Peak calling with different methods and consensus peak identification
Annotate peaks
Differential binding analysis
Gene set enrichment analysis
Motif prediction to identify putative TF binding sites
Challenge Project: Comparison of peak calling methods
Run workflow from start to finish (steps 1-8) on ChIP-Seq data set from Kaufman et al. (2010)
Challenge project tasks
Call peaks with MACS2 and PeakSeq
Compare the results from (a) with peaks identified by Kaufmann et al (2010)
Report unique and common peaks among three methods and plot the results as venn diagrams
Plot the performance of the peak callers in form of ROC plots. As true result set one can use the intersect of the peaks identified by all methods.
References
Feng J, Liu T, Qin B, Zhang Y, Liu XS (2012) Identifying ChIP-seq enrichment using MACS. Nat Protoc 7: 1728–1740. PubMed
Kaufmann, K, F Wellmer, J M Muiño, T Ferrier, S E Wuest, V Kumar, A Serrano-Mislata, et al. 2010. “Orchestration of Floral Initiation by APETALA1.” Science 328 (5974): 85–89. PubMed
Landt SG, Marinov GK, Kundaje A, Kheradpour P, Pauli F, Batzoglou S, Bernstein BE, Bickel P, Brown JB, Cayting P, et al (2012) ChIP-seq guidelines and practices of the ENCODE and modENCODE consortia. Genome Res 22: 1813–1831 PubMed
Lun ATL, Smyth GK (2014) De novo detection of differentially bound regions for ChIP-seq data using peaks and windows: controlling error rates correctly. Nucleic Acids Res 42: e95 PubMed
Wilbanks EG, Facciotti MT (2010) Evaluation of algorithm performance in ChIP-seq peak detection. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011471 PubMed
Zhang Y, Liu T, Meyer CA, Eeckhoute J, Johnson DS, Bernstein BE, Nussbaum C, Myers RM, Brown M, Li W, et al (2008) Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol. doi: 10.1186/gb-2008-9-9-r137 PubMed