↓ Skip to main content

Maternal 5mCpG Imprints at the PARD6G-AS1 and GCSAML Differentially Methylated Regions Are Decoupled From Parent-of-Origin Expression Effects in Multiple Human Tissues

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
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
Maternal 5mCpG Imprints at the PARD6G-AS1 and GCSAML Differentially Methylated Regions Are Decoupled From Parent-of-Origin Expression Effects in Multiple Human Tissues
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2018.00036
Pubmed ID
Authors

Graziela de Sá Machado Araújo, Ronaldo da Silva Francisco, Cristina dos Santos Ferreira, Pedro Thyago Mozer Rodrigues, Douglas Terra Machado, Thais Louvain de Souza, Jozimara Teixeira de Souza, Cleiton Figueiredo Osorio da Silva, Antônio Francisco Alves da Silva, Claudia Caixeta Franco Andrade, Alan Tardin da Silva, Victor Ramos, Ana Beatriz Garcia, Filipe Brum Machado, Enrique Medina-Acosta

Abstract

A hallmark of imprinted genes in mammals is the occurrence of parent-of-origin-dependent asymmetry of DNA cytosine methylation (5mC) of alleles at CpG islands (CGIs) in their promoter regions. This 5mCpG asymmetry between the parental alleles creates allele-specific imprinted differentially methylated regions (iDMRs). iDMRs are often coupled to the transcriptional repression of the methylated allele and the activation of the unmethylated allele in a tissue-specific, developmental-stage-specific and/or isoform-specific fashion. iDMRs function as regulatory platforms, built through the recruitment of chemical modifications to histones to achieve differential, parent-of-origin-dependent chromatin segmentation states. Here, we used a comparative computational data mining approach to identify 125 novel constitutive candidate iDMRs that integrate the maximal number of allele-specific methylation region records overlapping CGIs in human methylomes. Twenty-nine candidate iDMRs display gametic 5mCpG asymmetry, and another 96 are candidate secondary iDMRs. We established the maternal origin of the 5mCpG imprints of one gametic (PARD6G-AS1) and one secondary (GCSAML) iDMRs. We also found a constitutively hemimethylated, nonimprinted domain at the PWWP2AP1 promoter CGI with oocyte-derived methylation asymmetry. Given that the 5mCpG level at the iDMRs is not a sufficient criterion to predict active or silent locus states and that iDMRs can regulate genes from a distance of more than 1 Mb, we used RNA-Seq experiments from the Genotype-Tissue Expression project and public archives to assess the transcriptional expression profiles of SNPs across 4.6 Mb spans around the novel maternal iDMRs. We showed that PARD6G-AS1 and GCSAML are expressed biallelically in multiple tissues. We found evidence of tissue-specific monoallelic expression of ZNF124 and OR2L13, located 363 kb upstream and 419 kb downstream, respectively, of the GCSAML iDMR. We hypothesize that the GCSAML iDMR regulates the tissue-specific, monoallelic expression of ZNF124 but not of OR2L13. We annotated the non-coding epigenomic marks in the two maternal iDMRs using data from the Roadmap Epigenomics project and showed that the PARD6G-AS1 and GCSAML iDMRs achieve contrasting activation and repression chromatin segmentations. Lastly, we found that the maternal 5mCpG imprints are perturbed in several hematopoietic cancers. We conclude that the maternal 5mCpG imprints at PARD6G-AS1 and GCSAML iDMRs are decoupled from parent-of-origin transcriptional expression effects in multiple tissues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Researcher 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 18%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
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 18 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,091,602
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#3,582
of 12,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,605
of 331,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#64
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 331,153 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.