I would be interested in discussing normalization strategies for ChIP-seq data across (a large number of) samples. More specifically, how to account for library clonality artifacts, differences in IP efficiency and other ChIP-seq specific experimental sources of bias.
Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
I came here this morning to start a very similar thread. So instead will bump this one, although I admit, I am not exactly sure what this subsection of the forum is for. If I need to start a new thread I can, just please let me know.
I have multiple ChIP-seq data sets for chromatin modifications that do not so much form peaks but instead have differential enrichment over specific genomic zones. But due to the difference in the total number of mapped reads per sample, normalization by number of mapped reads skews the data in the opposite direction of the biologist's expectations. The biologists proclaim that the difference in reads per sample is because in one sample there is more binding. And so I need a method that does not use mapped read counts as a normalization strategy.
What I imagine could be an interesting strategy, as I have no input controls to work with, would be to attempt to establish a baseline signal in regions that are not enriched for binding, but I feel I am in a bit of a chicken-meets-egg scenario here and cannot find a method that explains how to proceed.
Any help or hints would be greatly appreciated.
Comment
-
>The biologists proclaim that the difference in reads per sample is because in one sample there is more binding.
So you have different treatments with the same modification and they are saying that some treatments have more binding than others?
>What I imagine could be an interesting strategy, as I have no input controls to work with, would be to attempt to establish a baseline signal in regions that are not enriched for binding
What about using regions that are enriched in binding but that are expected to remain consistent across all samples? For example, when we do ChIP-qPCR for some active histone modifications we normalize to enrichment at the Gapdh promoter since it has a strong and consistent signal in all our treatments. It'd be up to the biologists to identify these positive controls sites, and probably having several would be better than just one.
Comment
-
Originally posted by biocomputer View PostSo you have different treatments with the same modification and they are saying that some treatments have more binding than others?
Yes, we are studying multiple modifications (multiple antibodies) and have 2 conditions (treatments) so I need a way to normalize data from the same antibody in different conditions to get differential binding. And from there, I assume that I can compare the differential binding between different antibodies without further normalization (an assumption cause I am not there yet...so am not totally sure).
Originally posted by biocomputer View PostWhat about using regions that are enriched in binding but that are expected to remain consistent across all samples? For example, when we do ChIP-qPCR for some active histone modifications we normalize to enrichment at the Gapdh promoter since it has a strong and consistent signal in all our treatments. It'd be up to the biologists to identify these positive controls sites, and probably having several would be better than just one.
In any event, this is a start and we are going to try it now. Thanks again.
Comment
Latest Articles
Collapse
-
by seqadmin
The field of conservation genomics centers on applying genomics technologies in support of conservation efforts and the preservation of biodiversity. This article features interviews with two researchers who showcase their innovative work and highlight the current state and future of conservation genomics.
Avian Conservation
Matthew DeSaix, a recent doctoral graduate from Kristen Ruegg’s lab at The University of Colorado, shared that most of his research...-
Channel: Articles
03-08-2024, 10:41 AM -
-
by seqadmin
Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved from a futuristic vision to a mainstream technology, highlighted by the introduction of tools like OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Gemini. In recent years, AI has become increasingly integrated into the field of genomics. This integration has enabled new scientific discoveries while simultaneously raising important ethical questions1. Interviews with two researchers at the center of this intersection provide insightful perspectives into...-
Channel: Articles
02-26-2024, 02:07 PM -
ad_right_rmr
Collapse
News
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seqadmin, 03-14-2024, 06:13 AM
|
0 responses
32 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
03-14-2024, 06:13 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 03-08-2024, 08:03 AM
|
0 responses
71 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
03-08-2024, 08:03 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 03-07-2024, 08:13 AM
|
0 responses
80 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
03-07-2024, 08:13 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 03-06-2024, 09:51 AM
|
0 responses
68 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
03-06-2024, 09:51 AM
|
Comment