Skip to main content
. 2009 Oct 13;5:312. doi: 10.1038/msb.2009.70

Table 1.

Significant and unique HOSVD combinations, that is, subtensors

Subtensor Overexpression Underexpression
  Fraction (%) Annotation J j P-value Annotation J j P-value
1 1, 1, 1 72.3
2 2, 2, 1 8.7 M/G1 84 41 1.5 × 10−33 S/G2 88 27 6.3 × 10−16
3 3, 3, 1 6.7 G1 and S 263 103 1.1 × 10−77 G2/M 141 53 2.6 × 10−36
4 4, 1, 2 2.7 3′-end ARS 153 14 1.1 × 10−2 Histone genes 9 9 9.1 × 10−13
5 5+6, 1, 3 1.9 Histone genes 9 7 1.5 × 10−8 3′-end ARS 153 16 1.9 × 10−3
6 7, 3, 2 0.8 Histone genes 9 4 4.9 × 10−4
7 8, 3, 3 0.7 3′-end ARS 153 17 6.9 × 10−4

The fractions of mRNA expression that the seven most significant combinations capture in the data cuboid (Figure 1), and the probabilistic significance of the enrichment of the corresponding patterns of expression variation across the genes in overexpressed or underexpressed cell cycle-regulated genes (Spellman et al, 1998), histone genes and genes with ARSs near their 3′ ends (Cherry et al, 1997; Nieduszynski et al, 2007). The P-value of each enrichment is calculated (Supplementary information Section 2.5) according to the annotations of the genes (Supplementary information Datasets 4 and 5), assuming hypergeometric distribution of the J annotations among the K=4270 genes, and of the subset of jJ annotations among the subset of k=200 genes with largest or smallest levels of expression in the corresponding pattern (Supplementary information Dataset 6), as described (Tavazoie et al, 1999).