Functional annotation of the human brain methylome identifies tissue-specific epigenetic variation across brain and blood
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Dynamic changes to the epigenome play a critical role in establishing and maintaining cellular phenotype during differentiation, but little is known about the normal methylomic differences that occur between functionally distinct areas of the brain. We characterized intra- and inter-individual methylomic variation across whole blood and multiple regions of the brain from multiple donors. RESULTS: Distinct tissue-specific patterns of DNA methylation were identified, with a highly significant over-representation of tissue-specific differentially methylated regions (TS-DMRs) observed at intragenic CpG islands and low CG density promoters. A large proportion of TS-DMRs were located near genes that are differentially expressed across brain regions. TS-DMRs were significantly enriched near genes involved in functional pathways related to neurodevelopment and neuronal differentiation, including BDNF, BMP4, CACNA1A, CACA1AF, EOMES, NGFR, NUMBL, PCDH9, SLIT1, SLITRK1 and SHANK3. Although between-tissue variation in DNA methylation was found to greatly exceed between-individual differences within any one tissue, we found that some inter-individual variation was reflected across brain and blood, indicating that peripheral tissues may have some utility in epidemiological studies of complex neurobiological phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: This study reinforces the importance of DNA methylation in regulating cellular phenotype across tissues, and highlights genomic patterns of epigenetic variation across functionally distinct regions of the brain, providing a resource for the epigenetics and neuroscience research communities.
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
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.
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?
In humans, some interindividual variation in epigenome-wide DNA methylation as measured in post-mortem brain samples and whole blood was reflected across tissues.
“in humans, some interindividual variation in epigenome-wide DNA methylation as measured in post-mortem brain samples and whole blood was reflected across tissues (Davies et al., 2012).”
From The applied implications of epigenetics in anxiety, affective and stress-related disorders - A review and synthesis on psychosocial stress, psychotherapy and prevention (2020) · cites this paper as Davies et al., 2012
There may be a correlation between brain and blood methylation marks.
“Furthermore, there may be a correlation between brain and blood methylation marks [46].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 630
- Authors
- Davies, M. N., Volta, M., Pidsley, R., Lunnon, K., Dixit, A., Lovestone, S., Coarfa, C., Harris, R. A., Milosavljevic, A., Troakes, C., Al-Sarraj, S., Dobson, R., Schalkwyk, L. C., & Mill, J.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Mill, Jonathan
- ORCID
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2012-06-15
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- R43-R43
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- PMC
- PMC3446315
- OpenAlex
- W2117347068
- Cited by
- 630
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 72 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 86 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 28.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- National Institutes of Health
- Medical Research Council
- Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of London
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG036039, AG036039)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01DA025956)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
- Keywords
- DNA methylation, brain regions, whole blood, interindividual variability, brain development, neuronal differentiation, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, SHANK3, neurodevelopmental genes, functional annotation, epigenetic variation
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Autopsy, Base Composition, Brain, DNA, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Organ Specificity, Phenotype, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Genome, Human, Conserved Sequence, CpG Islands, DNA Methylation, Epigenesis, Genetic, Gene Regulatory Networks, Molecular Sequence Annotation
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