English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Large experimental efforts are characterizing the regulatory genome, yet we are still missing a systematic definition of functional and silent genetic variants in non-coding regions. Here, we integrated DNaseI footprinting data with sequence-based transcription factor (TF) motif models to predict the impact of a genetic variant on TF binding across 153 tissues and 1,372 TF motifs. Each annotation we derived is specific for a cell-type condition or assay and is locally motif-driven. We found 5.8 million genetic variants in footprints, 66% of which are predicted by our model to affect TF binding. Comprehensive examination using allele-specific hypersensitivity (ASH) reveals that only the latter group consistently shows evidence for ASH (3,217 SNPs at 20% FDR), suggesting that most (97%) genetic variants in footprinted regulatory regions are indeed silent. Combining this information with GWAS data reveals that our annotation helps in computationally fine-mapping 86 SNPs in GWAS hit regions with at least a 2-fold increase in the posterior odds of picking the causal SNP. The rich meta information provided by the tissue-specificity and the identity of the putative TF binding site being affected also helps in identifying the underlying mechanism supporting the association. As an example, the enrichment for LDL level-associated SNPs is 9.1-fold higher among SNPs predicted to affect HNF4 binding sites than in a background model already including tissue-specific annotation.

Which Genetics Variants in DNase-Seq Footprints Are More Likely to Alter Binding?