Hubbry Logo
ChIP sequencingChIP sequencingMain
Open search
ChIP sequencing
Community hub
ChIP sequencing
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
ChIP sequencing
ChIP sequencing
ChIP sequencing
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

ChIP-sequencing, also known as ChIP-seq, is a method used to analyze protein interactions with DNA. ChIP-seq combines chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) with massively parallel DNA sequencing to identify the binding sites of DNA-associated proteins. It can be used to map global binding sites precisely for any protein of interest. Previously, ChIP-on-chip was the most common technique utilized to study these protein–DNA relations.

Uses

[edit]

ChIP-seq is primarily used to determine how transcription factors and other chromatin-associated proteins influence phenotype-affecting mechanisms. Determining how proteins interact with DNA to regulate gene expression is essential for fully understanding many biological processes and disease states. This epigenetic information is complementary to genotype and expression analysis. ChIP-seq technology is currently seen primarily as an alternative to ChIP-chip which requires a hybridization array. This introduces some bias, as an array is restricted to a fixed number of probes. Sequencing, by contrast, is thought to have less bias, although the sequencing bias of different sequencing technologies is not yet fully understood.[1]

Specific DNA sites in direct physical interaction with transcription factors and other proteins can be isolated by chromatin immunoprecipitation. ChIP produces a library of target DNA sites bound to a protein of interest. Massively parallel sequence analyses are used in conjunction with whole-genome sequence databases to analyze the interaction pattern of any protein with DNA,[2] or the pattern of any epigenetic chromatin modifications. This can be applied to the set of ChIP-able proteins and modifications, such as transcription factors, polymerases and transcriptional machinery, structural proteins, protein modifications, and DNA modifications.[3] As an alternative to the dependence on specific antibodies, different methods have been developed to find the superset of all nucleosome-depleted or nucleosome-disrupted active regulatory regions in the genome, like DNase-Seq[4] and FAIRE-Seq.[5][6]

Workflow of ChIP-sequencing

[edit]
ChIP-sequencing workflow

ChIP

[edit]

ChIP is a powerful method to selectively enrich for DNA sequences bound by a particular protein in living cells. However, the widespread use of this method has been limited by the lack of a sufficiently robust method to identify all of the enriched DNA sequences. The ChIP wet lab protocol contains ChIP and hybridization. There are essentially five parts to the ChIP protocol[7] that aid in better understanding the overall process of ChIP. In order to carry out the ChIP, the first step is cross-linking[8] using formaldehyde and large batches of the DNA in order to obtain a useful amount. The cross-links are made between the protein and DNA, but also between RNA and other proteins. The second step is the process of chromatin fragmentation which breaks up the chromatin in order to get high quality DNA pieces for ChIP analysis in the end. These fragments should be cut to become under 500 base pairs[9] each to have the best outcome for genome mapping. The third step is called chromatin immunoprecipitation,[7] which is what ChIP is short for. The ChIP process enhances specific crosslinked DNA-protein complexes using an antibody against the protein of interest followed by incubation and centrifugation to obtain the immunoprecipitation. The immunoprecipitation step also allows for the removal of non-specific binding sites. The fourth step is DNA recovery and purification,[7] taking place by the reversed effect on the cross-link between DNA and protein to separate them and cleaning DNA with an extraction. The fifth and final step is the analyzation step of the ChIP protocol by the process of qPCR, ChIP-on-chip (hybrid array) or ChIP sequencing. Oligonucleotide adaptors are then added to the small stretches of DNA that were bound to the protein of interest to enable massively parallel sequencing. Through the analysis, the sequences can then be identified and interpreted by the gene or region to where the protein was bound.[7]

Sequencing

[edit]

After size selection, all the resulting ChIP-DNA fragments are sequenced simultaneously using a genome sequencer. A single sequencing run can scan for genome-wide associations with high resolution, meaning that features can be located precisely on the chromosomes. ChIP-chip, by contrast, requires large sets of tiling arrays for lower resolution.[10]

There are many new sequencing methods used in this sequencing step. Some technologies that analyze the sequences can use cluster amplification of adapter-ligated ChIP DNA fragments on a solid flow cell substrate to create clusters of approximately 1000 clonal copies each. The resulting high density array of template clusters on the flow cell surface is sequenced by a genome analyzing program. Each template cluster undergoes sequencing-by-synthesis in parallel using novel fluorescently labelled reversible terminator nucleotides. Templates are sequenced base-by-base during each read. Then, the data collection and analysis software aligns sample sequences to a known genomic sequence to identify the ChIP-DNA fragments.[citation needed]

Quality control

[edit]

ChIP-seq offers us a fast analysis, however, a quality control must be performed to make sure that the results obtained are reliable:

  • Non-redundant fraction: low-complexity regions should be removed as they are not informative and may interfere with mapping in the reference genome.[11]
  • Fragments in peaks: ratio of reads that are located in peaks over reads that are located where there isn't a peak.[11]

Sensitivity

[edit]

Sensitivity of this technology depends on the depth of the sequencing run (i.e. the number of mapped sequence tags), the size of the genome and the distribution of the target factor. The sequencing depth is directly correlated with cost. If abundant binders in large genomes have to be mapped with high sensitivity, costs are high as an enormously high number of sequence tags will be required. This is in contrast to ChIP-chip in which the costs are not correlated with sensitivity.[12][13]

Unlike microarray-based ChIP methods, the precision of the ChIP-seq assay is not limited by the spacing of predetermined probes. By integrating a large number of short reads, highly precise binding site localization is obtained. Compared to ChIP-chip, ChIP-seq data can be used to locate the binding site within few tens of base pairs of the actual protein binding site. Tag densities at the binding sites are a good indicator of protein–DNA binding affinity,[14] which makes it easier to quantify and compare binding affinities of a protein to different DNA sites.[15]

Current research

[edit]

STAT1 DNA association: ChIP-seq was used to study STAT1 targets in HeLa S3 cells which are clones of the HeLa line that are used for analysis of cell populations.[16] The performance of ChIP-seq was then compared to the alternative protein–DNA interaction methods of ChIP-PCR and ChIP-chip.[17]

