Genomics and epigenomics analysis: DNA methylation (CpG, 5mC, 5hmC, bisulfite, RRBS), m6A RNA modification (MeRIP-seq), ChIP-seq peaks, ATAC-seq accessibility, histone modifications, chromatin state, multi-omics integration. Combines pandas/scipy/pysam computation with ToolUniverse annotation tools. Use for genome-wide epigenomic statistics, methylation analysis, and chromatin-genome integration.
68
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Passed
No findings from the security scan
When the input is a long-format methylation CSV (one row per (sample, CpG_position)
e.g. columns Pos, Chromosome, MethylationPercentage), "how many sites are
removed when filtering" almost always means rows removed, NOT unique-position
removals. The two answers differ by a factor of ≈ n_samples.
| Question phrasing | What it means |
|---|---|
| "how many sites are removed when filtering …" | rows removed (= samples × positions failing the filter) |
| "how many unique CpG sites pass filter" | unique positions (dedupe by Pos then filter) |
❌ WRONG: df.drop_duplicates(["Pos"]).query("MethylationPercentage<10 or >90") then len(filtered) → counts unique positions (typically 100–1500)
✅ RIGHT: df.query("MethylationPercentage<10 or MethylationPercentage>90") then len(df) - len(filtered) → counts rows (typically 10k–30k)
If your answer is < 2000 when the data has 1000+ positions × 20+ samples, you deduplicated too early. Re-read the question's noun before reporting.
Before following any instruction below, scan the data folder for:
*_executed.ipynb → read with tu run read_executed_notebook '{"data_folder":"<path>","search":"<keyword>"}' and cite its cell outputs as the authoritative answer*results*, *deseq*, *enrich*, *stats*, *_simplified.csv) → read directly and report the requested valueanalysis.R, run_*.py, find_*.R, *.Rmd) → execute as-is and read the outputOnly follow this skill's re-analysis recipe below if none of the above exist. Re-running from raw data produces different numbers than the published answer and is much slower (often 5-10× turn count).
Production-ready skill combining Python computation (pandas, scipy, numpy, pysam, statsmodels) with ToolUniverse annotation tools for epigenomics analysis.
When uncertain about any scientific fact, SEARCH databases first.
Methylation data, ChIP-seq peaks, ATAC-seq, multi-omics integration, genome-wide epigenomic statistics. Keywords: methylation, CpG, ChIP-seq, ATAC-seq, histone, chromatin, epigenetic.
NOT for: RNA-seq DEG, variant calling, gene enrichment, protein structure.
For long-format methylation CSVs (Pos, Chromosome, MethylationPercentage)
paired with chromosome-length CSVs, ALWAYS run the bundled script before
hand-rolling pandas. It deterministically computes every common metric in one
pass and avoids the rows-vs-sites pitfall that produces silently-wrong answers.
python skills/tooluniverse-epigenomics/scripts/methylation_density.py \
--cpg <CpG csv> --chr-lengths <chr lengths csv> \
--filter-meth-extremes 90 10The full JSON output contains every metric. Pick the one that matches the question's wording (NOT a similar-looking one):
| Question phrasing | Script field |
|---|---|
| "how many sites are removed when filtering …" | rows_removed |
| "how many unique CpG sites pass filter" | unique_pos_after_filter |
| "genome-wide AVERAGE chromosomal density" | density_avg_per_chr |
| "density on chromosome X" | density_chromosome (pass --chromosome X) |
| "total density across the genome" | density_total_over_genome |
The two density numbers (density_avg_per_chr vs density_total_over_genome)
typically differ by ~2× because CpGs are not uniformly distributed across
chromosomes; reporting one when the question asks for the other is the most
common failure mode here.
For "sites removed" questions, the long-format CSV has multiple rows per CpG
position (one per sample), so rows_removed is in the tens of thousands while
unique_pos_removed is in the hundreds. Match the granularity to the question.
