4.6 Article

Usability of human Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip for mouse DNA methylation studies

期刊

BMC BIOINFORMATICS
卷 18, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12859-017-1870-y

关键词

Epigenetics; DNA methylation; Infinium BeadChip; Epic; Mouse; Rat; Guinea pig; Rabbit; Sheep; Pig; Cown; Dog; Cat; Macaque; Chimpanzee

资金

  1. Swedish Foundation
  2. Swedish Research Council
  3. NEURO Sweden
  4. Margaretha af Ugglas Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The advent of array-based genome-wide DNA methylation methods has enabled quantitative measurement of single CpG methylation status at relatively low cost and sample input. Whereas the use of Infinium Human Methylation BeadChips has shown great utility in clinical studies, no equivalent tool is available for rodent animal samples. We examined the feasibility of using the new Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip for studying DNA methylation in mouse. Results: In silico, we identified 19,420 EPIC probes (referred as mEPIC probes), which align with a unique best alignment score to the bisulfite converted reference mouse genome mm10. Further annotation revealed that 85% of mEPIC probes overlapped with mm10. refSeq genes at different genomic features including promoters (TSS1500 and TSS200), 1st exons, 5'UTRs, 3' UTRs, CpG islands, shores, shelves, open seas and FANTOM5enhancers. Hybridization of mouse samples to Infinium Human MethylationEPIC BeadChips showed successful measurement of mEPIC probes and reproducibility between inter-array biological replicates. Finally, we demonstrated the utility of mEPIC probes for data exploration such as hierarchical clustering. Conclusions: Given the absence of cost and labor convenient genome-wide technologies in the murine system, our findings show that the Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip platform is suitable for investigation of the mouse methylome. Furthermore, we provide the mEPICmanifest with genomic features, available to users of Infinium Human MethylationEPIC arrays for mouse samples.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据