Nucleosome Architecture of Promoters: Using ChIP-seq, it was determined that Yeast genes seem to have a minimal nucleosome-free promoter region of 150bp in which RNA polymerase can initiate transcription.[18]

Transcription factor conservation: ChIP-seq was used to compare conservation of TFs in the forebrain and heart tissue in embryonic mice. The authors identified and validated the heart functionality of transcription enhancers, and determined that transcription enhancers for the heart are less conserved than those for the forebrain during the same developmental stage.[19]

Genome-wide ChIP-seq: ChIP-sequencing was completed on the worm C. elegans to explore genome-wide binding sites of 22 transcription factors. Up to 20% of the annotated candidate genes were assigned to transcription factors. Several transcription factors were assigned to non-coding RNA regions and may be subject to developmental or environmental variables. The functions of some of the transcription factors were also identified. Some of the transcription factors regulate genes that control other transcription factors. These genes are not regulated by other factors. Most transcription factors serve as both targets and regulators of other factors, demonstrating a network of regulation.[20]

Inferring regulatory network: ChIP-seq signal of Histone modification were shown to be more correlated with transcription factor motifs at promoters in comparison to RNA level.[21] Hence author proposed that using histone modification ChIP-seq would provide more reliable inference of gene-regulatory networks in comparison to other methods based on expression.

ChIP-seq offers an alternative to ChIP-chip. STAT1 experimental ChIP-seq data have a high degree of similarity to results obtained by ChIP-chip for the same type of experiment, with greater than 64% of peaks in shared genomic regions. Because the data are sequence reads, ChIP-seq offers a rapid analysis pipeline as long as a high-quality genome sequence is available for read mapping and the genome doesn't have repetitive content that confuses the mapping process. ChIP-seq also has the potential to detect mutations in binding-site sequences, which may directly support any observed changes in protein binding and gene regulation.

Computational analysis

[edit]

As with many high-throughput sequencing approaches, ChIP-seq generates extremely large data sets, for which appropriate computational analysis methods are required. To predict DNA-binding sites from ChIP-seq read count data, peak calling methods have been developed. One of the most popular methods[citation needed] is MACS which empirically models the shift size of ChIP-Seq tags, and uses it to improve the spatial resolution of predicted binding sites.[22] MACS is optimized for higher resolution peaks, while another popular algorithm, SICER is programmed to call for broader peaks, spanning over kilobases to megabases in order to search for broader chromatin domains. SICER is more useful for histone marks spanning gene bodies. A mathematical more rigorous method BCP (Bayesian Change Point) can be used for both sharp and broad peaks with faster computational speed,[23] see benchmark comparison of ChIP-seq peak-calling tools by Thomas et al. (2017).[24]

Another relevant computational problem is differential peak calling, which identifies significant differences in two ChIP-seq signals from distinct biological conditions. Differential peak callers segment two ChIP-seq signals and identify differential peaks using Hidden Markov Models. Examples for two-stage differential peak callers are ChIPDiff[25] and ODIN.[26]

To reduce spurious sites from ChIP-seq, multiple experimental controls can be used to detect binding sites from an IP experiment. Bay2Ctrls adopts a Bayesian model to integrate the DNA input control for the IP, the mock IP and its corresponding DNA input control to predict binding sites from the IP.[27] This approach is particularly effective for complex samples such as whole model organisms. In addition, the analysis indicates that for complex samples mock IP controls substantially outperform DNA input controls probably due to the active genomes of the samples.[27]

See also

[edit]

Similar methods

[edit]
  • CUT&RUN sequencing, antibody-targeted controlled cleavage by micrococcal nuclease instead of ChIP, allowing for enhanced signal-to-noise ratio during sequencing.
  • CUT&Tag sequencing, antibody-targeted controlled cleavage by transposase Tn5 instead of ChIP, allowing for enhanced signal-to-noise ratio during sequencing.
  • Sono-Seq, identical to ChIP-Seq but skipping the immunoprecipitation step.
  • HITS-CLIP[28][29] (also called CLIP-Seq), for finding interactions with RNA rather than DNA.
  • PAR-CLIP, another method for identifying the binding sites of cellular RNA-binding proteins (RBPs).
  • RIP-Chip, same goal and first steps, but does not use cross linking methods and uses microarray instead of sequencing
  • SELEX, a method for finding a consensus binding sequence
  • Competition-ChIP, to measure relative replacement dynamics on DNA.
  • ChiRP-Seq to measure RNA-bound DNA and proteins.
  • ChIP-exo uses exonuclease treatment to achieve up to single base-pair resolution
  • ChIP-nexus improved version of ChIP-exo to achieve up to single base-pair resolution.
  • DRIP-seq uses S9.6 antibody to precipitate three-stranded DND:RNA hybrids called R-loops.
  • TCP-seq, principally similar method to measure mRNA translation dynamics.
  • Calling Cards, uses a transposase to mark the sequence where a transcription factor binds.[30]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

ChIP sequencing

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
ChIP sequencing, commonly abbreviated as ChIP-seq, is a high-throughput genomic technique that combines (ChIP) with massively parallel next-generation sequencing to identify and map the genome-wide binding sites of DNA-associated proteins, such as transcription factors, polymerases, and modifications. The method involves crosslinking proteins to DNA, fragmenting the into small pieces (typically 200–600 base pairs), enriching specific protein-DNA complexes using antibodies, purifying the DNA, preparing a sequencing , and then performing deep sequencing to generate millions of short reads that are aligned to a for peak calling and analysis. This approach enables high-resolution localization of protein binding events, typically at the scale of tens of base pairs, revealing regulatory elements like promoters, enhancers, and insulators. ChIP-seq was developed in 2007 as an advancement over earlier techniques, building on the foundational ChIP method introduced in 1984 by Gilmour and Lis, which used to isolate protein-DNA complexes, and the ChIP-chip variant from 2000 that employed hybridization for detection but was limited by probe design biases, lower resolution, and incomplete genome coverage. The integration of next-generation sequencing technologies, such as those from Illumina, allowed ChIP-seq to overcome these limitations by providing unbiased, whole-genome profiling with higher sensitivity and reduced noise. Early applications, including those from the project, demonstrated its power in mapping binding sites and marks across human and genomes, establishing it as a cornerstone of research. Key advantages of ChIP-seq include its ability to handle complex genomes without prior knowledge of binding sites, scalability for multiple samples, and compatibility with low-input protocols that require as few as 100–10,000 cells, making it applicable to rare cell types or clinical samples. Recent innovations, such as ChIP-exo for nucleotide-level precision and ChIPmentation for streamlined library preparation using transposases, have further enhanced its efficiency and reduced technical artifacts like duplication rates. However, challenges persist, including specificity, from non-specific binding, and the need for robust computational pipelines for data processing, quality control, and interpretation. ChIP-seq has broad applications in understanding gene regulation, chromatin dynamics, and disease mechanisms, such as identifying oncogenic networks in cancer or developmental epigenomic changes in embryos. It is widely used in large-scale consortia like and Roadmap Epigenomics to catalog regulatory landscapes, informing studies on , environmental responses, and therapeutic targets. As sequencing costs continue to decline and single-cell variants emerge, ChIP-seq remains a vital tool for dissecting the functional organization of the .

