Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic evaluation of factors influencing ChIP-seq fidelity

Open access
Chen, Yiwen, Negre, Nicolas, Li, Qunhua, Mieczkowska, Joanna O, Slattery, Matthew, Liu, Tao, Zhang, Yong, Kim, Tae-Kyung, He, Housheng Hansen, Zieba, Jennifer, Ruan, Yijun, Bickel, Peter J, Myers, Richard M, Wold, Barbara J, White, Kevin P, Lieb, Jason D, Liu, X Shirley·2012·Nature Methods

Abstract

We evaluated how variations in sequencing depth and other parameters influence interpretation of chromatin immunoprecipitation–sequencing (ChIP-seq) experiments. Using Drosophila melanogaster S2 cells, we generated ChIP-seq data sets for a site-specific transcription factor (Suppressor of Hairy-wing) and a histone modification (H3K36me3). We detected a chromatin-state bias: open chromatin regions yielded higher coverage, which led to false positives if not corrected. This bias had a greater effect on detection specificity than any base-composition bias. Paired-end sequencing revealed that single-end data underestimated ChIP-library complexity at high coverage. Removal of reads originating at the same base reduced false-positives but had little effect on detection sensitivity. Even at mappable-genome coverage depth of ∼1 read per base pair, ∼1% of the narrow peaks detected on a tiling array were missed by ChIP-seq. Evaluation of widely used ChIP-seq analysis tools suggests that adjustments or algorithm improvements are required to handle data sets with deep coverage.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nmeth.1985

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 171

Metadata

Authors
Chen, Y., Negre, N., Li, Q., Mieczkowska, J. O., Slattery, M., Liu, T., Zhang, Y., Kim, T.-K., He, H. H., Zieba, J., Ruan, Y., Bickel, P. J., Myers, R. M., Wold, B. J., White, K. P., Lieb, J. D., & Liu, X. S.
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2012-04-22
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
609-614
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W2146303939
Cited by
171
References
5
FWCI
8.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic evaluation of factors influencing ChIP-seq fidelity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nmeth.1985
The paper
Chen, Y., Negre, N., Li, Q., Mieczkowska, J. O., Slattery, M., Liu, T., Zhang, Y., Kim, T.-K., He, H. H., Zieba, J., Ruan, Y., Bickel, P. J., Myers, R. M., Wold, B. J., White, K. P., Lieb, J. D., & Liu, X. S. (2012). Systematic evaluation of factors influencing ChIP-seq fidelity. Nature Methods. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1985

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.