MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321813948 · doi:10.1038/protex.2015.007

Ultra-low-input native ChIP-seq for rare cell populations

2015· article· en· W2321813948 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Julie Brind’Amour, Sheng Liu, Matthew B. Hudson, Carol Chen, Mohammad Mahdi Karimi, Matthew C. Lorincz

Bibliographic record

VenueProtocol Exchange · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChipComputational biologyBiologyComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combined chromatin immunoprecipitation and next generation sequencing \(ChIP-seq) has become an extremely popular method to generate genome-wide epigenetic pro les from numerous cell lines and tissue types.Typical ChIP-seq experiments require large number of cells, making them ill-adapted to the study of rare cell populations.This procedure describes an ultra-low-input \(ULI) micrococcal nucleasebased native ChIP \(NChIP) and sequencing library construction method to generate genome-wide chromatin pro les from as few as 10 3 cells \(Brind'Amour et al., 10.1038/ncomms7033).In addition, ULI-NChIP-seq has been validated in vivo, by generation of H3K9me3 and H3K27me3 pro les from E13.5 primordial germ cells isolated from single embryos \ (Liu, Brind'Amour et al., 10.1101/gad.244848.114).ULI-NChIP-seq should be useful to generate high quality and complexity libraries from rare cell populations, allowing to decrease colony breeding size or to analyze rare clinical samples.Due to often variable cell numbers obtained during isolation of in vivo cell population, the procedure described here allows for exibility, with some suggestions on adaptation of buffer or volume conditions at various points during the procedure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtocol ExchangeSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207