CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 3Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromatin Remodeling and CancerEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

Post-mitotic transcriptional activation and 3D regulatory interactions show locus- and differentiation-specific sensitivity to cohesin depletion

Open access
Lee, UkJin, Laguillo-Diego, Alejandra, Wong, Wilfred, Ni, Zhangli, Cheng, Lingling, Li, Jieru, Pelham-Webb, Bobbie, Pertsinidis, Alexandros +2 more·2025·bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
DOI 10.1101/2025.02.13.638153PMC PMC11875242
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Prior studies showed that structural loops collapse upon acute cohesin depletion, while regulatory enhancer-promoter (E-P) loops largely persist, consistent with minimal transcriptional changes. However, these studies, conducted in asynchronous cells, could not resolve whether cohesin is required for the establishment of regulatory interactions and transcriptional activation during cell division or cell state transitions. To address this gap, we degraded RAD21, a core cohesin subunit, in naïve mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) transitioning from mitosis to G1 either in self-renewal condition or during differentiation toward formative pluripotency. Although most structural loops failed to be re-established without cohesin, about 35% of regulatory loops reformed at normal or higher frequencies. Cohesin-independent loops showed characteristics of strong active enhancers and promoters and a significant association with H3K27ac mitotic bookmarks. However, inhibition of CBP/p300 during mitotic exit did not impact these cohesin-independent interactions, suggesting the presence of complex compensatory mechanisms. At the transcriptional level, cohesin depletion induced only minor changes, supporting that post-mitotic transcriptional reactivation is largely independent of cohesin. The few genes with impaired reactivation were directly bound by RAD21 at their promoters, engaged in many structural loops, and located within strongly insulated TADs with low gene density. Importantly, degrading cohesin during the M-to-G1 transition in the presence of EpiLC differentiation signals revealed a larger group of susceptible genes, including key signature genes and transcription factors. Impaired activation of these genes was partly due to the failure to establish de novo EpiLC-specific interactions in the absence of cohesin. These experiments revealed locus-specific and context-specific dependencies between cohesin, E-P interactions, and transcription.

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 · 10.1101/2025.02.13.638153

Cites

12 of 12 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 102

  1. [1]Furlong E. E. M. C Levine M. Developmental enhancers and chromosome topology. Science 361, 1341– 1345 (2018). 30262496 PMC6986801
  2. [2]Rowley M. J. C Corces V. G. Organizational principles of 3D genome architecture. Nat. Rev. Genet. 1G, 789– 800 (2018). PMC6312108 30367165
  3. [3]Gibcus J. H. C Dekker J. The Hierarchy of the 3D Genome. Mol. Cell 4G, 773– 782 (2013). PMC3741673 23473598
  4. [4]Dekker J. Two ways to fold the genome during the cell cycle: insights obtained with chromosome conformation capture. Epigenetics Chromatin 7, 25 (2014). 25435919 PMC4247682
  5. [6]Abramo K. A chromosome folding intermediate at the condensin-to-cohesin transition during telophase. Nat. Cell Biol. 21, 1393– 1402 (2019). 31685986 PMC6858582
  6. [8]Pelham-Webb B. H3K27ac bookmarking promotes rapid post-mitotic activation of the pluripotent stem cell program without impacting 3D chromatin reorganization. Mol. Cell 81, 1732– 1748.e8 (2021). 33730542 PMC8052294
  7. [9]Kang H. Dynamic regulation of histone modifications and long-range chromosomal interactions during postmitotic transcriptional reactivation. Genes Dev. 34, 913– 930 (2020). 32499403 PMC7328517
  8. [10]Nagano T. Cell-cycle dynamics of chromosomal organization at single-cell resolution. Nature 547, 61– 67 (2017). 28682332 PMC5567812
  9. [11]Dixon J. R. Chromatin architecture reorganization during stem cell differentiation. Nature 518, 331– 336 (2015). 25693564 PMC4515363
