Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716143›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2016

Reduced representation bisulphite sequencing of ten bovine somatic tissues reveals DNA methylation patterns and their impacts on gene expression.

Yang Zhou, Lingyang Xu, Derek M Bickhart, El Hamidi Abdel Hay, Steven G Schroeder, Erin E Connor, Leeson J Alexander, Tad S Sonstegard, Curtis P Van Tassell, Hong Chen and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
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, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. DNA methylation studies in cattle.Journal of applied genetics · 2021
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Yang ZhouShaanxi Key Laboratory of Agricultural Molecular Biology, College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, 712100, People's Republic of China.
Lingyang XuInstitute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science, Beijing, 100193, People's Republic of China.
Derek M BickhartAnimal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, BARC, USDA-ARS, Building 306, Room 111, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA.
El Hamidi Abdel HayUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Laboratory, Miles City, MT, 59301, USA.
Steven G SchroederAnimal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, BARC, USDA-ARS, Building 306, Room 111, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA.
Erin E ConnorAnimal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, BARC, USDA-ARS, Building 306, Room 111, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA.
Leeson J AlexanderUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Laboratory, Miles City, MT, 59301, USA.
Tad S SonstegardRecombinetics, Inc., St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA.
Curtis P Van TassellAnimal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, BARC, USDA-ARS, Building 306, Room 111, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA.
Hong ChenShaanxi Key Laboratory of Agricultural Molecular Biology, College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, 712100, People's Republic of China. chenhong1212@263.net.
George E LiuAnimal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, BARC, USDA-ARS, Building 306, Room 111, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA. George.Liu@ars.usda.gov.
Agricultural Research Service · USChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CNFort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Laboratory · USNorthwest A&F University · CNRecombinetics (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs a major epigenetic component, DNA methylation plays important functions in individual development and various diseases. DNA methylation has been well studied in human and model organisms, but only limited data exist in economically important animals like cattle.

resultsUsing reduced representation bisulphite sequencing (RRBS), we obtained single-base-resolution maps of bovine DNA methylation from ten somatic tissues. In total, we evaluated 1,868,049 cytosines in CG-enriched regions. While we found slightly low methylation levels (29.87 to 38.06 %) in cattle, the methylation contexts (CGs and non-CGs) of cattle showed similar methylation patterns to other species. Non-CG methylation was detected but methylation levels in somatic tissues were significantly lower than in pluripotent cells. To study the potential function of the methylation, we detected 10,794 differentially methylated cytosines (DMCs) and 836 differentially methylated CG islands (DMIs). Further analyses in the same tissues revealed many DMCs (including non-CGs) and DMIs, which were highly correlated with the expression of genes involved in tissue development.

conclusionsIn summary, our study provides a baseline dataset and essential information for DNA methylation profiles of cattle.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationGene ExpressionAnimalsCattleCpG IslandsEpigenesis, GeneticEpigenomicsOrgan SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNACattle genomeDNA methylationRRBS (reduced representation bisulphite sequencing)Somatic tissue

Identifiers

PMID27716143
PMCPMC5053184
OpenAlexW2529256946

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.