Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21306619›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2011

Responsiveness of genes to manipulation of transcription factors in ES cells is associated with histone modifications and tissue specificity.

Alexei A Sharov, Akira Nishiyama, Yulan Piao, Lina S Correa-Cerro, Tomokazu Amano, Marshall Thomas, Samir Mehta, Minoru S H Ko

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Induction of specific neuron types by overexpression of single transcription factors.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2016
    Article
  4. A double take on bivalent promoters.Genes & development · 2013
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexei A SharovDevelopmental Genomics and Aging Section, Laboratory of Genetics, National Institute on Aging, NIH, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA.
Akira Nishiyama
Yulan Piao
Lina S Correa-Cerro
Tomokazu Amano
Marshall Thomas
Samir Mehta
Minoru S H Ko
National Institute on Aging · USYokohama City University · JP

Funding

Development and maintenance of bioinformatics tools for mouse biologyZIAAG000702 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI SCHLESSINGER, DAVID · 2009 to 2016
$4.1M
Systematic analysis of gene regulatory networksZIAAG000656 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI SCHLESSINGER, DAVID · 2009 to 2016
$3.9M
Expression profiling of mouse embryonic and tissue stem cellsZIAAG000662 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI SCHLESSINGER, DAVID · 2009 to 2012
$2.0M
Transcription factor-manipulable mouse ES cell bankZIAAG000700 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI KO, MINORU · 2009 to 2011
$1.3M
Analysis of protein complexes in mouse ES cellsZIAAG000703 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI KO, MINORU · 2009 to 2011
$1.1M
Systematic identification of transcription factor binding sitesZIAAG000704 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI KO, MINORU · 2009 to 2011
$957k
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn addition to determining static states of gene expression (high vs. low), it is important to characterize their dynamic status. For example, genes with H3K27me3 chromatin marks are not only suppressed but also poised for activation. However, the responsiveness of genes to perturbations has never been studied systematically. To distinguish gene responses to specific factors from responsiveness in general, it is necessary to analyze gene expression profiles of cells responding to a large variety of disturbances, and such databases did not exist before.

resultsWe estimated the responsiveness of all genes in mouse ES cells using our recently published database on expression change after controlled induction of 53 transcription factors (TFs) and other genes. Responsive genes (N=4746), which were readily upregulated or downregulated depending on the kind of perturbation, mostly have regulatory functions and a propensity to become tissue-specific upon differentiation. Tissue-specific expression was evaluated on the basis of published (GNF) and our new data for 15 organs and tissues. Non-responsive genes (N=9562), which did not change their expression much following any perturbation, were enriched in housekeeping functions. We found that TF-responsiveness in ES cells is the best predictor known for tissue-specificity in gene expression. Among genes with CpG islands, high responsiveness is associated with H3K27me3 chromatin marks, and low responsiveness is associated with H3K36me3 chromatin, stronger tri-methylation of H3K4, binding of E2F1, and GABP binding motifs in promoters.

conclusionsWe thus propose the responsiveness of expression to perturbations as a new way to define the dynamic status of genes, which brings new insights into mechanisms of regulation of gene expression and tissue specificity.

Indexed as

AnimalsChromatinEmbryonic Stem CellsHistonesMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLPromoter Regions, GeneticProtein BindingTranscription FactorsChromatinHistonesTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID21306619
PMCPMC3044670
OpenAlexW2123989628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.