<i>wigExplorer</i>, a BioJS component to visualise wig data

Anil S. Thanki; Rafael C. Jimenez; Gemy G. Kaithakottil; Manuel Corpas; Robert P. Davey

doi:10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v3

Home Browse wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Software Tool Article

Revised

wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data

[version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]

Anil S. Thanki¹, Rafael C. Jimenez², Gemy G. Kaithakottil¹, Manuel Corpas¹, Robert P. Davey¹

Anil S. Thanki¹, Rafael C. Jimenez², [...] Gemy G. Kaithakottil¹, Manuel Corpas¹, Robert P. Davey¹

PUBLISHED 09 Aug 2016

Author details Author details

¹ Earlham Institute, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UH, UK
² European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Bioinformatics gateway.

This article is included in the BioJS collection.

This article is included in the EMBL-EBI collection.

Abstract

Summary: wigExplorer is a BioJS component whose main purpose is to provide a platform for visualisation of wig-formatted data. Wig files are extensively used by genome browsers such as the UCSC Genome Browser. wigExplorer follows the BioJS standard specification, requiring a simple configuration and installation. wigExplorer provides an easy way to navigate the visible region of the canvas and allows interaction with other components via predefined events.
Availability: http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer ;http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516

Keywords

BioJS, data visualisation, genome browsers

Corresponding author: Anil S. Thanki

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: AT, GK and RD were supported by the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) National Capability Grant (BB/J010375/1) at Earlham Institute.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2016 Thanki AS et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Thanki AS, Jimenez RC, Kaithakottil GG et al. wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2016, 3:53 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v3) First published: 13 Feb 2014, 3:53 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v1) Latest published: 09 Aug 2016, 3:53 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v3)

Revised Amendments from Version 2

In the new version we have updated the availability sources, and some reference details based on the referees' comments.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Stefan Thomas Lang
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Robert Buels
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Phil Lord

Introduction

Numerous web applications exist for visualisation of biological data. Data can be prepared for visualisation using a variety of formats, one of which is the widely used wiggle (wig) file. A wiggle file contains text that defines either a feature or a data track. The wiggle format was developed by the UCSC genome browser¹ and then quickly adopted by other initiatives^2,3. Web applications such as genome browsers rely heavily on JavaScript, a popular language for processing and rendering client-side information in a web browser. Despite their widespread use in bioinformatics, biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed⁴. BioJS code contains proper guidelines on how to use the components and how the API can be implemented to interact with other components.

BioJS is an open source JavaScript library of components for the visualisation of biological data on the web. Here we present wigExplorer, a standard, portable BioJS component designed to easily render wig data format files. wigExplorer can be integrated and controlled from other applications. To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards.

The wigExplorer component

wigExplorer is fully integrated in the BioJS project. It follows the standards set by the BioJS registry⁵, a centralised repository of BioJS components hosted at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI). Having wigExplorer in the BioJS registry is advantageous because it promotes i) easy discoverability for the component, ii) collaborative development with other members of the BioJS community and iii) reutilisation by third party applications. In the BioJS registry, component APIs are exposed, i.e., events and methods are defined and documented so that other BioJS components can interact with each other. By following these conventions, wigExplorer is able to interact with other components on the same web page, enriching the overall experience for the user. The code below shows how to incorporate wigExplorer into a web application. Only three configuration elements are needed: the target HTML element in which the component will be rendered, the background colour of the component, and the file path containing the wig data. Wig files contain minimalistic information of genomic data wigExplorer and can handle a large genomic region such as a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but this depends on the richness of the data rather than the length of the genomic region.

var instance = new Biojs.wigExplorer({
     target: "YourOwnDivId",
     selectionBackgroundColor: ’<background-colour>’,
     dataSet: "<path–to–file>"
});

wigExplorer uses D3.js, the data-driven documents JavaScript library⁶, to generate graphical representations from wig data. D3.js handles the manipulation of the data documents, the reading of wig data as text format and their conversion to an area chart format. On the top right side, wigExplorer contains a dropdown to toogle between different references from the wig file. To control the visual aspect of the wig data, wigExplorer contains simple controls for zooming and panning. It is also possible to zoom and pan using provided API.

instance._updateDraw(start, end)

Application

wigExplorer can be used to visualise genomic data in different ways. An application is shown in Figure 1, depicting single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) density data from a genomic annotation in the tomato genome. Here chromosome 2 is zoomed in to show the genomic interval contained between position 2.5M and 47.5M. The SNP density data contained in the wig data file are presented as bins, where the Y axis indicates the number of SNPs contained in each bin. The screenshot shows a dramatic change in the density of SNPs just after the 24M bin mark of the chromosome, suggesting a potential boundary for an introgression segment introduced from a closely related tomato species. Other potential applications of wigExplorer may involve the visualisation of gene expression and alignment data.

Figure 1. wigExplorer view of tomato variety Heinz chromosome 2.

The top controls are designed to toogle between different references as well as zoom and pan. Peaks show SNP density of 1kb size bins. A change of SNP density can be observed around the 24M mark, with a slightly greater density of SNPs on the right, indicative of a potential introgression segment from another related species.

Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer. A screenshot of the TGAC Browser⁷ is shown in Figure 2 using wigExplorer to depict Myzus spp. scaffold 1 zoomed in between regions 714K and 727K. Here strandspecific RNA-Seq paired-end read coverage is shown as a wig track. The track below shows a closely related annotated species gene set for comparison. This comparison suggests a potential gene extension in both forward and reverse orientation.

Figure 2. An example of wigExplorer integration using the TGAC Browser.

The wigExplorer track shows read coverage in Myzus spp. for scaffold 1. Forward and backward strands are depicted in red and blue respectively. Evidence genes from a closely related species are displayed in the track below.

Conclusions

The wigExplorer component provides a platform to visualise biological data in wig format. wigExplorer can be easily integrated with other web components or extended to provide new functionality. We expect this component to be particularly useful for visualisation in a variety of data types such as SNP density, alignments and gene expression. Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation.

Software availability

Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data_v2, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8516⁸

GitHub: BioJS, http://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0;

Author contributions

AT and RJ developed the code for wigExplorer. MC and GK created the user cases for Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. AT, RD, MC and GK wrote the paper.

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

AT, GK and RD were supported by the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) National Capability Grant (BB/J010375/1) at Earlham Institute.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to all BioJS developers who have contributed their work under an open source license. We are thankful to David Swarbreck at Earlham Institute for his advice on the data shown in Figure 2.

Faculty Opinions recommended

References

1. Kent WJ, Sugnet CW, Furey TS, et al.: The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 2002; 12(6): 996–1006. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
2. Donlin MJ: Using the Generic Genome Browser (GBrowse). Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2009. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
3. Skinner ME, Uzilov AV, Stein LD, et al.: JBrowse: A next-generation genome browser. Genome Res. 2009; 19(9): 1630–1638. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
4. Gómez J, García LJ, Salazar GA, et al.: BioJS: an open source JavaScript framework for biological data visualization. Bioinformatics. 2013; 29(8): 1103–1104. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
5. BioJS: registry. http://biojs.io, 2016. Reference Source
6. D3.js data-driven documents. http://d3js.org, 2012. Reference Source
7. Thanki AS, Bian X, Davey RP, et al.: TGAC Browser: visualisation solutions for big data in the genomic era. 2016. Reference Source
8. Thanki AS, Jiminez RC, Kaithakottil GK, et al.: wigexplorer, a biojs component to visualise wig data_v2. Zenodo. 2014. Data Source

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3

VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2014

Author details Author details

¹ Earlham Institute, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UH, UK
² European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

AT, GK and RD were supported by the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) National Capability Grant (BB/J010375/1) at Earlham Institute.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (3)

version 3

Revised

Published: 09 Aug 2016, 3:53

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v3

version 2

Revised

Published: 30 May 2014, 3:53

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v2

version 1

Published: 13 Feb 2014, 3:53

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v1

© 2016 Thanki AS et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Thanki AS, Jimenez RC, Kaithakottil GG et al. wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2016, 3:53 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-53.v3)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 3

VERSION 3

PUBLISHED 09 Aug 2016

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 05 Oct 2016

Chunlei Wu, Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA

Jiwen Xin, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.10145.r16472

This manuscript decribed a useful BioJS component for visualizing genomic tracks from a wig-formatted file. There are some major concerns raised by the reviewer:

Demo code show “Unknown format detected” error. When clicking the demo code

This manuscript decribed a useful BioJS component for visualizing genomic tracks from a wig-formatted file. There are some major concerns raised by the reviewer:

Demo code show “Unknown format detected” error. When clicking the demo code from the provided links to JSBin, Codepen and Plunker, all three have the same errors. This is also confirmed the same by running the demo code locally. But it can be fixed by changing the dataSet to:

dataSet: "./wigExplorerDataSet5.txt"
(was dataSet: "https://cdn.rawgit.com/anilthanki/biojs-vis-wigexplorer/master/snippets/data/wigExplorerDataSet5.txt")

Even thought, there still are some javascript errors displayed on the browser console (using Google Chrome 54) as described below.
The website http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer shows two javascript errors, even though the rendering of the widget looks fine. I confirmed that these errors are from the wigexplorer itself, as I can see the same errors in the console by running the demo code locally. This is the screenshot of the javascript errors:

http://imgur.com/a/sfWkK
After several previous reviewers requested the actual code example for integrating WigExplorer into third-party applications like TGAC browser, you still did not provide much details of it.