  10. [13]Murphy D. 3D Enhancer–promoter networks provide predictive features for gene expression and coregulation in early embryonic lineages. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 1– 16 (2023) doi: 10.1038/s41594-023-01130-4. PMC10897904 38053013 · DOI
  11. [14]Theis A. C Harrison M. M. Reprogramming of three-dimensional chromatin organization in the early embryo. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 81, 102613 (2023). 37224641 PMC10524315
  12. [15]Zheng H. C Xie W. The role of 3D genome organization in development and cell differentiation. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 535– 550 (2019). 31197269
  13. [18]Liu J. Transcriptional Dysregulation in NIPBL and Cohesin Mutant Human Cells. Plos Biol 7, e1000119 (2009). 19468298 PMC2680332
  14. [19]Piché J., Vliet P. P. V., Pucéat M. C Andelfinger G. The expanding phenotypes of cohesinopathies: one ring to rule them all! Cell Cycle 18, 2828– 2848 (2019). 31516082 PMC6791706
  15. [20]Uyehara C. M. C Apostolou E. 3D enhancer-promoter interactions and multi-connected hubs: Organizational principles and functional roles. Cell Reports 42, 112068 (2023). 37059094 PMC10556201
  16. [21]Laat W. de C Duboule D. Topology of mammalian developmental enhancers and their regulatory landscapes. Nature 502, 499– 506 (2013). 24153303
  17. [23]Vermunt M. W., Zhang D. C Blobel G. A. The interdependence of gene-regulatory elements and the 3D genome. J Cell Biology 218, 12– 26 (2019). PMC6314554 30442643
  18. [24]Bonev B. C Cavalli G. Organization and function of the 3D genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 661– 678 (2016). 27739532
  19. [25]Steensel B. van C Furlong E. E. M. The role of transcription in shaping the spatial organization of the genome. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 327– 337 (2019). 30886333 PMC7116054
  20. [29]Gabriele M. Dynamics of CTCF- and cohesin-mediated chromatin looping revealed by live-cell imaging. Science 376, 496– 501 (2022). 35420890 PMC9069445
  21. [30]Makrantoni V. C Marston A. L. Cohesin and chromosome segregation. Curr Biol 28, R688– R693 (2018). 29920258 PMC6013277
  22. [31]Dong P. Cohesin prevents cross-domain gene coactivation. Nat. Genet. 56, 1654– 1664 (2024). 39048795 PMC11319207
  23. [32]Kane L. Cohesin is required for long-range enhancer action at the Shh locus. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2G, 891– 897 (2022). PMC7613721 36097291
  24. [34]Rao S. S. P. Cohesin Loss Eliminates All Loop Domains. Cell 171, 305– 320.e24 (2017). 28985562 PMC5846482
  25. [35]Nora E. P. Targeted Degradation of CTCF Decouples Local Insulation of Chromosome Domains from Genomic Compartmentalization. Cell 16G, 930– 944.e22 (2017). PMC5538188 28525758
  26. [36]Rhodes J. D. P. Cohesin Disrupts Polycomb-Dependent Chromosome Interactions in Embryonic Stem Cells. Cell Reports 30, 820– 835.e10 (2020). 31968256 PMC6988126
  27. [37]Kriz A. J., Colognori D., Sunwoo H., Nabet B. C Lee J. T. Balancing cohesin eviction and retention prevents aberrant chromosomal interactions, Polycomb-mediated repression, and X-inactivation. Mol. Cell 81, 1970– 1987.e9 (2021). 33725485 PMC8106664
  28. [39]Thiecke M. J. Cohesin-Dependent and -Independent Mechanisms Mediate Chromosomal Contacts between Promoters and Enhancers. Cell Rep. 32, 107929 (2020). 32698000 PMC7383238
  29. [40]Hsiung C. C.-S. A hyperactive transcriptional state marks genome reactivation at the mitosis–G1 transition. Genes Dev. 30, 1423– 1439 (2016). 27340175 PMC4926865
  30. [41]Palozola K. C. Mitotic transcription and waves of gene reactivation during mitotic exit. Science 358, 119– 122 (2017). 28912132 PMC5727891
  31. [42]Pelham-Webb B., Murphy D. C Apostolou E. Dynamic 3D Chromatin Reorganization during Establishment and Maintenance of Pluripotency. Stem Cell Rep 15, 1176– 1195 (2020). PMC7724465 33242398
  32. [43]Teves S. S. A stable mode of bookmarking by TBP recruits RNA polymerase II to mitotic chromosomes. eLife 7, e35621 (2018). 29939130 PMC6037474
  33. [44]Boward B., Wu T. C Dalton S. Concise Review: Control of Cell Fate Through Cell Cycle and Pluripotency Networks. Stem Cells 34, 1427– 1436 (2016). 26889666 PMC5201256
