1
|
Bina M. Defining Candidate Imprinted loci in Bos taurus. Genes (Basel) 2023; 14:1036. [PMID: 37239396 PMCID: PMC10217866 DOI: 10.3390/genes14051036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 04/27/2023] [Accepted: 04/30/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Using a whole-genome assembly of Bos taurus, I applied my bioinformatics strategy to locate candidate imprinting control regions (ICRs) genome-wide. In mammals, genomic imprinting plays essential roles in embryogenesis. In my strategy, peaks in plots mark the locations of known, inferred, and candidate ICRs. Genes in the vicinity of candidate ICRs correspond to potential imprinted genes. By displaying my datasets on the UCSC genome browser, one could view peak positions with respect to genomic landmarks. I give two examples of candidate ICRs in loci that influence spermatogenesis in bulls: CNNM1 and CNR1. I also give examples of candidate ICRs in loci that influence muscle development: SIX1 and BCL6. By examining the ENCODE data reported for mice, I deduced regulatory clues about cattle. I focused on DNase I hypersensitive sites (DHSs). Such sites reveal accessibility of chromatin to regulators of gene expression. For inspection, I chose DHSs in chromatin from mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) ES-E14, mesoderm, brain, heart, and skeletal muscle. The ENCODE data revealed that the SIX1 promoter was accessible to the transcription initiation apparatus in mouse ESCs, mesoderm, and skeletal muscles. The data also revealed accessibility of BCL6 locus to regulatory proteins in mouse ESCs and examined tissues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minou Bina
- Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Male-Specific Transcription Factor Occupancy Alone Does Not Account for Differential Methylation at Imprinted Genes in the mouse Germ Cell Lineage. G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS 2016; 6:3975-3983. [PMID: 27694116 PMCID: PMC5144967 DOI: 10.1534/g3.116.033613] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic mechanism that affects a subset of mammalian genes, resulting in monoallelic expression depending on the parental origin of the alleles. Imprinted regions contain regulatory elements that are methylated in the gametes in a sex-specific manner (differentially methylated regions; DMRs). DMRs are present at nonimprinted loci as well, but whereas most regions are equalized after fertilization, methylation at imprinted regions maintains asymmetry. We tested the hypothesis that paternally unmethylated DMRs are occupied by transcription factors (TFs) present during male gametogenesis. Meta-analysis of mouse RNA data to identify DNA-binding proteins expressed in male gametes and motif enrichment analysis of active promoters yielded a list of candidate TFs. We then asked whether imprinted or nonimprinted paternally unmethylated DMRs harbored motifs for these TFs, and found many shared motifs between the two groups. However, DMRs that are methylated in the male germ cells also share motifs with DMRs that remain unmethylated. There are recognition sequences exclusive to the unmethylated DMRs, whether imprinted or not, that correspond with cell-cycle regulators, such as p53. Thus, at least with the current available data, our results indicate a complex scenario in which TF occupancy alone is not likely to play a role in protecting unmethylated DMRs, at least during male gametogenesis. Rather, the epigenetic features of DMRs, regulatory sequences other than DMRs, and the role of DNA-binding proteins capable of endowing sequence specificity to DNA-methylating enzymes are feasible mechanisms and further investigation is needed to answer this question.
