Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 333

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Expression Patterns and Post-translational Modifications Associated with Mammalian Histone H3 Variants

Open access
Hake, Sandra B., Garcia, Benjamin A., Duncan, Elizabeth M., Kauer, Monika, Dellaire, Graham, Shabanowitz, Jeffrey, Bazett-Jones, David P., Allis, C. David, Hunt, Donald F.·2006·Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract

Covalent histone modifications and the incorporation of histone variants bring about changes in chromatin structure that in turn alter gene expression. Interest in non-allelic histone variants has been renewed, in part because of recent work on H3 (and other) histone variants. However, only in mammals do three non-centromeric H3 variants (H3.1, H3.2, and H3.3) exist. Here, we show that mammalian cell lines can be separated into two different groups based on their expression of H3.1, H3.2, and H3.3 at both mRNA and protein levels. Additionally, the ratio of these variants changes slightly during neuronal differentiation of murine ES cells. This difference in H3 variant expression between cell lines could not be explained by changes in growth rate, cell cycle stages, or chromosomal ploidy, but rather suggests other possibilities, such as changes in H3 variant incorporation during differentiation and tissue- or species-specific H3 variant expression. Moreover, quantitative mass spectrometry analysis of human H3.1, H3.2, and H3.3 showed modification differences between these three H3 variants, suggesting that they may have different biological functions. Specifically, H3.3 contains marks associated with transcriptionally active chromatin, whereas H3.2, in contrast, contains mostly silencing modifications that have been associated with facultative heterochromatin. Interestingly, H3.1 is enriched in both active and repressive marks, although the latter marks are different from those observed in H3.2. Although the biological significance as to why mammalian cells differentially employ three highly similar H3 variants remains unclear, our results underscore potential functional differences between them and reinforce the general view that H3.1 and H3.2 in mammalian cells should not be treated as equivalent proteins.

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 · 10.1074/jbc.m509266200

Cites

1 of 1 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

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 333

Metadata

Authors
Hake, S. B., Garcia, B. A., Duncan, E. M., Kauer, M., Dellaire, G., Shabanowitz, J., Bazett-Jones, D. P., Allis, C. D., & Hunt, D. F.
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
281
Issue
1
Pages
559-568
ISSN
0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974590591
Cited by
333
References
1
FWCI
6.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Expression Patterns and Post-translational Modifications Associated with Mammalian Histone H3 Variants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1074/jbc.m509266200
The paper
Hake, S. B., Garcia, B. A., Duncan, E. M., Kauer, M., Dellaire, G., Shabanowitz, J., Bazett-Jones, D. P., Allis, C. D., & Hunt, D. F. (2006). Expression Patterns and Post-translational Modifications Associated with Mammalian Histone H3 Variants. Journal of Biological Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m509266200

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.