Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks
Enhancer-promoter interactions (EPIs) are crucial for transcriptional regulation. Mapping such interactions proves useful for understanding disease regulations and discovering risk genes in genome-wide association studies. Some previous studies showed that machine learning methods, as computational...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2019-12-01
|
Series: | Genes |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/11/1/41 |
id |
doaj-ae5e955dc8ac4c1fafc17f0f7792f611 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-ae5e955dc8ac4c1fafc17f0f7792f6112020-11-25T02:40:33ZengMDPI AGGenes2073-44252019-12-011114110.3390/genes11010041genes11010041Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural NetworksMengli Xiao0Zhong Zhuang1Wei Pan2Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USADepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USADivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USAEnhancer-promoter interactions (EPIs) are crucial for transcriptional regulation. Mapping such interactions proves useful for understanding disease regulations and discovering risk genes in genome-wide association studies. Some previous studies showed that machine learning methods, as computational alternatives to costly experimental approaches, performed well in predicting EPIs from local sequence and/or local epigenomic data. In particular, deep learning methods were demonstrated to outperform traditional machine learning methods, and using DNA sequence data alone could perform either better than or almost as well as only utilizing epigenomic data. However, most, if not all, of these previous studies were based on randomly splitting enhancer-promoter pairs as training, tuning, and test data, which has recently been pointed out to be problematic; due to multiple and duplicating/overlapping enhancers (and promoters) in enhancer-promoter pairs in EPI data, such random splitting does not lead to independent training, tuning, and test data, thus resulting in model over-fitting and over-estimating predictive performance. Here, after correcting this design issue, we extensively studied the performance of various deep learning models with local sequence and epigenomic data around enhancer-promoter pairs. Our results confirmed much lower performance using either sequence or epigenomic data alone, or both, than reported previously. We also demonstrated that local epigenomic features were more informative than local sequence data. Our results were based on an extensive exploration of many convolutional neural network (CNN) and feed-forward neural network (FNN) structures, and of gradient boosting as a representative of traditional machine learning.https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/11/1/41boostingconvolutional neural networksdeep learningfeed-forward neural networksmachine learning |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Mengli Xiao Zhong Zhuang Wei Pan |
spellingShingle |
Mengli Xiao Zhong Zhuang Wei Pan Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks Genes boosting convolutional neural networks deep learning feed-forward neural networks machine learning |
author_facet |
Mengli Xiao Zhong Zhuang Wei Pan |
author_sort |
Mengli Xiao |
title |
Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks |
title_short |
Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks |
title_full |
Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks |
title_fullStr |
Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks |
title_full_unstemmed |
Local Epigenomic Data are more Informative than Local Genome Sequence Data in Predicting Enhancer-Promoter Interactions Using Neural Networks |
title_sort |
local epigenomic data are more informative than local genome sequence data in predicting enhancer-promoter interactions using neural networks |
publisher |
MDPI AG |
series |
Genes |
issn |
2073-4425 |
publishDate |
2019-12-01 |
description |
Enhancer-promoter interactions (EPIs) are crucial for transcriptional regulation. Mapping such interactions proves useful for understanding disease regulations and discovering risk genes in genome-wide association studies. Some previous studies showed that machine learning methods, as computational alternatives to costly experimental approaches, performed well in predicting EPIs from local sequence and/or local epigenomic data. In particular, deep learning methods were demonstrated to outperform traditional machine learning methods, and using DNA sequence data alone could perform either better than or almost as well as only utilizing epigenomic data. However, most, if not all, of these previous studies were based on randomly splitting enhancer-promoter pairs as training, tuning, and test data, which has recently been pointed out to be problematic; due to multiple and duplicating/overlapping enhancers (and promoters) in enhancer-promoter pairs in EPI data, such random splitting does not lead to independent training, tuning, and test data, thus resulting in model over-fitting and over-estimating predictive performance. Here, after correcting this design issue, we extensively studied the performance of various deep learning models with local sequence and epigenomic data around enhancer-promoter pairs. Our results confirmed much lower performance using either sequence or epigenomic data alone, or both, than reported previously. We also demonstrated that local epigenomic features were more informative than local sequence data. Our results were based on an extensive exploration of many convolutional neural network (CNN) and feed-forward neural network (FNN) structures, and of gradient boosting as a representative of traditional machine learning. |
topic |
boosting convolutional neural networks deep learning feed-forward neural networks machine learning |
url |
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/11/1/41 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT menglixiao localepigenomicdataaremoreinformativethanlocalgenomesequencedatainpredictingenhancerpromoterinteractionsusingneuralnetworks AT zhongzhuang localepigenomicdataaremoreinformativethanlocalgenomesequencedatainpredictingenhancerpromoterinteractionsusingneuralnetworks AT weipan localepigenomicdataaremoreinformativethanlocalgenomesequencedatainpredictingenhancerpromoterinteractionsusingneuralnetworks |
_version_ |
1724780936769306624 |