Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
6
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
6 results for “fantom5”
Transcription initiation peaks based on FANTOM5 CAGE data on hg38 and mm10
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Decomposition-based peak identification (DPI, https://github.com/hkawaji/dpi1) is applied to the re-processed (re-aligned) FANTOM5 data, upon hg38 (GRCh38) and mm10 (GRCm38), obtained from below:</p> <ul> <li>http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/hg38_v1/basic/</li> <li>http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/mm10_v1/basic/</li> </ul> <p>The same parameters to the ones used in the previous paper (Forrest ARR, Kawaji H, Rehli M, et al. Nature 507: 462–470, 2014) was used.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Data files</strong></p> <p>Four data files per assembly are prepared as below.</p> <ol> <li>tag cluster in the original definition (*.tc.bed.gz)</li> <li>full set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.bed.gz)</li> <li>permissive set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.ctssMaxCounts3.bed.gz)</li> <li>robust set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.ctssMaxCounts11_ctssMaxTpm1.bed.gz)</li> </ol> <p> </p> <p><strong>Acknowledgement</strong></p> <p>This data set is supported by Research Grant from MEXT to RIKEN Preventive Medicine and Diagnosis Innovation Program, RIKEN Center for Life Science Technologies, and JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No. 16H02902.</p>
Transcription initiation peaks based on FANTOM5 CAGE data on rn6, canFam3, and galGal5
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Decomposition-based peak identification (DPI, https://github.com/hkawaji/dpi1) is applied to the FANTOM5 data of rat (rn3), dog (canFam3), and chicken (galGal5):</p> <ul> <li>https://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/phase2.6/basic/</li> </ul> <p>The same parameters to the ones used in the previous paper (Forrest ARR, Kawaji H, Rehli M, et al. Nature 507: 462–470, 2014) was used.</p> <p><strong>Data files</strong></p> <p>Four data files per assembly are prepared as below.</p> <ol> <li>tag cluster in the original definition (*.tc.bed.gz)</li> <li>full set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.bed.gz)</li> <li>permissive set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.ctssMaxCounts3.bed.gz)</li> <li>robust set of DPI peaks (*.tc.decompose_smoothing_merged.ctssMaxCounts11_ctssMaxTpm1.bed.gz)</li> </ol> <p><strong>Acknowledgement</strong></p> <p>This data set is supported by Research Grant from MEXT to RIKEN Preventive Medicine and Diagnosis Innovation Program, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, and JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No. 16H02902.</p>
Aggregated frequencies of transcription initiations observed in FANTOM5 CAGE data on GRCh38, including alignments with low mapping qualities
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Aligned reads of the FANTOM5 CAGE data have been used after filtering (ones with mapping quality less than 20 or percent identity less than 85% were discarded) for general purpose, resulting in the data set consisting of only the reads aligned with confidence. The filtering process made possible to interpret the data without ambiguity, however it also limited interpretation of paralogous or duplicated regions within the genome. Here all of the 5'-ends of the CAGE read alignments, including the ones with low mapping quality, were counted. The counts in the individual profiles were aggregated and summed up. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Special usage note</strong></p> <p>As noted above, this data derived from the alignments with low mapping qualities, as well as the ones with high mapping qualities. The result has to be examined very carefully: observations on the genome does not support transcription initiation with confidence, and even absence of such observation does not support silence of transcription with confidence. For example, file size on the forward strand is substantially larger than the one on the reverse strand, which is likely caused by an arbitrary preference of the alignment process. It does not mean transcription happens more frequently on the forward strand. Interpretation has to be made always in comparison with the standard data (BED files under http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/hg38_v4/basic/ or bigWig files under http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datahub/hg38/reads/).</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Data files</strong></p> <p>The resulting data files are formatted as bigWig (https://genome.ucsc.edu/FAQ/FAQformat.html#format6.1). '*.fwd.bw' and '*.rev.bw' represent forward and reverse strand on the genome, respectively. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Methods</strong></p> <p>The BAM files under http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/hg38_v4/basic/ were subjected to 5'-end counting by bedtools v2.27.1 (https://github.com/arq5x/bedtools2), followed by conversion into bigWig with jksrc v357 (http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/admin/).</p> <p> </p>
FANTOM5 transcribed enhancers in hg38
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Transcribed enhancers were identified and their expression was quantified across all human FANTOM5 libraries, following the re-aligned FANTOM5 CAGE data upon hg38 (GRCh38) (obtained from http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/hg38_v1/basic/), and decomposition-based peak identification (obtained from https://zenodo.org/record/545682#.WPuNy1Pyv2Q) by Kawaji, Hideya.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Description</strong></p> <p>Transcribed enhancers were called based on bidirectional balanced RNA signatures as per Andersson et al (2014). Enhancers were only identified distal to known exons (+/-100bp region from boundaries) and transcription start sites (+/-300bp), defined by GENCODE v24 annotation. In total, 63,285 enhancers were identified across 1,829 libraries. The expression was quantified and TPM (tags per million) normalised according to the total number of mapped reads within the full set of TCs. For details regarding the identification of transcribed enhancers from CAGE data, please see Andersson et al (2014) and blog post.