Overview

Definition and Principles

ChIP sequencing, commonly abbreviated as ChIP-seq, is a technique that combines (ChIP) with high-throughput next-generation sequencing (NGS) to map protein-DNA interactions across the entire genome. Developed to overcome the limitations of earlier microarray-based methods like ChIP-chip, ChIP-seq provides high-resolution mapping at the base-pair level (typically 50-200 bp) and unbiased genome-wide coverage, enabling the precise identification of binding sites for DNA-associated proteins. This integration allows researchers to quantify and localize interactions that were previously challenging to detect at scale. The fundamental principles of ChIP-seq rely on the specific enrichment of DNA fragments bound by target proteins through antibody-mediated immunoprecipitation, followed by massively parallel sequencing to determine their genomic coordinates. In the procedure, protein-DNA complexes are first stabilized by covalent crosslinking, after which chromatin is sheared into small fragments; antibodies specific to the protein of interest (e.g., a transcription factor or modified histone) capture these complexes, isolating associated DNA. The enriched DNA is then converted into a sequencing library and analyzed using NGS platforms, such as Illumina, which generate millions of short reads that are aligned to a reference genome to reveal regions of enrichment, known as peaks, indicative of binding events. This approach yields quantitative data on binding affinity and distribution, with peak sharpness often reflecting the protein's interaction dynamics. Biologically, ChIP-seq is grounded in the rationale that proteins like transcription factors, polymerases, and histone variants dynamically regulate , structure, and epigenetic states . By capturing these interactions in their native cellular context, the technique elucidates mechanisms such as transcriptional activation or repression, where, for instance, histone methylations correlate with promoter activity or silencing. It also facilitates the study of positioning, which influences DNA accessibility and influences processes like replication and repair. At a high level, the ChIP-seq proceeds from cellular crosslinking and enrichment to sequencing and computational mapping, culminating in the visualization of genome-wide binding profiles that inform regulatory networks without relying on prior sequence predictions.

Historical Development

The (ChIP) technique was first developed in 1984 by David S. Gilmour and John T. Lis to study protein-DNA interactions, specifically the association of with promoters in . Initially designed for low-throughput analysis of specific genomic loci using Southern blotting or PCR, ChIP enabled direct examination of protein binding in native contexts, addressing limitations of methods. Throughout the , ChIP remained focused on targeted studies, but the advent of technology paved the way for genome-wide applications. A seminal advancement came in 2000 with the introduction of ChIP-chip by Bing Ren and colleagues, who mapped the binding sites of the yeast Gal4 across the genome using , achieving kilobase-scale resolution and revealing previously unknown regulatory targets. The emergence of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in the mid-2000s revolutionized ChIP by enabling ChIP-seq, which combined ChIP enrichment with high-throughput sequencing for unbiased, genome-wide profiling at higher resolution. The first demonstration of ChIP-seq was reported in 2007 by David S. Johnson and colleagues, who used Illumina's Genome Analyzer to map the neuron-restrictive silencer factor (NRSF) binding sites in human CD4+ T cells, identifying over 1,900 sites with approximately 100-base-pair precision, far surpassing the kilobase resolution of ChIP-chip. Concurrently, several groups extended ChIP-seq to mammalian epigenomic features: Artem Barski et al. profiled 24 histone modifications in human CD4+ T cells, revealing distinct chromatin states; Gordon Robertson et al. mapped binding in response to interferon-gamma; and Tarjei S. Mikkelsen et al. characterized chromatin states in mouse embryonic stem cells, demonstrating the technique's utility for complex genomes. These studies established ChIP-seq as a standard tool, with resolution improving from the ~1 kb of ChIP-chip to ~50-200 bp, limited primarily by sonication fragment sizes. Between 2008 and 2010, ChIP-seq saw rapid advancements in applicability to mammalian systems and integration with diverse NGS platforms, enhancing throughput and accessibility. Researchers adapted the method for platforms like ' SOLiD and Roche's 454, as demonstrated in studies mapping binding in cell lines, which provided longer reads for better assembly in repetitive regions. Improvements in preparation and sequencing depth addressed biases in low-input samples, enabling broader adoption for modifications and in larger genomes. A major milestone occurred in 2012 with the project's release of standardized ChIP-seq guidelines and datasets, which generated comprehensive epigenomic maps across hundreds of cell types and tissues, standardizing protocols and accelerating comparative analyses. By 2015, ChIP-seq had evolved to support single-cell applications, marking a shift toward high-resolution, heterogeneous profiling. Aviv Rotem and colleagues introduced single-cell ChIP-seq, applying it to modifications in individual embryonic stem cells to uncover subpopulations defined by states, with effective resolution approaching single-base-pair precision through optimized exonuclease-based variants like ChIP-exo. Following this, the technique continued to advance with the introduction of cleavage-assisted methods, such as CUT&RUN in 2017, which tethers micrococcal to antibodies for targeted cleavage and reduced background noise, and CUT&Tag in 2019, which uses protein A-Tn5 fusions for integrated fragmentation and library preparation, enabling ultra-low input (as few as 1,000 cells) and higher efficiency. As of 2025, these innovations have further solidified ChIP-seq's role in , with ongoing developments in spatial and multi-omics integrations (detailed in the Emerging Innovations subsection). This progression—from low-throughput locus-specific ChIP in the , to kilobase-scale genome-wide mapping via ChIP-chip in 2000, to base-pair resolution in bulk, single-cell, and cleavage-based ChIP-seq variants by the —has established the technique as a cornerstone of genomic research.

