Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Mar 5.
Published in final edited form as: Cell. 2010 Mar 5;140(5):744–752. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.044

Figure 1. TF expression versus connectivity.

Figure 1

(A) Distribution of tissue specificity for all TFs. The green curves fit the bi-modal distribution as a mixture of two Gaussian. (B) Scatterplot of tissue specificity (y-axis) versus number of neighbors (x-axis). Red points are defined as specifier hubs and blue points as facilitator hubs (Supplementary Table 1). (C) TFs are binned into four groups of approximately equal size based on their number of interactions (x-axis). The tissue specificity distribution of each bin is represented by stacks of colored segments. Segment height represents the fraction of TFs in an expression group (left y-axis), and segment color represents the number of tissues in which TFs in that group are expressed. The black line displays the median TSPS of each group (right y-axis). Among TFs with six or more interactions, 70% are expressed in more than half of tissues. Among TFs with fewer than six interactions, this number falls to 45%. The results shown are for human M2H interactions supplemented with TF-TF interactions downloaded from literature (Supplementary Table 2); similar results are obtained for mouse interactions or for M2H interactions only (Supplementary Table 3. See also Supplementary Table 4 for confirmation of the M2H positives using in-vitro pull down assays as a second technology).