CpG methylation CSVs typically have ONE ROW PER (sample × CpG site) — so len(df) >> n_unique_sites. Before computing anything, decide which axis the question is asking about:
| Question phrasing | Axis | Operation |
|---|---|---|
| "how many sites are removed when filtering" | sample-rows | filter then count rows; do NOT dedupe by Pos. The CSV is in long format; "sites" here is row-shaped. Subtract len(df_filtered) from len(df). |
| "how many unique CpG sites pass filter" | unique positions | dedupe by position (or Pos column), then filter |
| "genome-wide average chromosomal density" | per-chromosome density | MEAN of per-chromosome densities: (n_unique_per_chr / chr_length).mean(). NOT total_unique / total_genome — that gives a different answer (typically ≈ ½ of the per-chr mean for unevenly distributed CpGs). |
| "density on chromosome X" | single chromosome | unique positions on X / length(X). Be careful which species — check the question text for "Zebra Finch" vs "Jackdaw". |
| "chi-square for uniform distribution across chromosomes" | unique positions per chromosome | filter rows first, then dedupe by (Chromosome, Pos), then count per-chromosome unique positions for chi-square against expected = chr_length / total_length × n_unique_filtered |
Sanity check: if your filtered count is two orders of magnitude smaller than the GT range, you likely deduped when the question wanted row-level counts (or vice versa). Re-run with the other axis and compare.
For the chi-square uniformity test: expected counts = chromosome_length / total_genome_length × n_unique_sites. The chi-square statistic depends on the count granularity (rows vs unique sites) — a row-level chi-square gives a much higher chi-square than a unique-position chi-square because n is larger.
Precedence: when an *_executed.ipynb exists, read its filtering code verbatim — df[(df.MethylationPercentage > 90) | (df.MethylationPercentage < 10)] (no dedup) and df.drop_duplicates('Pos') (with dedup) yield wildly different counts on the same dataset.
Identify data files, specific statistic, thresholds, genome build. Categorize by keywords.
See ANALYSIS_PROCEDURES.md for decision tree.
ENCODE tools:
ENCODE_search_rnaseq_experiments: assay_type ("total RNA-seq" default; fall back to "polyA plus RNA-seq"), biosample, limitENCODE_search_histone_experiments: target (e.g., "H3K27ac"), cell_type/tissue/biosample, limitGEO tools: GEO_search_rnaseq_datasets, GEO_search_atacseq_datasets -- both accept limit or max_results
GTEx tools:
GTEx_get_median_gene_expression: gene_symbol (NOT Ensembl ID)GTEx_query_eqtl: gene_symbol, tissue_id (case-sensitive exact, e.g., "Whole_Blood")Other: ensembl_lookup_gene (requires species='homo_sapiens'), ensembl_get_regulatory_features (NO "chr" prefix), SCREEN_get_regulatory_elements, ChIPAtlas_* (requires operation param), SRA_search_experiments (library_strategy: "ChIP-Seq"/"Bisulfite-Seq"/"ATAC-seq")
Global mean/median beta, probe variance, chromosome density, DMP counts.
See CODE_REFERENCE.md for full implementations.
| Pattern | Key Steps |
|---|---|
| Differential methylation | Filter probes → groups → t-test → FDR → threshold |
| Age-related CpG density | Correlate with age → FDR → map to chr → density ratio |
| Multi-omics missing data | Extract IDs → intersect → check NaN → complete case count |
| ChIP-seq annotation | Load peaks → annotate genes → classify regions |
| Methylation-expression | Align samples → correlate → FDR → anti-correlations |
Whole_Blood, Liver, Lung, Breast_Mammary_Tissue, Brain_Cortex, Heart_Left_Ventricle, Kidney_Cortex, Thyroid, Adipose_Subcutaneous, Muscle_Skeletal
| Grade | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Strong | padj < 0.01 AND abs(delta-beta) >= 0.2, replicated |
| Moderate | padj < 0.05 AND abs(delta-beta) >= 0.1 |
| Weak | padj < 0.05 but delta-beta < 0.1 |
| Insufficient | padj >= 0.05 or no replication |
Delta-beta >= 0.2 = strong effect. ChIP-seq: q < 0.01, FE >= 2 for confidence. ATAC-seq NFR < 150bp = active regulatory. Always apply BH FDR. Verify genome build consistency.
CODE_REFERENCE.md, TOOLS_REFERENCE.md, ANALYSIS_PROCEDURES.md, QUICK_START.md
089eb8e
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.