ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2024
Using paired-end read orientations to assess technical biases in capture Hi-C.
Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hi-C and capture Hi-C (CHi-C) both leverage paired-end sequencing of chimeric fragments to gauge the strength of interactions based on the total number of paired-end reads mapped to a common pair of restriction fragments. Mapped paired-end reads can have four relative orientations, depending on the genomic positions and strands of the two reads. We assigned one paired-end read orientation to each of the four possible re-ligations that can occur between two given restriction fragments. In a large hematopoietic cell dataset, we determined the read pair counts of interactions separately for each orientation. Interactions with imbalances in the counts occur much more often than expected by chance for both Hi-C and CHi-C. Based on such imbalances, we identified target restriction fragments enriched at only one instead of both ends. By matching them to the baits used for the experiments, we confirmed our assignment of paired-end read orientations and gained insights that can inform bait design. An analysis of unbaited fragments shows that, beyond bait effects, other known types of technical biases are reflected in count imbalances. Taking advantage of distance-dependent contact frequencies, we assessed the impact of such biases. Our results have the potential to improve the design and interpretation of CHi-C experiments.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.