![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Indexing ChIPseq libraries using Illumina's TruSeq and ChIPseq kits | Alex Clop | Epigenetics | 6 | 11-08-2012 12:07 PM |
ChIPseq for histone modifications | Alex Clop | Epigenetics | 9 | 02-09-2012 11:32 PM |
Chipseq data analysis | RadAniba | Bioinformatics | 6 | 06-17-2011 11:35 AM |
ChIPseq question (MACS) | Rachelly | Bioinformatics | 1 | 02-24-2011 09:50 AM |
duplicate reads in ChIPSeq | tec | Illumina/Solexa | 7 | 10-08-2009 05:23 AM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Location: texas Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2
|
![]()
I was wondering which was the preferred method?
Would people prefer performing chipseq with two diff antibodies, or repeating chipseq with same antibody? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Location: Australia Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10
|
![]()
Not sure what you mean. Once an antibody is validated as specific, it should be fine to use. The more biological and technical replicates you perform the better.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Location: Bioo Scientific, Austin, TX, USA Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 119
|
![]()
As a reviewer, ChIP-Seq with a different antibody would definitely add strength to a manuscript. Biological triplicates with both antibodies would be ideal. I think people sometimes put too much faith in antibody specificity, so I think data generated with two different antibodies is much more convincing. Also, an IP-Western with an IP done with one antibody and the Western done with another is always a strong piece of data to add to a manuscript, in my opinion.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|