Metabolomics,Unknown,Transcriptomics,Genomics,Proteomics

Dataset Information

Transcription Factor Binding Sites by ChIP-seq from ENCODE/LICR

ABSTRACT: This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Yin Shen mailto:y7shen@ucsd.edu). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). This track shows a comprehensive survey of cis-regulatory elements in the mouse genome by using ChIP-seq (Robertson et al., 2007) to identify transcription factor binding sites and chromatin modification profiles in many mouse (C57Bl/6) tissues and primary cells, including bone marrow, cerebellum, cortex, heart, kidney, liver, lung, spleen, mouse embryonic fibroblast cells (MEFs) and embryonic stem (ES) cells. In specific, the Ren lab examined RNA polymerase II (PolII), co-activator protein p300, the insulator protein CTCF, and two chromatin modification marks, H3K4me3 and H3K4me1, due to their demonstrated utilities in identifying promoters, enhancers and insulator elements (Barski et al., 2007; Blow et al., 2010; Heintzman et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2005a; Visel et al., 2009). Enrichment of H3K4me3 or PolII signals is a strong indicator of an active promoter, while the presence of p300 or H3K4me1 outside of promoter regions has been used as a mark for enhancers. CTCF binding sites are considered as a mark for potential insulator elements. For each transcription factor or chromatin mark in each tissue, ChIP-seq was carried out with at least two biological replicates. Each experiment produced 20-30 million monoclonal, uniquely mapped tags. For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://genome.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Enrichment and Library Preparation Chromatin immunoprecipitation was performed according to Ren Lab ChIP Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabChipProtocolV1.pdf). Library construction was performed according to Ren Lab Library Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabLibraryProtocolV1.pdf). Sequencing and Analysis Samples were sequenced on Illumina Genome Analyzer II, Genome Analyzer IIx and HiSeq 2000 platforms for 36 cycles. Image analysis, base calling and alignment to the mouse genome version mm9 were performed using Illumina's RTA and Genome Analyzer Pipeline software. Alignment to the mouse genome was performed using ELAND or Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009) with a seed length of 25 and allowing up to two mismatches. Only the sequences that mapped to one location were used for further analysis. Of those sequences, clonal reads, defined as having the same start position on the same strand, were discarded. BED and wig files were created using custom perl scripts.

ORGANISM(S): Mus musculus

SUBMITTER: UCSC ENCODE DCC

PROVIDER: E-GEOD-36027 | biostudies-arrayexpress |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-arrayexpress

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Yin Shen mailto:y7shen@ucsd.edu). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). This track shows a comprehensive survey of cis-regulatory elements in the mouse genome by using ChIP-seq (Robertson et al., 2007) to identify transcription factor binding sites and chromatin modification profiles in many mouse (C57Bl/6) tissues and primary cells, including bone marrow, cerebellum, cortex, heart, kidney, liver, lung, spleen, mouse embryonic fibroblast cells (MEFs) and embryonic stem (ES) cells. In specific, the Ren lab examined RNA polymerase II (PolII), co-activator protein p300, the insulator protein CTCF, and two chromatin modification marks H3K4me3 and H3K4me1 due to their demonstrated utilities in identifying promoters, enhancers and insulator elements (Barski et al., 2007; Blow et al., 2010; Heintzman et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2005a; Visel et al., 2009). Enrichment of H3K4me3 or PolII signals is a strong indicator of active promoter, while the presence of p300 or H3K4me1 outside of promoter regions has been used as a mark for enhancers. CTCF binding sites are considered as a mark for potential insulator elements. For each transcription factor or chromatin mark in each tissue, ChIP-seq was carried out with at least two biological replicates. Each experiment produced 20-30 million monoclonal, uniquely mapped tags. For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Enrichment and Library Preparation: Chromatin immunoprecipitation was performed according to Ren Lab ChIP Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabChipProtocolV1.pdf). Library construction was performed according to Ren Lab Library Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabLibraryProtocolV1.pdf). Sequencing and Analysis: Samples were sequenced on Illumina Genome Analyzer II Genome Analyzer IIx, and HiSeq 2000 platforms for 36 cycles. Image analysis, base calling and alignment to the mouse genome version mm9 were performed using Illumina's RTA and Genome Analyzer Pipeline software. Alignment to the mouse genome was performed using ELAND or Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009) with a seed length of 25 and allowing up to two mismatches. Only the sequences that mapped to one location were used for further analysis. Of those sequences, clonal reads, defined as having the same start position on the same strand, were discarded. BED and wig files were created using custom perl scripts.

