Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23805837›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2013

Contribution of nucleosome binding preferences and co-occurring DNA sequences to transcription factor binding.

Ximiao He, Raghunath Chatterjee, Sam John, Hector Bravo, B K Sathyanarayana, Simon C Biddie, Peter C FitzGerald, John A Stamatoyannopoulos, Gordon L Hager, Charles Vinson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Understanding how long-acting βBritish journal of pharmacology · 2016
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Epigenomics of macrophages.Immunological reviews · 2014
    Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ximiao HeLaboratory of Metabolism, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Raghunath Chatterjee
Sam John
Hector Bravo
B K Sathyanarayana
Simon C Biddie
Peter C FitzGerald
John A Stamatoyannopoulos
Gordon L Hager
Charles Vinson
National Institutes of Health · USNational Cancer Institute · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Chromatin Structure and Gene ExpressionZIABC005450 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI HAGER, GORDON L · 2009 to 2025
$35.2M
Gene Regulation and Function: The B-ZIP ProteinsZIABC005271 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI VINSON, CHARLES · 2009 to 2019
$11.2M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChromatin plays a critical role in regulating transcription factors (TFs) binding to their canonical transcription factor binding sites (TFBS). Recent studies in vertebrates show that many TFs preferentially bind to genomic regions that are well bound by nucleosomes in vitro. Co-occurring secondary motifs sometimes correlated with functional TFBS.

resultsWe used a logistic regression to evaluate how well the propensity for nucleosome binding and co-occurrence of a secondary motif identify which canonical motifs are bound in vivo. We used ChIP-seq data for three transcription factors binding to their canonical motifs: c-Jun binding the AP-1 motif (TGA(C)/(G)TCA), GR (glucocorticoid receptor) binding the GR motif (G-ACA---(T)/(C)GT-C), and Hoxa2 (homeobox a2) binding the Pbx (Pre-B-cell leukemia homeobox) motif (TGATTGAT). For all canonical TFBS in the mouse genome, we calculated intrinsic nucleosome occupancy scores (INOS) for its surrounding 150-bps DNA and examined the relationship with in vivo TF binding. In mouse mammary 3134 cells, c-Jun and GR proteins preferentially bound regions calculated to be well-bound by nucleosomes in vitro with the canonical AP-1 and GR motifs themselves contributing to the high INOS. Functional GR motifs are enriched for AP-1 motifs if they are within a nucleosome-sized 150-bps region. GR and Hoxa2 also bind motifs with low INOS, perhaps indicating a different mechanism of action.

conclusionOur analysis quantified the contribution of INOS and co-occurring sequence to the identification of functional canonical motifs in the genome. This analysis revealed an inherent competition between some TFs and nucleosomes for binding canonical TFBS. GR and c-Jun cooperate if they are within 150-bps. Binding of Hoxa2 and a fraction of GR to motifs with low INOS values suggesting they are not in competition with nucleosomes and may function using different mechanisms.

Indexed as

AnimalsBase SequenceCell LineChromatinChromatin Assembly and DisassemblyDNALogistic ModelsMiceModels, MolecularNucleic Acid ConformationNucleosomesNucleotide MotifsProtein BindingProtein ConformationSubstrate SpecificityTranscription FactorsChromatinDNANucleosomesTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID23805837
PMCPMC3700821
OpenAlexW2148567711

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.