Quantitative Biology

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 156–174 | Cite as

Understanding spatial organizations of chromosomes via statistical analysis of Hi-C data

  • Ming Hu
  • Ke Deng
  • Zhaohui Qin
  • Jun S. LiuEmail author


Understanding how chromosomes fold provides insights into the transcription regulation, hence, the functional state of the cell. Using the next generation sequencing technology, the recently developed Hi-C approach enables a global view of spatial chromatin organization in the nucleus, which substantially expands our knowledge about genome organization and function. However, due to multiple layers of biases, noises and uncertainties buried in the protocol of Hi-C experiments, analyzing and interpreting Hi-C data poses great challenges, and requires novel statistical methods to be developed. This article provides an overview of recent Hi-C studies and their impacts on biomedical research, describes major challenges in statistical analysis of Hi-C data, and discusses some perspectives for future research.


Polymer Model Chromatin Interaction Topological Domain Chromosome Conformation Capture Biophysical Principle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Naumova, N. and Dekker, J. (2010) Integrating one-dimensional and three-dimensional maps of genomes. J. Cell. Sci., 123, 1979–1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Woodcock, C. L. and Ghosh, R. P. (2010) Chromatin higher-order structure and dynamics. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 2, a000596.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Misteli, T. (2004) Spatial positioning: a new dimension in genome function. Cell, 119, 153–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dekker, J. (2008) Gene regulation in the third dimension. Science, 319, 1793–1794.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Miele, A. and Dekker, J. (2008) Long-range chromosomal interactions and gene regulation. Mol Biosyst, 4, 1046–1057.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fraser, P. and Bickmore, W. (2007) Nuclear organization of the genome and the potential for gene regulation. Nature, 447, 413–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Misteli, T. (2007) Beyond the sequence: cellular organization of genome function. Cell, 128, 787–800.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alt, F. W., Zhang, Y., Meng, F. L., Guo, C. and Schwer, B. (2013) Mechanisms of programmed DNA lesions and genomic instability in the immune system. Cell, 152, 417–429.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitelman, F. (2000) Recurrent chromosome aberrations in cancer. Mutat. Res., 462, 247–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rowley, J. D. (1998) The critical role of chromosome translocations in human leukemias. Annu. Rev. Genet., 32, 495–519.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Steensel, B. and Dekker, J. (2010) Genomics tools for unraveling chromosome architecture. Nat. Biotechnol., 28, 1089–1095.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cremer, T., et al. (2012) Chromosome Territory Organization within the Nucleus. Encyclopedia of Molecular Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cremer, T., Cremer, M., Dietzel, S., Müller, S., Solovei, I. and Fakan, S. (2006) Chromosome territories—a functional nuclear landscape. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol., 18, 307–316.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Branco, M. R. and Pombo, A. (2007) Chromosome organization: new facts, new models. Trends Cell Biol., 17, 127–134.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wasserman, W.W. and Sandelin, A. (2004) Applied bioinformatics for the identification of regulatory elements. Nat. Rev. Genet., 5, 276–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gilbert, N., Boyle, S., Fiegler, H., Woodfine, K., Carter, N. P. and Bickmore, W. A. (2004) Chromatin architecture of the human genome: gene-rich domains are enriched in open chromatin fibers. Cell, 118, 555–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Wit, E. and de Laat, W. (2012) A decade of 3C technologies: insights into nuclear organization. Genes Dev., 26, 11–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dekker, J., Marti-Renom, M. A. and Mirny, L. A. (2013) Exploring the three-dimensional organization of genomes: interpreting chromatin interaction data. Nat. Rev. Genet., 14, 390–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dekker, J., Rippe, K., Dekker, M. and Kleckner, N. (2002) Capturing chromosome conformation. Science, 295, 1306–1311.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simonis, M., Klous, P., Splinter, E., Moshkin, Y., Willemsen, R., de Wit, E., van Steensel, B. and de Laat, W. (2006) Nuclear organization of active and inactive chromatin domains uncovered by chromosome conformation capture-on-chip (4C). Nat. Genet., 38, 1348–1354.