Cited by 1,983Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromosomal and Genetic VariationsChromatin Remodeling and Cancer

Three-dimensional folding and functional organization principles of the Drosophila genome

Open access
Sexton, Tom, Yaffe, Eitan, Kenigsberg, Ephraim, Bantignies, Frédéric, Leblanc, Benjamin, Hoichman, Michael, Parrinello, Hugues, Tanay, Amos +1 more·2012·Cell

Abstract

Chromosomes are the physical realization of genetic information and thus form the basis for its readout and propagation. Here we present a high-resolution chromosomal contact map derived from a modified genome-wide chromosome conformation capture approach applied to Drosophila embryonic nuclei. The data show that the entire genome is linearly partitioned into well-demarcated physical domains that overlap extensively with active and repressive epigenetic marks. Chromosomal contacts are hierarchically organized between domains. Global modeling of contact density and clustering of domains show that inactive domains are condensed and confined to their chromosomal territories, whereas active domains reach out of the territory to form remote intra- and interchromosomal contacts. Moreover, we systematically identify specific long-range intrachromosomal contacts between Polycomb-repressed domains. Together, these observations allow for quantitative prediction of the Drosophila chromosomal contact map, laying the foundation for detailed studies of chromosome structure and function in a genetically tractable system.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.010

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Eukaryotic chromosomes are partitioned into topologically associated domains (TADs).

    “Second, it was demonstrated that eukaryotic chromosomes are partitioned into so-called topologically associated domains (TADs) [35,36,37], which appear to restrict the areas of enhancer action [38,39,40,41].”

    From Enhancer Function in the 3D Genome (2023) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Introduction describes domains with sharp boundaries in fly embryonic chromosomes, and “Domain-Based Hierarchical Chromosomal Architecture” reports that those chromosomes partition into physical domains. This supports the claim for Drosophila, but the paper’s findings alone do not establish the stated generalization to eukaryotic chromosomes broadly. The later enhancer-action clause has separate citations and is not attributed to this source here. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Topologically associating domains (TADs) exist at intermediate scales (100 kb to 1 Mb).

    “At intermediate scales (100 kb to 1 Mb), a major discovery is the existence of topologically associating domains (TADs) (Dixon et al., 2012, Nora et al., 2012, Sexton et al., 2012).”

    From Multiscale 3D Genome Rewiring during Mouse Neural Development (2017) · cites this paper as Sexton et al., 2012

  • Genome-wide, high-resolution understanding of chromosome cell-cycle dynamics is still limited by current technologies.

    “genome-wide, high-resolution understanding of chromosome cell-cycle dynamics11 is still limited by current technologies”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sexton, T., Yaffe, E., Kenigsberg, E., Bantignies, F., Leblanc, B., Hoichman, M., Parrinello, H., Tanay, A., & Cavalli, G.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Montpellier GenomiX (FR)
Corresponding author
  • Tanay, Amos
  • Cavalli, Giacomo
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-02
Volume
148
Issue
3
Pages
458-472
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2056482755
Cited by
1,983
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 72 · 2025: 88 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 130 · 2021: 180 · 2020: 168 · 2019: 182 · 2018: 176 · 2017: 169 · 2016: 159 · 2015: 139 · 2014: 107 · 2013: 124 · 2012: 62
FWCI
55.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-10-INBS-0009)
  • Israel Science Foundation
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Chromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Keywords
chromosome conformation, 3D genome organization, chromatin domains, epigenetic modifications, chromosome structure
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Nucleus, Drosophila melanogaster, Models, Statistical, Drosophila Proteins, Genome, Insect, Chromosomes, Insect, Polycomb Repressive Complex 1

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review