Cargando…
A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments
BACKGROUND: Chromatin immunoprecipitation coupled with massively parallel sequencing (ChIP-seq) is increasingly being applied to study transcriptional regulation on a genome-wide scale. While numerous algorithms have recently been proposed for analysing the large ChIP-seq datasets, their relative me...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804666/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20017957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-10-618 |
_version_ | 1782176169814130688 |
---|---|
author | Laajala, Teemu D Raghav, Sunil Tuomela, Soile Lahesmaa, Riitta Aittokallio, Tero Elo, Laura L |
author_facet | Laajala, Teemu D Raghav, Sunil Tuomela, Soile Lahesmaa, Riitta Aittokallio, Tero Elo, Laura L |
author_sort | Laajala, Teemu D |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Chromatin immunoprecipitation coupled with massively parallel sequencing (ChIP-seq) is increasingly being applied to study transcriptional regulation on a genome-wide scale. While numerous algorithms have recently been proposed for analysing the large ChIP-seq datasets, their relative merits and potential limitations remain unclear in practical applications. RESULTS: The present study compares the state-of-the-art algorithms for detecting transcription factor binding sites in four diverse ChIP-seq datasets under a variety of practical research settings. First, we demonstrate how the biological conclusions may change dramatically when the different algorithms are applied. The reproducibility across biological replicates is then investigated as an internal validation of the detections. Finally, the predicted binding sites with each method are compared to high-scoring binding motifs as well as binding regions confirmed in independent qPCR experiments. CONCLUSIONS: In general, our results indicate that the optimal choice of the computational approach depends heavily on the dataset under analysis. In addition to revealing valuable information to the users of this technology about the characteristics of the binding site detection approaches, the systematic evaluation framework provides also a useful reference to the developers of improved algorithms for ChIP-seq data. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2804666 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28046662010-01-12 A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments Laajala, Teemu D Raghav, Sunil Tuomela, Soile Lahesmaa, Riitta Aittokallio, Tero Elo, Laura L BMC Genomics Research article BACKGROUND: Chromatin immunoprecipitation coupled with massively parallel sequencing (ChIP-seq) is increasingly being applied to study transcriptional regulation on a genome-wide scale. While numerous algorithms have recently been proposed for analysing the large ChIP-seq datasets, their relative merits and potential limitations remain unclear in practical applications. RESULTS: The present study compares the state-of-the-art algorithms for detecting transcription factor binding sites in four diverse ChIP-seq datasets under a variety of practical research settings. First, we demonstrate how the biological conclusions may change dramatically when the different algorithms are applied. The reproducibility across biological replicates is then investigated as an internal validation of the detections. Finally, the predicted binding sites with each method are compared to high-scoring binding motifs as well as binding regions confirmed in independent qPCR experiments. CONCLUSIONS: In general, our results indicate that the optimal choice of the computational approach depends heavily on the dataset under analysis. In addition to revealing valuable information to the users of this technology about the characteristics of the binding site detection approaches, the systematic evaluation framework provides also a useful reference to the developers of improved algorithms for ChIP-seq data. BioMed Central 2009-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC2804666/ /pubmed/20017957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-10-618 Text en Copyright ©2009 Laajala et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research article Laajala, Teemu D Raghav, Sunil Tuomela, Soile Lahesmaa, Riitta Aittokallio, Tero Elo, Laura L A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title | A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title_full | A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title_fullStr | A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title_full_unstemmed | A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title_short | A practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments |
title_sort | practical comparison of methods for detecting transcription factor binding sites in chip-seq experiments |
topic | Research article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2804666/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20017957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-10-618 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT laajalateemud apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT raghavsunil apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT tuomelasoile apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT lahesmaariitta apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT aittokalliotero apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT elolaural apracticalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT laajalateemud practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT raghavsunil practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT tuomelasoile practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT lahesmaariitta practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT aittokalliotero practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments AT elolaural practicalcomparisonofmethodsfordetectingtranscriptionfactorbindingsitesinchipseqexperiments |