Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-3135-y
Title: A comparative study of ChIP-seq sequencing library preparation methods
Authors: Sundaram, A.Y.M
Hughes, T
Biondi, S
Bolduc, N
Bowman, S.K
Camilli, A
Chew, Y.C
Couture, C
Farmer, A
Jerome, J.P
Lazinski, D.W
McUsic, A
Peng, X
Shazand, K
Xu, F 
Lyle, R
Gilfillan, G.D
Keywords: reagent
Article
controlled study
DNA sequence
gene amplification
gene library
gene mapping
human
human cell
intermethod comparison
reproducibility
sensitivity and specificity
sequence analysis
chromatin immunoprecipitation
chromosomal mapping
DNA sequence
genome
genomics
high throughput sequencing
procedures
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation
Chromosome Mapping
Gene Library
Genome
Genomics
High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
Humans
Reproducibility of Results
Sequence Analysis, DNA
Issue Date: 2016
Citation: Sundaram, A.Y.M, Hughes, T, Biondi, S, Bolduc, N, Bowman, S.K, Camilli, A, Chew, Y.C, Couture, C, Farmer, A, Jerome, J.P, Lazinski, D.W, McUsic, A, Peng, X, Shazand, K, Xu, F, Lyle, R, Gilfillan, G.D (2016). A comparative study of ChIP-seq sequencing library preparation methods. BMC Genomics 17 (1) : 816. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-3135-y
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: Background: ChIP-seq is the primary technique used to investigate genome-wide protein-DNA interactions. As part of this procedure, immunoprecipitated DNA must undergo "library preparation" to enable subsequent high-throughput sequencing. To facilitate the analysis of biopsy samples and rare cell populations, there has been a recent proliferation of methods allowing sequencing library preparation from low-input DNA amounts. However, little information exists on the relative merits, performance, comparability and biases inherent to these procedures. Notably, recently developed single-cell ChIP procedures employing microfluidics must also employ library preparation reagents to allow downstream sequencing. Results: In this study, seven methods designed for low-input DNA/ChIP-seq sample preparation (Accel-NGS® 2S, Bowman-method, HTML-PCR, SeqPlex™, DNA SMART™, TELP and ThruPLEX®) were performed on five replicates of 1 ng and 0.1 ng input H3K4me3 ChIP material, and compared to a "gold standard" reference PCR-free dataset. The performance of each method was examined for the prevalence of unmappable reads, amplification-derived duplicate reads, reproducibility, and for the sensitivity and specificity of peak calling. Conclusions: We identified consistent high performance in a subset of the tested reagents, which should aid researchers in choosing the most appropriate reagents for their studies. Furthermore, we expect this work to drive future advances by identifying and encouraging use of the most promising methods and reagents. The results may also aid judgements on how comparable are existing datasets that have been prepared with different sample library preparation reagents. © 2016 The Author(s).
Source Title: BMC Genomics
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/181333
ISSN: 14712164
DOI: 10.1186/s12864-016-3135-y
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_s12864-016-3135-y.pdf2.11 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons