MOTIVATION: Regulatory proteins associate with the genome either by directly binding cognate DNA motifs or via protein-protein interactions with other regulators. Each recruitment mechanism may be associated with distinct motifs and may also result in distinct characteristic patterns in high-resolution protein-DNA binding assays. For example, the ChIP-exo protocol precisely characterizes protein-DNA crosslinking patterns by combining chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) with 5' → 3' exonuclease digestion. Since different regulatory complexes will result in different protein-DNA crosslinking signatures, analysis of ChIP-exo tag enrichment patterns should enable detection of multiple protein-DNA binding modes for a given regulatory protein. However, current ChIP-exo analysis methods either treat all binding events as being of a uniform type or rely on motifs to cluster binding events into subtypes. RESULTS: To systematically detect multiple protein-DNA interaction modes in a single ChIP-exo experiment, we introduce the ChIP-exo mixture model (ChExMix). ChExMix probabilistically models the genomic locations and subtype memberships of binding events using both ChIP-exo tag distribution patterns and DNA motifs. We demonstrate that ChExMix achieves accurate detection and classification of binding event subtypes using in silico mixed ChIP-exo data. We further demonstrate the unique analysis abilities of ChExMix using a collection of ChIP-exo experiments that profile the binding of key transcription factors in MCF-7 cells. In these data, ChExMix identifies possible recruitment mechanisms of FoxA1 and ERα, thus demonstrating that ChExMix can effectively stratify ChIP-exo binding events into biologically meaningful subtypes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: ChExMix is available from https://github.com/seqcode/chexmix. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
MOTIVATION: Regulatory proteins associate with the genome either by directly binding cognate DNA motifs or via protein-protein interactions with other regulators. Each recruitment mechanism may be associated with distinct motifs and may also result in distinct characteristic patterns in high-resolution protein-DNA binding assays. For example, the ChIP-exo protocol precisely characterizes protein-DNA crosslinking patterns by combining chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) with 5' → 3' exonuclease digestion. Since different regulatory complexes will result in different protein-DNA crosslinking signatures, analysis of ChIP-exo tag enrichment patterns should enable detection of multiple protein-DNA binding modes for a given regulatory protein. However, current ChIP-exo analysis methods either treat all binding events as being of a uniform type or rely on motifs to cluster binding events into subtypes. RESULTS: To systematically detect multiple protein-DNA interaction modes in a single ChIP-exo experiment, we introduce the ChIP-exo mixture model (ChExMix). ChExMix probabilistically models the genomic locations and subtype memberships of binding events using both ChIP-exo tag distribution patterns and DNA motifs. We demonstrate that ChExMix achieves accurate detection and classification of binding event subtypes using in silico mixed ChIP-exo data. We further demonstrate the unique analysis abilities of ChExMix using a collection of ChIP-exo experiments that profile the binding of key transcription factors in MCF-7 cells. In these data, ChExMix identifies possible recruitment mechanisms of FoxA1 and ERα, thus demonstrating that ChExMix can effectively stratify ChIP-exo binding events into biologically meaningful subtypes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION:ChExMix is available from https://github.com/seqcode/chexmix. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Authors: Anaïs F Bardet; Jonas Steinmann; Sangeeta Bafna; Juergen A Knoblich; Julia Zeitlinger; Alexander Stark Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2013-08-24 Impact factor: 6.937
Authors: Makiko Iwafuchi-Doi; Greg Donahue; Akshay Kakumanu; Jason A Watts; Shaun Mahony; B Franklin Pugh; Dolim Lee; Klaus H Kaestner; Kenneth S Zaret Journal: Mol Cell Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 17.970
Authors: Shaun Mahony; Matthew D Edwards; Esteban O Mazzoni; Richard I Sherwood; Akshay Kakumanu; Carolyn A Morrison; Hynek Wichterle; David K Gifford Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Matthew T Weirauch; Ally Yang; Mihai Albu; Atina G Cote; Alejandro Montenegro-Montero; Philipp Drewe; Hamed S Najafabadi; Samuel A Lambert; Ishminder Mann; Kate Cook; Hong Zheng; Alejandra Goity; Harm van Bakel; Jean-Claude Lozano; Mary Galli; Mathew G Lewsey; Eryong Huang; Tuhin Mukherjee; Xiaoting Chen; John S Reece-Hoyes; Sridhar Govindarajan; Gad Shaulsky; Albertha J M Walhout; François-Yves Bouget; Gunnar Ratsch; Luis F Larrondo; Joseph R Ecker; Timothy R Hughes Journal: Cell Date: 2014-09-11 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Hanan S Elsarraj; Yan Hong; Darlene Limback; Ruonan Zhao; Jenna Berger; Stephanie C Bishop; Aria Sabbagh; Linzi Oppenheimer; Haleigh E Harper; Anna Tsimelzon; Shixia Huang; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Dean P Edwards; Joseph Fontes; Fang Fan; Rashna Madan; Ben Fangman; Ashley Ellis; Ossama Tawfik; Diane L Persons; Timothy Fields; Andrew K Godwin; Christy R Hagan; Katherine Swenson-Fields; Cristian Coarfa; Jeffrey Thompson; Fariba Behbod Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2020-04-24
Authors: Rafael Riudavets Puig; Paul Boddie; Aziz Khan; Jaime Abraham Castro-Mondragon; Anthony Mathelier Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 3.969