  34. [45]Dalton S. Linking the Cell Cycle to Cell Fate Decisions. Trends Cell Biol. 25, 592– 600 (2015). 26410405 PMC4584407
  35. [46]Soufi A. C Dalton S. Cycling through developmental decisions: how cell cycle dynamics control pluripotency, differentiation and reprogramming. Development 143, 4301– 4311 (2016). 27899507 PMC5201050
  36. [47]Nabet B. The dTAG system for immediate and target-specific protein degradation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 431– 441 (2017). PMC6295913 29581585
  37. [48]Cheng L., De C., Li J. C Pertsinidis A. Mechanisms of transcription control by distal enhancers from high-resolution single-gene imaging. Biorxiv 2023.03.19.533190 (2023) doi: 10.1101/2023.03.19.533190. · DOI · Paper page
  38. [49]Carvalhal S., Tavares A., Santos M. B., Mirkovic M. C Oliveira R. A. A quantitative analysis of cohesin decay in mitotic fidelity. J Cell Biol 217, 3343– 3353 (2018). 30002073 PMC6168270
  39. [50]Heidinger-Pauli J. M., Mert O., Davenport C., Guacci V. C Koshland D. Systematic Reduction of Cohesin Differentially Affects Chromosome Segregation, Condensation, and DNA Repair. Curr. Biol. 20, 957– 963 (2010). 20451387 PMC2892909
  40. [51]Matthey-Doret C. Computer vision for pattern detection in chromosome contact maps. Nat. Commun. 11, 5795 (2020). 33199682 PMC7670471
  41. [52]Sheffield N. C. C Bock C. LOLA: enrichment analysis for genomic region sets and regulatory elements in R and Bioconductor. Bioinformatics 32, 587– 589 (2016). 26508757 PMC4743627
  42. [53]Weintraub A. S. YY1 Is a Structural Regulator of Enhancer-Promoter Loops. Cell 171, 1573– 1588.e28 (2017). 29224777 PMC5785279
  43. [55]Lam J. C. YY1-controlled regulatory connectivity and transcription are influenced by the cell cycle. Nat. Genet. 56, 1938– 1952 (2024). 39210046 PMC11687402
  44. [56]Alonso-Gil D., Cuadrado A., Giménez-Llorente D., Rodríguez-Corsino M. C Losada A. Different NIPBL requirements of cohesin-STAG1 and cohesin-STAG2. Nat. Commun. 14, 1326 (2023). 36898992 PMC10006224
  45. [57]Zuin J. A Cohesin-Independent Role for NIPBL at Promoters Provides Insights in CdLS. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004153 (2014). 24550742 PMC3923681
  46. [58]Berg D. L. C. van den Nipbl Interacts with Zfp609 and the Integrator Complex to Regulate Cortical Neuron Migration. Neuron G 3, 348– 361 (2017). PMC5263256 28041881
  47. [59]Luna-Peláez N. The Cornelia de Lange Syndrome-associated factor NIPBL interacts with BRD4 ET domain for transcription control of a common set of genes. Cell Death Dis. 10, 548 (2019). 31320616 PMC6639259
  48. [60]Whyte W. A. Master Transcription Factors and Mediator Establish Super-Enhancers at Key Cell Identity Genes. Cell 153, 307– 319 (2013). 23582322 PMC3653129
  49. [61]Giammartino D. C. D. KLF4 is involved in the organization and regulation of pluripotency-associated three-dimensional enhancer networks. Nat Cell Biol 21, 1179– 1190 (2019). 31548608 PMC7339746
  50. [62]Teves S. S. A dynamic mode of mitotic bookmarking by transcription factors. eLife 5, e22280 (2016). 27855781 PMC5156526
  51. [63]Deluz C. A role for mitotic bookmarking of SOX2 in pluripotency and differentiation. Genes Dev. 30, 2538– 2550 (2016). 27920086 PMC5159668
  52. [64]Liu Y. Widespread Mitotic Bookmarking by Histone Marks and Transcription Factors in Pluripotent Stem Cells. Cell Reports 1G, 1283– 1293 (2017). PMC5495017 28514649
  53. [65]Chervova A. Mitotic bookmarking redundancy by nuclear receptors in pluripotent cells. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 31, 513– 522 (2024). 38196033 PMC10948359
  54. [66]Narita T. A unified model of gene expression control by cohesin and CTCF. bioRxiv 2024.11.29.625887 (2024) doi: 10.1101/2024.11.29.625887. · DOI
  55. [67]Sun F. Promoter-Enhancer Communication Occurs Primarily within Insulated Neighborhoods. Mol. Cell 73, 250– 263.e5 (2019). 30527662 PMC6338517
  56. [68]Dowen J. M. Control of Cell Identity Genes Occurs in Insulated Neighborhoods in Mammalian Chromosomes. Cell 15G, 374– 387 (2014). PMC4197132 25303531
  57. [69]Dejosez M. Regulatory architecture of housekeeping genes is driven by promoter assemblies. Cell Reports 42, 112505 (2023). 37182209 PMC10329844
  58. [70]Smith A. Formative pluripotency: the executive phase in a developmental continuum. Development 144, 365– 373 (2017). 28143843 PMC5430734
  59. [71]Morgani S., Nichols J. C Hadjantonakis A.-K. The many faces of Pluripotency: in vitro adaptations of a continuum of in vivo states. BMC Dev. Biol. 17, 7 (2017). 28610558 PMC5470286
  60. [73]Hamilton W. B. Dynamic lineage priming is driven via direct enhancer regulation by ERK. Nature 575, 355– 360 (2019). 31695196 PMC7618169
  61. [74]Abuhashem A. RNA Pol II pausing facilitates phased pluripotency transitions by buffering transcription. Genes Dev. 36, 770– 789 (2022). 35981753 PMC9480856
  62. [75]Buecker C. Reorganization of Enhancer Patterns in Transition from Naive to Primed Pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 14, 838– 853 (2014). 24905168 PMC4491504
  63. [76]Aboreden N. G. Cis-regulatory chromatin contacts form de novo in the absence of loop extrusion. bioRxiv 2025.01.12.632634 (2025) doi: 10.1101/2025.01.12.632634. · DOI
  64. [77]Popay T. M. Genome-wide in vivo dynamics of cohesin-mediated loop extrusion and its role in transcription activation. bioRxiv 2024.10.02.616323 (2024) doi: 10.1101/2024.10.02.616323. · DOI · Paper page
  65. [78]Hansen K. L. Synergy between cis-regulatory elements can render cohesin dispensable for distal enhancer function. bioRxiv 2024.10.04.615095 (2024) doi: 10.1101/2024.10.04.615095. PMC13446962 41308125 · DOI
  66. [79]Nuebler J., Fudenberg G., Imakaev M., Abdennur N. C Mirny L. A. Chromatin organization by an interplay of loop extrusion and compartmental segregation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, E6697– E6706 (2018). 29967174 PMC6055145
  67. [80]Calderon L. Cohesin-dependence of neuronal gene expression relates to chromatin loop length. eLife 11, e76539 (2022). 35471149 PMC9106336
  68. [81]Rinzema N. J. Building regulatory landscapes reveals that an enhancer can recruit cohesin to create contact domains, engage CTCF sites and activate distant genes. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2G, 563– 574 (2022). PMC9205769 35710842
  69. [82]Weinert B. T. Time-Resolved Analysis Reveals Rapid Dynamics and Broad Scope of the CBP/p300 Acetylome. Cell 174, 231– 244.e12 (2018). 29804834 PMC6078418
  70. [83]Aboreden N. G. LDB1 establishes multi-enhancer networks to regulate gene expression. Mol. Cell 85, 376– 393.e9 (2025). 39721581 PMC11741933
  71. [84]Ramasamy S. The Mediator complex regulates enhancer-promoter interactions. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 30, 991– 1000 (2023). 37430065 PMC10352134
  72. [85]Zhang S., Übelmesser N., Barbieri M. C Papantonis, A. Enhancer–promoter contact formation requires RNAPII and antagonizes loop extrusion. Nat. Genet. 55, 832– 840 (2023). 37012454
  73. [86]Zhang S. RNA polymerase II is required for spatial chromatin reorganization following exit from mitosis. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg8205 (2021). 34678064 PMC8535795
  74. [87]Quinodoz S. A. RNA promotes the formation of spatial compartments in the nucleus. Cell 184, 5775– 5790.e30 (2021). 34739832 PMC9115877
  75. [88]Karr J. P., Ferrie J. J., Tjian R. C Darzacq X. The transcription factor activity gradient (TAG) model: contemplating a contact-independent mechanism for enhancer–promoter communication. Genes Dev. 36, 7– 16 (2021). 34969825 PMC8763055
  76. [89]Cuartero S. Control of inducible gene expression links cohesin to hematopoietic progenitor self-renewal and differentiation. Nat. Immunol. 1G, 932– 941 (2018). PMC6195188 30127433
  77. [90]Sasca D. Cohesin-dependent regulation of gene expression during differentiation is lost in cohesin-mutated myeloid malignancies. Blood 134, 2195– 2208 (2019). 31515253 PMC7484777
  78. [91]Minderjahn J. Postmitotic differentiation of human monocytes requires cohesin-structured chromatin. Nat. Commun. 13, 4301 (2022). 35879286 PMC9314343
  79. [92]Festuccia N. Mitotic binding of Esrrb marks key regulatory regions of the pluripotency network. Nat. Cell Biol. 18, 1139– 1148 (2016). 27723719
  80. [93]Rossi M. J., Lai W. K. M. C Pugh B. F. Simplified ChIP-exo assays. Nat. Commun. G, 2842 (2018). PMC6054642 30030442
