MAnorm2 for quantitatively comparing groups of ChIP-seq samples

    • 1CAS Key Laboratory of Computational Biology, CAS-MPG Partner Institute for Computational Biology, Shanghai Institute of Nutrition and Health, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China;
    • 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
    • 3Children's Medical Center Research Institute, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas 75390, USA;
    • 4Department of Biology and Bioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA;
    • 5National Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Genetics, CAS Center for Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Shanghai Institute of Plant Physiology and Ecology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200032, China
Published November 18, 2020. Vol 31 Issue 1, pp. 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.262675.120
Download PDF Please log-in to or register for your personal account in order to access PDF Cite Article Permissions Share
cover of Genome Research Vol 36 Issue 5
Current Issue:

Abstract

Eukaryotic gene transcription is regulated by a large cohort of chromatin-associated proteins, and inferring their differential binding sites between cellular contexts requires a rigorous comparison of the corresponding ChIP-seq data. We present MAnorm2, a new computational tool for quantitatively comparing groups of ChIP-seq samples. MAnorm2 uses a hierarchical strategy for normalization of ChIP-seq data and assesses within-group variability of ChIP-seq signals based on an empirical Bayes framework. In this framework, MAnorm2 allows for abundant differential ChIP-seq signals between groups of samples as well as very different global within-group variability between groups. Using a number of real ChIP-seq data sets, we observed that MAnorm2 clearly outperformed existing tools for differential ChIP-seq analysis, especially when the groups of samples being compared had distinct global within-group variability.

Loading
Loading
Back to top