↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Epigenomic Annotation of Regulatory DNA

Overview of attention for article published in Cell, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
183 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
399 Mendeley
citeulike
11 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative Epigenomic Annotation of Regulatory DNA
Published in
Cell, June 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shu Xiao, Dan Xie, Xiaoyi Cao, Pengfei Yu, Xiaoyun Xing, Chieh-Chun Chen, Meagan Musselman, Mingchao Xie, Franklin D. West, Harris A. Lewin, Ting Wang, Sheng Zhong

Abstract

Despite the explosive growth of genomic data, functional annotation of regulatory sequences remains difficult. Here, we introduce "comparative epigenomics"-interspecies comparison of DNA and histone modifications-as an approach for annotation of the regulatory genome. We measured in human, mouse, and pig pluripotent stem cells the genomic distributions of cytosine methylation, H2A.Z, H3K4me1/2/3, H3K9me3, H3K27me3, H3K27ac, H3K36me3, transcribed RNAs, and P300, TAF1, OCT4, and NANOG binding. We observed that epigenomic conservation was strong in both rapidly evolving and slowly evolving DNA sequences, but not in neutrally evolving sequences. In contrast, evolutionary changes of the epigenome and the transcriptome exhibited a linear correlation. We suggest that the conserved colocalization of different epigenomic marks can be used to discover regulatory sequences. Indeed, seven pairs of epigenomic marks identified exhibited regulatory functions during differentiation of embryonic stem cells into mesendoderm cells. Thus, comparative epigenomics reveals regulatory features of the genome that cannot be discerned from sequence comparisons alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 399 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 3%
United Kingdom 7 2%
Germany 4 1%
Canada 4 1%
Japan 3 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 358 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 127 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 99 25%
Student > Master 35 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 26 7%
Professor 25 6%
Other 62 16%
Unknown 25 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 231 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 86 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 4%
Computer Science 7 2%
Neuroscience 6 2%
Other 19 5%
Unknown 35 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2023.
All research outputs
#2,398,848
of 25,460,914 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#6,134
of 17,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,762
of 179,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#50
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,460,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 179,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.