The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fidelity of the Methylation Pattern and Its Variation in the Genome
Open accessAbstract
The methylated or unmethylated status of a CpG site is copied faithfully from parental DNA to daughter DNA, and functions as a cellular memory. However, no information is available for the fidelity of methylation pattern in unmethylated CpG islands (CGIs) or its variation in the genome. Here, we determined the methylation status of each CpG site on each DNA molecule obtained from clonal populations of normal human mammary epithelial cells. Methylation pattern error rates (MPERs) were calculated based upon the deviation from the methylation patterns that should be obtained if the cells had 100% fidelity in replicating the methylation pattern. Unmethylated CGIs in the promoter regions of five genes showed MPERs of 0.018–0.032 errors/site/21.6 generations, and the fidelity of methylation pattern was calculated as 99.85%–99.92%/site/generation. In contrast, unmethylated CGIs outside the promoter regions showed MPERs more than twice as high (P < 0.01). Methylated regions, including a CGI in the MAGE-A3 promoter and DMR of the H19 gene, showed much lower MPERs than unmethylated CGIs. These showed that errors in methylation pattern were mainly due to de novo methylations in unmethylated regions. The differential MPERs even among unmethylated CGIs indicated that a promoter-specific protection mechanism(s) from de novo methylation was present. [Supplemental material is available online at www.genome.org.]
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
DNA methylation patterns and epigenetic memory
Bird, A. (2002) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.947102 · Cited by 7,124
Cited by
Epigenetics as a unifying principle in the aetiology of complex traits and diseases
Petronis, A. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09230 · Cited by 687
DNA methylation profiles in monozygotic and dizygotic twins
Kaminsky, Z. A., Tang, T., Wang, S.-C., Ptak, C., Oh, G. H. T., Wong, A. H. C., Feldcamp, L. A., Virtanen, C., Halfvarson, J., Tysk, C., et al. (2009) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.286 · Cited by 668
Detection and interpretation of altered methylation patterns in cancer cells
Ushijima, T. (2005) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1571 · Cited by 483
Self-citationSingle-cell epigenomics: Recording the past and predicting the future
Kelsey, G., Stegle, O., & Reik, W. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aan6826 · Cited by 415
DNA methylation signatures in development and aging of the human prefrontal cortex
Numata, S., Ye, T., Hyde, T. M., Guitart-Navarro, X., Tao, R., Wininger, M., Colantuoni, C., Weinberger, D. R., Kleinman, J. E., & Lipska, B. K. (2012) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.12.020 · Cited by 364
Metadata
- Authors
- Ushijima, T., Watanabe, N., Okochi, E., Kaneda, A., Sugimura, T., & Miyamoto, K.
- Venue
- Genome Research
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 2003-05-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 868-874
- ISSN
- 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-5469
- OpenAlex
- W2163599835
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 1
- 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: Fidelity of the Methylation Pattern and Its Variation in the Genome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.969603
- The paper
- Ushijima, T., Watanabe, N., Okochi, E., Kaneda, A., Sugimura, T., & Miyamoto, K. (2003). Fidelity of the Methylation Pattern and Its Variation in the Genome. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.969603
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.