  81. [94]Krijger P. H. L., Geeven G., Bianchi V., Hilvering C. R. E. C Laat W. de. 4C-seq from beginning to end: A detailed protocol for sample preparation and data analysis. Methods 170, 17– 32 (2020). 31351925
  82. [95]Li J. Single-gene imaging links genome topology, promoter–enhancer communication and transcription control. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 27, 1032– 1040 (2020). 32958948 PMC7644657
  83. [96]Köster J. C Rahmann S. Snakemake—a scalable bioinformatics workflow engine. Bioinformatics 28, 2520– 2522 (2012). 22908215
  84. [97]Dobin A. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics 2G, 15– 21 (2012). PMC3530905 23104886
  85. [98]Danecek P. Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools. GigaScience 10, giab008 (2021). 33590861 PMC7931819
  86. [99]Liao Y., Smyth G. K. C Shi W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923– 930 (2014). 24227677
  87. [100]Love M. I., Huber W. C Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol 15, 550 (2014). 25516281 PMC4302049
  88. [101]Bushnell B., Rood J. C Singer E. BBMerge – Accurate paired shotgun read merging via overlap. PLoS ONE 12, e0185056 (2017). 29073143 PMC5657622
  89. [102]Langmead B. C Salzberg S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods G, 357– 359 (2012). PMC3322381 22388286
  90. [104]Quinlan A. R. C Hall I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841– 842 (2010). 20110278 PMC2832824
  91. [105]Amemiya H. M., Kundaje A. C Boyle A. P. The ENCODE Blacklist: Identification of Problematic Regions of the Genome. Sci. Rep. G, 9354 (2019). PMC6597582 31249361
  92. [106]Kent W. J., Zweig A. S., Barber G., Hinrichs A. S. C Karolchik D. BigWig and BigBed: enabling browsing of large distributed datasets. Bioinformatics 26, 2204– 2207 (2010). 20639541 PMC2922891
  93. [107]Zhang Y. Model-based Analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol. G, R137 (2008). PMC2592715 18798982
  94. [109]ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis | SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4. · DOI
  95. [110]Li H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. arXiv (2013) doi: 10.48550/arxiv.1303.3997. · DOI
  96. [111]Open2C et al. Pairtools: from sequencing data to chromosome contacts. bioRxiv 2023.02.13.528389 (2023) doi: 10.1101/2023.02.13.528389. PMC11164360 38809952 · DOI
  97. [112]Durand N. C. Juicer Provides a One-Click System for Analyzing Loop-Resolution Hi-C Experiments. Cell Syst. 3, 95– 98 (2016). 27467249 PMC5846465
  98. [113]Ramírez F. High-resolution TADs reveal DNA sequences underlying genome organization in flies. Nat. Commun. G, 189 (2018). PMC5768762 29335486
  99. [114]Ursu O. GenomeDISCO: a concordance score for chromosome conformation capture experiments using random walks on contact map graphs. Bioinformatics 34, 2701– 2707 (2018). 29554289 PMC6084597
  100. [115]Open2C Cooltools: Enabling high-resolution Hi-C analysis in Python. PLOS Comput. Biol. 20, e1012067 (2024). 38709825 PMC11098495
  101. [116]Weide R. H. van der Hi-C analyses with GENOVA: a case study with cohesin variants. NAR Genom. Bioinform. 3, lqab040 (2021). 34046591 PMC8140737
  102. [117]Yu G., Wang L.-G., Han Y. C He Q.-Y. clusterProfiler: an R Package for Comparing Biological Themes Among Gene Clusters. OMICS: A J. Integr. Biol. 16, 284– 287 (2012). PMC3339379 22455463

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, U., Laguillo-Diego, A., Wong, W., Ni, Z., Cheng, L., Li, J., Pelham-Webb, B., Pertsinidis, A., Leslie, C., & Apostolou, E.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Apostolou, Effie
ORCID
Venue
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2025-02-14
DOI
10.1101/2025.02.13.638153
PMC
PMC11875242
OpenAlex
W4407601879
Cited by
3
References
12
Citations by year
2025: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM138635, R01GM144508, RM1GM139738)
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
cohesin, RAD21, enhancer-promoter loops, 3D genome organization, mouse embryonic stem cells, epiblast-like cells, cell differentiation, mitotic bookmarking, H3K27ac, CBP/p300, transcription factor binding, topologically associating domains, chromatin insulation, mitotic exit

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