Cargando…

Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq

BACKGROUND: The robustness of ChIP-seq datasets is highly dependent upon the antibodies used. Currently, polyclonal antibodies are the standard despite several limitations: They are non-renewable, vary in performance between lots and need to be validated with each new lot. In contrast, monoclonal an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Busby, Michele, Xue, Catherine, Li, Catherine, Farjoun, Yossi, Gienger, Elizabeth, Yofe, Ido, Gladden, Adrianne, Epstein, Charles B., Cornett, Evan M., Rothbart, Scott B., Nusbaum, Chad, Goren, Alon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5097419/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27826357
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13072-016-0100-6
_version_ 1782465598348853248
author Busby, Michele
Xue, Catherine
Li, Catherine
Farjoun, Yossi
Gienger, Elizabeth
Yofe, Ido
Gladden, Adrianne
Epstein, Charles B.
Cornett, Evan M.
Rothbart, Scott B.
Nusbaum, Chad
Goren, Alon
author_facet Busby, Michele
Xue, Catherine
Li, Catherine
Farjoun, Yossi
Gienger, Elizabeth
Yofe, Ido
Gladden, Adrianne
Epstein, Charles B.
Cornett, Evan M.
Rothbart, Scott B.
Nusbaum, Chad
Goren, Alon
author_sort Busby, Michele
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The robustness of ChIP-seq datasets is highly dependent upon the antibodies used. Currently, polyclonal antibodies are the standard despite several limitations: They are non-renewable, vary in performance between lots and need to be validated with each new lot. In contrast, monoclonal antibody lots are renewable and provide consistent performance. To increase ChIP-seq standardization, we investigated whether monoclonal antibodies could replace polyclonal antibodies. We compared monoclonal antibodies that target five key histone modifications (H3K4me1, H3K4me3, H3K9me3, H3K27ac and H3K27me3) to their polyclonal counterparts in both human and mouse cells. RESULTS: Overall performance was highly similar for four monoclonal/polyclonal pairs, including when we used two distinct lots of the same monoclonal antibody. In contrast, the binding patterns for H3K27ac differed substantially between polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. However, this was most likely due to the distinct immunogen used rather than the clonality of the antibody. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, we found that monoclonal antibodies as a class perform equivalently to polyclonal antibodies for the detection of histone post-translational modifications in both human and mouse. Accordingly, we recommend the use of monoclonal antibodies in ChIP-seq experiments. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13072-016-0100-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5097419
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50974192016-11-08 Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq Busby, Michele Xue, Catherine Li, Catherine Farjoun, Yossi Gienger, Elizabeth Yofe, Ido Gladden, Adrianne Epstein, Charles B. Cornett, Evan M. Rothbart, Scott B. Nusbaum, Chad Goren, Alon Epigenetics Chromatin Methodology BACKGROUND: The robustness of ChIP-seq datasets is highly dependent upon the antibodies used. Currently, polyclonal antibodies are the standard despite several limitations: They are non-renewable, vary in performance between lots and need to be validated with each new lot. In contrast, monoclonal antibody lots are renewable and provide consistent performance. To increase ChIP-seq standardization, we investigated whether monoclonal antibodies could replace polyclonal antibodies. We compared monoclonal antibodies that target five key histone modifications (H3K4me1, H3K4me3, H3K9me3, H3K27ac and H3K27me3) to their polyclonal counterparts in both human and mouse cells. RESULTS: Overall performance was highly similar for four monoclonal/polyclonal pairs, including when we used two distinct lots of the same monoclonal antibody. In contrast, the binding patterns for H3K27ac differed substantially between polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. However, this was most likely due to the distinct immunogen used rather than the clonality of the antibody. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, we found that monoclonal antibodies as a class perform equivalently to polyclonal antibodies for the detection of histone post-translational modifications in both human and mouse. Accordingly, we recommend the use of monoclonal antibodies in ChIP-seq experiments. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13072-016-0100-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5097419/ /pubmed/27826357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13072-016-0100-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Busby, Michele
Xue, Catherine
Li, Catherine
Farjoun, Yossi
Gienger, Elizabeth
Yofe, Ido
Gladden, Adrianne
Epstein, Charles B.
Cornett, Evan M.
Rothbart, Scott B.
Nusbaum, Chad
Goren, Alon
Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title_full Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title_fullStr Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title_full_unstemmed Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title_short Systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by ChIP-seq
title_sort systematic comparison of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibodies for mapping histone modifications by chip-seq
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5097419/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27826357
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13072-016-0100-6
work_keys_str_mv AT busbymichele systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT xuecatherine systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT licatherine systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT farjounyossi systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT giengerelizabeth systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT yofeido systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT gladdenadrianne systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT epsteincharlesb systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT cornettevanm systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT rothbartscottb systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT nusbaumchad systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq
AT gorenalon systematiccomparisonofmonoclonalversuspolyclonalantibodiesformappinghistonemodificationsbychipseq