Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25024162›Full record

ArticleGenome research2014

Decoding ChIP-seq with a double-binding signal refines binding peaks to single-nucleotides and predicts cooperative interaction.

Antonio L C Gomes, Thomas Abeel, Matthew Peterson, Elham Azizi, Anna Lyubetskaya, Luís Carvalho, James Galagan

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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Functional genomic approaches to elucidate the role of enhancers during development.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine · 2020
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Defining bacterial regulons using ChIP-seq.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Protein-DNA binding in high-resolution.Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology · 2015
    Review
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

7 authors.

Antonio L C GomesBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
Thomas AbeelBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA; VIB Department of Plant Systems Biology, Ghent University, 9052 Ghent, Belgium.
Matthew PetersonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
Elham AziziBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
Anna LyubetskayaBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
Luís CarvalhoBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA; Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
James GalaganBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA; antluiz@bu.edu jgalag@bu.edu.

Funding

NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200800059C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The comprehension of protein and DNA binding in vivo is essential to understand gene regulation. Chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing (ChIP-seq) provides a global map of the regulatory binding network. Most ChIP-seq analysis tools focus on identifying binding regions from coverage enrichment. However, less work has been performed to infer the physical and regulatory details inside the enriched regions. This research extends a previous blind-deconvolution approach to develop a post-peak-calling algorithm that improves binding site resolution and predicts cooperative interactions. At the core of our new method is a physically motivated model that characterizes the binding signal as an extreme value distribution. This model suggests a mathematical framework to study physical properties of DNA shearing from the ChIP-seq coverage. The model explains the ChIP-seq coverage with two signals: The first considers DNA fragments with only a single binding event, whereas the second considers fragments with two binding events (a double-binding signal). The model incorporates motif discovery and is able to detect multiple sites in an enriched region with single-nucleotide resolution, high sensitivity, and high specificity. Our method improves peak caller sensitivity, from less than 45% up to 94%, at a false positive rate < 11% for a set of 47 experimentally validated prokaryotic sites. It also improves resolution of highly enriched regions of large-scale eukaryotic data sets. The double-binding signal provides a novel application in ChIP-seq analysis: the identification of cooperative interaction. Predictions of known cooperative binding sites show a 0.85 area under an ROC curve.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBinding SitesChromatin ImmunoprecipitationComputational BiologyDNA-Binding ProteinsModels, GeneticNucleotidesSequence Analysis, DNADNA-Binding ProteinsNucleotides

Identifiers

PMID25024162
PMCPMC4199365

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.