Cited by 171Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromatin Remodeling and CancerEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

High-resolution genome-wide functional dissection of transcriptional regulatory regions and nucleotides in human

Open access
Wang, Xinchen, He, Liang, Goggin, Sarah M., Saadat, Alham, Wang, Li, Sinnott-Armstrong, Nasa, Claussnitzer, Melina, Kellis, Manolis·2018·Nature Communications

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Genome-wide epigenomic maps have revealed millions of putative enhancers and promoters, but experimental validation of their function and high-resolution dissection of their driver nucleotides remain limited. Here, we present HiDRA (High-resolution Dissection of Regulatory Activity), a combined experimental and computational method for high-resolution genome-wide testing and dissection of putative regulatory regions. We test ~7 million accessible DNA fragments in a single experiment, by coupling accessible chromatin extraction with self-transcribing episomal reporters (ATAC-STARR-seq). By design, fragments are highly overlapping in densely-sampled accessible regions, enabling us to pinpoint driver regulatory nucleotides by exploiting differences in activity between partially-overlapping fragments using a machine learning model (SHARPR-RE). In GM12878 lymphoblastoid cells, we find ~65,000 regions showing enhancer function, and pinpoint ~13,000 high-resolution driver elements. These are enriched for regulatory motifs, evolutionarily-conserved nucleotides, and disease-associated genetic variants from genome-wide association studies. Overall, HiDRA provides a high-throughput, high-resolution approach for dissecting regulatory regions and driver nucleotides.

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/s41467-018-07746-1

Cites

46 of 46 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?

  • Histone modification and cofactor binding are enriched but not completely predictive of enhancer activity.

    “Although enriched, histone modification and cofactor binding is not completely predictive of enhancer activity54,58,72,77,105.”

    From Towards a comprehensive catalogue of validated and target-linked human enhancers (2020) · cites this paper as [77]

    In Results, “HiDRA elements are enriched in promoters and enhancers” (page unavailable), the paper reports enrichment of active-enhancer-associated histone marks in active fragments. The Introduction and “Regulatory activity outside promoters and enhancers” explain why epigenomic marks do not fully predict reporter activity. The paper discusses enrichment of transcription-factor motifs and binding, but the available passages do not establish the claim specifically for cofactor binding. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It remains possible that many biochemically identified enhancers may not be enhancing transcription of anything.

    “In fact, it remains entirely possible that many biochemically identified enhancers may not be enhancing transcription of anything77.”

    From Towards a comprehensive catalogue of validated and target-linked human enhancers (2020) · cites this paper as [77]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says many regions identified by epigenomic marks do not drive reporter-gene expression, supporting doubt that every biochemically identified enhancer is functional. A negative reporter assay does not establish that those regions enhance no transcription in any context, so the broader possibility in the claim is not fully supported. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MPRAs have been applied to assess biochemically annotated candidate enhancers, candidate enhancers harbouring variants that potentially mediate eQTLs, and even scans of the entire human genome.

    “MPRAs have been applied to assess biochemically annotated candidate enhancers77,176-178, candidate enhancers harbouring variants that potentially mediate eQTLs179-182, and even scans of the entire human genome108,183.”

    From Towards a comprehensive catalogue of validated and target-linked human enhancers (2020) · cites this paper as [77]

    This source is cited for the genome-wide-scan portion of the sentence. The Introduction reports a genome-wide HiDRA assay, but says its approximately 7 million tested fragments were preferentially selected from accessible chromatin in GM12878 cells. The Results (‘HiDRA experimental method overview’; page unavailable) likewise say the library targeted accessible DNA rather than randomly sampling the entire genome, so the claim overstates its scope. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Massively parallel reporter assays and CRISPR genome editing have matured rapidly to enable functional characterization of targeted sequence perturbations at scale.

    “To address this, there has been rapid maturation of technologies, such as massively parallel reporter assays121–123 and CRISPR genome editing, to support functional characterization of targeted sequence perturbations at scale.”

    From A brief history of human disease genetics (2020) · cites this paper as [123]

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
Wang, X., He, L., Goggin, S. M., Saadat, A., Wang, L., Sinnott-Armstrong, N., Claussnitzer, M., & Kellis, M.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Claussnitzer, Melina
  • Kellis, Manolis
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2018-12-19
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
5380-5380
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2903823332
Cited by
159
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3
FWCI
6.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Nature
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (GM12878, NIH-R01)
  • McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG007610, R01HG008155, U01HG009088)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM113708)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Chromatin Remodeling and Cancer
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
Keywords
HIDRA, enhancer function, transcriptional regulatory sequences, chromatin accessibility, machine learning, regulatory motifs, disease-associated variants
MeSH terms
Gene Expression Regulation, Genetic Techniques, Humans, Regulatory Sequences, Nucleic Acid, Genome, Human, 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