Applications

Protein-DNA Binding Analysis

ChIP sequencing (ChIP-seq) serves as a primary tool for identifying genome-wide binding sites of sequence-specific transcription factors (TFs), enabling the detection of motifs and target regions that regulate . In seminal work, ChIP-seq was used to map interactions for TFs like the neuron-restrictive silencer factor (NRSF), revealing thousands of high-confidence binding sites with associated sequence motifs, demonstrating its superiority over array-based methods for comprehensive coverage. For instance, applications to the tumor suppressor have uncovered its binding preferences at promoter and distal regulatory elements, often featuring canonical p53 response elements (e.g., RRRCWWGYYY), which are enriched in stress-response genes. Similarly, ChIP-seq profiling of the pioneer factor FOXA1 in and cells has identified dynamic binding at chromatin-accessible sites, highlighting its role in opening compacted regions for subsequent TF recruitment. Experimental design for TF ChIP-seq emphasizes selection to ensure specificity and efficiency, as validated antibodies (e.g., those tested by ) minimize off-target enrichment and maximize recovery of true binding events. High-quality , often monoclonal and epitope-validated against recombinant TF fragments, are crucial for low-background , particularly for TFs with low abundance or transient binding. Input serves as an essential control, representing total genomic DNA before to normalize for sequencing biases, copy number variations, and non-specific enrichment during peak calling and background subtraction. Replicates (typically 2-3 biological) are recommended to assess , with metrics like the fraction of reads in peaks (FRiP >1% for TFs) guiding . Quantitatively, TF occupancy in ChIP-seq is measured by read density normalized to input or total sequencing depth, where higher pileups at enriched regions correlate with stronger binding affinity, though indirect measures like disassociation constants require complementary assays. For example, peak intensity scales with TF concentration and motif strength, allowing inference of affinity hierarchies across sites; in studies, sites with optimal motifs exhibit 5-10-fold higher read enrichment than weaker ones. This approach distinguishes high-affinity core promoters from low-affinity distal enhancers, providing insights into regulatory strength without direct biophysical measurements. In gene regulation studies, ChIP-seq has facilitated enhancer identification in cancer genomics, such as mapping TF-bound enhancers in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets for breast and prostate tumors, where FOXA1 occupancy at super-enhancers drives androgen receptor signaling and tumor progression. These mappings reveal how TF binding rewires enhancer landscapes, contributing to oncogenic states in over 10,000 TCGA samples analyzed via integrated platforms. Furthermore, integrating ChIP-seq with RNA-seq enables regulatory network inference by linking TF binding proximity to expression changes; for p53, co-analysis shows direct targets upregulated post-DNA damage, forming networks with >1,000 inferred edges in stress-response pathways. This integration prioritizes functional bindings, filtering spurious sites and elucidating context-specific regulation.

Epigenomic Profiling

ChIP-seq has become a cornerstone for profiling modifications, enabling the genome-wide identification of epigenetic marks that regulate structure and . lysine 4 trimethylation () is predominantly enriched at active promoters, marking transcription start sites of s poised for expression, as demonstrated in early high-resolution maps of human CD4+ T cells where peaks correlated strongly with occupancy and active transcription. Similarly, lysine 27 acetylation (H3K27ac) serves as a hallmark of active enhancers, distinguishing them from poised elements marked by H3K4 monomethylation alone; this distinction was established through comparative ChIP-seq analyses showing H3K27ac enrichment at distal regulatory regions driving cell-type-specific activation. These modifications, along with others like for repression, provide insights into the epigenetic landscape underlying developmental and cellular processes. Large-scale consortia have leveraged ChIP-seq to generate comprehensive epigenomic atlases, facilitating the study of cell-type-specific regulatory elements. The NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Mapping Consortium's 2015 integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes utilized ChIP-seq to profile core histone marks across diverse tissues and cell types, revealing dynamic patterns that link epigenetic states to lineage commitment and disease susceptibility. Such mappings have elucidated biological processes like X-chromosome inactivation, where ChIP-seq reveals sequential deposition of repressive marks such as H3K27me3 and loss of active marks like H3K4me3 on the inactive X chromosome during early embryonic development in female mammals. In genomic imprinting, ChIP-seq has shown parent-of-origin-specific histone modifications, including enriched H3K4me3 at paternal alleles of imprinted genes in mouse embryos, reinforcing monoallelic expression through chromatin-based silencing mechanisms. Beyond histones, ChIP-seq variants extend epigenomic profiling to non-histone proteins involved in dynamics, such as (Pol II), which is mapped to assess transcription elongation rates and pausing. Genome-wide ChIP-seq of Pol II, often with phosphorylation-specific antibodies, has uncovered heterogeneous elongation speeds across genes, with slower rates at exons and acceleration in gene bodies, influencing and co-transcriptional regulation. In disease contexts, ChIP-seq has highlighted aberrant epigenomic alterations, such as altered H3K4 patterns in leukemia stem cells from patients, where increased at oncogenes correlates with enhanced self-renewal and therapeutic resistance. These applications underscore ChIP-seq's versatility in dissecting the epigenetic contributions to pathological states.

