Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Biostatistics. 2014 Jul;15(3):442-56. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxu003. Epub 2014 Feb 11.

Reproducibility of 3D chromatin configuration reconstructions.

Author information

1
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Center for Bioinformatics and Molecular Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, USADepartment of Mathematics, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA 94132, USA mark@biostat.ucsf.edu.
2
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Center for Bioinformatics and Molecular Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, USADepartment of Mathematics, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA 94132, USA.

Abstract

It is widely recognized that the three-dimensional (3D) architecture of eukaryotic chromatin plays an important role in processes such as gene regulation and cancer-driving gene fusions. Observing or inferring this 3D structure at even modest resolutions had been problematic, since genomes are highly condensed and traditional assays are coarse. However, recently devised high-throughput molecular techniques have changed this situation. Notably, the development of a suite of chromatin conformation capture (CCC) assays has enabled elicitation of contacts-spatially close chromosomal loci-which have provided insights into chromatin architecture. Most analysis of CCC data has focused on the contact level, with less effort directed toward obtaining 3D reconstructions and evaluating the accuracy and reproducibility thereof. While questions of accuracy must be addressed experimentally, questions of reproducibility can be addressed statistically-the purpose of this paper. We use a constrained optimization technique to reconstruct chromatin configurations for a number of closely related yeast datasets and assess reproducibility using four metrics that measure the distance between 3D configurations. The first of these, Procrustes fitting, measures configuration closeness after applying reflection, rotation, translation, and scaling-based alignment of the structures. The others base comparisons on the within-configuration inter-point distance matrix. Inferential results for these metrics rely on suitable permutation approaches. Results indicate that distance matrix-based approaches are preferable to Procrustes analysis, not because of the metrics per se but rather on account of the ability to customize permutation schemes to handle within-chromosome contiguity. It has recently been emphasized that the use of constrained optimization approaches to 3D architecture reconstruction are prone to being trapped in local minima. Our methods of reproducibility assessment provide a means for comparing 3D reconstruction solutions so that we can discern between local and global optima by contrasting solutions under perturbed inputs.

KEYWORDS:

Chromatin conformation; Distance matrix; Genome architecture; Procrustes analysis

PMID:
24519450
PMCID:
PMC4059464
DOI:
10.1093/biostatistics/kxu003
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center