Characterization of tissue-specific differential DNA methylation suggests distinct modes of positive and negative gene expression regulation
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: DNA methylation plays an important role in regulating gene expression during many biological processes. However, the mechanism of DNA-methylation-dependent gene regulation is not fully understood. Here, we explore two possible DNA methylation regulatory mechanisms with opposite modes of gene expression regulation. RESULTS: By comparing the genome-wide methylation and expression patterns in different tissues, we find that majority of tissue-specific differentially methylated regions (T-DMRs) are negatively correlated with expression of their associated genes (negative T-DMRs), consistent with the classical dogma that DNA methylation suppresses gene expression; however, a significant portion of T-DMRs are positively correlated with gene expression (positive T-DMRs). We observe that the positive T-DMRs have similar genomic location as negative T-DMRs, except that the positive T-DMRs are more enriched in the promoter regions. Both positive and negative T-DMRs are enriched in DNase I hypersensitivity sites (DHSs), suggesting that both are likely to be functional. The CpG sites of both positive and negative T-DMRs are also more evolutionarily conserved than the genomic background. Interestingly, the putative target genes of the positive T-DMR are enriched for negative regulators such as transcriptional repressors, suggesting a novel mode of indirect DNA methylation inhibition of expression through transcriptional repressors. Likewise, two distinct sets of DNA sequence motifs exist for positive and negative T-DMRs, suggesting that two distinct sets of transcription factors (TFs) are involved in positive and negative regulation mediated by DNA methylation. CONCLUSIONS: We find both negative and positive association between T-DMRs and gene expression, which implies the existence of two different mechanisms of DNA methylation-dependent gene regulation.
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 mouse retina and brain comparisons, about 47% of methylation regions lying within 4 kb of transcription start sites had a positive link to expression of their presumed target genes.
“Among the differentially methylated regions located within 4 kb upstream of transcriptional start sites, approximately 47% showed a positive correlation with the expression of their putative target genes.”
From Transcription factors as readers and effectors of DNA methylation (2016) · cites this paper as [101]
The enrichment in DNase I hypersensitive sites and evolutionary conservation indicate that these methylation sites are probably functional.
“suggesting that these sites are likely to be functional101”
From Transcription factors as readers and effectors of DNA methylation (2016) · cites this paper as [101]
Some transcription factors preferentially bind to these positively correlated methylation regions.
“suggesting that some TFs bind preferentially to these regions101”
From Transcription factors as readers and effectors of DNA methylation (2016) · cites this paper as [101]
A separate set of sequence motifs was found in these positively correlated methylation regions.
“More importantly, a distinct set of sequence motifs was discovered in these regions”
From Transcription factors as readers and effectors of DNA methylation (2016) · cites this paper as [101]
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 38 · Cited by 165
- Authors
- Wan, J., Oliver, V. F., Wang, G., Zhu, H., Zack, D. J., Merbs, S. L., & Qian, J.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Institut de la Vision (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Merbs, Shannath L
- Qian, Jiang
- Venue
- BMC Genomics
- Published
- 2015-02-05
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-49
- ISSN
- 1471-2164 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4331481
- OpenAlex
- W2054523001
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 7.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMC Genomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Research to Prevent Blindness
- National Eye Institute (R21EY018703, R01EY024580, R01EY009769, P30EY001765, R01EY023188)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM111514)
- 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, gene expression regulation, promoter methylation, DNase I hypersensitive sites, transcriptional repressor, transcription factor binding motifs, epigenetic regulation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Brain, Deoxyribonuclease I, Gene Expression Regulation, Organ Specificity, Retina, CpG Islands, DNA Methylation, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Epigenesis, Genetic, Mice, Nucleotide Motifs
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