The styling of the tracks in TGAC Browser screenshot does not look similar to the demo example, which does raise the concerns about how the integration was actually done in a real application, and how flexible a developer can control the look and feel of the application. A real code example should address those concerns.
I also tried the demo code locally with two example wig files downloaded from NCI website: WashU (74MB) and Baylor (79MB). The WashU example file does load, but the track rendering is very slow, and the track control buttons (like zoom and move) are pretty much unusable. The Baylor example file does not load, also without any error message. These two files could be out of the file size range for reasonable rendering in this widget, a proper error msg should be displayed ideally.
A minor suggestion, although the project website is provided under "Software availability" section, it would be helpful to provide the direct links to the demo code at the relevant text.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Version 2

VERSION 2

PUBLISHED 30 May 2014

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 07 Jun 2016

Stefan Thomas Lang, Department of Molecular Hematology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.4634.r14186

I am no JavaScript developer myself and I have not tested the described functionality, but I already can think of applications in my own work if the package is able to not only show predefined chromosomes in a wig file, but ... Continue reading

The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigexplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.
I can not approve this article, if your package can not display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this javascript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user can not change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the javascript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

In addition I have several minor 'complains':

Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.
You claim that your tool easily integrats into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

I hope I could add some additional points of view to your work and give a kind of positive feedback.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 09 Aug 2016

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

09 Aug 2016

Author Response
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our ... Continue reading
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigExplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.

Answer: We can understand your concern, as this component was developed as a part of BioJS 1 and now BioJS is evolved to version 2, so some links are broken or redirected. We will update links in the article according. Link : http://www.biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer

2) I cannot approve this article, if your package cannot display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this JavaScript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user cannot change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the JavaScript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

Answer: I can understand your issue here about visualising user defined region, wigExplorer was already had a capability of allowing user to move around and zoom in and out for visualising region of interest, but due to compatibility issue with BioJS2 buttons were not visible. Now we had fixed the issue and you will notice some controls on top left corner which gives user flexibility to visualise any region. It is also possible to visualise user defined area using API provided.

3) Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.

Answer: Yes, this package has been designed to work standalone, I have set up some example on my personal GitHub page to prove that. Here is the link to stand alone example for wigExplorer: http://anilthanki.github.io/tools/biojs/wigExplorer/

4) You claim that your tool easily integrates into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

Answer: Yes, we believe that it's easy to integrate into any third party application and TGAC Browser uses wigExplorer to visualise users’ wig data. Here is an example explaining procedure to visualise your own wig data using TGAC Browser.
Example:

Go to link http://browser.tgac.ac.uk/tgac-browser-demo/index.jsp?query=chr1&coord=4&&from=0&&to=5749886

Click on the upload icon on the right (before ‘Save Session’)

There is a link to example wig file, to save and upload to see example

Upload the same file to the ‘Drop files here’ region and close the upload box

You should see the uploaded wig file displayed with prefix of the filename you uploaded.

Regards,

Anil Thanki
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigExplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.

Answer: We can understand your concern, as this component was developed as a part of BioJS 1 and now BioJS is evolved to version 2, so some links are broken or redirected. We will update links in the article according. Link : http://www.biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer

2) I cannot approve this article, if your package cannot display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this JavaScript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user cannot change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the JavaScript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

Answer: I can understand your issue here about visualising user defined region, wigExplorer was already had a capability of allowing user to move around and zoom in and out for visualising region of interest, but due to compatibility issue with BioJS2 buttons were not visible. Now we had fixed the issue and you will notice some controls on top left corner which gives user flexibility to visualise any region. It is also possible to visualise user defined area using API provided.

3) Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.

Answer: Yes, this package has been designed to work standalone, I have set up some example on my personal GitHub page to prove that. Here is the link to stand alone example for wigExplorer: http://anilthanki.github.io/tools/biojs/wigExplorer/

4) You claim that your tool easily integrates into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

Answer: Yes, we believe that it's easy to integrate into any third party application and TGAC Browser uses wigExplorer to visualise users’ wig data. Here is an example explaining procedure to visualise your own wig data using TGAC Browser.
Example:

Go to link http://browser.tgac.ac.uk/tgac-browser-demo/index.jsp?query=chr1&coord=4&&from=0&&to=5749886

Click on the upload icon on the right (before ‘Save Session’)

There is a link to example wig file, to save and upload to see example

Upload the same file to the ‘Drop files here’ region and close the upload box

You should see the uploaded wig file displayed with prefix of the filename you uploaded.

Regards,

Anil Thanki
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 09 Aug 2016

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

09 Aug 2016

Author Response
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our ... Continue reading
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigExplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.

Answer: We can understand your concern, as this component was developed as a part of BioJS 1 and now BioJS is evolved to version 2, so some links are broken or redirected. We will update links in the article according. Link : http://www.biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer

2) I cannot approve this article, if your package cannot display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this JavaScript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user cannot change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the JavaScript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

Answer: I can understand your issue here about visualising user defined region, wigExplorer was already had a capability of allowing user to move around and zoom in and out for visualising region of interest, but due to compatibility issue with BioJS2 buttons were not visible. Now we had fixed the issue and you will notice some controls on top left corner which gives user flexibility to visualise any region. It is also possible to visualise user defined area using API provided.

3) Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.

