Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24709819›Full record

ArticleGenome research2014

Quantifying ChIP-seq data: a spiking method providing an internal reference for sample-to-sample normalization.

Nicolas Bonhoure, Gergana Bounova, David Bernasconi, Viviane Praz, Fabienne Lammers, Donatella Canella, Ian M Willis, Winship Herr, Nouria Hernandez, Mauro Delorenzi and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

99 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Genome-wide absolute quantification of chromatin looping.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. ChIP-Rx: Arabidopsis Chromatin Profiling Using Quantitative ChIP-Seq.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Wild West of spike-in normalization.Nature biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Nicolas BonhoureCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Gergana BounovaCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Bioinformatics Core Facility, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
David BernasconiCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Bioinformatics Core Facility, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Viviane PrazCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Fabienne LammersCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Donatella CanellaCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Ian M WillisDepartment of Biochemistry, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York 10461, USA;
Winship HerrCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Nouria HernandezCenter for Integrative Genomics, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Mauro DelorenziBioinformatics Core Facility, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Department of Oncology and the Ludwig Center for Cancer Research, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
CycliX Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by deep sequencing (ChIP-seq) experiments are widely used to determine, within entire genomes, the occupancy sites of any protein of interest, including, for example, transcription factors, RNA polymerases, or histones with or without various modifications. In addition to allowing the determination of occupancy sites within one cell type and under one condition, this method allows, in principle, the establishment and comparison of occupancy maps in various cell types, tissues, and conditions. Such comparisons require, however, that samples be normalized. Widely used normalization methods that include a quantile normalization step perform well when factor occupancy varies at a subset of sites, but may miss uniform genome-wide increases or decreases in site occupancy. We describe a spike adjustment procedure (SAP) that, unlike commonly used normalization methods intervening at the analysis stage, entails an experimental step prior to immunoprecipitation. A constant, low amount from a single batch of chromatin of a foreign genome is added to the experimental chromatin. This "spike" chromatin then serves as an internal control to which the experimental signals can be adjusted. We show that the method improves similarity between replicates and reveals biological differences including global and largely uniform changes.

Indexed as

AnimalsChromatinChromatin ImmunoprecipitationComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMiceQuality ControlReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsChromatin

Identifiers

PMID24709819
PMCPMC4079971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.