Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Apr 3.
Published in final edited form as: Development. 2008 Jun 11;135(14):2403–2413. doi: 10.1242/dev.019018

Table 2.

Transcription factor binding sites enriched in TEB versus duct

# Annotation Total genes Bayes factor
1 E2F1_Q6: E2F1 123 15.34
2 KROX_Q6 101 13.37
3 SOX9_B1: SOX (SRY-related HMG box) 61 9.67
4 SP3_Q3 138 9.39
5 MRF2_01: modulator recognition factor 2 71 9.23
6 MAZ_Q6 142 8.75
7 E2F_Q3_01 86 8.48
8 OCT1_06: octamer-binding factor 1 62 8.11
9 MAZR_01: MAZ related factor 98 8.07
10 SOX5_01: SOX5 48 7.81
11 E2F1_Q6_01 86 7.6
12 POU6F1_01 1 6.57
13 NMYC_01: N-MYC 59 6.27
14 ELK1_02: ELK1 148 5.59
15 USF_01: upstream stimulating factor 35 5.49
16 E2F_Q4: E2F 81 5.33
17 NRF2_01: nuclear respiratory factor 2 48 5.33
18 EVI1_04: ectopic viral integration site 1 encoded factor 101 4.7
19 E2F1_Q3_01 68 4.67
20 MYC_Q2 51 4.61

From a dataset comparing microdissected TEBs to ducts, the expression of various genes was compared for fold change [log2(Cy5 TEB/Cy3 stroma) − log2(Cy5 duct/Cy3 stroma)]. For the top 200 genes elevated in the TEB sample, the genes were analyzed using GATHER to assess which transcription factor binding sites they contained based on the TRANSFAC database. The top 20 results are shown for these 200 genes, with the number of genes from this dataset and the significance indicated by the Bayes factor. E2F factors are in bold.