIsaac et al. [34]. We plot the fraction of motifs that obtained the highest score among all three sets. We first compare transcription factors with previously characterized motifs by their similarity to the known motif from the literature [26]–[28], calculated using our BLiC score. For this comparison, we took for each transcription factor the motif most similar to the known binding site (as done in these two previous works). Our motifs received the highest similarity score (among all three studies) in 65% of the cases (right). The second comparison is for transcription factors with no characterized binding motif. This comparison is based on the enrichment of the motifs in the ChIP-chip data sets. For this comparison we took the most highly enriched motif for each factor and condition (for consistency with the two previous works). The same parameters were applied in the analysis of motifs from all three methods. In this setting, our motifs were found to have higher enrichments in 80% of the cases (left).