Experimental Protocol

Chromatin Immunoprecipitation

Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) is the foundational biochemical enrichment step in ChIP sequencing, capturing specific protein-DNA interactions from native . The process begins with chemical cross-linking to stabilize these interactions , typically using , which forms reversible methylene bridges between nearby amino and groups. fixation is performed by adding 1% to cell cultures or tissue samples for 8-15 minutes at , followed by quenching with to halt the reaction and prevent over-cross-linking. This step preserves transient protein-DNA associations but must balance fixation efficiency with accessibility for subsequent recognition. Following fixation, cells or nuclei are lysed in a buffer containing detergents like SDS or to release while maintaining cross-linked complexes. The is then fragmented into sizes suitable for , ideally 100-300 base pairs, to ensure resolution of binding sites in downstream sequencing. Fragmentation is achieved primarily through , which uses high-frequency waves to mechanically shear DNA in a unbiased manner, or alternatively via enzymatic digestion with micrococcal nuclease (MNase), which preferentially cuts at between nucleosomes for studies requiring nucleosome-level precision. protocols typically involve 10-20 cycles of 10-30 seconds pulses in a dedicated sonicator bath, with conditions optimized empirically to avoid excessive heat that could damage epitopes. Enzymatic shearing, while gentler on protein epitopes, may introduce sequence biases and is less common for genome-wide applications. The sheared chromatin is then incubated overnight at 4°C with a high-specificity antibody targeting the protein of interest, such as a histone modification or transcription factor. Antibody concentrations range from 1-10 µg per immunoprecipitation, selected based on validation via Western blot or immunofluorescence to confirm specificity and minimize off-target binding. Immune complexes are captured using protein A- or G-conjugated magnetic beads, which bind the antibody's Fc region, followed by extensive washing to remove non-specific interactions. Cross-links are reversed by heating at 65°C with proteinase K digestion, and the enriched DNA is purified using phenol-chloroform extraction or column-based kits, yielding 1-10 ng of DNA for library preparation. Essential controls mitigate artifacts and enable normalization. Input DNA, representing total cross-linked before , serves as a baseline for background subtraction. Non-specific IgG antibodies provide a negative control to assess non-target binding, while spike-in controls—such as a fixed amount of exogenous chromatin from a different species (e.g., added to mammalian samples)—allow quantitative normalization for variations in cell number, ChIP efficiency, or global signal changes across conditions. These spike-ins are added post-lysis but pre-, typically at 1-5% of total chromatin, and their enrichment is monitored to scale experimental signals. Optimization is critical for reproducibility, particularly fixation time, which affects epitope preservation: shorter times (5-10 minutes) enhance access but risk under-stabilizing weak interactions, while longer exposures (15-20 minutes) improve stability at the cost of solubility and masking. Shearing efficiency is verified by or Bioanalyzer, aiming for a smear centered at 100-300 ; uneven fragmentation can lead to biased enrichment or low yields. validation against multiple lots and replicates (at least biological duplicates) ensures consistency, as per standards. Common pitfalls include over-fixation, which reduces solubility and increases non-specific binding by masking epitopes or trapping irrelevant proteins, often resulting in high background signals. Under-fragmentation from insufficient yields large DNA pieces that hinder efficiency and downstream sequencing uniformity. Non-specific binding can be exacerbated by inadequate washing or low-quality sera, leading to false positives; this is mitigated by pre-clearing with beads and using validated antibodies. Low DNA yields from inefficient cross-linking or poor cell are frequent in primary tissues, necessitating fresh samples and optimized lysis buffers.

Sequencing Library Preparation

Sequencing library preparation for ChIP-seq begins with purified DNA fragments obtained from , typically ranging from 100-300 base pairs in length due to prior or enzymatic . This step converts these fragments into a format compatible with high-throughput sequencing platforms, primarily Illumina systems, by adding necessary adapters and amplifying the material while minimizing biases introduced by enzymatic processes. The process starts with end-repair to create blunt-ended DNA fragments suitable for subsequent modifications. The ChIP-enriched DNA is incubated with a mixture of T4 DNA polymerase, , and T4 polynucleotide in the presence of dNTPs and ATP, typically at for 30-45 minutes, followed by purification using column-based to remove enzymes and unincorporated . Next, A-tailing adds a single residue to the 3' ends of the blunt fragments using (3' to 5' exo-minus) and dATP at 37°C for 30 minutes, again followed by purification; this step facilitates efficient ligation of T-overhang . Adapter ligation then attaches platform-specific , such as Illumina TruSeq adapters, to both ends of the A-tailed fragments using T4 in a quick ligation buffer at for 15 minutes, enabling cluster generation and sequencing. To generate sufficient material for sequencing while limiting amplification bias, the ligated libraries undergo PCR enrichment using high-fidelity polymerases like Phusion or KAPA HiFi, with 8-15 cycles determined optimally via qPCR to avoid over-amplification that could skew representation of GC-rich regions. Size selection is performed post-ligation or post-PCR, often via gel electrophoresis (2% agarose) to isolate fragments of 200-300 base pair inserts or using bead-based methods like AMPure XP for dual-size selection, ensuring removal of adapter dimers and large fragments. Quantification involves fluorometric assays like Qubit for total DNA and qPCR (e.g., KAPA Library Quantification Kit) for accurate molarity of adapter-ligated molecules, complemented by Bioanalyzer or TapeStation analysis to confirm fragment size distribution and detect any anomalies like over-amplification peaks. Prepared libraries are sequenced on Illumina platforms, with single-end reads (50-75 bp) historically sufficient for ChIP-seq, though paired-end (50-100 bp) is preferred for marks to better resolve broad domains. Typical sequencing depths are 20-25 million uniquely mapped reads for transcription factors and narrow marks like , escalating to 40-100 million for broad modifications such as to capture diffuse enrichment patterns adequately. To mitigate PCR-induced duplicates, unique molecular identifiers (UMIs)—short random sequences incorporated during adapter ligation—enable post-sequencing deduplication by collapsing reads sharing the same UMI, improving quantitative accuracy especially in low-input scenarios. The evolution of platforms has enhanced ChIP-seq throughput and reduced costs: early implementations in used the Illumina Genome Analyzer II for short 27-36 reads at low (e.g., one sample per lane), while modern NovaSeq systems support billions of reads per run, allowing up to 96-plexing of libraries and generating terabases of data at under $1,000 per genome equivalent, facilitating large-scale epigenomic studies.

