Modeling methyl-sensitive transcription factor motifs with an expanded epigenetic alphabet
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Transcription factors bind DNA in specific sequence contexts. In addition to distinguishing one nucleobase from another, some transcription factors can distinguish between unmodified and modified bases. Current models of transcription factor binding tend not to take DNA modifications into account, while the recent few that do often have limitations. This makes a comprehensive and accurate profiling of transcription factor affinities difficult. Results: Here, we develop methods to identify transcription factor binding sites in modified DNA. Our models expand the standard /// DNA alphabet to include cytosine modifications. We develop Cytomod to create modified genomic sequences and we also enhance the MEME Suite, adding the capacity to handle custom alphabets. We adapt the well-established position weight matrix (PWM) model of transcription factor binding affinity to this expanded DNA alphabet. Using these methods, we identify modification-sensitive transcription factor binding motifs. We confirm established binding preferences, such as the preference of ZFP57 and C/EBPβ for methylated motifs and the preference of c-Myc for unmethylated E-box motifs. Conclusions: Using known binding preferences to tune model parameters, we discover novel modified motifs for a wide array of transcription factors. Finally, we validate our binding preference predictions for OCT4 using cleavage under targets and release using nuclease (CUT&RUN) experiments across conventional, methylation-, and hydroxymethylation-enriched sequences. Our approach readily extends to other DNA modifications. As more genome-wide single-base resolution modification data becomes available, we expect that our method will yield insights into altered transcription factor binding affinities across many different modifications.
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Enrichment Map: A Network-Based Method for Gene-Set Enrichment Visualization and Interpretation
Merico, D., Isserlin, R., Stueker, O., Emili, A., & Bader, G. D. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013984 · Cited by 2,235 · see citing works
Impact of cytosine methylation on DNA binding specificities of human transcription factors
Yin, Y., Morgunova, E., Jolma, A., Kaasinen, E., Sahu, B., Khund-Sayeed, S., Das, P. K., Kivioja, T., Dave, K., Zhong, F., et al. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaj2239 · Cited by 1,257 · see citing works
Transcription factors as readers and effectors of DNA methylation
Zhu, H., Wang, G., & Qian, J. (2016) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg.2016.83 · Cited by 649 · see citing works
Peak calling by Sparse Enrichment Analysis for CUT&RUN chromatin profiling
Meers, M. P., Tenenbaum, D., & Henikoff, S. (2019) · Epigenetics & Chromatin · doi:10.1186/s13072-019-0287-4 · Cited by 556 · see citing works
Genome-wide Analysis Reveals TET- and TDG-Dependent 5-Methylcytosine Oxidation Dynamics
Shen, L., Wu, H., Diep, D., Yamaguchi, S., D’Alessio, A. C., Fung, H.-L., Zhang, K., & Zhang, Y. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.002 · Cited by 497 · see citing works
C2H2 zinc finger proteins greatly expand the human regulatory lexicon
Najafabadi, H. S., Mnaimneh, S., Schmitges, F. W., Garton, M., Lam, K. N., Yang, A., Albu, M., Weirauch, M. T., Radovani, E., Kim, P. M., et al. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3128 · Cited by 346 · see citing works
Li, J. J., Bickel, P. J., & Biggin, M. D. (2014) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.270 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Potential functional roles of DNA demethylation intermediates
Song, C.-X., & He, C. (2013) · Trends in Biochemical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2013.07.003 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Strogantsev, R., Krueger, F., Yamazawa, K., Shi, H., Gould, P., Goldman-Roberts, M., McEwen, K., Sun, B., Pedersen, R., & Ferguson-Smith, A. C. (2015) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-015-0672-7 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
DNA methylation disruption reshapes the hematopoietic differentiation landscape
Izzo, F., Lee, S. C., Poran, A., Chaligne, R., Gaiti, F., Gross, B., Murali, R. R., Deochand, S. D., Ang, C., Jones, P. W., et al. (2020) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-020-0595-4 · Cited by 236 · see citing works
- Authors
- Viner, C., Ishak, C. A., Johnson, J., Walker, N. J., Shi, H., Sjöberg-Herrera, M. K., Shen, S. Y., Lardo, S. M., Adams, D. J., Ferguson-Smith, A. C., De Carvalho, D. D., Hainer, S. J., Bailey, T. L., & Hoffman, M. M.
- Affiliations
- University Health Network (CA)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (CL)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
- University of Nevada, Reno (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hoffman, Michael M.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2024-01-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-11
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- PMC
- PMC10773111
- OpenAlex
- W4390668729
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 2.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2015-03948)
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (201512MSH-360970)
- Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities
- Canadian Cancer Society (703827)
- Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation (ER-15-11-223)
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research (CSC-FR-UHN)
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto (MC-2015-16)
- Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation
- Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (1171004)
- BLUEPRINT Project (HEALTH-F5-2011-282510)
- Wellcome Trust (WT095606RR)
- Medical Research Council (MR/J001597/1)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM133732, R01GM103544)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- transcription factor binding motifs, DNA methylation, cytosine modification, hydroxymethylation, position weight matrices, modified DNA, ZFP57, C/EBPβ, c-Myc, Oct4, CUT&RUN, binding affinity prediction
- MeSH terms
- DNA, Gene Expression Regulation, Transcription Factors, Epigenesis, Genetic, Epigenomics
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