Comparing chromatin contact maps at scale: methods and insights
Gunsalus, L. M.; McArthur, E.; Gjoni, K.; Kuang, S.; Pittman, M.; Capra, J. A.; Pollard, K. S.
Show abstract
Comparing chromatin contact maps is an essential step in quantifying how three-dimensional (3D) genome organization shapes development, evolution, and disease. However, no gold standard exists for comparing contact maps, and even simple methods often disagree. In this study, we propose novel comparison methods and evaluate them alongside existing approaches using genome-wide Hi-C data and 22,500 in silico predicted contact maps. We also quantify the robustness of methods to common sources of biological and technical variation, such as boundary size and noise. We find that simple difference-based methods such as mean squared error are suitable for initial screening, but biologically informed methods are necessary to identify why maps diverge and propose specific functional hypotheses. We provide a reference guide, codebase, and benchmark for rapidly comparing chromatin contact maps at scale to enable biological insights into the 3D organization of the genome.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Harmonizing single cell 3D genome data with STARK and scNucleome 96%
- A global high-density chromatin interaction network reveals functional long-range and trans-chromosomal relationships 95%
- Conformational analysis of chromosome structures reveals vital role of chromosome morphology in gene function 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- A supervised learning framework for chromatin loop detection in genome-wide contact maps 96%
- Boosting the detection of enhancer-promoter loops via novel normalization methods for chromatin interaction data 96%
- Fine-mapping of nuclear compartments using ultra-deep Hi-C shows that active promoter and enhancer elements localize in the active A compartment even when adjacent sequences do not 95%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.