ArticleNucleic acids research2025
Response to the commentary by Melidis et al. on "Untargeted CUT&Tag reads are enriched at accessible chromatin and restrict identification of potential G4-forming sequences in G4-targeted CUT&Tag experiments".
Article in Nucleic acids research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In their Matters Arising commentary, Melidis et al. critically evaluate our work (Nucleic Acids Research, volume 53, gkaf678). In our response, we emphasize why our approach supports the validity of our conclusions. The authors' suggestion that we failed to include "explicit disclosure of the analytical methods and code" in our original publication is misleading; we used publicly available tools and disclosed explicit parameters and detailed methods for each process in our original publication. While the authors raise several important points, such as the difference in DNA recovery between targeted and untargeted samples, we argue that this difference does not abrogate the need to control for untargeted tagmentation. Due to the co-localization of G4s and preferential Tn5 tagmentation in accessible chromatin, our suggestion that G4 CUT&Tag data be validated is both reasonable and scientifically rigorous.
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.