| Literature DB >> 34405268 |
Struan F A Grant1,2,3,4, Andrew D Wells5,6, Chun Su7, Matthew C Pahl7,8.
Abstract
Promoter-focused chromatin conformation techniques directly detect interactions between gene promoters and distal genomic sequences, providing structural information relevant to gene regulation without the excessive non-genic architectural data generated by full-scale Hi-C. 3D promoter 'interactome' maps are crucial for understanding how epigenomic features such as histone modifications and open chromatin, or genetic variants identified in genome-wide association studies (GWAS), contribute to biological function. However, variation in sensitivity between such promoter-focused methods, principally due to restriction enzyme selection, has not been systematically assessed. Here, we performed a head-to-head comparison of promoter capture datasets using 4 cutters (DpnII or MboI) versus the 6 cutter HindIII from the same five cell types. While HindIII generally produces a higher signal-to-noise ratio for significant interactions in comparison to 4-cutters, we show that DpnII/MboI detects more proximal interactions and shows little overlap with the HindIII detection range. Promoter-interacting genomic regions mapped by 4-cutters are more enriched for regulatory features and disease-associated genetic variation than 6-cutters maps, suggesting that high-resolution maps better capture gene regulatory architectures than do lower resolution approaches.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34405268 PMCID: PMC9013487 DOI: 10.1007/s00439-021-02326-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Genet ISSN: 0340-6717 Impact factor: 5.881