Project description:This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Florencia Pauli mailto:fpauli@hudsonalpha.org). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). This track is produced as part of the ENCODE Project. RNA-seq is a method for mapping and quantifying the transcriptome of any organism that has a genomic DNA sequence assembly (Mortazavi et al., 2008). Biological replicates of ENCODE cell lines were grown on separate culture plates, total RNA was purified and polyA selected two times. mRNA was then fragmented by magnesium-catalyzed hydrolysis, reverse transcribed to cDNA by random priming and amplified. The cDNA was sequenced on an Illumina Genome Analyzer (GAI or GAIIx). The DNA sequences were aligned to the NCBI Build37 (hg19) version of the human genome using the sequence alignment programs ELAND (Illumina) or Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009). The first 10 residues of sequencing have a weak characteristic nucleotide bias of unknown origin. This RNA-seq protocol does not specify the coding strand. As a result, there will be ambiguity at loci where both strands are transcribed. This is the first NCBI Build37 (hg19) release of this track (Jan 2012). This release includes the 3 datasets (Jurkat, A549/DEX100nm, and A549/EtOH2pct) previously released on NCBI Build36 (hg18) and adds data for several more cell types and growth conditions in replicate. Four types of download files are available for each replicate including the Raw Data (fastq), Transcripts GencodeV7 (gtf), Raw Signal (bigwig), and Alignments (bam). For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Experimental Procedures Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell) except for H1-hESC for which frozen cell pellets were purchased from Cellular Dynamics. Cells were lysed in RLT buffer (Qiagen RNEasy kit) and processed on RNEasy midi columns according to the manufacturer's protocol, with the inclusion of the "on-column" DNase digestion step to remove residual genomic DNA. mRNA was isolated from at least 10 ug of total RNA with oligo(dT) two times (Dynabeads mRNA PurificationgKit, Invitrogen). Alternatively, cells were lysed and mRNA was purified directly two times with oligo(dT) (Dynabeads mRNA DIRECT Kit, Invitrogen). 100 ng of mRNA was fragmented by magnesium-catalyzed hydrolysis and reverse transcribed to cDNA by random priming according to the protocol in Mortazavi et al. (2008). cDNA was prepared for sequencing on the Genome Analyzer flowcell according to the protocol for the ChIPSeq DNA genomic DNA kit (Illumina). The sequencing libraries were size-selected around 225 bp and amplified with 15 rounds of PCR. Libraries were sequenced with an Illumina Genome Analyzer I or an Illumina Genome Analyzer IIx according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Single end reads of 36 nt in length were obtained. Data Processing and Analysis Fastq files were made from qseq files generated by the Illumina pipeline (Casava 1.7). The Raw Signal files (bigWig) were generated from bedgraph files and the score was calculated as the number of reads at that position divided by the total number of reads divided by one million. Casava export files were aligned to the NCBI Build37 (hg19) version of the human genome with ELAND (Illumina), generating SAM files. Fastq files of experiments that were previously aligned to NCBI Build36 (hg18) were aligned to NCBI Build37 (hg19) using Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009; parameters: -S -n 2 -k 11 -m 10 --best), also generating SAM files. SAM files were converted to BAM with SAMtools (Li et al., 2009). Gene expression within Gencode.v7 (Harrow et al., 2006) gene models was estimated using Cufflinks v0.9.3 (Roberts et al., 2011). Estimates of transcript abundance were reported in Fragments Per Kilobase of exon per Million fragments mapped (FPKM). FPKM is calculated by dividing the total number of fragments that align to the gene model by the size of the spliced transcript (exons) in kilobases. This number is then divided by the total number of reads in millions for the experiment. FPKM is reported in the last column of the gtf (TranscriptGencV7) files. Raw Data (fastq), Raw Signal (bigWig), Alignments (bam) and Transcript Gencode V7 (gtf) files are available from the Downloads (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgFileUi?g=wgEncodeHaibRnaSeq) page.

