ArticlePloS one2019
Maximum parsimony interpretation of chromatin capture experiments.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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.
Funding
Abstract
We present a new approach to characterizing the global geometric state of chromatin from HiC data. Chromatin conformation capture techniques (3C, and its variants: 4C, 5C, HiC, etc.) probe the spatial structure of the genome by identifying physical contacts between genomic loci within the nuclear space. In whole-genome conformation capture (HiC) experiments, the signal can be interpreted as spatial proximity between genomic loci and physical distances can be estimated from the data. However, observed spatial proximity signal does not directly translate into persistent contacts within the nuclear space. Attempts to infer a single conformation of the genome within the nuclear space lead to internal geometric inconsistencies, notoriously violating the triangle inequality. These inconsistencies have been attributed to the stochastic nature of chromatin conformation or to experimental artifacts. Here we demonstrate that it can be explained by a mixture of cells, each in one of only several conformational states, contained in the sample. We have developed and implemented a graph-theoretic approach that identifies the properties of such postulated subpopulations. We show that the geometrical conflicts in a standard yeast HiC dataset, can be explained by only a small number of homogeneous populations of cells (4 populations are sufficient to reconcile 95,000 most prominent impossible triangles, 8 populations can explain 375,000 top geometric conflicts). Finally, we analyze the functional annotations of genes differentially interacting between the populations, suggesting that each inferred subpopulation may be involved in a functionally different transcriptional program.
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.