↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of control samples for ChIP-seq of histone modifications

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A comparison of control samples for ChIP-seq of histone modifications
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00329
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoffer Flensburg, Sarah A. Kinkel, Andrew Keniry, Marnie E. Blewitt, Alicia Oshlack

Abstract

The advent of high-throughput sequencing has allowed genome wide profiling of histone modifications by Chromatin ImmunoPrecipitation (ChIP) followed by sequencing (ChIP-seq). In this assay the histone mark of interest is enriched through a chromatin pull-down assay using an antibody for the mark. Due to imperfect antibodies and other factors, many of the sequenced fragments do not originate from the histone mark of interest, and are referred to as background reads. Background reads are not uniformly distributed and therefore control samples are usually used to estimate the background distribution at any given genomic position. The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) Consortium guidelines suggest sequencing a whole cell extract (WCE, or "input") sample, or a mock ChIP reaction such as an IgG control, as a background sample. However, for a histone modification ChIP-seq investigation it is also possible to use a Histone H3 (H3) pull-down to map the underlying distribution of histones. In this paper we generated data from a hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell population isolated from mouse fetal liver to compare WCE and H3 ChIP-seq as control samples. The quality of the control samples is estimated by a comparison to pull-downs of histone modifications and to expression data. We find minor differences between WCE and H3 ChIP-seq, such as coverage in mitochondria and behavior close to transcription start sites. Where the two controls differ, the H3 pull-down is generally more similar to the ChIP-seq of histone modifications. However, the differences between H3 and WCE have a negligible impact on the quality of a standard analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 142 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 23%
Researcher 35 23%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 19 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 64 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 54 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 22 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 06 July 2021.
All research outputs
#4,481,990
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,371
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,739
of 252,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#15
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 252,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.