Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41097033›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2025

Evaluating Reproducibility and Best Practices for Replicate Design in G-Quadruplex ChIP-Seq Studies.

Ke Xiao, Rongxin Zhang, Jing Tu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ke XiaoState Key Laboratory of Digital Medical Engineering, School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0169-4185
Rongxin ZhangRobert Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Jing TuState Key Laboratory of Digital Medical Engineering, School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1310-5915

Funding

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China 2242023K5005National Natural Science Foundation of China 62002060
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

G-quadruplex (G4) ChIP-Seq data are critical for studying the roles of G4 structures in various biological processes, yet their reproducibility remains systematically uncharacterized. In this study, we evaluated the consistency of in vivo G4 peaks across multiple replicates in three publicly available datasets. We observed considerable heterogeneity in peak calls, with only a minority of peaks shared across all replicates. To address this challenge, we compared three computational methods-IDR, MSPC, and ChIP-R-for assessing reproducibility and found that MSPC is the optimal solution in reconciling inconsistent signals in G4 ChIP-Seq data. We further demonstrated that employing at least three replicates significantly improved detection accuracy compared to conventional two-replicate designs, while four replicates proved sufficient to achieve reproducible outcomes, with diminishing returns beyond this number. Moreover, we showed that the reproducibility-aware analytical strategies can partially mitigate the adverse effects of low sequencing depth, though they do not fully substitute for high-quality data. Based on our findings, we recommend 10 million mapped reads as a minimum standard for G4 ChIP-Seq experiments, with 15 million or more reads being preferable for optimal results. Our study provides practical guidelines for experimental design and data analysis in G4 studies, emphasizing the importance of replication and robust bioinformatic strategies to enhance the reliability of genome-wide G4 mapping.

Indexed as

Chromatin Immunoprecipitation SequencingG-QuadruplexesComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansReproducibility of ResultsG-quadruplex (G4)performance comparisonreplicate designreproducibility estimation

Identifiers

PMID41097033
PMCPMC12524710

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.