<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Lin YY</submitter><funding>BMBF</funding><funding>Joachim Herz Foundation</funding><funding>German Center for Cardiovascular Research</funding><funding>Wilhelm Sander-Stiftung</funding><funding>Horizon Europe</funding><funding>Cardio-Pulmonary Institute</funding><funding>KU Leuven</funding><funding>German Cancer Aid</funding><funding>Horizon 2020</funding><funding>German Network for Bioinformatics Infrastructure</funding><pagination>gkaf970</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12539629</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>53(19)</volume><pubmed_abstract>DNA methylation is a widely studied epigenetic mark and a powerful biomarker of cell type, age, environmental exposures, and disease. Whole-genome sequencing following selective conversion of unmethylated cytosines into thymines via bisulfite treatment or enzymatic methods remains the reference method for DNA methylation profiling genome-wide. While numerous software tools facilitate processing of DNA methylation sequencing reads, a comprehensive benchmarking study has been lacking. In this study, we systematically compared complete computational workflows for processing DNA methylation sequencing data using a dedicated benchmarking dataset generated with five whole-genome profiling protocols. As an evaluation reference, we employed accurate locus-specific measurements from our previous be</pubmed_abstract><journal>Nucleic acids research</journal><pubmed_title>Pipeline Olympics: continuable benchmarking of computational workflows for DNA methylation sequencing data against an experimental gold standard.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC12539629</pmcid><funding_grant_id>70113869</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>81Z0200101</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>01KD2207A</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>101058427</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>390649896</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>STG/22/024</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>031L0162B</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>2022.010.1</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>031L0101A</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>824110</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Plass C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nordstroem K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lipka DB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lin YY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kensche PR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schonung M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Giacomelli G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lafrenz P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Iskar M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Esteller M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zapatka M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Weichenhan D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lawerenz C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schulz MH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schlesner M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Merkel A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bock C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gerhauser C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chepeleva M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wolf S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hovestadt V</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gonzalez-Avalos E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hartmann M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Assenov Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kramer S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mucke O</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Toth R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Walter J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sarnataro A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lutsik P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Twardziok S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Breuer K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Buchhalter I</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thommen F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kretzmer H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Fischer J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hoffmann S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wilk A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Petermann F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Weiser L</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Pipeline Olympics: continuable benchmarking of computational workflows for DNA methylation sequencing data against an experimental gold standard.</name><description>DNA methylation is a widely studied epigenetic mark and a powerful biomarker of cell type, age, environmental exposures, and disease. Whole-genome sequencing following selective conversion of unmethylated cytosines into thymines via bisulfite treatment or enzymatic methods remains the reference method for DNA methylation profiling genome-wide. While numerous software tools facilitate processing of DNA methylation sequencing reads, a comprehensive benchmarking study has been lacking. In this study, we systematically compared complete computational workflows for processing DNA methylation sequencing data using a dedicated benchmarking dataset generated with five whole-genome profiling protocols. As an evaluation reference, we employed accurate locus-specific measurements from our previous be</description><dates><release>2025-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2025 Oct</publication><modification>2026-05-10T03:23:35.345Z</modification><creation>2026-05-10T03:12:29.433Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC12539629</accession><cross_references><pubmed>41118575</pubmed><doi>10.1093/nar/gkaf970</doi></cross_references></HashMap>