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhao, Z., Tavoosidana, G., Sjölinder, M., Göndör, A., Mariano, P., Wang, S., Kanduri, C., Lezcano, M., Sandhu, K. S., Singh, U., et al. (2006) Circular chromosome conformation capture (4C) uncovers extensive networks of epigenetically regulated intra- and interchromosomal interactions. Nat. Genet., 38, 1341–1347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dostie, J., Richmond, T. A., Arnaout, R. A., Selzer, R. R., Lee, W. L., Honan, T. A., Rubio, E. D., Krumm, A., Lamb, J., Nusbaum, C., et al. (2006) Chromosome Conformation Capture Carbon Copy (5C): a massively parallel solution for mapping interactions between genomic elements. Genome Res., 16, 1299–1309.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dostie, J. and Dekker, J. (2007) Mapping networks of physical interactions between genomic elements using 5C technology. Nat Protoc, 2, 988–1002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Simonis, M., Kooren, J. and de Laat, W. (2007) An evaluation of 3Cbased methods to capture DNA interactions. Nat. Methods, 4, 895–901.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fullwood, M. J. and Ruan, Y. (2009) ChIP-based methods for the identification of long-range chromatin interactions. J. Cell. Biochem., 107, 30–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Handoko, L., Xu, H., Li, G., Ngan, C. Y., Chew, E., Schnapp, M., Lee, C. W., Ye, C., Ping, J. L., Mulawadi, F., et al. (2011) CTCF-mediated functional chromatin interactome in pluripotent cells. Nat. Genet., 43, 630–638.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Espinoza, C. A. and Ren, B. (2011) Mapping higher order structure of chromatin domains. Nat. Genet., 43, 615–616.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fullwood, M. J., Liu, M. H., Pan, Y. F., Liu, J., Xu, H., Mohamed, Y. B., Orlov, Y. L., Velkov, S., Ho, A., Mei, P. H., et al. (2009) An oestrogen-receptor-alpha-bound human chromatin interactome. Nature, 462, 58–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rusk, N. (2009) When ChIA PETs meet Hi-C. Nat. Methods, 6, 863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Miele, A., Bystricky, K. and Dekker, J. (2009) Yeast silent mating type loci form heterochromatic clusters through silencer protein-dependent long-range interactions. PLoS Genet., 5, e1000478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tolhuis, B., Palstra, R. J., Splinter, E., Grosveld, F. and de Laat, W. (2002) Looping and interaction between hypersensitive sites in the active beta-globin locus. Mol. Cell, 10, 1453–1465.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lajoie, B. R., van Berkum, N. L., Sanyal, A. and Dekker, J. (2009) My5C: web tools for chromosome conformation capture studies. Nat. Methods, 6, 690–691.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baù D., Sanyal, A., Lajoie, B. R., Capriotti, E., Byron, M., Lawrence, J. B., Dekker, J. and Marti-Renom, M. A. (2011) The three-dimensional folding of the α-globin gene domain reveals formation of chromatin globules. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol., 18, 107–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lieberman-Aiden, E., van Berkum, N. L., Williams, L., Imakaev, M., Ragoczy, T., Telling, A., Amit, I., Lajoie, B. R., Sabo, P. J., Dorschner, M. O., et al. (2009) Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science, 326, 289–293.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    van Berkum, N.L., et al. (2010) Hi-C: a method to study the three-dimensional architecture of genomes. J. Vis. Exp., 39.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Baker, M. (2011) Genomics: Genomes in three dimensions. Nature, 470, 289–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kalhor, R., Tjong, H., Jayathilaka, N., Alber, F. and Chen, L. (2012) Genome architectures revealed by tethered chromosome conformation capture and population-based modeling. Nat. Biotechnol., 30, 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Duan, Z., Andronescu, M., Schutz, K., McIlwain, S., Kim, Y. J., Lee, C., Shendure, J., Fields, S., Blau, C. A. and Noble, W. S. (2010) A three-dimensional model of the yeast genome. Nature, 465, 363–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rousseau, M., Fraser, J., Ferraiuolo, M. A., Dostie, J. and Blanchette, M. (2011) Three-dimensional modeling of chromatin structure from interaction frequency data using Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling. BMC Bioinformatics, 12, 414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tanizawa, H., Iwasaki, O., Tanaka, A., Capizzi, J. R., Wickramasinghe, P., Lee, M., Fu, Z. and Noma, K. (2010) Mapping of long-range associations throughout the fission yeast genome reveals global genome organization linked to transcriptional regulation. Nucleic Acids Res., 38, 8164–8177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Marti-Renom, M. A. and Mirny, L. A. (2011) Bridging the resolution gap in structural modeling of 3D genome organization. PLoS Comput. Biol., 7, e1002125.