Cited by 165Epigenetics and DNA MethylationGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting

Characterization of tissue-specific differential DNA methylation suggests distinct modes of positive and negative gene expression regulation

Open access
Wan, Jun, Oliver, Verity F, Wang, Guohua, Zhu, Heng, Zack, Donald J, Merbs, Shannath L, Qian, Jiang·2015·BMC Genomics

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12864-015-1271-4

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.

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?

  • 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.”
  • 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”
  • Some transcription factors preferentially bind to these positively correlated methylation regions.

    “suggesting that some TFs bind preferentially to these regions101”
  • 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”

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)
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
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