IDENTIFICATION OF GENES CONTROLLING BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND PATHWAYS THROUGH STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND NETWORK RECONSTRUCTION

The developmental processes and functions of an organism are controlled by the genes and the proteins that are derived from these genes. The identification of key genes and the reconstruction of gene networks can provide a model to help us understand the regulatory mechanisms for the initiation and progression of biological processes or functional abnormalities (e.g. diseases) in living organisms. In this dissertation, I have developed statistical methods to identify the genes and transcription factors (TFs) involved in biological processes, constructed their regulatory networks, and also evaluated some existing association methods to find robust methods for coexpression analyses. Two kinds of data sets were used for this work: genotype data and gene expression microarray data. On the basis of these data sets, this dissertation has two major parts, together forming six chapters. The first part deals with developing association methods for rare variants using genotype data (chapter 4 and 5). The second part deals with developing and/or evaluating statistical methods to identify genes and TFs involved in biological processes, and construction of their regulatory networks using gene expression data (chapter 2, 3, and 6). For the first part, I have developed two methods to find the groupwise association of rare variants with given diseases or traits. The first method is based on kernel machine learning and can be applied to both quantitative as well as qualitative traits. Simulation results showed that the proposed method has improved power over the existing weighted sum method (WS) in most settings. The second method uses multiple phenotypes to select a few top significant genes. It then finds the association of each gene with each phenotype while controlling the population stratification by adjusting the data for ancestry using principal components. This method was applied to GAW 17 data and was able to find several disease risk genes. For the second part, I have worked on three problems. First problem involved evaluation of eight gene association methods. A very comprehensive comparison of these methods with further analysis clearly demonstrates the distinct and common performance of these eight gene association methods. For the second problem, an algorithm named the bottom-up graphical Gaussian model was developed to identify the TFs that regulate pathway genes and reconstruct their hierarchical regulatory networks. This algorithm has produced very significant results and it is the first report to produce such hierarchical networks for these pathways. The third problem dealt with developing another algorithm called the top-down graphical Gaussian model that identifies the network governed by a specific TF. The network produced by the algorithm is proven to be of very high accuracy.

Comparison of the effects of inquiry-based cooperative learning and demonstrations in science education

The reported research project involved studying how teaching science using demonstrations, inquiry-based cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two methods affected sixth grade students’ understanding of air pressure and density. Three different groups of students were each taught the two units using different teaching methods. Group one learned about the topics through both demonstrations and inquirybased cooperative learning, whereas group two only viewed demonstrations, and group three only participated in inquiry-based learning in cooperative learning groups. The study was designed to answer the following two questions: 1. Which teaching strategy works best for supporting student understanding of air pressure and density: demonstrations, inquirybased labs in cooperative learning groups, or a combination of the two? 2. And what effect does the time spent engaging in a particular learning experience (demonstrations or labs) have on student learning? Overall, the data did not provide sufficient evidence that one method of learning was more effective than the others. The results also suggested that spending more time on a unit does not necessarily equate to a better understanding of the concepts by the students. Implications for science instruction are discussed.