BMC BioinformaticsBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article
Comparative analysis of ChIP-exo peak-callers: impact of data quality, read duplication and binding subtypes
Abstract
BackgroundChIP (Chromatin immunoprecipitation)-exo has emerged as an important and versatile improvement over conventional ChIP-seq as it reduces the level of noise, maps the transcription factor (TF) binding location in a very precise manner, upto single base-pair resolution, and enables binding mode prediction. Availability of numerous peak-callers for analyzing ChIP-exo reads has motivated the need to assess their performance and report which tool executes reasonably well for the task.\n\nResultsThis study has focussed on comparing peak-callers that report direct binding events with those that report indirect binding events. The effect of strandedness of reads and duplication of data on the performance of peak-callers has been investigated. The number of peaks reported by each peak-caller is compared followed by a comparison of the annotated motifs present in the reported peaks. The significance of peaks is assessed based on the presence of a motif in top peaks. Indirect binding tools have been compared on the basis of their ability to identify annotated motifs and predict mode of protein-DNA interaction.\n\nConclusionBy studying the output of the peak-callers investigated in this study, it is concluded that the tools that use self-learning algorithms, i.e. the tools that estimate all the essential parameters from the aligned reads, perform better than the algorithms which require formation of peak-pairs. The latest tools that account for indirect binding of TFs appear to be an upgrade over the available tools, as they are able to reveal valuable information about the mode of binding in addition to direct binding. Furthermore, the quality of ChIP-exo reads have important consequences on the output of data analysis.
- assay: ChIP-seq
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: differential expression
- research focus: gene regulatory network inference
- research focus: protein structure prediction
- approach: statistical model
- approach: benchmark study
- Citations
- 3
- FWCI
- 0.08
- Field percentile
- 33th percentile
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Characterizing protein-DNA binding event subtypes in ChIP-exo data
Naomi C. F. Yamada, William Lai, … Shaun Mahony·BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Aug 23, 2018
- Features of ChIP-seq data peak calling algorithms with good operating characteristics
Reuben Thomas, Sean Thomas, … Katherine S Pollard·bioRxiv·Jan 22, 2016
- ChIP-AP, An Integrated ChIP-Seq Analysis Pipeline
Jeremiah Suryatenggara, Kol Jia Yong, … Mahmoud Adel Bassal·bioRxiv·Apr 18, 2021
- Accounting for GC-content bias reduces systematic errors and batch effects in ChIP-Seq data
Mingxiang Teng, Rafael A. Irizarry·Genome ResearchPeer-reviewed·Nov 1, 2017
- RECAP reveals the true statistical significance of ChIP-seq peak calls
Justin G. Chitpin, Aseel Awdeh, Theodore J. Perkins·BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Feb 27, 2019
- Detection Of Cooperatively Bound Transcription Factor Pairs Using ChIP-seq Peak Intensities And Expectation Maximization
Vishaka Datta, Rahul Siddharthan, Sandeep Krishna·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Jul 17, 2018