Project description:This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Barbara Wold mailto:woldb@caltech.edu, Georgi K. Marinov mailto:georgi@caltech.edu, Diane Trout mailto:diane@caltech.edu). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). Our knowledge of the function of genomic DNA sequences comes from three basic approaches. Genetics uses changes in behavior or structure of a cell or organism in response to changes in DNA sequence to infer function of the altered sequence. Biochemical approaches monitor states of histone modification, binding of specific transcription factors, accessibility to DNases and other epigenetic features along genomic DNA. In general, these are associated with gene activity, but the precise relationships remain to be established. The third approach is evolutionary, using comparisons among homologous DNA sequences to find segments that are evolving more slowly or more rapidly than expected given the local rate of neutral change. These are inferred to be under negative or positive selection, respectively, and we interpret these as DNA sequences needed for a preserved (negative selection) or adaptive (positive selection) function. The ENCODE project aims to discover all the DNA sequences associated with various epigenetic features, with the reasonable expectation that these will also be functional (best tested by genetic methods). However, it is not clear how to relate these results with those from evolutionary analyses. The mouse ENCODE project aims to make this connection explicitly and with a moderate breadth. Assays identical to those being used in the ENCODE project are performed in cell types in mouse that are similar or homologous to those studied in the human project. Thus, we will be able to discover which epigenetic features are conserved between mouse and human, and we can examine the extent to which these overlap with the DNA sequences under negative selection. The contribution of DNA that with a function preserved in mammals versus that with a function in only one species will be discovered. The results will have a significant impact on our understanding of the evolution of gene regulation. Maps of Occupancy by Transcription Factors Genome-wide occupancy maps of transcription factors (TFs) are generated by ChIP-seq. A ChIP-Seq experiment combines a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) experiment that enriches genomic DNA for the segments bound by specific proteins (the antigens recognized by the antibody) with high-throughput short read sequencing of the enriched DNA fragments (Wold & Myers, 2008). Proteins are crosslinked to DNA (usually with formaldehyde), chromatin is sheared and immunoprecipitated with the antibody of interest. The immunoprecipitated material is turned into a sequencing library and sequenced. The sequencing reads are then aligned to the genome. A control sample consisting of sonicated chromatin that has not been immunoprecipitated or immunoprecipitated with a non-specific immunoglobulin is also sequenced. The ChIP and the control datasets are analyzed with a variety of software packages to identify regions occupied by the target protein. The sequencing data, alignments and analysis files for these experiments are available for download. In specific, the Ren lab examined RNA polymerase II (PolII), co-activator protein p300, the insulator protein CTCF, and two chromatin modification marks, H3K4me3 and H3K4me1, due to their demonstrated utilities in identifying promoters, enhancers and insulator elements (Barski et al., 2007; Blow et al., 2010; Heintzman et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2005a; Visel et al., 2009). Enrichment of H3K4me3 or PolII signals is a strong indicator of an active promoter, while the presence of p300 or H3K4me1 outside of promoter regions has been used as a mark for enhancers. CTCF binding sites are considered as a mark for potential insulator elements. For each transcription factor or chromatin mark in each tissue, ChIP-seq was carried out with at least two biological replicates. Each experiment produced 20-30 million monoclonal, uniquely mapped tags. Our knowledge of the function of genomic DNA sequences comes from three basic approaches. Genetics uses changes in behavior or structure of a cell or organism in response to changes in DNA sequence to infer function of the altered sequence. Biochemical approaches monitor states of histone modification, binding of specific transcription factors, accessibility to DNases and other epigenetic features along genomic DNA. In general, these are associated with gene activity, but the precise relationships remain to be established. The third approach is evolutionary, using comparisons among homologous DNA sequences to find segments that are evolving more slowly or more rapidly than expected given the local rate of neutral change. These are inferred to be under negative or positive selection, respectively, and we interpret these as DNA sequences needed for a preserved (negative selection) or adaptive (positive selection) function. The ENCODE project aims to discover all the DNA sequences associated with various epigenetic features, with the reasonable expectation that these will also be functional (best tested by genetic methods). However, it is not clear how to relate these results with those from evolutionary analyses. The mouse ENCODE project aims to make this connection explicitly and with a moderate breadth. Assays identical to those being used in the ENCODE project are performed in cell types in mouse that are similar or homologous to those studied in the human project. Thus we will be able to discover which epigenetic features are conserved between mouse and human, and we can examine the