2006
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0601180103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-based analysis of tiling-arrays for ChIP-chip

Abstract: We propose a fast and powerful analysis algorithm, titled Modelbased Analysis of Tiling-arrays (MAT), to reliably detect regions enriched by transcription factor chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) on Affymetrix tiling arrays (ChIP-chip). MAT models the baseline probe behavior by considering probe sequence and copy number on each array. It standardizes the probe value through the probe model, eliminating the need for sample normalization. MAT uses an innovative function to score regions for ChIP enrichment, w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
434
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 388 publications
(438 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
3
434
1
Order By: Relevance
“…S1C). Three biological replicates for PPAR␥ and control IgG were hybridized to the wholegenome Mouse Tiling 2.0R Array Set (Affymetrix), and the data were analyzed using the model-based analysis of tiling arrays (MAT) Johnson et al 2006), using the cutoffs of false discovery rate Յ1% and enrichment of PPAR␥ signal over IgG equal to or greather than twofold. This analysis identified 5299 unique regions of ∼1000-base-pair (bp) length, including known sites at Fabp4/aP2, Cd36, Lipe/Hsl, Olr1, and Me1 (Supplemental Table 1).…”
Section: Identification and Validation Of Novel Ppar␥-binding Sitesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…S1C). Three biological replicates for PPAR␥ and control IgG were hybridized to the wholegenome Mouse Tiling 2.0R Array Set (Affymetrix), and the data were analyzed using the model-based analysis of tiling arrays (MAT) Johnson et al 2006), using the cutoffs of false discovery rate Յ1% and enrichment of PPAR␥ signal over IgG equal to or greather than twofold. This analysis identified 5299 unique regions of ∼1000-base-pair (bp) length, including known sites at Fabp4/aP2, Cd36, Lipe/Hsl, Olr1, and Me1 (Supplemental Table 1).…”
Section: Identification and Validation Of Novel Ppar␥-binding Sitesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whole-genome arrays were analyzed with MAT (Johnson et al 2006), with probes remapped to the February 2006 Mouse Genome Assembly (mm8) using xMAN . The threshold cutoffs for binding regions were FDR Յ1%, and enrichment of PPAR␥ or C/EBP␣ over IgG twofold or more.…”
Section: Chip-chip Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To analyze the D-REAM microarray data, we applied modelbased analysis of tiling arrays (MAT) (Johnson et al 2006). MATscores represent the enrichment of unmethylated fragments and are indicative of the relative methylation status of the HpyCH4IV site.…”
Section: Features Of T-dmr Profiling By Restriction Tag-mediated Amplmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To satisfy gene ID requirements of the bioinformatics analysis, we converted gene IDs under certain circumstances. MAT (Johnson et al 2006) (bandwidth, 300 bp) was used to analyze the tiling array .CEL files and identify the hypomethylated regions based on tiling probe signals, probe sequences, and copy numbers. xMAN (Li et al 2008) was used to remap the original tiling probes according to the mouse genome assembly of version mm8 (March 2006 build) from the UCSC genome database (Kuhn et al 2007).…”
Section: Bioinformaticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Historically, analysis of NR transcriptional activity has focused on the contributions of chromatin remodeling and assembly of the pre-initiation complex; however, clear roles for remodeling complexes in processes, such as elongation, termination, splicing as well as heterochromatin assembly, suggest a potentially larger field of study must be considered (Horn and Peterson, 2006;Sims et al, 2004;Corey et al, 2003;Batsche et al, 2006;Alen et al, 2002;Morillon et al, 2003). Finally, numerous microarray and chip-on-chip data sets clearly point to various classes of hormonally responsive genes that will be dependent on promoter specificity and biological content for a final transcriptional disposition (Wang et al, 2004;Johnson et al, 2006;Wan and Nordeen, 2003). To this end, the clear mechanistic insights gained from functional interactions between ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling machines and nuclear receptors may provide a way forward to better understand the precise sequence of events involved in transcriptional activation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%