Collapse
|
3
|
Abi Habib W, Brioude F, Azzi S, Salem J, Das Neves C, Personnier C, Chantot-Bastaraud S, Keren B, Le Bouc Y, Harbison MD, Netchine I. 11p15 ICR1 Partial Deletions Associated with IGF2/H19 DMR Hypomethylation and Silver-Russell Syndrome. Hum Mutat 2016; 38:105-111. [PMID: 27701793 DOI: 10.1002/humu.23131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2016] [Revised: 09/22/2016] [Accepted: 09/27/2016] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
The 11p15 region harbors the IGF2/H19 imprinted domain, implicated in fetal and postnatal growth. Silver-Russell syndrome (SRS) is characterized by fetal and postnatal growth failure, and is caused principally by hypomethylation of the 11p15 imprinting control region 1 (ICR1). However, the mechanisms leading to ICR1 hypomethylation remain unknown. Maternally inherited genetic defects affecting the ICR1 domain have been associated with ICR1 hypermethylation and Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (an overgrowth syndrome, the clinical and molecular mirror of SRS), and paternal deletions of IGF2 enhancers have been detected in four SRS patients. However, no paternal deletions of ICR1 have ever been associated with hypomethylation of the IGF2/H19 domain in SRS. We screened for new genetic defects within the ICR1 in a cohort of 234 SRS patients with hypomethylated IGF2/H19 domain. We report deletions close to the boundaries of ICR1 on the paternal allele in one familial and two sporadic cases of SRS with ICR1 hypomethylation. These deletions are associated with hypomethylation of the remaining CBS, and decreased IGF2 expression. These results suggest that these regions are most likely required to maintain methylation after fertilization. We estimate these anomalies to occur in about 1% of SRS cases with ICR1 hypomethylation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Walid Abi Habib
- INSERM, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France
| | - Frederic Brioude
- INSERM, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France
| | - Salah Azzi
- INSERM, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France.,Epigenetics Programme, The Babraham Institute, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jennifer Salem
- MAGIC Foundation, RSS/SGA Research and Education Fund, Oak Park, Illinois
| | - Cristina Das Neves
- AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France
| | - Claire Personnier
- Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal, Service de Pédiatrie, Poissy, France
| | - Sandra Chantot-Bastaraud
- INSERM U933, Service de Génétique et d'Embryologie Médicales, Paris, 75571, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service de Génétique et d'Embryologie Médicales, Paris, 75571, France
| | - Boris Keren
- Département de Génétique, CRICM UPMC INSERM UMR_S975/CNRS UMR 7225, GH Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHP, Paris, France
| | - Yves Le Bouc
- INSERM, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France
| | - Madeleine D Harbison
- Department of Pediatrics, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
| | - Irene Netchine
- INSERM, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR_S 938, CDR Saint-Antoine, Paris, F-75012, France.,AP-HP, Hôpital Trousseau, Service d'explorations fonctionnelles endocriniennes, Paris, 75571, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fedoriw A, Mugford J, Magnuson T. Genomic imprinting and epigenetic control of development. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2012; 4:a008136. [PMID: 22687277 PMCID: PMC3385953 DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a008136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
Epigenetic mechanisms are extensively utilized during mammalian development. Specific patterns of gene expression are established during cell fate decisions, maintained as differentiation progresses, and often augmented as more specialized cell types are required. Much of what is known about these mechanisms comes from the study of two distinct epigenetic phenomena: genomic imprinting and X-chromosome inactivation. In the case of genomic imprinting, alleles are expressed in a parent-of-origin-dependent manner, whereas X-chromosome inactivation in females requires that only one X chromosome is active in each somatic nucleus. As model systems for epigenetic regulation, genomic imprinting and X-chromosome inactivation have identified and elucidated the numerous regulatory mechanisms that function throughout the genome during development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Fedoriw
- The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Department of Genetics, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Adjaye J, Herwig R, Brink TC, Herrmann D, Greber B, Sudheer S, Groth D, Carnwath JW, Lehrach H, Niemann H. Conserved molecular portraits of bovine and human blastocysts as a consequence of the transition from maternal to embryonic control of gene expression. Physiol Genomics 2007; 31:315-27. [PMID: 17595343 DOI: 10.1152/physiolgenomics.00041.2007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The present study investigated mRNA expression profiles of bovine oocytes and blastocysts by using a cross-species hybridization approach employing an array consisting of 15,529 human cDNAs as probe, thus enabling the identification of conserved genes during human and bovine preimplantation development. Our analysis revealed 419 genes that were expressed in both oocytes and blastocysts. The expression of 1,324 genes was detected exclusively in the blastocyst, in contrast to 164 in the oocyte including a significant number of novel genes. Genes indicative for transcriptional and translational control (ELAVL4, TACC3) were overexpressed in the oocyte, whereas cellular trafficking (SLC2A14, SLC1A3), proteasome (PSMA1, PSMB3), cell cycle (BUB3, CCNE1, GSPT1), and protein modification and turnover (TNK1, UBE3A) genes were found to be overexpressed in blastocysts. Transcripts implicated in chromatin remodeling were found in both oocytes (NASP, SMARCA2) and blastocysts (H2AFY, HDAC7A). The trophectodermal markers PSG2 and KRT18 were enriched 5- and 50-fold in the blastocyst. Pathway analysis revealed differential expression of genes involved in 107 distinct signaling and metabolic pathways. For example, phosphatidylinositol signaling and gluconeogenesis were prominent pathways identified in the blastocyst. Expression patterns in bovine and human blastocysts were to a large extent identical. This analysis compared the transcriptomes of bovine oocytes and blastocysts and provides a solid foundation for future studies on the first major differentiation events in blastocysts and identification of a set of markers indicative for regular mammalian development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Adjaye
- Department of Vertebrate Genomics, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|