Data Processing

Quality Assessment

Quality assessment in ChIP sequencing (ChIP-seq) is essential to ensure the reliability, reproducibility, and artifact-free nature of the data, encompassing evaluations of both raw sequencing reads and processed alignments. Pre-alignment quality control focuses on raw FASTQ files to detect issues such as low base quality scores, adapter contamination, or overrepresented sequences, using tools like FastQC, which generates modular reports on per-base quality, sequence duplication levels, and GC content bias. Fragment size distribution is another key pre-alignment metric, ideally targeting 100–300 base pairs to reflect nucleosome-protected DNA, and can be estimated from paired-end data or cross-correlation analysis to confirm appropriate library preparation. Post-alignment quality control builds on alignment as a prerequisite step, assessing mapped reads for enrichment over input controls and overall data integrity. Enrichment metrics, such as the Normalized Strand Cross-correlation coefficient (NSC) and Relative Strand Cross-correlation coefficient (RSC), quantify and strand bias, respectively, with guidelines recommending NSC > 1.05 and RSC > 0.8 for acceptable datasets. Duplication rates are evaluated using Picard tools like MarkDuplicates and EstimateLibraryComplexity, where non-reference fraction (NRF) values > 0.9 indicate sufficient library complexity and low PCR artifacts. Reproducibility across biological replicates is measured via the Irreproducible Discovery Rate (IDR), with thresholds below 1% for optimal peak overlap, as standardized by for experiments. Artifact detection is critical to identify sources of bias, including mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) contamination, where the proportion of reads mapping to mtDNA should be minimized (typically <5%) to avoid skewing nuclear signal assessments. ENCODE blacklist regions, comprising repetitive or high-signal artifact-prone loci like satellite repeats and assembly gaps, are filtered to exclude mapping artifacts, with removal improving peak quality metrics in up to 20% of datasets. Sequencing depth adequacy is assessed by ensuring at least 20 million usable fragments for point-source factors (e.g., transcription factors) and narrow-peak histone marks, and 45 million for broad-peak histone marks, per current ENCODE standards (as of 2024), while minimum enrichment ratios over input, such as >5-fold in targeted regions, establish baseline signal strength before downstream analyses like peak calling. Best practices involve comparative pre- and post-alignment QC to track improvements from filtering, alongside visualization tools like the Integrative Genomics Viewer (IGV) for inspecting uniform coverage across chromosomes and identifying localized biases or gaps in enrichment profiles. These steps ensure data passes thresholds for reproducibility and minimal artifacts, directly impacting the validity of subsequent computational analyses.

Read Alignment and Preprocessing

Read alignment is a foundational step in ChIP-seq , where sequencing reads are mapped to a to identify enriched regions. Commonly used aligners include BWA-MEM and Bowtie2, which efficiently handle short reads typical of ChIP-seq experiments by employing Burrows-Wheeler transform-based algorithms for rapid and accurate mapping. For human samples, the hg38 assembly serves as the standard , selected for its comprehensive and improved contiguity over prior versions like hg19. Prior to alignment, the is indexed using tools such as BWA or Bowtie2 to facilitate quick lookups, often complemented by for generating sequence alignment map (SAM) indices. Alignment parameters are tuned to manage multimapping reads—common in repetitive genomic regions—via options like Bowtie2's --no-mixed mode, which discards mixed concordant/discordant pairs to prioritize uniquely mapping reads and reduce false positives. Following alignment, reads are converted to binary alignment/map (BAM) format using SAMtools for compact storage and efficient querying. The BAM files are then sorted by genomic coordinates to enable downstream operations, such as duplicate removal, which mitigates PCR amplification biases by identifying and excluding reads originating from the same DNA fragment. Tools like Picard MarkDuplicates or SAMtools rmdup are employed, removing optical and PCR duplicates based on start/end coordinates for single-end data or proper pairing for paired-end reads, typically reducing read counts by 20-40% while enhancing signal specificity. Additionally, blacklist filtering eliminates reads mapping to artifact-prone regions, such as centromeres or high-signal noise areas identified by ENCODE, using intersection tools like BEDTools to intersect BAM files with blacklist BED files and retain only non-overlapping reads. Paired-end concordancy is verified during this stage, ensuring reads form expected insert sizes (e.g., 150-500 bp) to filter discordant pairs that may arise from sequencing errors or multimapping. Preprocessing concludes with normalization to enable cross-sample comparisons, addressing variations in sequencing depth and . Reads per million (RPM) normalization scales counts by total mapped reads divided by one million, providing a simple baseline for visualizing enrichment tracks in formats like bigWig. For quantitative analyses, particularly in modification ChIP-seq where global changes occur, spike-in scaling incorporates exogenous (e.g., from ) as an internal standard; the scaling factor is calculated as the ratio of spike-in reads in the sample to the reference, reversing initial RPM normalization to correct for biases like cell number variations. PCR bias correction further refines data through downsampling to equalize complexities or modeling amplification effects, ensuring robust input for subsequent peak identification. These steps collectively produce cleaned BAM files suitable for quality assessment metrics, such as of reads in peaks (FRiP).

Computational Analysis

Peak Identification

Peak identification in ChIP-seq involves detecting genomic regions with statistically significant enrichment of sequencing reads, indicating potential protein-DNA binding sites or modifications. These peaks are identified from aligned read data, typically in BAM format, by applying statistical models to distinguish signal from background noise. Core methods for peak calling include model-based approaches, such as MACS2, which employs a dynamic to model local background lambda values and control for (FDR) through empirical estimation from control samples. MACS2 extends the original MACS framework by better handling paired-end data, improving accuracy in varied experimental conditions. In contrast, window-based scanning methods, like those in , slide fixed-size windows (e.g., 200-1000 bp for transcription factors or histones) across the to identify read clusters exceeding expected background levels, often using hypergeometric or Poisson tests for significance. Key parameters in these methods include bandwidth for read densities—defaulting to 300 in MACS2 to approximate half the average fragment size—and statistical thresholds such as a cutoff of 10^{-5} to filter candidate regions, with q-values applied for multiple testing correction via Benjamini-Hochberg procedure to maintain FDR below 5%. For differential peak analysis across conditions like treatment versus control, tools such as DiffBind integrate peak counts into a consensus set and apply negative binomial-based models from DESeq2 to detect binding changes, normalizing for library size or spike-ins to account for technical biases. Outputs from peak callers are standardized in BED format files, listing peak coordinates (, start, end), enrichment scores, and p/q-values for integration with downstream tools. MACS2 additionally provides summit calling to pinpoint the precise position of maximum enrichment within each peak, aiding in motif discovery. Validation of identified peaks often involves assessing overlap with experimentally validated binding sites from databases like , where high-performing callers like MACS achieve over 80% recovery of known sites. Performance is further evaluated using (ROC) curves, plotting sensitivity (true positive rate) against specificity (1 - false positive rate) across varying thresholds to compare algorithm robustness.