extent to which these overlap with the DNA sequences under negative selection. The contribution of DNA that with a function preserved in mammals versus that with a function in only one species will be discovered. The results will have a significant impact on our understanding of the evolution of gene regulation. Maps of histone modifications Levels of three histone modifications are being determined. H3K4me1 (monomethylation of lysine 4 of histone H3) is a mark for active chromatin and in the absence of H3K4me3, it is one indicator of an enhancer. H3K4me3 (trimethylation of lysine 4 of histone H3) is highly enriched at active promoters. One repressive (Polycomb) mark, H3K27me3, is associated with some silenced genes. Maps of genomic DNA in chromatin with these histone modifications are generated by ChIP-seq. This consists of two basic steps: chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) is used to highly enrich genomic DNA for the segments bound by specific proteins (the antigens recognized by the antibodies) followed by massively parallel short read sequencing to tag the enriched DNA segments. Sequencing is done on the Illumina GAIIx and HiSeq. The sequence tags are mapped back to the mouse genome (Langmead et al. 2009), and a graph of the enrichment for histone modifications are displayed as the "Signal" track (essentially the counts of mapped reads per interval) and the deduced probable binding sites from the MACS program (Zhang et al. 2008) are shown in the "Peaks" track. Each experiment is associated with an input signal, which represents the control condition where immunoprecipitation with non-specific immunoglobulin was performed in the same cell type. The sequence reads, quality scores, and alignment coordinates from these experiments are available for download. Our knowledge of the function of genomic DNA sequences comes from three basic approaches. Genetics uses changes in behavior or structure of a cell or organism in response to changes in DNA sequence to infer function of the altered sequence. Biochemical approaches monitor states of histone modification, binding of specific transcription factors, accessibility to DNases and other epigenetic features along genomic DNA. In general, these are associated with gene activity, but the precise relationships remain to be established. The third approach is evolutionary, using comparisons among homologous DNA sequences to find segments that are evolving more slowly or more rapidly than expected given the local rate of neutral change. These are inferred to be under negative or positive selection, respectively, and we interpret these as DNA sequences needed for a preserved (negative selection) or adaptive (positive selection) function. The ENCODE project aims to discover all the DNA sequences associated with various epigenetic features, with the reasonable expectation that these will also be functional (best tested by genetic methods). However, it is not clear how to relate these results with those from evolutionary analyses. The mouse ENCODE project aims to make this connection explicitly and with a moderate breadth. Assays identical to those being used in the ENCODE project are performed in cell types in mouse that are similar or homologous to those studied in the human project. Thus we will be able to discover which epigenetic features are conserved between mouse and human, and we can examine the extent to which these overlap with the DNA sequences under negative selection. The contribution of DNA that with a function preserved in mammals versus that with a function in only one species will be discovered. The results will have a significant impact on our understanding of the evolution of gene regulation. Maps of Occupancy by Transcription Factors Maps of occupancy of genomic DNA by transcription factors (TFs) are determined by ChIP-seq. This consists of two basic steps: chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) is used to highly enrich genomic DNA for the segments bound by specific proteins (the antigens recognized by the antibodies) followed by massively parallel short read sequencing to tag the enriched DNA segments. Sequencing is done on the Illumina GAIIx and HiSeq. The sequence tags are mapped back to the mouse genome (Langmead et al. 2009), and a graph of the enrichment for TF binding are displayed as the "Signal" track (essentially the counts of mapped reads per interval) and the deduced probable binding sites from the MACS program (Zhang et al. 2008) are shown in the "Peaks" track. Each experiment is associated with an input signal, which represents the control condition where immunoprecipitation with non-specific immunoglobulin was performed in the same cell type. The sequence reads, quality scores, and alignment coordinates from these experiments are available for download. The sequence reads, quality scores, and alignment coordinates from these experiments are available for download. For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://genome-test.