In many GEO records associated with publications, I see CTCF ChIP-seq datasets without background controls—neither input nor IgG. Is there some accepted, different standard for CTCF that I’m unaware of? My understanding is that, in general for a ChIP-seq dataset, a matched input is necessary for a well-controlled experiment.
Or is this a kind of thing where CTCF ChIP-seq often have (apparently sufficiently) strong signal-to-noise that, historically, experiments have been considered acceptable without a background control? If so, I'm not sure I really understand the rationale. Lots of strong ChIP-seq signal can be arbitrary or technical in origin, which is part of why controls and things like exclusion lists (e.g., blacklists and greylists) exist in the first place.
Am I missing something specific to CTCF, or is not using a background control simply a fairly common practice for these datasets?
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
Really no reason to exclude input for CTCF ChIP-seq. IgG is less common for ChIP-seq in general though. It does also tend toward very high signal-noise ratio though.
In many papers, reviewers don't try too hard in evaluating the rigor of sequencing experiments. As long as it sounds nice in the paper. Depends on the field/reviewer/journal of course.