Cited by 1,357Epigenetics and DNA MethylationGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Charting a dynamic DNA methylation landscape of the human genome

Open access

Abstract

DNA methylation is a defining feature of mammalian cellular identity and is essential for normal development. Most cell types, except germ cells and pre-implantation embryos, display relatively stable DNA methylation patterns, with 70-80% of all CpGs being methylated. Despite recent advances, we still have a limited understanding of when, where and how many CpGs participate in genomic regulation. Here we report the in-depth analysis of 42 whole-genome bisulphite sequencing data sets across 30 diverse human cell and tissue types. We observe dynamic regulation for only 21.8% of autosomal CpGs within a normal developmental context, most of which are distal to transcription start sites. These dynamic CpGs co-localize with gene regulatory elements, particularly enhancers and transcription-factor-binding sites, which allow identification of key lineage-specific regulators. In addition, differentially methylated regions (DMRs) often contain single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with cell-type-related diseases as determined by genome-wide association studies. The results also highlight the general inefficiency of whole-genome bisulphite sequencing, as 70-80% of the sequencing reads across these data sets provided little or no relevant information about CpG methylation. To demonstrate further the utility of our DMR set, we use it to classify unknown samples and identify representative signature regions that recapitulate major DNA methylation dynamics. In summary, although in theory every CpG can change its methylation state, our results suggest that only a fraction does so as part of coordinated regulatory programs. Therefore, our selected DMRs can serve as a starting point to guide new, more effective reduced representation approaches to capture the most informative fraction of CpGs, as well as further pinpoint putative regulatory elements.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/nature12433

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 30 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Ziller, M. J., Gu, H., Müller, F., Donaghey, J., Tsai, L. T.-Y., Kohlbacher, O., De Jager, P. L., Rosen, E. D., Bennett, D. A., Bernstein, B. E., Gnirke, A., & Meissner, A.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Quantitative Biology Center (DE)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Meissner, Alexander
Venue
Nature
Published
2013-08
Volume
500
Issue
7463
Pages
477-481
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2163327652
Cited by
1,357
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 99 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 112 · 2021: 97 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 103 · 2018: 100 · 2017: 128 · 2016: 151 · 2015: 159 · 2014: 133 · 2013: 17
FWCI
68.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG017917, R01AG36042, P30-AG 10161, R01‐AG17917, R01 AG15819, R01AG036042, R01AG015819, P30AG010161, RF1AG036042)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P01GM099117)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK087092)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (U01ES017155, ES017690)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Keywords
CpG methylation, cell type-specific methylation, differentially methylated regions, enhancers, transcription factor binding sites, gene regulatory elements, single nucleotide polymorphisms, epigenetic regulation, bisulfite sequencing, epigenome mapping
MeSH terms
Binding Sites, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Humans, Organ Specificity, Sulfites, Transcription Factors, Genome, Human, Sequence Analysis, DNA, CpG Islands, DNA Methylation, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Genome-Wide Association Study

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