2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.06.045
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic Enhancer DNA Methylation as Basis for Transcriptional and Cellular Heterogeneity of ESCs

Abstract: Highlights d Allele-specific reporters revealed dynamic DNA methylation of Sox2 and miR290 SEs d DNMTs and transcription factor binding regulate methylation dynamics d SE DNA methylation directly regulates transcription in cis d Dynamic DNA methylation is co-regulated with MED1 recruitment and H3K27ac level

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

8
56
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
8
56
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Although we focused specifically at the actual TF binding sites in our analyses, all of the examples in this study show that the associations of TF binding and CpG methylation patterns across development still exists not just at the core binding site, but at the surrounding region as well. This is consistent with previous studies showing that knocking out two specific TF binding sites within a super enhancer results in increased de-novo DNA methylation of the entire super enhancer region [42]. Taken together, the evidence suggests that TF binding and placeholder nucleosome occupancy may be coupled, but further studies are needed to verify the existence of placeholder nucleosomes in mammals and the relationship of their localization to TF binding during PGC and pre-implantation development.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Although we focused specifically at the actual TF binding sites in our analyses, all of the examples in this study show that the associations of TF binding and CpG methylation patterns across development still exists not just at the core binding site, but at the surrounding region as well. This is consistent with previous studies showing that knocking out two specific TF binding sites within a super enhancer results in increased de-novo DNA methylation of the entire super enhancer region [42]. Taken together, the evidence suggests that TF binding and placeholder nucleosome occupancy may be coupled, but further studies are needed to verify the existence of placeholder nucleosomes in mammals and the relationship of their localization to TF binding during PGC and pre-implantation development.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…ESCs in serum/LIF can toggle from naive-to-primed pluripotency states with some cells initiating differentiation, as reflected in heterogeneous transcriptional states 28,29 . Interestingly, cell state fluctuations also manifest at the epigenetic level with evidence of CpG methylation oscillations at enhancers [30][31][32][33] . To assess the level of cell-to-cell methylation heterogeneity at PU and DM, and its potential association with gene expression, we reanalysed parallel single-cell transcriptional (sc-RNA-seq) and bisulphite (sc-BS-seq) data from ESCs grown in serum/LIF and 2i/LIF 30 .…”
Section: Dm and Pu Units Regulate Distinct Pluripotency Gene Modulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While limitations in the current mouse genome assemblies prevented us from identifying the causal variant(s) encoded by the Dlk1-Dio3 QTL, we speculate that the relevant genes may facilitate the recruitment of the de novo DNA methylation machinery to susceptible gene loci. This appears to be a dynamic process, potentially resembling recent observations made at pluripotency-associated enhancers (Song et al, 2019), that can be counteracted by stimulating DNA and/or histone demethylases. The ability to suppress imprint instability by ascorbic acid may prove beneficial when attempting to preserve the developmental potential of pluripotent cell lines that have been determined to be susceptible to ICR hypermethylation due to their genetic composition.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 54%