4.5 Article

Comparison of computational methods for the identification of topologically associating domains

Journal

GENOME BIOLOGY
Volume 19, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-018-1596-9

Keywords

Topologically associating domain; Hi-C; Method comparison

Funding

  1. Giorgi-Cavaglieri Foundation
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) [310030_169519]
  3. Swiss League Against Cancer foundation [KFS-3983-08-2016]
  4. ISREC Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundChromatin folding gives rise to structural elements among which are clusters of densely interacting DNA regions termed topologically associating domains (TADs). TADs have been characterized across multiple species, tissue types, and differentiation stages, sometimes in association with regulation of biological functions. The reliability and reproducibility of these findings are intrinsically related with the correct identification of these domains from high-throughput chromatin conformation capture (Hi-C) experiments.ResultsHere, we test and compare 22 computational methods to identify TADs across 20 different conditions. We find that TAD sizes and numbers vary significantly among callers and data resolutions, challenging the definition of an average TAD size, but strengthening the hypothesis that TADs are hierarchically organized domains, rather than disjoint structural elements. Performances of these methods differ based on data resolution and normalization strategy, but a core set of TAD callers consistently retrieve reproducible domains, even at low sequencing depths, that are enriched for TAD-associated biological features.ConclusionsThis study provides a reference for the analysis of chromatin domains from Hi-C experiments and useful guidelines for choosing a suitable approach based on the experimental design, available data, and biological question of interest.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available