Answer: Yes, this package has been designed to work standalone, I have set up some example on my personal GitHub page to prove that. Here is the link to stand alone example for wigExplorer: http://anilthanki.github.io/tools/biojs/wigExplorer/

4) You claim that your tool easily integrates into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

Answer: Yes, we believe that it's easy to integrate into any third party application and TGAC Browser uses wigExplorer to visualise users’ wig data. Here is an example explaining procedure to visualise your own wig data using TGAC Browser.
Example:

Go to link http://browser.tgac.ac.uk/tgac-browser-demo/index.jsp?query=chr1&coord=4&&from=0&&to=5749886

Click on the upload icon on the right (before ‘Save Session’)

There is a link to example wig file, to save and upload to see example

Upload the same file to the ‘Drop files here’ region and close the upload box

You should see the uploaded wig file displayed with prefix of the filename you uploaded.

Regards,

Anil Thanki
Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigExplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.

Answer: We can understand your concern, as this component was developed as a part of BioJS 1 and now BioJS is evolved to version 2, so some links are broken or redirected. We will update links in the article according. Link : http://www.biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer

2) I cannot approve this article, if your package cannot display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this JavaScript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user cannot change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the JavaScript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

Answer: I can understand your issue here about visualising user defined region, wigExplorer was already had a capability of allowing user to move around and zoom in and out for visualising region of interest, but due to compatibility issue with BioJS2 buttons were not visible. Now we had fixed the issue and you will notice some controls on top left corner which gives user flexibility to visualise any region. It is also possible to visualise user defined area using API provided.

3) Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.

Answer: Yes, this package has been designed to work standalone, I have set up some example on my personal GitHub page to prove that. Here is the link to stand alone example for wigExplorer: http://anilthanki.github.io/tools/biojs/wigExplorer/

4) You claim that your tool easily integrates into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

Answer: Yes, we believe that it's easy to integrate into any third party application and TGAC Browser uses wigExplorer to visualise users’ wig data. Here is an example explaining procedure to visualise your own wig data using TGAC Browser.
Example:

Go to link http://browser.tgac.ac.uk/tgac-browser-demo/index.jsp?query=chr1&coord=4&&from=0&&to=5749886

Click on the upload icon on the right (before ‘Save Session’)

There is a link to example wig file, to save and upload to see example

Upload the same file to the ‘Drop files here’ region and close the upload box

You should see the uploaded wig file displayed with prefix of the filename you uploaded.

Regards,

Anil Thanki
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 01 Mar 2016

Phil Lord, School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.4634.r4977

The authors have provided ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2014

Views

Reviewer Report 07 Mar 2014

Phil Lord, School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3732.r3697

I have tried this piece of software and it does appear to do what it says and running the software was not too difficult. The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to
local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

I ran the software from a GitHub checkout - here all the paths given in the documentation assume a specific configuration of directories (which is different from that of the GitHub repository). None of this is a show stopper, but it does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

There are also a couple of places which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:"To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data
that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer".

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 23 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

23 May 2014

Author Response

We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the ... Continue reading We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

Answer: We have uploaded a new version of the code to Zenodo with dependencies provided (http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516). This new version is also included in BioJS Release 1.0 https://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0

2) It does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

Answer: We understand that there are a number of required dependencies for this component, and not including these in the component’s distribution made it harder to install and utilise. As above, we have included these dependencies as well as sample datasets, so simply unzipping the distribution is sufficient to install and start using the component.

3) The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

Answer: F1000Research requires a working copy of the code when article get published (for archival purposes) so, we have uploaded current version of code to zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/8516#.U334LlhdV0s) so this copy of code will be same though main code can be updated. So this article will always point to the version of the code that it describes, which is stored in zenodo. And on the performance issue, in this case size of the file matters rather than size of genomic region. Because size of data depends on depth of the genomic information, though we tried to make an effort to make it clear in manuscript. In first paragraph of wigExplorer component section, “Wig files contains minimalistic information of genomic data, wigExplorer can handle large genomic region like a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but it depends on depth of data rather than length of genomic region.”

4) The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts, which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

Answer: Here by using the word "reutilisation guidelines”, we mean that BioJS components can be easily implemented and can interact with each other with standard API. We have added a statement explaining this in the last line of the first paragraph of introduction that “BioJS code contains standard guidelines that how to use components and how API can be implemented to interact with other components.”

5) There are also a couple of places, which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:" To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer". I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Answer: We have reformatted the first statement to “Currently, this is the only BioJS component to show wig data” and we have changed the second statement as reviewer suggested, “Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer”
We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

Answer: We have uploaded a new version of the code to Zenodo with dependencies provided (http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516). This new version is also included in BioJS Release 1.0 https://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0

2) It does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

Answer: We understand that there are a number of required dependencies for this component, and not including these in the component’s distribution made it harder to install and utilise. As above, we have included these dependencies as well as sample datasets, so simply unzipping the distribution is sufficient to install and start using the component.

3) The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

Answer: F1000Research requires a working copy of the code when article get published (for archival purposes) so, we have uploaded current version of code to zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/8516#.U334LlhdV0s) so this copy of code will be same though main code can be updated. So this article will always point to the version of the code that it describes, which is stored in zenodo. And on the performance issue, in this case size of the file matters rather than size of genomic region. Because size of data depends on depth of the genomic information, though we tried to make an effort to make it clear in manuscript. In first paragraph of wigExplorer component section, “Wig files contains minimalistic information of genomic data, wigExplorer can handle large genomic region like a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but it depends on depth of data rather than length of genomic region.”

