MCL coexpression mm9:1205

Phase1 CAGE Peaks

	Short description
Mm9::chr6:52184816..52184824,-	p@chr6:52184816..52184824 -
Mm9::chr6:52184880..52184893,-	p6@Hoxa10
Mm9::chr6:52184901..52184959,-	p2@Hoxa10
Mm9::chr6:52190467..52190500,-	p1@Hoxa10
Mm9::chr6:52190858..52190873,-	p4@Hoxa10
Mm9::chr6:52195964..52195986,+	p2@Hoxa11as
Mm9::chr6:52195994..52196011,+	p1@ENSMUST00000141850

Enriched pathways on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b><br>Canonical pathway gene sets were compiled from Reactome, Wikipathways and KEGG. For the major signaling pathways, the transcriptionally-regulated genes (downstream targets) were obtained from Netpath. Combined, the canonical pathways and downstream targets totaled 489 human gene sets. The corresponding M. musculus gene sets were inferred by homology using the HomoloGene database. Enrichment for each of the canonical 489 pathways and gene sets included in the co-expression cluster was assessed by the hypergeometric probability. The resulting P values were also then adjusted by the Benjamini-Hochberg method for multiple comparisons.<br><b>Analyst: </b>Emmanuel Dimont<br><br>link to source dataset<br>data

---

no results for this coexpression

Relative expression of the co-expression cluster over median <br>Analyst:

---

Enriched sample ontology terms on this co-expression cluster<b>Summary:</b>To summarize promoter activities (expression profile of a TSS region) across ~1000 samples, we performed enrichment analysis based on FANTOM5 Sample Ontology (FF ontology). The question here is “in which type of samples the promoter is more active”. To answer this question, we compared expressions (TPMs) in the samples associated with a sample ontology term and the rest of the samples by using the Mann-Whitney rank sum test. To summarize ontologies enriched in this co-expression cluster, we ran the same analysis on an averaged expression profile of all promoters that make up. <b>Analyst:</b> Hideya Kawaji <br><br>links to source dataset<br><br><br>uberon_data<br><br>

---

Uber Anatomy

Ontology term	p-value	n
cavitated compound organ	3.58e-15	21
renal system	9.67e-15	19
urinary system structure	6.93e-14	18
kidney	2.20e-10	14
kidney mesenchyme	2.20e-10	14
upper urinary tract	2.20e-10	14
kidney rudiment	2.20e-10	14
kidney field	2.20e-10	14
female reproductive system	2.02e-09	9
surface structure	1.32e-08	22
female reproductive organ	1.93e-08	8
forelimb	4.69e-08	7
pectoral appendage	4.69e-08	7
pectoral appendage bud	4.69e-08	7
forelimb bud	4.69e-08	7
forelimb/pectoral fin field	4.69e-08	7
appendage	1.40e-07	12
paired limb/fin	1.40e-07	12
limb	1.40e-07	12
paired limb/fin bud	1.40e-07	12
limb bud	1.40e-07	12
limb/fin field	1.40e-07	12
limb field	1.40e-07	12
reproductive structure	2.87e-07	26
reproductive system	2.87e-07	26
female organism	3.99e-07	11
internal genitalia	8.49e-07	9
pectoral complex	9.34e-07	8
appendage girdle complex	9.77e-07	13

TFBS overrepresentation<b>Summary:</b>The values shown are the p-values for overrepresentation of the motif in this coexpression cluster. So a small p-value means a strong overrepresentation. <b>Analyst:</b> Michiel de Hoon <br><br>link to source data <br> Novel motifs <br>data <br><br> Jaspar motifs <br>data

---

Novel motifs

JASPAR motifs

Motifs	-log10(p-value)
{{{tfbs_overrepresentation_jaspar}}}