One of the main challenges, from a statistician’s perspective, is accessing appropriate datasets for developing and testing methodology improvements. Getting the right balance between detailed information for a small number of samples (high cost per sample) and less detail about a biological replicated cohort (low cost per sample) is still an open question. This part of our benchmarking work package addresses the lack of analyses comparing platforms in these terms, i.e., cost per information content.
Bock, C. (2012). Analysing and interpreting DNA methylation data. Nature Reviews Genetics, 13, 705-719
Laird, P. W. (2010). Principles and challenges of genome-wide DNA methylation analysis. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11(3), 191–203.
Riebler, A., Menigatti, M., Song, J. Z., Statham, A. L., Stirzaker, C., Mahmud, N., Robinson, M. D. (2014). BayMeth: improved DNA methylation quantification for affinity capture sequencing data using a flexible Bayesian approach. Genome Biology, 15(2), R35.
Robinson, M. D., Statham, A. L., Speed, T. P., Clark, S. J. (2010). Protocol matters: which methylome are you actually studying? Epigenomics, 2(4), 587–598.
Ziller, M. J., Gu, H., Muller, F., Donaghey, J., Tsai, L. T., Kohlbacher, O., Meissner, A. (2013). Charting a dynamic DNA methylation landscape of the human genome. Nature, 500(7463), 477–481.
C1omics 2015 Single-cell omics methods and applications, 24-25 November 2015, Manchester....more information
See Software section for software developed by the RADIANT team
See Publications section for latest papers from the RADIANT project
Collaborative research project
European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme
Start date: December 2012
End date: December 2015
Coordinator: University of Manchester
Grant Agreement no: 305626