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Chromatin immunoprecipitation followed published methods (Johnson & Mortazavi et al., 2007) with the exception of certain experiments for which glutaraldehyde was added to the crosslink reaction. Information on the antibodies used is available via the metadata for each subtrack. Libraries were constructed using the Illumina ChIP-seq Sample Preparation Kit or using a modified protocol that includes the addition of multiplexing tags to the fragments. DNA fragments were repaired to generate blunt ends and a single A nucleotide was added to each end. Double-stranded Illumina adaptors or Double-stranded Illumina adaptors with multiplexing tags were ligated to the fragments. Ligation products were amplified by 18 cycles of PCR, and the DNA between 150-250 bp was gel purified. Completed libraries were quantified with Quant-iT dsDNA HS Assay Kit. The DNA library was sequenced on the Illumina GAII and GAIIx sequencing systems, and more recently, for multiplexed libraries, several of them were pooled and sequenced on the HiSeq platform. Cluster generation, linearization, blocking and sequencing primer reagents were provided in the Illumina Cluster Amplification kits. Older libraries were generated using 2 rounds of PCR. Matched input samples were sequenced for each variation of fixation conditions and the number of PCR rounds. Reads of 32 bp, 36 bp or 50 bp length were generated. Sequencing reads (fastq files) were assigned to the corresponding libraries based on the multiplexing tag for pooled libraries (all tags have been removed from reads in the fastq files available for download) or directly processed. Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009) was used to map reads to the male or female version of the mouse genome (excluding the _random chromosomes in the assembly) depending on the cell line sex. The following parameters were used: "-v 2 -k 11 -m 10 -t --best --strata". Aligned reads were converted into rds files using the ERANGE package (Johnson & Mortazavi et al., 2007) and the findall.py program in ERANGE was used to identify enriched regions against the matching input sample. The following settings were used for point-source transcription factors: "--shift learn --ratio 3 --minimum 2 --listPeak --revbackground". For histone modifications, the settings were changed to "--notrim --nodirectionality --spacing 100 --ratio 3 --minimum 2 --listPeak --revbackground". Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://genome.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). RNA-Seq RNA samples from tissues and primary cells were extracted from Trizol® according to protocol (Invitrogen). PolyA+ RNA was purified with the Dynabeads mRNA purification kit (Invitrogen). The mRNA libraries were prepared for strand-specific sequencing as described previously (Parkhomchuk et al., 2009). Sequencing and Analysis Samples were sequenced on Illumina Genome Analyzer II, Genome Analyzer IIx and HiSeq 2000 platforms for 36 cycles. Image analysis, base calling and alignment to the mouse genome version mm9 were performed using Illumina's RTA. Alignment to the mouse genome was performed using TopHat (Trapnell et al., 2009). Wig files were generated by TopHat and expression levels were calculated with Cufflinks (Trapnell et al., 2010). Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://genome.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Enrichment and Library Preparation Chromatin immunoprecipitation was performed according to Ren Lab ChIP Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabChipProtocolV1.pdf). Library construction was performed according to Ren Lab Library Protocol (http://bioinformatics-renlab.ucsd.edu/RenLabLibraryProtocolV1.pdf). Sequencing and Analysis Samples were sequenced on Illumina Genome Analyzer II, Genome Analyzer IIx and HiSeq 2000 platforms for 36 cycles. Image analysis, base calling and alignment to the mouse genome version mm9 were performed using Illumina's RTA and Genome Analyzer Pipeline software. Alignment to the mouse genome was performed using ELAND or Bowtie (Langmead et al., 2009) with a seed length of 25 and allowing up to two mismatches. Only the sequences that mapped to one location were used for further analysis. Of those sequences, clonal reads, defined as having the same start position on the same strand, were discarded. BED and wig files were created using custom perl scripts. Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols. The chromatin immunoprecipitation followed published methods (Welch et al. 2004). Information on antibodies used is available via the hyperlinks in the "Select subtracks" menu. Samples passing initial quality thresholds (enrichment and depletion for positive and negative controls - if available - by quantitative PCR of ChIP material) are processed for library construction for Illumina sequencing, using the ChIP-seq Sample Preparation Kit purchased from Illumina. Starting with a 10 ng sample of ChIP DNA, DNA fragments were repaired to generate blunt ends and a single A nucleotide was added to each end. Double-stranded Illumina adaptors were ligated to the fragments. Ligation products were amplified by 18 cycles of PCR, and the DNA between 250-350 bp was gel purified. Completed libraries were quantified with Quant-iT dsDNA HS Assay Kit. The DNA library was sequenced on the Illumina Genome Analyzer II sequencing system, and more recently on the HiSeq. Cluster generation, linearization, blocking and sequencing primer reagents were provided in the Illumina Cluster Amplification kits. All samples are being determined as biological replicates except time course samples. The data displayed are from the pooled reads for all replicates, but individual replicates are available by download. The resulting 36-nucleotide sequence reads (fastq files) were moved to a data library in Galaxy, and the tools implemented in Galaxy were used for further processing via workflows (Blankenberg et al. 2010). The reads were mapped to the mouse genome (mm9 assembly) using the program bowtie (Langmead et al. 2009), and the files of mapped reads for the ChIP sample and from the "input" control (no antibody) were processed by MACs (Zhang et al. 2008) to call peaks for occupancy by transcription factors, using the parameters mfold=15, bandwidth=125. Because the signal for some histone modifications is not expected to be tightly localized (compared to a transcription factor), peak calling programs may not be appropriate. Thus in addition, we provide wiggle tracks with tag counts for every 10 bp segment. Per-replicate aligments and sequences are available for download at downloads page. Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). The chromatin immunoprecipitation followed published methods (Welch et al. 2004). Information on antibodies used is available via the hyperlinks in the "Select subtracks" menu. Samples passing initial quality thresholds (enrichment and depletion for positive and negative controls - if available - by quantitative PCR of ChIP material) are processed for library construction for Illumina sequencing, using the ChIP-seq Sample Preparation Kit purchased from Illumina. Starting with a 10 ng sample of ChIP DNA, DNA fragments were repaired to generate blunt ends and a single A nucleotide was added to each end. Double-stranded Illumina adaptors were ligated to the fragments. Ligation products were amplified by 18 cycles of PCR, and the DNA between 250-350 bp was gel purified. Completed libraries were quantified with Quant-iT dsDNA HS Assay Kit. The DNA library was sequenced on the Illumina Genome Analyzer II sequencing system, and more recently on the HiSeq. Cluster generation, linearization, blocking and sequencing primer reagents were provided in the Illumina Cluster Amplification kits. All samples are being determined as biological replicates except time course samples. The data displayed are from the pooled reads for all replicates, but individual replicates are available by download. The resulting 36-nucleotide sequence reads (fastq files) were moved to a data library in Galaxy, and the tools implemented in Galaxy were used for further processing via workflows (Blankenberg et al. 2010). The reads were mapped to the mouse genome (mm9 assembly) using the program bowtie (Langmead et al. 2009), and the files of mapped reads for the ChIP sample and from the "input" control (no antibody) were processed by MACs (Zhang et al. 2008) to call peaks for occupancy by transcription factors, using the parameters mfold=15, bandwidth=125. Per-replicate aligments and sequences are available for download at downloads page (http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/mm9/encodeDCC/wgEncodePsuTfbs/). Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). For details on the chromatin immunoprecipitation protocol used, see Euskirchen et. al., (2007), Rozowsky et. al. (2009) and Auerbach et. al. (2009). DNA recovered from the precipitated chromatin was sequenced on the Illumina (Solexa) sequencing platform and mapped to the genome using the Eland alignment program. ChIP-seq data was scored based on sequence reads (length ~30 bps) that align uniquely to the human genome. From the mapped tags, a signal map of ChIP DNA fragments (average fragment length ~ 200 bp) was constructed where the signal height is the number of overlapping fragments at each nucleotide position in the genome. Reads were pooled from all submitted replicates to generate the Peak and Signal files. Per-replicate aligments and sequences are available for download at downloads page (http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/mm9/encodeDCC/wgEncodeSydhTfbs/). For each 1 Mb segment of each chromosome, a peak height threshold was determined by requiring a false discovery rate <= 0.01 when comparing the number of peaks above said threshold to the number of peaks obtained from multiple simulations of a random null background with the same number of mapped reads (also accounting for the fraction of mapable bases for sequence tags in that 1 Mb segment). The number of mapped tags in a putative binding region is compared to the normalized (normalized by correlating tag counts in genomic 10 kb windows) number of mapped tags in the same region from an input DNA control. Using a binomial test, only regions that have a p-value = 0.01 are considered to be significantly enriched compared to the input DNA control. Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Fresh tissues were harvested from mice and the nuclei prepared according to the tissue appropriate protocol (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Digital DNaseI was performed by DNaseI digestion of intact nuclei, isolating DNaseI 'double-hit' fragments as described in Sabo et al. (2006), and direct sequencing of fragment ends (which correspond to in vivo DNaseI cleavage sites) using the Illumina IIx (and Illumina HiSeq by early 2011) platform (36 bp reads). Uniquely mapping high-quality reads were mapped to the genome using the bowtie aligner. DNaseI sensitivity is directly reflected in raw tag density, which is shown in the track as density of tags mapping within a 150 bp sliding window (at a 20 bp step across the genome). DNaseI sensitive zones (HotSpots) were identified using the HotSpot algorithm described in Sabo et al. (2004). 1.0% false discovery rate thresholds (FDR 0.01) were computed for each cell type by applying the HotSpot algorithm to an equivalent number of random uniquely mapping 36mers. DNaseI hypersensitive sites (DHSs or Peaks) were identified as signal peaks within FDR 1.0% hypersensitive zones using a peak-finding algorithm (I-max). Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Fresh tissues were harvested from mice and the nuclei prepared according to the tissue appropriate protocol (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell/mouse). Reads were aligned to mm9 reference using ABI BioScope software version 1.2.1. Colorspace FASTQ format files were created using Heng Li's solid2fastq.pl script version 0.1.4, representing 0,1,2,3 color codes with the letters A,C,G,T respectively. Signal files were created from the BAM alignments using BEDTools.

