Cargando…
The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data
Epigenetic modifications are crucial for normal development and implicated in disease pathogenesis. While epigenetics continues to be a burgeoning research area in neuroscience, unaddressed issues related to data reproducibility across laboratories remain. Separating meaningful experimental changes...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8748700/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35013473 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04346-w |
_version_ | 1784631061501706240 |
---|---|
author | Boison, Detlev Masino, Susan A. Lubin, Farah D. Guo, Kai Lusardi, Theresa Sanchez, Richard Ruskin, David N. Ohm, Joyce Geiger, Jonathan D. Hur, Junguk |
author_facet | Boison, Detlev Masino, Susan A. Lubin, Farah D. Guo, Kai Lusardi, Theresa Sanchez, Richard Ruskin, David N. Ohm, Joyce Geiger, Jonathan D. Hur, Junguk |
author_sort | Boison, Detlev |
collection | PubMed |
description | Epigenetic modifications are crucial for normal development and implicated in disease pathogenesis. While epigenetics continues to be a burgeoning research area in neuroscience, unaddressed issues related to data reproducibility across laboratories remain. Separating meaningful experimental changes from background variability is a challenge in epigenomic studies. Here we show that seemingly minor experimental variations, even under normal baseline conditions, can have a significant impact on epigenome outcome measures and data interpretation. We examined genome-wide DNA methylation and gene expression profiles of hippocampal tissues from wild-type rats housed in three independent laboratories using nearly identical conditions. Reduced-representation bisulfite sequencing and RNA-seq respectively identified 3852 differentially methylated and 1075 differentially expressed genes between laboratories, even in the absence of experimental intervention. Difficult-to-match factors such as animal vendors and a subset of husbandry and tissue extraction procedures produced quantifiable variations between wild-type animals across the three laboratories. Our study demonstrates that seemingly minor experimental variations, even under normal baseline conditions, can have a significant impact on epigenome outcome measures and data interpretation. This is particularly meaningful for neurological studies in animal models, in which baseline parameters between experimental groups are difficult to control. To enhance scientific rigor, we conclude that strict adherence to protocols is necessary for the execution and interpretation of epigenetic studies and that protocol-sensitive epigenetic changes, amongst naive animals, may confound experimental results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8748700 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87487002022-01-11 The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data Boison, Detlev Masino, Susan A. Lubin, Farah D. Guo, Kai Lusardi, Theresa Sanchez, Richard Ruskin, David N. Ohm, Joyce Geiger, Jonathan D. Hur, Junguk Sci Rep Article Epigenetic modifications are crucial for normal development and implicated in disease pathogenesis. While epigenetics continues to be a burgeoning research area in neuroscience, unaddressed issues related to data reproducibility across laboratories remain. Separating meaningful experimental changes from background variability is a challenge in epigenomic studies. Here we show that seemingly minor experimental variations, even under normal baseline conditions, can have a significant impact on epigenome outcome measures and data interpretation. We examined genome-wide DNA methylation and gene expression profiles of hippocampal tissues from wild-type rats housed in three independent laboratories using nearly identical conditions. Reduced-representation bisulfite sequencing and RNA-seq respectively identified 3852 differentially methylated and 1075 differentially expressed genes between laboratories, even in the absence of experimental intervention. Difficult-to-match factors such as animal vendors and a subset of husbandry and tissue extraction procedures produced quantifiable variations between wild-type animals across the three laboratories. Our study demonstrates that seemingly minor experimental variations, even under normal baseline conditions, can have a significant impact on epigenome outcome measures and data interpretation. This is particularly meaningful for neurological studies in animal models, in which baseline parameters between experimental groups are difficult to control. To enhance scientific rigor, we conclude that strict adherence to protocols is necessary for the execution and interpretation of epigenetic studies and that protocol-sensitive epigenetic changes, amongst naive animals, may confound experimental results. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8748700/ /pubmed/35013473 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04346-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Boison, Detlev Masino, Susan A. Lubin, Farah D. Guo, Kai Lusardi, Theresa Sanchez, Richard Ruskin, David N. Ohm, Joyce Geiger, Jonathan D. Hur, Junguk The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title | The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title_full | The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title_fullStr | The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title_short | The impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of DNA methylation data |
title_sort | impact of methodology on the reproducibility and rigor of dna methylation data |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8748700/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35013473 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04346-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT boisondetlev theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT masinosusana theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT lubinfarahd theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT guokai theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT lusarditheresa theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT sanchezrichard theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT ruskindavidn theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT ohmjoyce theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT geigerjonathand theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT hurjunguk theimpactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT boisondetlev impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT masinosusana impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT lubinfarahd impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT guokai impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT lusarditheresa impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT sanchezrichard impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT ruskindavidn impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT ohmjoyce impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT geigerjonathand impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata AT hurjunguk impactofmethodologyonthereproducibilityandrigorofdnamethylationdata |