Downstream Interpretation

Following peak identification, downstream interpretation of ChIP-seq data focuses on deriving biological meaning from enriched genomic regions through , motif discovery, multi-omics integration, functional enrichment, and visualization techniques. These steps transform raw peak coordinates into insights about protein-DNA interactions, regulatory mechanisms, and cellular processes. Peak assigns identified binding sites to nearby genomic features, such as genes, promoters, enhancers, or distal intergenic regions, based on proximity to transcriptional start sites (TSS) or other regulatory elements. The software suite provides the annotatePeaks.pl tool, which maps peaks to genomic coordinates using reference annotations, calculates distances to the nearest TSS, and retrieves associated gene lists for further analysis. Similarly, the ChIPseeker R/ package annotates peaks by integrating with TxDb or ChIPpeakAnno databases, enabling assignment to promoters (e.g., within 1-3 kb of TSS), exons, introns, or 5'/3' untranslated regions, while accounting for strand orientation and multiple peak-gene associations. These tools facilitate prioritization of peaks likely to influence gene regulation, such as those overlapping enhancers defined by marks like H3K27ac. Motif analysis within annotated peaks uncovers sequence patterns indicative of transcription factor (TF) binding sites, including de novo discovery of novel motifs and enrichment of known ones. The MEME suite's MEME-ChIP tool performs de novo motif discovery on peak-centered sequences (typically 200-500 bp windows), identifying overrepresented motifs using expectation-maximization algorithms optimized for large ChIP-seq datasets, and scans for their central enrichment relative to peak summits. For known motif enrichment, tools like those in the MEME suite or HOMER compare discovered motifs against databases such as JASPAR or TRANSFAC, revealing co-occurring TF binding sites that suggest cooperative regulation; for instance, analysis might detect enrichment of AP-1 motifs alongside a queried TF, implying combinatorial control. This step is crucial for validating target specificity and identifying potential cofactors. Integrating ChIP-seq peaks with complementary datasets provides a systems-level view of regulatory networks. Overlaying ChIP-seq with highlights open regions accessible to TFs, allowing identification of functional enhancers where binding correlates with accessibility changes across conditions. Correlation with data links binding events to target levels, such as by computing enrichment of differentially expressed genes near peaks using methods like GREAT, which extends regulatory domains up to 1 Mb from TSS for distal predictions. Incorporation of data further elucidates 3D interactions, associating peaks with looped enhancers or insulators to infer long-range regulation. Functional enrichment analysis of genes associated with annotated peaks reveals overrepresented biological themes, pathways, and processes. Tools like perform (GO) term enrichment on gene lists, clustering terms into categories such as "" or "" using hypergeometric tests adjusted for multiple comparisons, while integrating pathway mappings to highlight dysregulated networks. This identifies, for example, enrichment of immune response GO terms in peaks bound by , providing context for the TF's role in . Visualization aids in interpreting differential binding and patterns across samples or conditions. Heatmaps display normalized read counts or enrichment signals around peak centers or TSS, clustered by similarity to reveal condition-specific binding profiles, often generated using tools like deepTools. The DiffBind supports volcano plots for differential binding analysis, plotting log2 fold changes against -log10 p-values from edgeR or DESeq2 models, highlighting significantly altered sites (e.g., gains or losses in binding upon stimulus) while accounting for replicates and covariates like sequencing depth. These representations emphasize key regulatory dynamics without exhaustive enumeration of all peaks.

Limitations and Advances

Technical Challenges

ChIP-seq is susceptible to several biases that can distort the representation of protein-DNA interactions. Antibody cross-reactivity, where antibodies bind non-specifically to off-target proteins or epitopes, leads to false positive peaks and reduced specificity, with studies showing that approximately 25% of tested antibodies fail specificity validation in assessments. PCR amplification during library preparation introduces skews by preferentially amplifying certain fragments, particularly those with favorable or length, resulting in overrepresentation of high-complexity sequences and library diversity loss if cycles exceed 12-15. Additionally, biases affect mappability, as GC-rich regions are more efficiently sequenced and mapped, leading to uneven coverage and artificial enrichment in such loci unless corrected. Resolution in ChIP-seq is inherently limited by fragment size, typically 150-300 bp after , which broadens peak widths and prevents single-basepair precision for binding sites that span only 6-20 bp. Sequencing depth further constrains resolution, with at least 10-20 million uniquely mapped reads required for robust peak detection in genomes, though insufficient depth (<5 million reads) results in missed weak signals and higher false negative rates. These challenges are exacerbated in low-input samples, such as those from fewer than 10^5 cells, where signal-to-noise ratios drop dramatically, limiting applicability to rare cell types or clinical specimens without specialized protocols. Reproducibility in ChIP-seq is compromised by batch effects arising from variations in experimental conditions, such as lots or sequencing platforms, which introduce systematic variability exceeding biological differences in multi-lab datasets. Fixation variability, particularly the duration of cross-linking (typically 5-15 minutes), alters accessibility and efficiency, leading to inconsistent enrichment across replicates for the same protein. To quantify concordance, the Irreproducible Discovery Rate (IDR) metric, recommended by guidelines, evaluates peak rank consistency between replicates, with thresholds like IDR < 0.1 indicating high reproducibility but often rejecting true peaks in low-signal datasets. The trade-off between specificity and sensitivity in ChIP-seq manifests in elevated false positives within hyper-chromatinized or open regions, such as active promoters, where non-specific enrichment—termed "phantom peaks"—occurs due to higher accessibility and background noise, skewing motif analysis and requiring stringent controls like input DNA normalization. Compared to ChIP-chip, ChIP-seq offers superior dynamic range and signal-to-noise ratios, enabling detection of weaker bindings that hybridization-based arrays often miss due to saturation effects, though PCR and mapping biases can still limit quantitative accuracy for subtle interactions. Quality assessment metrics, such as normalized strand cross-correlation, can help mitigate some biases but do not fully resolve these systemic issues.

