ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2016
Genome-Scale Analysis of Cell-Specific Regulatory Codes Using Nuclear Enzymes.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The cistrome response to hypoxia in human umbilical vein endothelial cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- How far are the new wave of mRNA drugs from us? mRNA product current perspective and future development.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Dual Roles for Ikaros in Regulation of Macrophage Chromatin State and Inflammatory Gene Expression.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2018Article
- Chromatin reprogramming in breast cancer.Endocrine-related cancer · 2018Review
- Dynamic enhancer function in the chromatin context.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine · 2018Review
- Anti-Inflammatory Chromatinscape Suggests Alternative Mechanisms of Glucocorticoid Receptor Action.Immunity · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
High-throughput sequencing technologies have made it possible for biologists to generate genome-wide profiles of chromatin features at the nucleotide resolution. Enzymes such as nucleases or transposes have been instrumental as a chromatin-probing agent due to their ability to target accessible chromatin for cleavage or insertion. On the scale of a few hundred base pairs, preferential action of the nuclear enzymes on accessible chromatin allows mapping of cell state-specific accessibility in vivo. Such accessible regions contain functionally important regulatory sites, including promoters and enhancers, which undergo active remodeling for cells adapting in a dynamic environment. DNase-seq and the more recent ATAC-seq are two assays that are gaining popularity. Deep sequencing of DNA libraries from these assays, termed genomic footprinting, has been proposed to enable the comprehensive construction of protein occupancy profiles over the genome at the nucleotide level. Recent studies have discovered limitations of genomic footprinting which reduce the scope of detectable proteins. In addition, the identification of putative factors that bind to the observed footprints remains challenging. Despite these caveats, the methodology still presents significant advantages over alternative techniques such as ChIP-seq or FAIRE-seq. Here we describe computational approaches and tools for analysis of chromatin accessibility and genomic footprinting. Proper experimental design and assay-specific data analysis ensure the detection sensitivity and maximize retrievable information. The enzyme-based chromatin profiling approaches represent a powerful and evolving methodology which facilitates our understanding of how the genome is regulated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.