Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38645064›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024

Predicting chromatin conformation contact maps.

Alan Min, Jacob Schreiber, Anshul Kundaje, William Stafford Noble

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alan MinDepartment of Statistics, University of Washington.
Jacob SchreiberDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University.
Anshul KundajeDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University.
William Stafford NobleDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-7283-4715

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past 15 years, a variety of next-generation sequencing assays have been developed for measuring the 3D conformation of DNA in the nucleus. Each of these assays gives, for a particular cell or tissue type, a distinct picture of 3D chromatin architecture. Accordingly, making sense of the relationship between genome structure and function requires teasing apart two closely related questions: how does chromatin 3D structure change from one cell type to the next, and how do different measurements of that structure differ from one another, even when the two assays are carried out in the same cell type? In this work, we assemble a collection of chromatin 3D datasets-each represented as a 2D contact map- spanning multiple assay types and cell types. We then build a machine learning model that predicts missing contact maps in this collection. We use the model to systematically explore how genome 3D architecture changes, at the level of compartments, domains, and loops, between cell type and between assay types.

Indexed as

3D genome architecturechromatinHi-C

Identifiers

PMID38645064
PMCPMC11030330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.