Project description:This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Florencia Pauli mailto:fpauli@hudsonalpha.org). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). The ChIP-Seq method was used to assay chromatin fragments bound by specific or general transcription factors as described below. DNA isolated by ChIP-Seq was size-selected (~225 bp) and sequenced. Short reads of 25-36 bp were mapped to the human reference genome, and enriched regions of high read density relative to a total input chromatin control reads were identified. The sequence reads with quality scores (fastq files) and alignment coordinates (BAM files) from these experiments are available for download. For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell). Cross-linked chromatin was immunoprecipitated with an antibody. The Protein:DNA crosslinks were then reversed and the DNA fragments were recovered and sequenced. Please see protocol notes below and go to http://hudsonalpha.org/myers-lab/protocols for the most current version of the protocol. Biological replicates from each experiment were completed. Libraries were sequenced with an Illumina Genome Analyzer I or an Illumina Genome Analyzer IIx according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Sequence data produced by the Illumina data pipeline software were quality filtered and then mapped to NCBI Build37 (hg19) using the integrated Eland software; 32 nt of the sequence reads were used for alignment; up to two mismatches were tolerated; reads that mapped to multiple sites in the genome were discarded. To identify likely binding sites, peak calling was applied to the aligned sequence data sets using Model-based Analysis of Chip-Seq MACS (Zhang Y, et al., 2008) (http://liulab.dfci.harvard.edu/MACS/00README.html). MACS models the shift size of ChIP-Seq tags empirically, and uses it to improve the spatial resolution of predicted binding sites. MACS also uses a dynamic Poisson distribution to capture local biases in the genome, allowing for more robust predictions (Zhang Y, et al., 2008). Protocol Notes: Several changes and improvements were made to the original ChIP-Seq protocol (Jonshon et al.,2008). The major differences between protocols are the number of cells and magnetic beads used for IP, the method of sonication used to fragment DNA, and the number of cycles of PCR used to amplify the sequencing library. The most current protocol used by the Myers lab can be found at http://hudsonalpha.org/myers-lab/protocols. The protocol field for each file denotes the version of the protocol used as being PCR1x, PCR2x or a version number (for examples, v041610.1). The sequencing libraries labeled as PCR2x were made with two rounds of amplification (25 and 15 cycles) and those labeled as PCR1x were made with one 15-cycle round of amplification. These experiments were completed prior to January 2010 and were originally aligned to NCBI Build36 (hg18). They have been re-aligned to NCBI Build37 (hg19) with the Bowtie software (Langmead, et al., 2009) for this data release (http://bowtie-bio.sourceforge.net/index.shtml). The libraries labeled with a protocol version number were competed after January 2010 and were only aligned to NCBI Build37 (hg19). Please refer to the Myers Lab website (http://hudsonalpha.org/myers-lab/protocols) for details on each protocol version. Verification: The MACS (http://liulab.dfci.harvard.edu/MACS/00README.html) peak caller was used to call significant peaks on the individual replicates of a ChIP-Seq experiment. Afterwards, the irreproducible discovery rate (IDR) method, developed by Li et al. (submitted), was used to quantify the consistency between pairs of ranked peaks lists from replicates. The IDR methods uses a model that assumes that the ranked lists of peaks in a pair of replicates consist of two groups - a reproducible group and an irreproducible group. In general, the signals in the reproducible group are more consistent (i.e. with a larger rank correlation coefficient) and are ranked higher than the irreproducible group. The proportion of peaks that belong to the irreproducible component and the correlation of the reproducible component are estimated adaptively from the data. The model also provides an IDR score for each peak, which reflects the posterior probability of the peak belonging to the irreproducible group. The aligned reads were pooled from all replicates and the MACS peak caller was used to call significant peaks on the pooled data. Only datasets containing at least 100 peaks passing the IDR threshold are considered valid and submitted for release.

Project description:This data was generated by ENCODE. If you have questions about the data, contact the submitting laboratory directly (Terry Furey mailto:tsfurey@duke.edu). If you have questions about the Genome Browser track associated with this data, contact ENCODE (mailto:genome@soe.ucsc.edu). These tracks display Formaldehyde-Assisted Isolation of Regulatory Elements (FAIRE) evidence as part of the four Open Chromatin track sets. FAIRE is a method to isolate and identify nucleosome-depleted regions of the genome. FAIRE was initially discovered in yeast and subsequently shown to identify active regulatory elements in human cells (Giresi et al., 2007). Similar to DNaseI HS, FAIRE appears to identify functional regulatory elements that include promoters, enhancers, silencers, insulators, locus control regions and novel elements. Together with DNaseI HS and ChIP-seq experiments, these tracks display the locations of active regulatory elements identified as open chromatin in multiple cell types (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgEncodeVocab?type=cellType) from the Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, UT-Austin, and EBI ENCODE group. Within this project, open chromatin was identified using two independent and complementary methods: DNaseI hypersensitivity (HS) and these FAIRE assays, combined with chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) for select regulatory factors. DNaseI HS and FAIRE provide assay cross-validation with commonly identified regions delineating the highest confidence areas of open chromatin. ChIP assays provide