ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2019
Detecting differential DNA methylation from sequencing of bisulfite converted DNA of diverse species.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uncovering alterations in cancer epigenetics via trans-dimensional Markov chain Monte Carlo and hidden Markov models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2026Article
- Epigenetic Mechanisms inCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Potential Role of DNA Methylation as a Driver of Plastic Responses to the Environment Across Cells, Organisms, and Populations.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- epialleleR: an R/Bioconductor package for sensitive allele-specific methylation analysis in NGS data.GigaScience · 2022Article
- Maternal undernutrition during periconceptional period affects whole-genome ovine muscle methylation in adult offspring.Journal of animal science · 2022Article
- Development and performance evaluation of TaqMan real-time fluorescence quantitative methylation specific PCR for detecting methylation level of PER2.Molecular biology reports · 2022Article
- Calling differentially methylated regions from whole genome bisulphite sequencing with DMRcate.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- A new approach to decode DNA methylome and genomic variants simultaneously from double strand bisulfite sequencing.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Remodeling the Epigenetic Landscape of Cancer-Application Potential of Flavonoids in the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Lineage and Parent-of-Origin Effects in DNA Methylation of Honey Bees (Apis mellifera) Revealed by Reciprocal Crosses and Whole-Genome Bisulfite Sequencing.Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
- Distinct epigenomic and transcriptomic modifications associated with Wolbachia-mediated asexuality.PLoS pathogens · 2020Article
- Insights into Epigenome Evolution from Animal and Plant Methylomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA methylation is one of the most extensively studied epigenetic modifications of genomic DNA. In recent years, sequencing of bisulfite-converted DNA, particularly via next-generation sequencing technologies, has become a widely popular method to study DNA methylation. This method can be readily applied to a variety of species, dramatically expanding the scope of DNA methylation studies beyond the traditionally studied human and mouse systems. In parallel to the increasing wealth of genomic methylation profiles, many statistical tools have been developed to detect differentially methylated loci (DMLs) or differentially methylated regions (DMRs) between biological conditions. We discuss and summarize several key properties of currently available tools to detect DMLs and DMRs from sequencing of bisulfite-converted DNA. However, the majority of the statistical tools developed for DML/DMR analyses have been validated using only mammalian data sets, and less priority has been placed on the analyses of invertebrate or plant DNA methylation data. We demonstrate that genomic methylation profiles of non-mammalian species are often highly distinct from those of mammalian species using examples of honey bees and humans. We then discuss how such differences in data properties may affect statistical analyses. Based on these differences, we provide three specific recommendations to improve the power and accuracy of DML and DMR analyses of invertebrate data when using currently available statistical tools. These considerations should facilitate systematic and robust analyses of DNA methylation from diverse species, thus advancing our understanding of DNA methylation.
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.