Personalized and graph genomes reveal missing signal in epigenomic data
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Epigenomic studies that use next generation sequencing experiments typically rely on the alignment of reads to a reference sequence. However, because of genetic diversity and the diploid nature of the human genome, we hypothesize that using a generic reference could lead to incorrectly mapped reads and bias downstream results. Results: We show that accounting for genetic variation using a modified reference genome or a de novo assembled genome can alter histone H3K4me1 and H3K27ac ChIP-seq peak calls either by creating new personal peaks or by the loss of reference peaks. Using permissive cutoffs, modified reference genomes are found to alter approximately 1% of peak calls while de novo assembled genomes alter up to 5% of peaks. We also show statistically significant differences in the amount of reads observed in regions associated with the new, altered, and unchanged peaks. We report that short insertions and deletions (indels), followed by single nucleotide variants (SNVs), have the highest probability of modifying peak calls. We show that using a graph personalized genome represents a reasonable compromise between modified reference genomes and de novo assembled genomes. We demonstrate that altered peaks have a genomic distribution typical of other peaks. Conclusions: Analyzing epigenomic datasets with personalized and graph genomes allows the recovery of new peaks enriched for indels and SNVs. These altered peaks are more likely to differ between individuals and, as such, could be relevant in the study of various human phenotypes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Pangenomes improve variant calling, transcript mapping accuracy and detection of ChIP-seq peaks.
“Pangenomes not only improve variant calling but also improve transcript mapping accuracy57 and detection of ChIP-seq peaks67.”
From A draft human pangenome reference. (2023) · cites this paper as [67]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 57
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [6]Wulfridge P, Langmead B, Feinberg AP, Hansen K. Choice of reference genome can introduce massive bias in bisulfite sequencing data. bioRxiv. 2016. Available from: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/09/22/076844.abstract.
- [18]Novak AM, Hickey G, Garrison E, Blum S, Connelly A, Dilthey A, et al.Genome graphs. bioRxiv. 2017:101378. Available from: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/01/18/101378.abstract.
- Authors
- Groza, C., Kwan, T., Soranzo, N., Pastinen, T., & Bourque, G.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- McGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre (CA)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Kyoto University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Bourque, Guillaume
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2020-05-25
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 124-124
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- PMC
- PMC7249353
- OpenAlex
- W3028658133
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (cc-by)
- Apollo
- Funders
- Compute Canada
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (151618_1, 120608_1, 120609_1)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Keywords
- genome graphs, de novo genome assembly, reference bias, ChIP-seq peak calling, genetic variation, indels, single nucleotide variants, diploid genome, epigenomics
- MeSH terms
- Epigenome, Chromatin Immunoprecipitation Sequencing, Humans, Genome, Human, Precision Medicine, Epigenomics
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