Ying-Tao Zhao1, Maria Fasolino1, Zhaolan Zhou1. 1. Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epigenomic reconfiguration, including changes in DNA methylation and histone modifications, is crucial for the differentiation of embryonic stem cells (ESCs) into somatic cells. However, the extent to which the epigenome is reconfigured and the interplay between components of the epigenome during cellular differentiation remain poorly defined. METHODS: We systematically analyzed and compared DNA methylation, various histone modification, and transcriptome profiles in ESCs with those of two distinct types of somatic cells from human and mouse. RESULTS: We found that global DNA methylation levels are lower in somatic cells compared to ESCs in both species. We also found that 80% of regions with histone modification occupancy differ between human ESCs and the two human somatic cell types. Approximately 70% of the reconfigurations in DNA methylation and histone modifications are locus- and cell type-specific. Intriguingly, the loss of DNA methylation is accompanied by the gain of different histone modifications in a locus- and cell type-specific manner. Further examination of transcriptional changes associated with epigenetic reconfiguration at promoter regions revealed an epigenetic switching for gene regulation-a transition from stable gene silencing mediated by DNA methylation in ESCs to flexible gene repression facilitated by repressive histone modifications in somatic cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that the epigenome is reconfigured in a locus- and cell type-specific manner and epigenetic switching is common during cellular differentiation in both human and mouse.
BACKGROUND: Epigenomic reconfiguration, including changes in DNA methylation and histone modifications, is crucial for the differentiation of embryonic stem cells (ESCs) into somatic cells. However, the extent to which the epigenome is reconfigured and the interplay between components of the epigenome during cellular differentiation remain poorly defined. METHODS: We systematically analyzed and compared DNA methylation, various histone modification, and transcriptome profiles in ESCs with those of two distinct types of somatic cells from human and mouse. RESULTS: We found that global DNA methylation levels are lower in somatic cells compared to ESCs in both species. We also found that 80% of regions with histone modification occupancy differ between human ESCs and the two human somatic cell types. Approximately 70% of the reconfigurations in DNA methylation and histone modifications are locus- and cell type-specific. Intriguingly, the loss of DNA methylation is accompanied by the gain of different histone modifications in a locus- and cell type-specific manner. Further examination of transcriptional changes associated with epigenetic reconfiguration at promoter regions revealed an epigenetic switching for gene regulation-a transition from stable gene silencing mediated by DNA methylation in ESCs to flexible gene repression facilitated by repressive histone modifications in somatic cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that the epigenome is reconfigured in a locus- and cell type-specific manner and epigenetic switching is common during cellular differentiation in both human and mouse.
Entities:
Keywords:
DNA methylation; cellular differentiation; epigenetic switch; epigenome; histone modifications
Authors: Michael B Stadler; Rabih Murr; Lukas Burger; Robert Ivanek; Florian Lienert; Anne Schöler; Erik van Nimwegen; Christiane Wirbelauer; Edward J Oakeley; Dimos Gaidatzis; Vijay K Tiwari; Dirk Schübeler Journal: Nature Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Gary C Hon; R David Hawkins; Otavia L Caballero; Christine Lo; Ryan Lister; Mattia Pelizzola; Armand Valsesia; Zhen Ye; Samantha Kuan; Lee E Edsall; Anamaria Aranha Camargo; Brian J Stevenson; Joseph R Ecker; Vineet Bafna; Robert L Strausberg; Andrew J Simpson; Bing Ren Journal: Genome Res Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Wei Xie; Matthew D Schultz; Ryan Lister; Zhonggang Hou; Nisha Rajagopal; Pradipta Ray; John W Whitaker; Shulan Tian; R David Hawkins; Danny Leung; Hongbo Yang; Tao Wang; Ah Young Lee; Scott A Swanson; Jiuchun Zhang; Yun Zhu; Audrey Kim; Joseph R Nery; Mark A Urich; Samantha Kuan; Chia-an Yen; Sarit Klugman; Pengzhi Yu; Kran Suknuntha; Nicholas E Propson; Huaming Chen; Lee E Edsall; Ulrich Wagner; Yan Li; Zhen Ye; Ashwinikumar Kulkarni; Zhenyu Xuan; Wen-Yu Chung; Neil C Chi; Jessica E Antosiewicz-Bourget; Igor Slukvin; Ron Stewart; Michael Q Zhang; Wei Wang; James A Thomson; Joseph R Ecker; Bing Ren Journal: Cell Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Ryan Lister; Eran A Mukamel; Joseph R Nery; Mark Urich; Clare A Puddifoot; Nicholas D Johnson; Jacinta Lucero; Yun Huang; Andrew J Dwork; Matthew D Schultz; Miao Yu; Julian Tonti-Filippini; Holger Heyn; Shijun Hu; Joseph C Wu; Anjana Rao; Manel Esteller; Chuan He; Fatemeh G Haghighi; Terrence J Sejnowski; M Margarita Behrens; Joseph R Ecker Journal: Science Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Gary C Hon; Nisha Rajagopal; Yin Shen; David F McCleary; Feng Yue; My D Dang; Bing Ren Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Madeleine P Ball; Jin Billy Li; Yuan Gao; Je-Hyuk Lee; Emily M LeProust; In-Hyun Park; Bin Xie; George Q Daley; George M Church Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2009-03-29 Impact factor: 54.908