ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2025
ChIP-Rx: Arabidopsis Chromatin Profiling Using Quantitative ChIP-Seq.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by deep sequencing (ChIP-seq) is widely used to probe the chromatin landscape of transcription factors, chromatin components, and associated proteins. Conventional ChIP normalization procedures robustly allow estimating differences in local enrichment across genomic regions. Yet, inter-sample comparisons can be biased by technical variability and biological differences. This is notably the case when samples display large differences in the abundance of the target protein or its enrichment at chromatin. For example, epigenome defects are improperly detected or quantified upon large-effect genetic or chemical inhibition of chromatin modifiers. To circumvent these caveats and robustly determine biological variations while minimizing technical variability, ChIP adaptations using an external reference have flourished. Here, we describe a step-by-step protocol employing a reference exogenous chromatin (ChIP-Rx) that allows absolute comparisons of epigenome variations in Arabidopsis samples displaying drastic differences in chromatin mark abundance. In contrast to the originally published ChIP-Rx approach, which assumes that exogenous spike-in references are constant across samples, the method detailed here involves the sequencing of each input sample to account for technical variability in initial reference chromatin contents. We also report a detailed computational workflow with an accompanying Github resource to help in calculating spike-in normalization factors, applying them to normalize epigenome tracks, and performing spike-in normalized inter-sample differential analyses. We propose two ways of computing the spike-in factor: a classically used method based on raw counts and a noise-corrected method using peak detection on the exogenous genome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39576597What 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.