4.7 Article

Genome-wide analysis of replication timing by next-generation sequencing with E/L Repli-seq

期刊

NATURE PROTOCOLS
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 819-839

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2017.148

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [GM083337, GM085354, DK107965]
  2. ARC French fellowship [SAE20160604436]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [U54DK107965] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [P01GM085354, R01GM083337] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cycling cells duplicate their DNA content during S phase, following a defined program called replication timing (RT). Early-and late-replicating regions differ in terms of mutation rates, transcriptional activity, chromatin marks and subnuclear position. Moreover, RT is regulated during development and is altered in diseases. Here, we describe E/L Repli-seq, an extension of our Repli-chip protocol. E/L Repli-seq is a rapid, robust and relatively inexpensive protocol for analyzing RT by next-generation sequencing (NGS), allowing genome-wide assessment of how cellular processes are linked to RT. Briefly, cells are pulse-labeled with BrdU, and early and late S-phase fractions are sorted by flow cytometry. Labeled nascent DNA is immunoprecipitated from both fractions and sequenced. Data processing leads to a single bedGraph file containing the ratio of nascent DNA from early versus late S-phase fractions. The results are comparable to those of Repli-chip, with the additional benefits of genome-wide sequence information and an increased dynamic range. We also provide computational pipelines for downstream analyses, for parsing phased genomes using single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to analyze RT allelic asynchrony, and for direct comparison to Repli-chip data. This protocol can be performed in up to 3 d before sequencing, and requires basic cellular and molecular biology skills, as well as a basic understanding of Unix and R.

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

4.7
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