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mateos-Langerak, J., Bohn, M., de Leeuw, W., Giromus, O., Manders, E. M., Verschure, P. J., Indemans, M. H., Gierman, H. J., Heermann, D. W., van Driel, R., et al. (2009) Spatially confined folding of chromatin in the interphase nucleus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 106, 3812–3817.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bohn, M. and Heermann, D. W. (2010) Diffusion-driven looping provides a consistent framework for chromatin organization. PLoS ONE, 5, e12218.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Barbieri, M., Chotalia, M., Fraser, J., Lavitas, L. M., Dostie, J., Pombo, A. and Nicodemi, M. (2012) Complexity of chromatin folding is captured by the strings and binders switch model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 109, 16173–16178.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dixon, J. R., Selvaraj, S., Yue, F., Kim, A., Li, Y., Shen, Y., Hu, M., Liu, J. S. and Ren, B. (2012) Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions. Nature, 485, 376–380.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nora, E. P., Lajoie, B. R., Schulz, E. G., Giorgetti, L., Okamoto, I., Servant, N., Piolot, T., van Berkum, N. L., Meisig, J., Sedat, J., et al. (2012) Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre. Nature, 485, 381–385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sexton, T., Yaffe, E., Kenigsberg, E., Bantignies, F., Leblanc, B., Hoichman, M., Parrinello, H., Tanay, A. and Cavalli, G. (2012) Three-dimensional folding and functional organization principles of the Drosophila genome. Cell, 148, 458–472.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hou, C., Li, L., Qin, Z. S. and Corces, V. G. (2012) Gene density, transcription, and insulators contribute to the partition of the Drosophila genome into physical domains. Mol. Cell, 48, 471–484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Duan, Z. and Blau, C. A. (2012) The genome in space and time: does form always follow function? How does the spatial and temporal organization of a eukaryotic genome reflect and influence its functions? Bioessays, 34, 800–810.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lan, X., Farnham, P. J. and Jin, V. X. (2012) Uncovering transcription factor modules using one- and three-dimensional analyses. J. Biol. Chem., 287, 30914–30921.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lan, X., Witt, H., Katsumura, K., Ye, Z., Wang, Q., Bresnick, E. H., Farnham, P. J. and Jin, V. X. (2012) Integration of Hi-C and ChIP-seq data reveals distinct types of chromatin linkages. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, 7690–7704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Khrameeva, E. E., Mironov, A. A., Fedonin, G. G., Khaitovich, P. and Gelfand, M. S. (2012) Spatial proximity and similarity of the epigenetic state of genome domains. PLoS ONE, 7, e33947.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hwang, Y. C., Zheng, Q., Gregory, B. D. and Wang, L. S. (2013) High-throughput identification of long-range regulatory elements and their target promoters in the human genome. Nucleic Acids Res., 41, 4835–4846.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wang, J., Lan, X., Hsu, P. Y., Hsu, H. K., Huang, K., Parvin, J., Huang, T. H. and Jin, V. X. (2013) Genome-wide analysis uncovers high frequency, strong differential chromosomal interactions and their associated epigenetic patterns in E2-mediated gene regulation. BMC Genomics, 14, 70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Baker, A., Audit, B., Chen, C. L., Moindrot, B., Leleu, A., Guilbaud, G., Rappailles, A., Vaillant, C., Goldar, A., Mongelard, F., et al. (2012) Replication fork polarity gradients revealed by megabase-sized U-shaped replication timing domains in human cell lines. PLoS Comput. Biol., 8, e1002443.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Moindrot, B., Audit, B., Klous, P., Baker, A., Thermes, C., de Laat, W., Bouvet, P., Mongelard, F. and Arneodo, A. (2012) 3D chromatin conformation correlates with replication timing and is conserved in resting cells. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, 9470–9481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Takebayashi, S., Dileep, V., Ryba, T., Dennis, J. H. and Gilbert, D. M. (2012) Chromatin-interaction compartment switch at developmentally regulated chromosomal domains reveals an unusual principle of chromatin folding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 109, 12574–12579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Fudenberg, G., Getz, G., Meyerson, M. and Mirny, L. A. (2011) High order chromatin architecture shapes the landscape of chromosomal alterations in cancer. Nat. Biotechnol., 29, 1109–1113.