The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessment and site-specific manipulation of DNA (hydroxy-)methylation during mouse corticogenesis
Abstract
Dynamic changes in DNA (hydroxy-)methylation are fundamental for stem cell differentiation. However, the signature of these epigenetic marks in specific cell types during corticogenesis is unknown. Moreover, site-specific manipulation of cytosine modifications is needed to reveal the significance and function of these changes. Here, we report the first assessment of (hydroxy-)methylation in neural stem cells, neurogenic progenitors, and newborn neurons during mammalian corticogenesis. We found that gain in hydroxymethylation and loss in methylation occur sequentially at specific cellular transitions during neurogenic commitment. We also found that these changes predominantly occur within enhancers of neurogenic genes up-regulated during neurogenesis and target of pioneer transcription factors. We further optimized the use of dCas9-Tet1 manipulation of (hydroxy-)methylation, locus-specifically, in vivo, showing the biological relevance of our observations for Dchs1, a regulator of corticogenesis involved in developmental malformations and cognitive impairment. Together, our data reveal the dynamics of cytosine modifications in lineage-related cell types, whereby methylation is reduced and hydroxymethylation gained during the neurogenic lineage concurrently with up-regulation of pioneer transcription factors and activation of enhancers for neurogenic genes.
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.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“while it has been shown that miR-486a and miR-486b promote myoblast differentiation (48) and are involved in regulatory pathways of ectodermal-derived tissues (49,50)”
From MicroRNA profiling of mouse cortical progenitors and neurons reveals miR-486-5p as a regulator of neurogenesis (2020) · cites this paper as [49]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Function and information content of DNA methylation
Schübeler, D. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14192 · Cited by 2,060
Global epigenomic reconfiguration during mammalian brain development
Lister, R., Mukamel, E. A., Nery, J. R., Urich, M., Puddifoot, C. A., Johnson, N. D., Lucero, J., Huang, Y., Dwork, A. J., Schultz, M. D., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1237905 · Cited by 1,830
DNA-binding factors shape the mouse methylome at distal regulatory regions
Stadler, M. B., Murr, R., Burger, L., Ivanek, R., Lienert, F., Schöler, A., Nimwegen, E. V., Wirbelauer, C., Oakeley, E. J., Gaidatzis, D., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10716 · Cited by 1,383
Self-citationA map of the cis-regulatory sequences in the mouse genome
Shen, Y., Yue, F., McCleary, D. F., Ye, Z., Edsall, L., Kuan, S., Wagner, U., Dixon, J., Lee, L., Lobanenkov, V. V., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11243 · Cited by 1,361 · cited 3×
“5 mouse cortex were taken from the ENCODE project (Shen et al, 2012).”
InfluentialImpact 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
Editing DNA Methylation in the Mammalian Genome
Liu, X. S., Wu, H., Ji, X., Stelzer, Y., Wu, X., Czauderna, S., Shu, J., Dadon, D., Young, R. A., & Jaenisch, R. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.056 · Cited by 1,224 · cited 2×
“Differently from two previous reports, we decided to only use two gRNAs rather than several (Liu et al, 2016) and avoid the bulky SunTag system to deliver Tet1 (Morita et al, 2016), thus decreasing potential off-targets and steric hindrance at once.”
Dnmt3a-Dependent Nonpromoter DNA Methylation Facilitates Transcription of Neurogenic Genes
Wu, H., Coskun, V., Tao, J., Xie, W., Ge, W., Yoshikawa, K., Li, E., Zhang, Y., & Sun, Y. E. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1190485 · Cited by 604
Bayam, E., Sahin, G. S., Guzelsoy, G., Guner, G., Kabakcioglu, A., & Ince-Dunn, G. (2015) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-015-1882-9 · Cited by 57
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 51
- 10.1080/23262133.2014.995524 · DOI
- 10.1038/emboj.2013.245 · DOI
- 10.15252/embj.201490061 · DOI
- 10.1038/nrg.2017.57 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.01.038 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ng.2765 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.gdata.2016.02.003 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41588-017-0034-3 · DOI
- 10.1242/dev.01912 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2012.01.009 · DOI
- 10.1007/s13238-016-0267-4 · DOI
- 10.1038/nn.2900 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.01.011 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1210944 · DOI
- 10.1038/nrn2810 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.08.026 · DOI
- 10.1038/nn.4181 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.08.032 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.diff.2015.10.003 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ceb.2013.02.014 · DOI
- 10.1038/onc.2010.481 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.conb.2012.03.006 · DOI
- 10.1101/gad.248005.114 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cell.2011.06.030 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.12.001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nbt.2726 · DOI
- 10.1101/gr.211466.116 · DOI
- 10.3791/52488 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.05.018 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nbt.3658 · DOI
- 10.1002/dvdy.21176 · DOI
- 10.1101/gad.1470906 · DOI
- 10.15252/embj.201591206 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.08.003 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.stem.2018.08.016 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.stemcr.2016.09.013 · DOI
- 10.1038/nrg3354 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nbt.1732 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1240622 · DOI
- 10.3389/fnins.2018.00005 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1170116 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/nar/gkt091 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-101011-155801 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.stem.2016.11.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/nar/gkw159 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ygeno.2014.08.020 · DOI
- 10.1038/srep07645 · DOI
- 10.1038/nrn.2016.70 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.stem.2013.05.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.11.030 · DOI
- 10.1038/nature13990 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dori, M., Cavalli, D., Lesche, M., Massalini, S., Alieh, L. H. A., de Toledo, B. C., Khudayberdiev, S., Schratt, G., Dahl, A., & Calegari, F. (2020) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.190520 · Cited by 22
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Noack, F., Pataskar, A., Schneider, M., Buchholz, F., Tiwari, V. K., & Calegari, F.
- Affiliations
- CRTD-Center for Regenerative Therapies, School of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Institute of Molecular Biology, Mainz, Germany
- Medical Systems Biology, School of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden and Max Planck Institute for Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden, Germany
- Venue
- Life Science Alliance
- Publisher
- Life Science Alliance, LLC
- Published
- 2019-02-27
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e201900331
- ISSN
- 2575-1077
- PMC
- PMC6394126
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 8
- Language
- en
- Funders
- CRTD
- DFG
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
