2021
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-23749-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HiC-DC+ enables systematic 3D interaction calls and differential analysis for Hi-C and HiChIP

Abstract: Recent genome-wide chromosome conformation capture assays such as Hi-C and HiChIP have vastly expanded the resolution and throughput with which we can study 3D genomic architecture and function. Here, we present HiC-DC+, a software tool for Hi-C/HiChIP interaction calling and differential analysis using an efficient implementation of the HiC-DC statistical framework. HiC-DC+ integrates with popular preprocessing and visualization tools and includes topologically associating domain (TAD) and A/B compartment cal… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, a permutation test was used to compare the number of co‐expressed (> 1 TPM in a specific cell type) enhancer‐promoter pairs versus that of background sets generated by sampling from all tag clusters. Differential interactions between enhancer‐promoter pairs identified by ABC scores were investigated using R library HiCDCPlus v0.99.12 (Sahin et al , 2021) using default parameters at 10 kb resolution. The degree of coordinated differential promoter interaction and differential expression was quantified through the application of RRHO2 v1.0 (Cahill et al , 2018) to gene lists ranked by DESeq2 test statistics; for promoters involved in multiple ABC E‐P pairs, the mean test statistic was used for ranking.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, a permutation test was used to compare the number of co‐expressed (> 1 TPM in a specific cell type) enhancer‐promoter pairs versus that of background sets generated by sampling from all tag clusters. Differential interactions between enhancer‐promoter pairs identified by ABC scores were investigated using R library HiCDCPlus v0.99.12 (Sahin et al , 2021) using default parameters at 10 kb resolution. The degree of coordinated differential promoter interaction and differential expression was quantified through the application of RRHO2 v1.0 (Cahill et al , 2018) to gene lists ranked by DESeq2 test statistics; for promoters involved in multiple ABC E‐P pairs, the mean test statistic was used for ranking.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to evaluate the performance of MaxHiC, we performed a comprehensive benchmarking between MaxHiC and Hi-C significant interactions callers (SIC) including GOTHiC, Fit-Hi-C, Fit-Hi-C2, HiCDC+ [ 14 ], and CHiCAGO (for capture Hi-C only). We also compared the performance of MaxHiC with Hi-C loop callers including HiCCUPS [ 5 ], Peakachu [ 7 ], and Mustache [ 8 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Raw and ICE-normalized contact matrices were prepared with HiC-Pro (Servant et al, 2015). ICE-normalized and condition-merged HiC-Pro matrices were converted to Juicer .hic files for resolutions 10 Kb and 100 Kb using a wrapper for the Juicer tools Pre command in the HiC-DC+ Bioconductor package (Durand et al, 2016; Sahin et al, 2021).…”
Section: Star Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Significant loops (q-value <= 0.05) and differential loops (log2FC cut-off = 1, p-value < 0.05) across conditions were identified using HiC-DC+ with raw HiC-Pro matrices and bed files of two AS replicates and two GFP replicates at 10 Kb resolution (Sahin et al ., 2021). To filter biases in denser genomic regions in close proximity and noise in sparser regions that are more far apart, only loops between 50 Kb and 2 Mb were called.…”
Section: Star Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%