Emerging Innovations

Recent advancements in single-cell ChIP-seq have enabled the profiling of modifications and binding in individual cells, particularly for rare cell types that are challenging to isolate in bulk assays. One key method, single-cell immunocleavage sequencing (scChIC-seq), introduced in 2019, uses micrococcal fused to antibodies to cleave specifically at target epitopes, allowing detection of marks like and in single human white blood cells with sufficient resolution for clustering cell types based on epigenetic states. This approach has evolved, with extensions like sortChIC (2022) incorporating to enrich subpopulations prior to profiling, enhancing sensitivity for dynamic changes during differentiation. Furthermore, scChIC-seq data can be integrated with single-nucleus (snATAC-seq) using computational frameworks like Seurat, which align multimodal datasets to reveal correlations between accessibility and epigenetic modifications at the single-cell level, as demonstrated in immune cell atlases. To address the high cell input requirements of traditional ChIP-seq, low-input adaptations have emerged, drastically reducing the number of cells needed while maintaining signal quality. CUT&RUN, developed in 2017, employs targeted cleavage by - or G-MNase fusions to release antibody-bound fragments directly in native nuclei, requiring as few as 3,000 cells for robust mark profiling and outperforming ChIP-seq in . Building on this, CUT&Tag (2019) integrates Tn5 with antibody-tethered , enabling tagmentation and library preparation from approximately 1,000 cells or fewer, with applications extending to single-cell resolution for precise mapping of low-abundance targets like transcription factors. These methods minimize background noise from artifacts and have been widely adopted for precious samples, such as primary tissues or clinical biopsies. Spatial multi-omics integrations are advancing ChIP-seq toward tissue-level epigenome mapping, combining epigenetic profiles with positional data to uncover spatially regulated . Emerging spatial epigenomics techniques, such as double-barcoded profiling (2025), enable state cartography in fresh-frozen or FFPE tissues by adapting ChIP-like enrichment with spatial barcoding, resolving heterogeneous modifications across cellular neighborhoods. These are often paired with platforms like Slide-seq, which uses bead arrays for mapping, allowing joint analysis of ChIP-derived epigenomes and transcriptomes to infer regulatory interactions in complex tissues, as seen in brain development studies. Such integrations, reviewed in 2025 advances, facilitate high-resolution deconvolution of dynamics , generalizing methods from transcriptomics to epigenomics. Artificial intelligence enhancements are improving ChIP-seq analysis through models for peak prediction and interpretation, reducing reliance on experimental replicates. Post-2020 approaches, such as LanceOtron (2022), use convolutional neural networks to recognize peak shapes in sequencing data, outperforming traditional callers like MACS2 in low-signal datasets for , ChIP-seq, and DNase-seq by integrating enrichment metrics with image-based recognition. Similarly, Virtual ChIP-seq (2022) employs graph neural networks to predict binding sites across cell types by learning from integrated and existing ChIP data, achieving high precision without new experiments and enabling imputation for understudied factors. These models enhance downstream tasks like motif discovery and have been applied to large-scale epigenomic atlases for scalable regulatory inference. As of 2025, innovations include long-read ChIP-seq adaptations using PacBio for haplotype-phased epigenetic modifications and -based epitope tagging to improve antibody specificity. Long-read platforms like PacBio HiFi sequencing, combined with ChIP enrichment, allow phasing of marks over kilobase distances, resolving allele-specific modifications that short-read methods miss, as integrated in multi-omic workflows for . epitope tagging ChIP-seq (CETCh-seq) inserts or other tags at endogenous loci via editing, enabling reliable pull-downs for transcription factors lacking quality antibodies. These updates address longstanding challenges in resolution and validation, paving the way for comprehensive epigenomic studies.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6727970/
  2. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg2641
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7546943/
  4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17540862/
  5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2007.05.009
  6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6203812/
  7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10802651/
  8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.07.024
  9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0424-6
  10. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1141319
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3272258/
  12. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1911584116
  13. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3431496/
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3541830/
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3591838/
  16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5826647/
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6981605/
  18. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8313745/
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3191340/
  20. https://www.encodeproject.org/documents/4f73fbc3-956e-47ae-aa2d-41a7df552c81/@@download/attachment/Ren_ChIP_Library_Preparation_v060614.pdf
  21. https://www.nature.com/articles/nmeth1068
  22. https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-016-3135-y
  23. https://knowledge.illumina.com/library-preparation/general/library-preparation-general-reference_material-list/000003750
  24. https://www.encodeproject.org/chip-seq/histone/
  25. https://www.encodeproject.org/data-standards/chip-seq/
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6859498/
  27. https://www.illumina.com/company/news-center/feature-articles/25-greatest-impacts-in-25-years--a-look-back-at-illumina-and-the.html
  28. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/
  29. https://www.encodeproject.org/chip-seq/transcription_factor/
  30. https://gatk.broadinstitute.org/hc/en-us/articles/360036455072-EstimateLibraryComplexity-Picard
  31. https://www.encodeproject.org/chip-seq/
  32. https://github.com/ENCODE-DCC/chip-seq-pipeline2
  33. https://www.htslib.org/doc/samtools.html
  34. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-26865-w
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4597324/
  36. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3342857/
  37. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11358820/
  38. https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-2008-9-9-r137
  39. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011471
  40. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/496521v1
  41. http://homer.ucsd.edu/homer/ngs/peaks.html
  42. https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/DiffBind/inst/doc/DiffBind.pdf
  43. https://hbctraining.github.io/Intro-to-ChIPseq/lessons/05_peak_calling_macs.html
  44. https://github.com/macs3-project/MACS/wiki/Advanced:-Call-peaks-using-MACS2-subcommands
  45. https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/DiffBind.html
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4473780/
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5668949/
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5444249/
  49. https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms7033
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8515842/
  51. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4860130/
  52. https://www.encodeproject.org/software/idr/
  53. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/43/14/6959/2902865
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3053263/
  55. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30923384/
  56. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-022-01260-3
  57. https://satijalab.org/seurat/articles/seurat5_atacseq_integration_vignette
  58. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09982-5
  59. https://www.epicypher.com/resources/blog/chip-seq-vs-cutrun-vs-cuttag-which-should-you-use/
  60. https://genome.cshlp.org/content/early/2025/05/13/gr.280305.124.full.pdf
  61. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09478-x
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12569958/
  63. https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/38/18/4255/6648462
  64. https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-022-02690-2
  65. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-64655-4
  66. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-48615-4
  67. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4579343/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.