4) The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts, which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

Answer: Here by using the word "reutilisation guidelines”, we mean that BioJS components can be easily implemented and can interact with each other with standard API. We have added a statement explaining this in the last line of the first paragraph of introduction that “BioJS code contains standard guidelines that how to use components and how API can be implemented to interact with other components.”

5) There are also a couple of places, which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:" To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer". I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Answer: We have reformatted the first statement to “Currently, this is the only BioJS component to show wig data” and we have changed the second statement as reviewer suggested, “Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer”
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 23 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

23 May 2014

Author Response

We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the ... Continue reading We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

Answer: We have uploaded a new version of the code to Zenodo with dependencies provided (http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516). This new version is also included in BioJS Release 1.0 https://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0

2) It does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

Answer: We understand that there are a number of required dependencies for this component, and not including these in the component’s distribution made it harder to install and utilise. As above, we have included these dependencies as well as sample datasets, so simply unzipping the distribution is sufficient to install and start using the component.

3) The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

Answer: F1000Research requires a working copy of the code when article get published (for archival purposes) so, we have uploaded current version of code to zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/8516#.U334LlhdV0s) so this copy of code will be same though main code can be updated. So this article will always point to the version of the code that it describes, which is stored in zenodo. And on the performance issue, in this case size of the file matters rather than size of genomic region. Because size of data depends on depth of the genomic information, though we tried to make an effort to make it clear in manuscript. In first paragraph of wigExplorer component section, “Wig files contains minimalistic information of genomic data, wigExplorer can handle large genomic region like a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but it depends on depth of data rather than length of genomic region.”

4) The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts, which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

Answer: Here by using the word "reutilisation guidelines”, we mean that BioJS components can be easily implemented and can interact with each other with standard API. We have added a statement explaining this in the last line of the first paragraph of introduction that “BioJS code contains standard guidelines that how to use components and how API can be implemented to interact with other components.”

5) There are also a couple of places, which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:" To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer". I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Answer: We have reformatted the first statement to “Currently, this is the only BioJS component to show wig data” and we have changed the second statement as reviewer suggested, “Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer”
We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

Answer: We have uploaded a new version of the code to Zenodo with dependencies provided (http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516). This new version is also included in BioJS Release 1.0 https://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0

2) It does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

Answer: We understand that there are a number of required dependencies for this component, and not including these in the component’s distribution made it harder to install and utilise. As above, we have included these dependencies as well as sample datasets, so simply unzipping the distribution is sufficient to install and start using the component.

3) The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

Answer: F1000Research requires a working copy of the code when article get published (for archival purposes) so, we have uploaded current version of code to zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/8516#.U334LlhdV0s) so this copy of code will be same though main code can be updated. So this article will always point to the version of the code that it describes, which is stored in zenodo. And on the performance issue, in this case size of the file matters rather than size of genomic region. Because size of data depends on depth of the genomic information, though we tried to make an effort to make it clear in manuscript. In first paragraph of wigExplorer component section, “Wig files contains minimalistic information of genomic data, wigExplorer can handle large genomic region like a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but it depends on depth of data rather than length of genomic region.”

4) The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts, which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

Answer: Here by using the word "reutilisation guidelines”, we mean that BioJS components can be easily implemented and can interact with each other with standard API. We have added a statement explaining this in the last line of the first paragraph of introduction that “BioJS code contains standard guidelines that how to use components and how API can be implemented to interact with other components.”

5) There are also a couple of places, which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:" To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer". I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Answer: We have reformatted the first statement to “Currently, this is the only BioJS component to show wig data” and we have changed the second statement as reviewer suggested, “Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer”
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

148

Reviewer Report 25 Feb 2014

Robert Buels, JBrowse, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.3732.r3699

The manuscript is well written, but it does not accurately describe the software in question.

I installed the software on my machine, and evaluated its behavior under several scenarios that I think would be commonly encountered by people using it. The major ... Continue reading

wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.
Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.
Most importantly, and I think this is a show stopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Unfortunately, I cannot approve this manuscript as it is currently written. It does not accurately describe the wigExplorer software.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Reader Comment 26 Feb 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

26 Feb 2014

Reader Comment

Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes ... Continue reading Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes regarding your comments, and happy to say that the first two of your three comments have already been fixed. I am now working on the third point and hope to have a solution as soon as possible. Once i do have one I will submit a revised version of the new code and manuscript.

Thanks a lot again,

Anil
Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes regarding your comments, and happy to say that the first two of your three comments have already been fixed. I am now working on the third point and hope to have a solution as soon as possible. Once i do have one I will submit a revised version of the new code and manuscript.

Thanks a lot again,

Anil
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Author Response 28 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

28 May 2014

Author Response

Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when ... Continue reading Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.

Answer: After considering this comment we have added more informative error messages, depending on the errors that can occur while running the component, e.g. “Unknown format detected”, “No data for selected reference”, “File not found”, etc. This will help make any installation problems clearer to users during installation.

2) Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.

Answer: Outside of the BioJS registry environment, the component’s CSS behaviour changes, which resulted in disappearing controls. We have reformatted the CSS for this component and this is now fixed.

3) Most importantly, and I think this is a showstopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Answer: We thanks Robert t raise this concern and we have rewritten the code and now the component fully supports the standard fixedStep and variableStep wig file format (as set out by UCSC) with span information and multiple references in one file if available.
Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.

Answer: After considering this comment we have added more informative error messages, depending on the errors that can occur while running the component, e.g. “Unknown format detected”, “No data for selected reference”, “File not found”, etc. This will help make any installation problems clearer to users during installation.

2) Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.

Answer: Outside of the BioJS registry environment, the component’s CSS behaviour changes, which resulted in disappearing controls. We have reformatted the CSS for this component and this is now fixed.

3) Most importantly, and I think this is a showstopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Answer: We thanks Robert t raise this concern and we have rewritten the code and now the component fully supports the standard fixedStep and variableStep wig file format (as set out by UCSC) with span information and multiple references in one file if available.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Reader Comment 26 Feb 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

26 Feb 2014

Reader Comment

Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes ... Continue reading Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes regarding your comments, and happy to say that the first two of your three comments have already been fixed. I am now working on the third point and hope to have a solution as soon as possible. Once i do have one I will submit a revised version of the new code and manuscript.

Thanks a lot again,

Anil
Hi Robert,

I thank you for your useful comments, and I fully understand your concerns about the code and the performance of the tool. I have already started working on fixes regarding your comments, and happy to say that the first two of your three comments have already been fixed. I am now working on the third point and hope to have a solution as soon as possible. Once i do have one I will submit a revised version of the new code and manuscript.

Thanks a lot again,

Anil
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Author Response 28 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

28 May 2014

Author Response

Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when ... Continue reading Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.

Answer: After considering this comment we have added more informative error messages, depending on the errors that can occur while running the component, e.g. “Unknown format detected”, “No data for selected reference”, “File not found”, etc. This will help make any installation problems clearer to users during installation.

2) Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.

Answer: Outside of the BioJS registry environment, the component’s CSS behaviour changes, which resulted in disappearing controls. We have reformatted the CSS for this component and this is now fixed.

3) Most importantly, and I think this is a showstopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Answer: We thanks Robert t raise this concern and we have rewritten the code and now the component fully supports the standard fixedStep and variableStep wig file format (as set out by UCSC) with span information and multiple references in one file if available.
Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.

Answer: After considering this comment we have added more informative error messages, depending on the errors that can occur while running the component, e.g. “Unknown format detected”, “No data for selected reference”, “File not found”, etc. This will help make any installation problems clearer to users during installation.

2) Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.

Answer: Outside of the BioJS registry environment, the component’s CSS behaviour changes, which resulted in disappearing controls. We have reformatted the CSS for this component and this is now fixed.

3) Most importantly, and I think this is a showstopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Answer: We thanks Robert t raise this concern and we have rewritten the code and now the component fully supports the standard fixedStep and variableStep wig file format (as set out by UCSC) with span information and multiple references in one file if available.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3

VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2014

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3	4
Version 3 (revision) 09 Aug 16				read
Version 2 (revision) 30 May 14		read	read
Version 1 13 Feb 14	read	read

Robert Buels, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
Phil Lord, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK
Stefan Thomas Lang, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
Chunlei Wu, Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, USA

Jiwen Xin, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, USA

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

17 Views

05 Oct 2016 | for Version 3

Chunlei Wu, Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA

Jiwen Xin, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA

17 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

This manuscript decribed a useful BioJS component for visualizing genomic tracks from a wig-formatted file. There are some major concerns raised by the reviewer:

Demo code show “Unknown format detected” error. When clicking the demo code from the provided links to JSBin, Codepen and Plunker, all three have the same errors. This is also confirmed the same by running the demo code locally. But it can be fixed by changing the dataSet to:

dataSet: "./wigExplorerDataSet5.txt"
(was dataSet: "https://cdn.rawgit.com/anilthanki/biojs-vis-wigexplorer/master/snippets/data/wigExplorerDataSet5.txt")

Even thought, there still are some javascript errors displayed on the browser console (using Google Chrome 54) as described below.
The website http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer shows two javascript errors, even though the rendering of the widget looks fine. I confirmed that these errors are from the wigexplorer itself, as I can see the same errors in the console by running the demo code locally. This is the screenshot of the javascript errors:

http://imgur.com/a/sfWkK
After several previous reviewers requested the actual code example for integrating WigExplorer into third-party applications like TGAC browser, you still did not provide much details of it.

The styling of the tracks in TGAC Browser screenshot does not look similar to the demo example, which does raise the concerns about how the integration was actually done in a real application, and how flexible a developer can control the look and feel of the application. A real code example should address those concerns.
I also tried the demo code locally with two example wig files downloaded from NCI website: WashU (74MB) and Baylor (79MB). The WashU example file does load, but the track rendering is very slow, and the track control buttons (like zoom and move) are pretty much unusable. The Baylor example file does not load, also without any error message. These two files could be out of the file size range for reasonable rendering in this widget, a proper error msg should be displayed ideally.
A minor suggestion, although the project website is provided under "Software availability" section, it would be helpful to provide the direct links to the demo code at the relevant text.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

18 Views

07 Jun 2016 | for Version 2

Stefan Thomas Lang, Department of Molecular Hematology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

18 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigexplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.
I can not approve this article, if your package can not display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this javascript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user can not change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the javascript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

In addition I have several minor 'complains':

Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.
You claim that your tool easily integrats into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

I hope I could add some additional points of view to your work and give a kind of positive feedback.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

09 Aug 2016

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

Dear Stefan

We would like to thank you for reviewing the manuscript and making some positive comments that could be used for your application.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) The link to your real example page (http://biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer) can only be found by reading your article, following to the rather unspecific GitHub link to the http://biojs.io web page. There one need to search for your wigExplorer - that is not acceptable! Make this link more prominent in the article and refer to the GitHub page as the main biojs.io GitHub page.

Answer: We can understand your concern, as this component was developed as a part of BioJS 1 and now BioJS is evolved to version 2, so some links are broken or redirected. We will update links in the article according. Link : http://www.biojs.io/d/biojs-vis-wigexplorer

2) I cannot approve this article, if your package cannot display any user defined region in a wig file. After having checked the functionality on the hidden demo page I get the impression that this JavaScript package does ONLY visualize whole chromosomes from a wig file. The user cannot change the visualized region by e.g. interactively zooming in or at least stating a displayed area in the JavaScript function call? But if your package can visualize a user defined area in a wig file this functionality needs to be highlighted in the article.

Answer: I can understand your issue here about visualising user defined region, wigExplorer was already had a capability of allowing user to move around and zoom in and out for visualising region of interest, but due to compatibility issue with BioJS2 buttons were not visible. Now we had fixed the issue and you will notice some controls on top left corner which gives user flexibility to visualise any region. It is also possible to visualise user defined area using API provided.

3) Can the package be used stand alone? If yes, please extend your code example to a minimal, working html page. It would be perfect to have the javascript library loaded from your own web server together with the example data. Much like on the hidden demo page, but as plain html plainly stated in the article.

Answer: Yes, this package has been designed to work standalone, I have set up some example on my personal GitHub page to prove that. Here is the link to stand alone example for wigExplorer: http://anilthanki.github.io/tools/biojs/wigExplorer/

4) You claim that your tool easily integrates into the third party TGAC Browser. Can you provide the example html there, too?

Answer: Yes, we believe that it's easy to integrate into any third party application and TGAC Browser uses wigExplorer to visualise users’ wig data. Here is an example explaining procedure to visualise your own wig data using TGAC Browser.
Example:

Go to link http://browser.tgac.ac.uk/tgac-browser-demo/index.jsp?query=chr1&coord=4&&from=0&&to=5749886
Click on the upload icon on the right (before ‘Save Session’)
There is a link to example wig file, to save and upload to see example
Upload the same file to the ‘Drop files here’ region and close the upload box
You should see the uploaded wig file displayed with prefix of the filename you uploaded.

Regards,

Anil Thanki

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

14 Views

01 Mar 2016 | for Version 2

Phil Lord, School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK

14 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The authors have provided answers to all my comments.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

65 Views

07 Mar 2014 | for Version 1

Phil Lord, School of Computing Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK

65 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

23 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

We would like to thank Phil for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments

1) The link to the software on Zenodo in the Software Availability section (Zenodo: wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data, doi:10.5281/zenodo.77218) seems a bit pointless as the download bundle requires a large number of dependencies which are not included and for which paths have been hardcoded to local machine locations. The authors should also include either a tag or a commit hash so that the version of the software in the download bundle can be identified in GitHub.

Answer: We have uploaded a new version of the code to Zenodo with dependencies provided (http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8516). This new version is also included in BioJS Release 1.0 https://github.com/biojs/biojs/releases/tag/v1.0

2) It does make me rather doubt the validity of the statement: "Like any other BioJS component, wigExplorer requires little technical knowledge for its utilisation."

Answer: We understand that there are a number of required dependencies for this component, and not including these in the component’s distribution made it harder to install and utilise. As above, we have included these dependencies as well as sample datasets, so simply unzipping the distribution is sufficient to install and start using the component.

3) The article is, essentially, an advert with relatively little technical content. This is appropriate; there is little point including, for example, precise instructions for the use of wigExplorer as this article will be checkpointed and the code will become out of date. I would however have liked a bit more information on the expected performance of the software: for instance, how big a chromosome can it visualize? How manipulable is the visualisation?

Answer: F1000Research requires a working copy of the code when article get published (for archival purposes) so, we have uploaded current version of code to zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/8516#.U334LlhdV0s) so this copy of code will be same though main code can be updated. So this article will always point to the version of the code that it describes, which is stored in zenodo. And on the performance issue, in this case size of the file matters rather than size of genomic region. Because size of data depends on depth of the genomic information, though we tried to make an effort to make it clear in manuscript. In first paragraph of wigExplorer component section, “Wig files contains minimalistic information of genomic data, wigExplorer can handle large genomic region like a chromosome (tested with a single file containing 12 chromosome with average length of 60 Mb), but it depends on depth of data rather than length of genomic region.”

4) The writing in the article is okay, but there are a few parts, which could do with improvement. For example, in the first paragraph of the Introduction section, the statement "biological web applications are usually implemented with no standard reutilisation guidelines in mind, hence BioJS was developed" I am not at all sure what "reutilisation guidelines" means with respect to code base. Do the authors just mean a defined and documented API? In which case, they should probably say this.

Answer: Here by using the word "reutilisation guidelines”, we mean that BioJS components can be easily implemented and can interact with each other with standard API. We have added a statement explaining this in the last line of the first paragraph of introduction that “BioJS code contains standard guidelines that how to use components and how API can be implemented to interact with other components.”

5) There are also a couple of places, which could do with simplification. In the second paragraph of the Introduction section:" To our knowledge, this is the first modular component to visualise wig data that complies with BioJS standards." This statement could be seen as a caveat, and I think the authors could risk saying "This is the only BioJS component to show wig data". Also in the second paragraph of the Application section the statement "We are aware that third party browsers are also using wigExplorer." could perhaps be simplified to "Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer". I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Answer: We have reformatted the first statement to “Currently, this is the only BioJS component to show wig data” and we have changed the second statement as reviewer suggested, “Third party browsers are also using wigExplorer”

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

148 Views

25 Feb 2014 | for Version 1

Robert Buels, JBrowse, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

148 Views Cite this report Responses(2)

Not Approved

wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.
Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.
Most importantly, and I think this is a show stopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Unfortunately, I cannot approve this manuscript as it is currently written. It does not accurately describe the wigExplorer software.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Respond to this report

Responses (2)

Author Response

28 May 2014

Anil Thanki, The Genome Analysis Centre, UK

Dear Robert

We would like to thank you for taking the time to review the manuscript.

Please find below our responses to your comments.

1) wigExplorer does not provide any useful error messages when it fails to fetch, or fails to parse, the file specified in its `dataSet` option. This can be a major issue for prospective users (i.e. installers) of the software.

Answer: After considering this comment we have added more informative error messages, depending on the errors that can occur while running the component, e.g. “Unknown format detected”, “No data for selected reference”, “File not found”, etc. This will help make any installation problems clearer to users during installation.

2) Also, when I installed it and ran it via the included TestwigExplorer2.html, the "top controls ... designed to scroll sideways" described in the manuscript were not shown. To rule out any problems with the way I installed it (caused by missing stylesheets or the like), I inspected the browser's (Google Chrome 32) document object model (DOM) using its built-in development tools, and verified that the controls were not even being placed in the DOM by the code itself. I didn't debug any further.

Answer: Outside of the BioJS registry environment, the component’s CSS behaviour changes, which resulted in disappearing controls. We have reformatted the CSS for this component and this is now fixed.

3) Most importantly, and I think this is a showstopper: wigExplorer does not actually support the Wiggle format as set forth by UCSC at http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html. It supports a limited tab-separated value format, which bears some resemblance to BedGraph format, but is not BedGraph either. So: it is named for a standard data format that it does not support, and the data format that it actually supports is not a standard format.

Answer: We thanks Robert t raise this concern and we have rewritten the code and now the component fully supports the standard fixedStep and variableStep wig file format (as set out by UCSC) with span information and multiple references in one file if available.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Kent WJ, Sugnet CW, Furey TS, et al.: The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 2002; 12(6): 996–1006. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[2] 2. Donlin MJ: Using the Generic Genome Browser (GBrowse). Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2009. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Skinner ME, Uzilov AV, Stein LD, et al.: JBrowse: A next-generation genome browser. Genome Res. 2009; 19(9): 1630–1638. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[4] 4. Gómez J, García LJ, Salazar GA, et al.: BioJS: an open source JavaScript framework for biological data visualization. Bioinformatics. 2013; 29(8): 1103–1104. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[5] 5. BioJS: registry. http://biojs.io, 2016. Reference Source

[6] 6. D3.js data-driven documents. http://d3js.org, 2012. Reference Source

[7] 7. Thanki AS, Bian X, Davey RP, et al.: TGAC Browser: visualisation solutions for big data in the genomic era. 2016. Reference Source

[8] 8. Thanki AS, Jiminez RC, Kaithakottil GK, et al.: wigexplorer, a biojs component to visualise wig data_v2. Zenodo. 2014. Data Source

wigExplorer, a BioJS component to visualise wig data

Abstract

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 2

Introduction

The wigExplorer component

Application

Figure 1. wigExplorer view of tomato variety Heinz chromosome 2.

Figure 2. An example of wigExplorer integration using the TGAC Browser.

Conclusions

Software availability

Author contributions

Competing interests

Grant information

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated