An evaluation of two-channel ChIP-on-chip and DNA methylation microarray normalization strategies

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The combination of chromatin immunoprecipitation with two-channel microarray technology enables genome-wide mapping of binding sites of DNA-interacting proteins (ChIP-on-chip) or sites with methylated CpG di-nucleotides (DNA methylation microarray). These powerful tools are the gateway to understanding gene transcription regulation. Since the goals of such studies, the sample preparation procedures, the microarray content and study design are all different from transcriptomics microarrays, the data pre-processing strategies traditionally applied to transcriptomics microarrays may not be appropriate. Particularly, the main challenge of the normalization of "regulation microarrays" is (i) to make the data of individual microarrays quantitatively comparable and (ii) to keep the signals of the enriched probes, representing DNA sequences from the precipitate, as distinguishable as possible from the signals of the un-enriched probes, representing DNA sequences largely absent from the precipitate.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We compare several widely used normalization approaches (VSN, LOWESS, quantile, T-quantile, Tukey's biweight scaling, Peng's method) applied to a selection of regulation microarray datasets, ranging from DNA methylation to transcription factor binding and histone modification studies. Through comparison of the data distributions of control probes and gene promoter probes before and after normalization, and assessment of the power to identify known enriched genomic regions after normalization, we demonstrate that there are clear differences in performance between normalization procedures.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>T-quantile normalization applied separately on the channels and Tukey's biweight scaling outperform other methods in terms of the conservation of enriched and un-enriched signal separation, as well as in identification of genomic regions known to be enriched. T-quantile normalization is preferable as it additionally improves comparability between microarrays. In contrast, popular normalization approaches like quantile, LOWESS, Peng's method and VSN normalization alter the data distributions of regulation microarrays to such an extent that using these approaches will impact the reliability of the downstream analysis substantially.</p

Advancing food, nutrition, and health research in Europe by connecting and building research infrastructures in a DISH-RI: Results of the EuroDISH project

Background: Research infrastructures (RIs) are essential to advance research on the relationship between food, nutrition, and health. RIs will facilitate innovation and allow insights at the systems level which are required to design (public health) strategies that will address societal challenges more effectively. Approach: In the EuroDISH project we mapped existing RIs in the food and health area in Europe, identified outstanding needs, and synthesised this into a conceptual design of a pan-European DISH-RI. The DISH model was used to describe and structure the research area: Determinants of food choice, Intake of foods and nutrients, Status and functional markers of nutritional health, and Health and disease risk. Key findings: The need to develop RIs in the food and health domain clearly emerged from the EuroDISH project. It showed the necessity for a unique interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder RI that overarches the research domains. A DISH-RI should bring services to the research community that facilitate network and community building and provide access to standardised, interoperable, and innovative data and tools. It should fulfil the scientific needs to connect within and between research domains and make use of current initiatives. Added value can also be created by providing services to policy makers and industry, unlocking data and enabling valorisation of research insights in practice through public-private partnerships. The governance of these services (e.g. ownership) and the centralised and distributed activities of the RI itself (e.g. flexibility, innovation) needs to be organised and aligned with the different interests of public and private partners