Cited by 390Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsEpigenetics and DNA MethylationChromosomal and Genetic Variations

Comparative analysis of metazoan chromatin organization

Open access
Ho, Joshua W. K., Jung, Youngsook L., Liu, Tao, Alver, Burak H., Lee, Soohyun, Ikegami, Kohta, Sohn, Kyung-Ah, Minoda, Aki +70 more·2014·Nature

Abstract

A large collection of new modENCODE and ENCODE genome-wide chromatin data sets from cell lines and developmental stages in worm, fly and human are analysed; this reveals many conserved features of chromatin organization among the three organisms, as well as notable differences in the composition and locations of repressive chromatin. This study describes numerous new genome-wide chromatin data sets from cell lines and developmental stages of Homo sapiens, Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans generated by the ENCODE and modENCODE consortia. The results point to many conserved features of chromatin organization among the three organisms, while identifying differences in the composition and locations of repressive chromatin. Genome function is dynamically regulated in part by chromatin, which consists of the histones, non-histone proteins and RNA molecules that package DNA. Studies in Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila melanogaster have contributed substantially to our understanding of molecular mechanisms of genome function in humans, and have revealed conservation of chromatin components and mechanisms1,2,3. Nevertheless, the three organisms have markedly different genome sizes, chromosome architecture and gene organization. On human and fly chromosomes, for example, pericentric heterochromatin flanks single centromeres, whereas worm chromosomes have dispersed heterochromatin-like regions enriched in the distal chromosomal ‘arms’, and centromeres distributed along their lengths4,5. To systematically investigate chromatin organization and associated gene regulation across species, we generated and analysed a large collection of genome-wide chromatin data sets from cell lines and developmental stages in worm, fly and human. Here we present over 800 new data sets from our ENCODE and modENCODE consortia, bringing the total to over 1,400. Comparison of combinatorial patterns of histone modifications, nuclear lamina-associated domains, organization of large-scale topological domains, chromatin environment at promoters and enhancers, nucleosome positioning, and DNA replication patterns reveals many conserved features of chromatin organization among the three organisms. We also find notable differences in the composition and locations of repressive chromatin. These data sets and analyses provide a rich resource for comparative and species-specific investigations of chromatin composition, organization and function.

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/nature13415

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • The median distance between the common boundaries was approximately 750 kb, consistent with the reported median TAD size in human cells.

    “The median distance between the common boundaries was approximately 750 kb, consistent with the reported median TAD size in human cells4,19 (Extended Data Fig. 1e).”
  • Five distinct groups of TADs were identified by k-means clustering of chromatin state coverage: heterochromatin (61), low/quiescent (705), repressed (481), low-active (764) and active (365) domains.

    “The obtained matrix was grouped using the k-means clustering approach and five distinct groups of TADs were identified similar to a previous classification of chromatin domains17,19,33. These groups comprised heterochromatin (61), low/quiescent (705), repressed (481), low-active (764) and active (365) domains (Fig. 4a, Supplementary Table 4).”

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
Ho, J. W. K., Jung, Y. L., Liu, T., Alver, B. H., Lee, S., Ikegami, K., Sohn, K.-A., Minoda, A., Tolstorukov, M. Y., Appert, A., Parker, S. C. J., Gu, T., Kundaje, A., Riddle, N. C., Bishop, E., Egelhofer, T. A., Hu, S. S., Alekseyenko, A. A., Rechtsteiner, A., Asker, D., Belsky, J. A., Bowman, S. K., Chen, Q. B., Chen, R. A.-J., Day, D. S., Dong, Y., Dose, A. C., Duan, X., Epstein, C. B., Ercan, S., Feingold, E. A., Ferrari, F., Garrigues, J. M., Gehlenborg, N., Good, P. J., Haseley, P., He, D., Herrmann, M., Hoffman, M. M., Jeffers, T. E., Kharchenko, P. V., Kolasinska-Zwierz, P., Kotwaliwale, C. V., Kumar, N., Langley, S. A., Larschan, E. N., Latorre, I., Libbrecht, M. W., Lin, X., Park, R., Pazin, M. J., Pham, H. N., Plachetka, A., Qin, B., Schwartz, Y. B., Shoresh, N., Stempor, P., Vielle, A., Wang, C., Whittle, C. M., Xue, H., Kingston, R. E., Kim, J. H., Bernstein, B. E., Dernburg, A. F., Pirrotta, V., Kuroda, M. I., Noble, W. S., Tullius, T. D., Kellis, M., MacAlpine, D. M., Strome, S., Elgin, S. C. R., Liu, X. S., Lieb, J. D., Ahringer, J., Karpen, G. H., & Park, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute (AU)
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Tongji University (CN)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
  • MacAlpine, David M.
  • Strome, Susan
  • Elgin, Sarah C. R.
  • Liu, Xiaole Shirley
  • Lieb, Jason D.
  • Ahringer, Julie
  • Karpen, Gary H.
  • Park, Peter J.
Venue
Nature
Published
2014-08-27
Volume
512
Issue
7515
Pages
449-452
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W1981516407
Cited by
390
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 11
FWCI
19.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1122374, 0000994)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Wellcome Trust (101863, 54523, 101863/Z/13/Z, 092096)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31028011, 1122374)
  • National Institutes of Health (5u54hg004570-04, 1122374, U54-CA121852)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG004258, U01HG004270, K99HG006259, U01HG004279, U01HG004695, U54HG006991, U54-HG004570, R01HG004037, T32HG002295)
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA121852)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM071340, R01GM098461, R37GM048405)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (RL9EB008539)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
Keywords
chromatin organization, comparative genomics, histone modifications, repressive chromatin, heterochromatin, topologically associating domains, nucleosome positioning, DNA replication, enhancers, promoter, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila melanogaster, human, modENCODE, ENCODE
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Line, Centromere, Chromatin, DNA Replication, Drosophila melanogaster, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Heterochromatin, Histones, Humans, Nucleosomes, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Species Specificity, Caenorhabditis elegans, Nuclear Lamina, Chromatin Assembly and Disassembly, Epigenesis, Genetic, Molecular Sequence Annotation

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