While long intergenic noncoding RNAs (lincRNAs) and mRNAs share similar biogenesis pathways, these transcript classes differ in many regards. LincRNAs are less evolutionarily conserved, less abundant, and more tissue-specific, suggesting that their pre-and post-transcriptional regulation is different from that of mRNAs. Here, we perform an in-depth characterization of the features that contribute to lincRNA regulation in multiple human cell lines. We find that lincRNA promoters are depleted of transcription factor (TF) binding sites, yet enriched for some specific factors such as GATA and FOS relative to mRNA promoters. Surprisingly, we find that H3K9me3-a histone modification typically associated with transcriptional repression-is more enriched at the promoters of active lincRNA loci than at those of active mRNAs. Moreover, H3K9me3-marked lincRNA genes are more tissue-specific. The most discriminant differences between lincRNAs and mRNAs involve splicing. LincRNAs are less efficiently spliced, which cannot be explained by differences in U1 binding or the density of exonic splicing enhancers but may be partially attributed to lower U2AF65 binding and weaker splicing-related motifs. Conversely, the stability of lincRNAs and mRNAs is similar, differing only with regard to the location of stabilizing protein binding sites. Finally, we find that certain transcriptional properties are correlated with higher evolutionary conservation in both DNA and RNA motifs and are enriched in lincRNAs that have been functionally characterized.

Transcription initiates at both coding and noncoding genomic elements, including mRNA and long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) core promoters and enhancer RNAs (eRNAs). However, each class has a different expression profile with lncRNAs and eRNAs being the most tissue specific. How these complex differences in expression profiles and tissue specificities are encoded in a single DNA sequence remains unresolved. Here, we address this question using computational approaches and massively parallel reporter assays (MPRA) surveying hundreds of promoters and enhancers. We find that both divergent lncRNA and mRNA core promoters have higher capacities to drive transcription than nondivergent lncRNA and mRNA core promoters, respectively. Conversely, intergenic lncRNAs (lincRNAs) and eRNAs have lower capacities to drive transcription and are more tissue specific than divergent genes. This higher tissue specificity is strongly associated with having less complex transcription factor (TF) motif profiles at the core promoter. We experimentally validated these findings by testing both engineered single-nucleotide deletions and human single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in MPRA. In both cases, we observe that single nucleotides associated with many motifs are important drivers of promoter activity. Thus, we suggest that high TF motif density serves as a robust mechanism to increase promoter activity at the expense of tissue specificity. Moreover, we find that 22% of common SNPs in core promoter regions have significant regulatory effects. Collectively, our findings show that high TF motif density provides redundancy and increases promoter activity at the expense of tissue specificity, suggesting that specificity of expression may be regulated by simplicity of motif usage.

Background Gene expression differences between species are driven by both cis and trans effects. Whereas cis effects are caused by genetic variants located on the same DNA molecule as the target gene, trans effects are due to genetic variants that affect diffusible elements. Previous studies have mostly assessed the impact of cis and trans effects at the gene level. However, how cis and trans effects differentially impact regulatory elements such as enhancers and promoters remains poorly understood. Here, we use massively parallel reporter assays to directly measure the transcriptional outputs of thousands of individual regulatory elements in embryonic stem cells and measure cis and trans effects between human and mouse. Results Our approach reveals that cis effects are widespread across transcribed regulatory elements, and the strongest cis effects are associated with the disruption of motifs recognized by strong transcriptional activators. Conversely, we find that trans effects are rare but stronger in enhancers than promoters and are associated with a subset of transcription factors that are differentially expressed between human and mouse. While we find that cis - trans compensation is common within promoters, we do not see evidence of widespread cis - trans compensation at enhancers. Cis - trans compensation is inversely correlated with enhancer redundancy, suggesting that such compensation may often occur across multiple enhancers. Conclusions Our results highlight differences in the mode of evolution between promoters and enhancers in complex mammalian genomes and indicate that studying the evolution of individual regulatory elements is pivotal to understand the tempo and mode of gene expression evolution.