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    De, S. and Michor, F. (2011) DNA replication timing and long-range DNA interactions predict mutational landscapes of cancer genomes. Nat. Biotechnol., 29, 1103–1108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Chiarle, R., Zhang, Y., Frock, R. L., Lewis, S. M., Molinie, B., Ho, Y. J., Myers, D. R., Choi, V. W., Compagno, M., Malkin, D. J., et al. (2011) Genome-wide translocation sequencing reveals mechanisms of chromosome breaks and rearrangements in B cells. Cell, 147, 107–119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Zhang, Y., McCord, R. P., Ho, Y. J., Lajoie, B. R., Hildebrand, D. G., Simon, A. C., Becker, M. S., Alt, F. W. and Dekker, J. (2012) Spatial organization of the mouse genome and its role in recurrent chromosomal translocations. Cell, 148, 908–921.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Elemento, O., Rubin, M. A. and Rickman, D. S. (2012) Oncogenic transcription factors as master regulators of chromatin topology: a new role for ERG in prostate cancer. Cell Cycle, 11, 3380–3383.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rickman, D. S., Soong, T. D., Moss, B., Mosquera, J. M., Dlabal, J., Terry, S., MacDonald, T. Y., Tripodi, J., Bunting, K., Najfeld, V., et al. (2012) Oncogene-mediated alterations in chromatin conformation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 109, 9083–9088.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Engreitz, J. M., Agarwala, V. and Mirny, L. A. (2012) Three-dimensional genome architecture influences partner selection for chromosomal translocations in human disease. PLoS ONE, 7, e44196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Shugay, M., Ortiz de Mendíbil, I., Vizmanos, J. L. and Novo, F. J. (2012) Genomic hallmarks of genes involved in chromosomal translocations in hematological cancer. PLoS Comput. Biol., 8, e1002797.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wang, Z., Cao, R., Taylor, K., Briley, A., Caldwell, C. and Cheng, J. (2013) The properties of genome conformation and spatial gene interaction and regulation networks of normal and malignant human cell types. PLoS ONE, 8, e58793.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Chambers, E. V., Bickmore, W. A. and Semple, C. A. (2013) Divergence of Mammalian higher order chromatin structure is associated with developmental Loci. PLoS Comput. Biol., 9, e1003017.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dai, Z. and Dai, X. (2012) Nuclear colocalization of transcription factor target genes strengthens coregulation in yeast. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, 27–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Witten, D. M. and Noble, W. S. (2012) On the assessment of statistical significance of three-dimensional colocalization of sets of genomic elements. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, 3849–3855.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Paulsen, J., Lien, T. G., Sandve, G. K., Holden, L., Borgan, O., Glad, I. K. and Hovig, E. (2013) Handling realistic assumptions in hypothesis testing of 3D co-localization of genomic elements. Nucleic Acids Res., (In press).Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Belton, J. M., McCord, R. P., Gibcus, J. H., Naumova, N., Zhan, Y. and Dekker, J. (2012) Hi-C: a comprehensive technique to capture the conformation of genomes. Methods, 58, 268–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Duan, Z., Andronescu, M., Schutz, K., Lee, C., Shendure, J., Fields, S., Noble, W. S. and Anthony Blau, C. (2012) A genome-wide 3C-method for characterizing the three-dimensional architectures of genomes. Methods, 58, 277–288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Yaffe, E. and Tanay, A. (2011) Probabilistic modeling of Hi-C contact maps eliminates systematic biases to characterize global chromosomal architecture. Nat. Genet., 43, 1059–1065.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Imakaev, M., Fudenberg, G., McCord, R. P., Naumova, N., Goloborodko, A., Lajoie, B. R., Dekker, J. and Mirny, L. A. (2012) Iterative correction of Hi-C data reveals hallmarks of chromosome organization. Nat. Methods, 9, 999–1003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Li, H. and Durbin, R. (2009) Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics, 25, 1754–1760.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Li, H., Ruan, J. and Durbin, R. (2008) Mapping short DNA sequencing reads and calling variants using mapping quality scores. Genome Res., 18, 1851–1858.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Langmead, B., Trapnell, C., Pop, M. and Salzberg, S. L. (2009) Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome. Genome Biol., 10, R25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
  79. 79.
  80. 80.
    Servant, N., Lajoie, B. R., Nora, E. P., Giorgetti, L., Chen, C. J., Heard, E., Dekker, J. and Barillot, E. (2012) HiTC: exploration of high-throughput ‘C’ experiments. Bioinformatics, 28, 2843–2844.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Shavit, Y. and Lio’, P. (2013) CytoHiC: a cytoscape plugin for visual comparison of Hi-C networks. Bioinformatics, 29, 1206–1207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Zhou, X., Lowdon, R. F., Li, D., Lawson, H. A., Madden, P. A., Costello, J. F. and Wang, T. (2013) Exploring long-range genome interactions using the WashU Epigenome Browser. Nat. Methods, 10, 375–376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Aird, D., Ross, M. G., Chen, W. S., Danielsson, M., Fennell, T., Russ, C., Jaffe, D. B., Nusbaum, C. and Gnirke, A. (2011) Analyzing and minimizing PCR amplification bias in Illumina sequencing libraries. Genome Biol., 12, R18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Benjamini, Y. and Speed, T. P. (2012) Summarizing and correcting the GC content bias in high-throughput sequencing. Nucleic Acids Res., 40, e72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Gascoigne, D. K., et al. (2011) Reassessment of the Hi-C analysis of human genome architecture. Scholar
  86. 86.
    Cournac, A., Marie-Nelly, H., Marbouty, M., Koszul, R. and Mozziconacci, J. (2012) Normalization of a chromosomal contact map. BMC Genomics, 13, 436.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Hu, M., Deng, K., Selvaraj, S., Qin, Z., Ren, B. and Liu, J. S. (2012) HiCNorm: removing biases in Hi-C data via Poisson regression. Bioinformatics, 28, 3131–3133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Bickmore, W. A. and van Steensel, B. (2013) Genome architecture: domain organization of interphase chromosomes. Cell, 152, 1270–1284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Smallwood, A. and Ren, B. (2013) Genome organization and longrange regulation of gene expression by enhancers. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol., 25, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gibcus, J. H. and Dekker, J. (2013) The hierarchy of the 3D genome. Mol. Cell, 49, 773–782.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Tanay, A. and Cavalli, G. (2013) Chromosomal domains: epigenetic contexts and functional implications of genomic compartmentalization. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev., 23, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Cavalli, G. and Misteli, T. (2013) Functional implications of genome topology. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol., 20, 290–299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Liu, L., Zhang, Y., Feng, J., Zheng, N., Yin, J. and Zhang, Y. (2012) GeSICA: genome segmentation from intra-chromosomal associations. BMC Genomics, 13, 164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Fudenberg, G. and Mirny, L. A. (2012) Higher-order chromatin structure: bridging physics and biology. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev., 22, 115–124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Gasser, S. M. (2002) Visualizing chromatin dynamics in interphase nuclei. Science, 296, 1412–1416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lanctôt, C., Cheutin, T., Cremer, M., Cavalli, G. and Cremer, T. (2007) Dynamic genome architecture in the nuclear space: regulation of gene expression in three dimensions. Nat. Rev. Genet., 8, 104–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Gerlich, D., Beaudouin, J., Kalbfuss, B., Daigle, N., Eils, R. and Ellenberg, J. (2003) Global chromosome positions are transmitted through mitosis in mammalian cells. Cell, 112, 751–764.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Grosberg, A. Y., Nechaev, S. K. and Shakhnovich, E. I. (1988) The role of topological constraints in the kinetics of collapse of macromolecules. J. Phys., 49, 2095–2100..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Grosberg, A. Y., et al. (1993) Crumpled globule model of the three-dimensional structure of DNA. Europhys. Lett., 23, 373..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Munkel, C. and Langowski, J. (1998) Chromosome structure predicted by a polymer model. Physcial Review E, 57, 5888–5896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Mirny, L. A. (2011) The fractal globule as a model of chromatin architecture in the cell. Chromosome Res., 19, 37–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Baù D. and Marti-Renom, M. A. (2011) Structure determination of genomic domains by satisfaction of spatial restraints. Chromosome Res., 19, 25–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Hu, M., Deng, K., Qin, Z., Dixon, J., Selvaraj, S., Fang, J., Ren, B. and Liu, J. S. (2013) Bayesian inference of spatial organizations of chromosomes. PLoS Comput. Biol., 9, e1002893.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Liu, J. S., Chen, R. and Wong, W. H. (1998) Rejection control and sequential importance sampling. J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 93, 1022–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Liu, J. S. (2001) Monte Carlo Strategies in scientific computing. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Duane, S., et al. (1987) Hybrid Monte-Carlo. Phys. Lett. B, 195, 216–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Misteli, T. (2012) Parallel genome universes. Nat. Biotechnol., 30, 55–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Akaike, H. (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 19, 716–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Mathematical Sciences CenterTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public HealthEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations