Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41377957›Full record

ArticleResearch square2025

Understanding the physical processes behind DNA-DNA proximity ligation assays.

Bernardo J Zubillaga Herrera, Amit Das, Linden Burack, Ailung Wang, Michele Di Pierro

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in Research square, 2025. 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

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

5 authors.

Bernardo J Zubillaga HerreraCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9917-9415
Amit DasCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.
Linden BurackCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.
Ailung WangCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4214-2352
Michele Di PierroCenter for Theoretical Biological Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2889-2632

Funding

PAR-20-117R35GM146852 · NIGMS · NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY · PI Michele Di Pierro · 2022 to 2026
$2.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM146852
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last decade, DNA-DNA proximity ligation assays opened powerful new ways to study the 3D organization of genomes and have become a mainstay experimental technology. Yet many aspects of these experiments remain poorly understood. We study the inner workings of DNA-DNA proximity ligation assays through numerical experiments and theoretical modeling. Chromosomes are modeled at nucleosome resolution and evolved in time via molecular dynamics. A virtual Hi-C experiment reproduces, in-silico, the different steps of the Hi-C protocol, including: crosslinking of chromatin to an underlying proteic matrix, enzymatic digestion of DNA, and subsequent proximity ligation of DNA open ends. The protocol is simulated on ensembles of different structures as well as individual structures, enabling the construction of ligation maps and the calculation of ligation probabilities as functions of genomic and Euclidean distance. The methods help to assess the effect of the many variables of the Hi-C experiment and of subsequent data processing methods on the quality of the final results.

Indexed as

Chromosome Conformation CaptureContact MapsDNADNA Structure and OrganizationHi-CProximity Ligation Assays

Identifiers

PMID41377957
PMCPMC12687825

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.