functional validation and preliminary annotation of a subset of open chromatin sites. Each method employed Illumina (formerly Solexa) sequencing by synthesis as the detection platform. The Tier 1 and Tier 2 cell types were additionally verified by a second platform, high-resolution 1% ENCODE tiled microarrays supplied by NimbleGen. Release 1 (March 2011) of this track consists of a remapping of all previously released experiments to the human reference genome GRCh37/hg19 (these data were previously mapped to NCBI36/hg18; please see the Release Notes section of the hg18 Open Chromatin track (http://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgTrackUi?db=hg18&g=wgEncodeChromatinMap) for information on the NCBI36/hg18 releases of the data). -There are 12 new FAIRE experiments in this release, on 10 new cell lines. -New to this release is a reconfiguration of how this track is displayed in relation to other tracks from the Duke/UNC/UT-Austin/EBI group. -A synthesis of open chromatin evidence from the three assay types was compiled for Tier 1 and 2 cell lines plus NHEK will also be added in this release and can be previewed in: Open Chromatin Synthesis (http://genome-preview.cse.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgTrackUi?db=hg19&g=wgEncodeOpenChromSynth). -Enhancer and Insulator Functional assays: A subset of DNase and FAIRE regions were cloned into functional tissue culture reporter assays to test for enhancer and insulator activity. Coordinates and results from these experiments can be found at http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/hg19/encodeDCC/wgEncodeOpenChromFaire/supplemental/. For data usage terms and conditions, please refer to http://www.genome.gov/27528022 and http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/ENCODE/ENCODEDataReleasePolicyFinal2008.pdf Cells were grown according to the approved ENCODE cell culture protocols (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/cell). FAIRE was performed (Giresi et al., 2007) by cross-linking proteins to DNA using 1% formaldehyde solution, and the complex was sheared using sonication. Phenol/chloroform extractions were performed to remove DNA fragments cross-linked to protein. The DNA recovered in the aqueous phase was sequenced using an Illumina (Solexa) sequencing system. FAIRE-seq data for Tier 1 and Tier 2 cell lines were verified by comparing multiple independent growths (replicates) and determining the reproducibility of the data. For some cell types, additional verification was performed using the same material but hybridized to NimbleGen Human ENCODE tiling arrays (1% of the genome) along with the input DNA as reference (FAIRE-chip). A more detailed protocol is available at http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/ENCODE/protocols/general/FAIRE_UNC_procedure.pdf. Also see Giresi et al., 2009. DNA fragments isolated by FAIRE are 100-200 bp in length, with the average length being 134 bp. Sequences from each experiment were aligned to the genome using BWA (Li et al., 2010) for the NCBI 36 (hg19) assembly. The command used for these alignments was: > bwa aln -t 8 genome.fa s_1.sequence.txt.bfq > s_1.sequence.txt.sai Where genome.fa is the whole genome sequence and s_1.sequence.txt.bfq is one lane of sequences converted into the required bfq format. Sequences from multiple lanes are combined for a single replicate using the bwa samse command, and converted in the sam/bam format using samtools. Only those that aligned to 4 or fewer locations were retained. Other sequences were also filtered based on their alignment to problematic regions (such as satellites and rRNA genes - see supplemental materials http://hgdownload.cse.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/hg19/encodeDCC/wgEncodeOpenChromFaire/supplemental/). The mappings of these short reads to the genome are available for download at http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgFileUi?g=wgEncodeOpenChromFaire. The resulting digital signal was converted to a continuous wiggle track using F-Seq that employs Parzen kernel density estimation to create base pair scores (Boyle et al., 2008b). Input data has been generated for several cell lines. These are used directly to create a control/background model used for F-Seq when generating signal annotations for these cell lines. These models are meant to correct for sequencing biases, alignment artifacts, and copy number changes in these cell lines. Input data is not being generated directly for other cell lines. Instead, a general background model was derived from the available Input data sets. This should provide corrections for sequencing biases and alignment artifacts, but will not correct for cell type specific copy number changes. The exact command used for this step is: > fseq -l 800 -v -b <bff files> -p <iff files> aligments.bed Where the (bff files) are the background files based on alignability, the (iff files) are the background files based on the Input experiments, and alignments.bed are a bed file of filtered sequence alignments. Discrete FAIRE sites (peaks) were identified from FAIRE-seq F-seq density signal. Significant regions were determined by fitting the data to a gamma distribution to calculate p-values. Contiguous regions data to a gamma distribution to calculate p-values. Contiguous regions where p-values were below a 0.05/0.01 threshold were considered significant. Data from the high-resolution 1% ENCODE tiled microarrays supplied by NimbleGen were normalized using the Tukey biweight normalization, and peaks were called using ChIPOTle (Buck, et al., 2005) at multiple levels of significance. Regions matched on size to these peaks that were devoid of any significant signal were also created as a null model. These data were used for additional verification of Tier 1 and Tier 2 cell lines by ROC analysis. Files containing this data can be found in the Downloads directory labeled Validation view (http://hgwdev.cse.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgFileUi?db=hg19&g=wgEncodeOpenChromFaire).

Dataset Information

Transcription Factor Binding Sites by ChIP-seq from ENCODE/LICR

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure