The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evolutionarily conserved replication timing profiles predict long-range chromatin interactions and distinguish closely related cell types
Open accessAbstract
To identify evolutionarily conserved features of replication timing and their relationship to epigenetic properties, we profiled replication timing genome-wide in four human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines, hESC-derived neural precursor cells (NPCs), lymphoblastoid cells, and two human induced pluripotent stem cell lines (hiPSCs), and compared them with related mouse cell types. Results confirm the conservation of coordinately replicated megabase-sized “replication domains” punctuated by origin-suppressed regions. Differentiation-induced replication timing changes in both species occur in 400- to 800-kb units and are similarly coordinated with transcription changes. A surprising degree of cell-type-specific conservation in replication timing was observed across regions of conserved synteny, despite considerable species variation in the alignment of replication timing to isochore GC/LINE-1 content. Notably, hESC replication timing profiles were significantly more aligned to mouse epiblast-derived stem cells (mEpiSCs) than to mouse ESCs. Comparison with epigenetic marks revealed a signature of chromatin modifications at the boundaries of early replicating domains and a remarkably strong link between replication timing and spatial proximity of chromatin as measured by Hi-C analysis. Thus, early and late initiation of replication occurs in spatially separate nuclear compartments, but rarely within the intervening chromatin. Moreover, cell-type-specific conservation of the replication program implies conserved developmental changes in spatial organization of chromatin. Together, our results reveal evolutionarily conserved aspects of developmentally regulated replication programs in mammals, demonstrate the power of replication profiling to distinguish closely related cell types, and strongly support the hypothesis that replication timing domains are spatially compartmentalized structural and functional units of three-dimensional chromosomal architecture.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
High-Resolution Profiling of Histone Methylations in the Human Genome
Barski, A., Cuddapah, S., Cui, K., Roh, T.-Y., Schones, D. E., Wang, Z., Wei, G., Chepelev, I., & Zhao, K. (2007) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.05.009 · Cited by 6,845
Replication timing and transcriptional control: beyond cause and effect--part II
Hiratani, I., Takebayashi, S.-I., Lu, J., & Gilbert, D. M. (2009) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/j.gde.2009.02.002 · Cited by 140
Self-citationReflections on the biology of embryonic stem (ES) cells
Gardner, R. L., & Brook, F. A. (1997) · The International Journal of Developmental Biology · doi:10.1387/ijdb.9184330 · Cited by 123
Cited by
Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions
Dixon, J. R., Selvaraj, S., Yue, F., Kim, A., Li, Y., Shen, Y., Hu, M., Liu, J. S., & Ren, B. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11082 · Cited by 6,829
Cohesin Loss Eliminates All Loop Domains
Rao, S. S. P., Huang, S.-C., Glenn St Hilaire, B., Engreitz, J. M., Perez, E. M., Kieffer-Kwon, K.-R., Sanborn, A. L., Johnstone, S. E., Bascom, G. D., Bochkov, I. D., et al. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.026 · Cited by 1,883
Nora, E. P., Goloborodko, A., Valton, A.-L., Gibcus, J. H., Uebersohn, A., Abdennur, N., Dekker, J., Mirny, L. A., & Bruneau, B. G. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.004 · Cited by 1,709
Chromatin architecture reorganization during stem cell differentiation
Dixon, J. R., Jung, I., Selvaraj, S., Shen, Y., Antosiewicz-Bourget, J. E., Lee, A. Y., Ye, Z., Kim, A., Rajagopal, N., Xie, W., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14222 · Cited by 1,646
A comparative encyclopedia of DNA elements in the mouse genome
Yue, F., Cheng, Y., Breschi, A., Vierstra, J., Wu, W., Ryba, T., Sandstrom, R., Ma, Z., Davis, C., Pope, B. D., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13992 · Cited by 1,781
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ryba, T., Hiratani, I., Lu, J., Itoh, M., Kulik, M., Zhang, J., Schulz, T. C., Robins, A. J., Dalton, S., & Gilbert, D. M.
- Venue
- Genome Research
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 2010-04-29
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 761-770
- ISSN
- 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2162362951
- Cited by
- 621
- References
- 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Evolutionarily conserved replication timing profiles predict long-range chromatin interactions and distinguish closely related cell types. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.099655.109
- The paper
- Ryba, T., Hiratani, I., Lu, J., Itoh, M., Kulik, M., Zhang, J., Schulz, T. C., Robins, A. J., Dalton, S., & Gilbert, D. M. (2010). Evolutionarily conserved replication timing profiles predict long-range chromatin interactions and distinguish closely related cell types. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.099655.109
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.
