↓ Skip to main content

ChIP bias as a function of cross-linking time

Overview of attention for article published in Chromosome Research, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 538)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
Title
ChIP bias as a function of cross-linking time
Published in
Chromosome Research, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10577-015-9509-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Baranello, Fedor Kouzine, Suzanne Sanford, David Levens

Abstract

The chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay is widely used to capture interactions between chromatin and regulatory proteins in vivo. Formaldehyde cross-linking of DNA and proteins is a critical step required to trap their interactions inside the cells before immunoprecipitation and analysis. Yet insufficient attention has been given to variables that might give rise to artifacts in this procedure, such as the duration of cross-linking. We analyzed the dependence of the ChIP signal on the duration of formaldehyde cross-linking time for two proteins: DNA topoisomerase 1 (Top1) that is functionally associated with the double helix in vivo, especially with active chromatin, and green fluorescent protein (GFP) that has no known bona fide interactions with DNA. With short time of formaldehyde fixation, only Top1 immunoprecipation efficiently recovered DNA from active promoters, whereas prolonged fixation augmented non-specific recovery of GFP dramatizing the need to optimize ChIP protocols to minimize the time of cross-linking, especially for abundant nuclear proteins. Thus, ChIP is a powerful approach to study the localization of protein on the genome when care is taken to manage potential artifacts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 139 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 23%
Researcher 25 17%
Student > Master 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 10%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 24 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 66 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 6%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 26 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,732,510
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from Chromosome Research
#15
of 538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,371
of 398,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chromosome Research
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 398,124 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.