↓ Skip to main content

Nucleosome Free Regions in Yeast Promoters Result from Competitive Binding of Transcription Factors That Interact with Chromatin Modifiers

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
citeulike
4 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
Nucleosome Free Regions in Yeast Promoters Result from Competitive Binding of Transcription Factors That Interact with Chromatin Modifiers
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, August 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003181
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evgeniy A. Ozonov, Erik van Nimwegen

Abstract

Because DNA packaging in nucleosomes modulates its accessibility to transcription factors (TFs), unraveling the causal determinants of nucleosome positioning is of great importance to understanding gene regulation. Although there is evidence that intrinsic sequence specificity contributes to nucleosome positioning, the extent to which other factors contribute to nucleosome positioning is currently highly debated. Here we obtained both in vivo and in vitro reference maps of positions that are either consistently covered or free of nucleosomes across multiple experimental data-sets in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We then systematically quantified the contribution of TF binding to nucleosome positioning using a rigorous statistical mechanics model in which TFs compete with nucleosomes for binding DNA. Our results reconcile previous seemingly conflicting results on the determinants of nucleosome positioning and provide a quantitative explanation for the difference between in vivo and in vitro positioning. On a genome-wide scale, nucleosome positioning is dominated by the phasing of nucleosome arrays over gene bodies, and their positioning is mainly determined by the intrinsic sequence preferences of nucleosomes. In contrast, larger nucleosome free regions in promoters, which likely have a much more significant impact on gene expression, are determined mainly by TF binding. Interestingly, of the 158 yeast TFs included in our modeling, we find that only 10-20 significantly contribute to inducing nucleosome-free regions, and these TFs are highly enriched for having direct interactions with chromatin remodelers. Together our results imply that nucleosome free regions in yeast promoters results from the binding of a specific class of TFs that recruit chromatin remodelers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 2%
Spain 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Greece 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 82 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 36%
Researcher 17 18%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 6 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 23%
Physics and Astronomy 8 9%
Computer Science 1 1%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 8 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 September 2013.
All research outputs
#16,722,913
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#7,219
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,187
of 210,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#78
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 210,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.