Cited by 106Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromatin Remodeling and CancerEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

Cell-type selective chromatin remodeling defines the active subset of FOXA1-bound enhancers

Open access
Eeckhoute, Jérôme, Lupien, Mathieu, Meyer, Clifford A., Verzi, Michael P., Shivdasani, Ramesh A., Liu, X. Shirley, Brown, Myles·2009·Genome Research

Abstract

Selective activity of a specific set of enhancers defines tissue-specific gene transcription. The pioneer factor FOXA1 has been shown to induce functional enhancer competency through chromatin openings. We have previously found that FOXA1 is recruited to thousands of regions across the genome of a given cell type. Here, we monitored the chromatin structure at FOXA1 binding sites on a chromosome-wide scale using formaldehyde assisted isolation of regulatory elements (FAIRE). Surprisingly, we find that a significant fraction of FOXA1-bound sites have a relatively closed chromatin conformation linked to a shift of the epigenetic signature toward repressive histone marks. Importantly, these sites are not correlated with gene expression in a given cell type suggesting that FOXA1 is required, but not sufficient, for the functional activity of bound enhancers. Interestingly, we find that a significant proportion of the inactive FOXA1-bound regulatory sites in one cell type are actually functional in another cellular context. We found that at least half of the FOXA1 binding sites from a given cell type are shared with another cell lineage. Mechanisms that restrict the activity of shared FOXA1-bound enhancers likely play a significant role in defining the cell-type-specific functions of FOXA1.

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/gr.084582.108

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Low H3K4me1 loci are typically functionally inactive and not co-occupied.

    “In support of this, our data show that these loci are typically functionally inactive and not co-occupied, in agreement with previous studies (Lupien et al. 2008;Eeckhoute et al. 2009).”

    From Locus co-occupancy, nucleosome positioning, and H3K4me1 regulate the functionality of FOXA2-, HNF4A-, and PDX1-bound loci in islets and liver (2010) · cites this paper as Eeckhoute et al. 2009

    The Results section (“Levels of FAIRE enrichment correlate with the transcriptional regulatory activity at FOXA1-bound enhancers”; page unavailable) reports that low-FAIRE FOXA1 sites are less likely to be functional and less often recruit ESR1. But the paper compares H3K4me2, not H3K4me1, and does not establish the claim for low-H3K4me1 loci generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Eeckhoute, J., Lupien, M., Meyer, C. A., Verzi, M. P., Shivdasani, R. A., Liu, X. S., & Brown, M.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2009-01-07
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
372-380
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2147789776
Cited by
106
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 16
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
  • Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG004069)
  • National Cancer Institute (P01CA8011105)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK074967)
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
FOXA1, enhancers, chromatin remodeling, cell type specificity, FAIRE, chromatin accessibility, histone modifications, pioneer factors
MeSH terms
Binding Sites, Chromosome Mapping, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Humans, Organ Specificity, Protein Binding, Tumor Cells, Cultured, Transcriptional Activation, Conserved Sequence, Cell Lineage, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Chromatin Assembly and Disassembly, Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 3-alpha

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