</p> <p>Due to varying noise levels across FANTOM5 libraries and the intrinsic low expression levels of transcribed enhancers, library-specific noise levels were estimated to define of robust set of enhancers in each sample. In summary, for each library, expression was quantified in randomly sampled genomic regions distal to assembly gaps, DNase hypersensitive sites (ENCODE), known exons and gene TSSs (GENCODE) to create a genomic background expression distribution. For each library, we called an enhancer active (used) if its expression was above the 99.9th quantile of the library’s genomic background expression distribution. The robust set of enhancers consist of 60,215 over 1,829 libraries, being significantly expressed in at least one library.</p> <p>While this approach ensures less permissive enhancer calling in noisy libraries, for some libraries the noise threshold is zero meaning that a single CAGE tag is sufficient for calling an enhancer active. Furthermore, the possibility of detecting enhancer transcription is affected by sequencing depth, so the number of active enhancers per library might not be biologically meaningful to compare when sequencing depths differ.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Data files</strong><br> Each predicted enhancer is described in BED12 format with two blocks denoting the merged regions of transcription initiation on the minus and plus strands. The thickStart and thickEnd columns denote the inferred mid position between blocks of transcription initiation events. Expression and usage matrices are tab delimited and the first row gives the FANTOM5 CNhs IDs and the first column the enhancer ID (same as column 4 in BED file). Usage matrices contain zeroes and ones (0:not used, 1:used).</p> <ul> <li>enhancers (BED12 format)</li> <li>enhancer expression matrix (tab delimited, first row: CNhs IDs, first column: enhancer ID (coordinate))</li> <li>enhancer expression matrix TPM normalized (tab delimited, first row: CNhs IDs, first column: enhancer ID (coordinate))</li> <li>binary enhancer usage matrix (0:not used, 1:used, tab delimited, first row: CNhs IDs, first column: enhancer ID (coordinate))</li> </ul>
FANTOM5 transcribed enhancers in mm10
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Transcribed enhancers were identified and their expression was quantified across all human FANTOM5 libraries, following the re-aligned FANTOM5 CAGE data upon mm10 (GRCm38) (obtained from http://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/mm10_v1/basic/), and decomposition-based peak identification (obtained from https://zenodo.org/record/545682#.WPuNy1Pyv2Q) by Kawaji, Hideya.</p> <p><strong>Description</strong></p> <p>Transcribed enhancers were called based on bidirectional balanced RNA signatures as per Andersson et al (2014). Enhancers were only identified distal to known exons (+/-100bp region from boundaries) and transcription start sites (+/-300bp), defined by GENCODE vM7 annotation. In total, 44,138 enhancers were identified across 1,068 libraries and the expression was quantified. For details regarding the identification of transcribed enhancers from CAGE data, please see Andersson et al (2014) and blog post.</p> <p>Due to varying noise levels across FANTOM5 libraries and the intrinsic low expression levels of transcribed enhancers, library-specific noise levels were estimated to define of robust set of enhancers in each sample. In summary, for each library, expression was quantified in randomly sampled genomic regions distal to assembly gaps, DNase hypersensitive sites (ENCODE), known exons and gene TSSs (GENCODE vM7) to create a genomic background expression distribution. For each library, we called an enhancer active (used) if its expression was above the 99.9th quantile of the library’s genomic background expression distribution. The robust set of enhancers consist of those significantly expressed in at least one library.</p> <p>While this approach ensures less permissive enhancer calling in noisy libraries, for some libraries the noise threshold is zero meaning that a single CAGE tag is sufficient for calling an enhancer active. Furthermore, the possibility of detecting enhancer transcription is affected by sequencing depth, so the number of active enhancers per library might not be biologically meaningful to compare when sequencing depths differ.</p> <p><strong>Data files</strong><br> Each predicted enhancer is described in BED12 format with two blocks denoting the merged regions of transcription initiation on the minus and plus strands. The thickStart and thickEnd columns denote the inferred mid position between blocks of transcription initiation events. Expression and usage matrices are tab delimited and the first row gives the FANTOM5 CNhs IDs and the first column the enhancer ID (same as column 4 in BED file). Usage matrices contain zeroes and ones (0:not used, 1:used).</p> <ul> <li>enhancers (BED12 format)</li> <li>enhancer expression matrix (tab delimited, first row: CNhs IDs, first column: enhancer ID (coordinate))</li> <li>binary enhancer usage matrix (0:not used, 1:used, tab delimited, first row: CNhs IDs, first column: enhancer ID (coordinate))</li> </ul>
Aggregated frequencies of transcription initiations observed in FANTOM5 CAGE data on GRCm38, including alignments with low mapping qualities
<p><strong>Overview</strong></p> <p>Aligned reads of the FANTOM5 CAGE data have been used after filtering (ones with mapping quality less than 20 or percent identity less than 85% were discarded) for general purpose, resulting in the data set consisting of only the reads aligned with confidence. The filtering process made possible to interpret the data without ambiguity, however it also limited interpretation of paralogous or duplicated regions within the genome. Here all of the 5'-ends of the CAGE read alignments, including the ones with low mapping quality, were counted. The counts in the individual profiles were aggregated and summed up. </p> <p>This data set is produced for mouse, in the same way to the one for human data set http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1410835</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Data files</strong></p> <p>The resulting data files are formatted as bigWig (https://genome.ucsc.edu/FAQ/FAQformat.html#format6.1). '*.fwd.bw' and '*.rev.bw' represent forward and reverse strand on the genome, respectively. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Methods</strong></p> <p>The BAM files under https://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/datafiles/reprocessed/mm10_v7/basic/ were subjected to 5'-end counting by bedtools v2.27.1 (https://github.com/arq5x/bedtools2), followed by conversion into bigWig with jksrc v366 (http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/admin/).</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.