Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29233090›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2017

DNA methylation regulates discrimination of enhancers from promoters through a H3K4me1-H3K4me3 seesaw mechanism.

Ali Sharifi-Zarchi, Daniela Gerovska, Kenjiro Adachi, Mehdi Totonchi, Hamid Pezeshk, Ryan J Taft, Hans R Schöler, Hamidreza Chitsaz, Mehdi Sadeghi, Hossein Baharvand and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 141 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Ali Sharifi-ZarchiDepartment of Bioinformatics, Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Daniela GerovskaComputational Biology and Systems Biomedicine, Biodonostia Health Research Institute, 20014, San Sebastián, Spain.
Kenjiro AdachiDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Mehdi TotonchiDepartment of Stem Cells and Developmental Biology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Hamid PezeshkSchool of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, College of Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Ryan J TaftIllumina Inc., San Diego, USA.
Hans R SchölerDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Hamidreza ChitsazComputer Science Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Mehdi SadeghiSchool of Biological Sciences, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran.
Hossein BaharvandDepartment of Stem Cells and Developmental Biology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. baharvand@royaninstitute.org.
Marcos J Araúzo-BravoComputational Biology and Systems Biomedicine, Biodonostia Health Research Institute, 20014, San Sebastián, Spain. mararabra@yahoo.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3264-464X
Biogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESColorado State University · USIkerbasque · ESIllumina (United States) · USMax Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine · DENational Institute of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology · IRRoyan Institute · IRSharif University of Technology · IRUniversity of Münster · DEUniversity of Science and Culture · IRUniversity of Tehran · IR

Funding

Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa DFG141/16Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa DFG15/15Ministry of Economy and Competitivity, Spain, MINECO BFU 2016-7798-P
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDNA methylation at promoters is largely correlated with inhibition of gene expression. However, the role of DNA methylation at enhancers is not fully understood, although a crosstalk with chromatin marks is expected. Actually, there exist contradictory reports about positive and negative correlations between DNA methylation and H3K4me1, a chromatin hallmark of enhancers.

resultsWe investigated the relationship between DNA methylation and active chromatin marks through genome-wide correlations, and found anti-correlation between H3K4me1 and H3K4me3 enrichment at low and intermediate DNA methylation loci. We hypothesized "seesaw" dynamics between H3K4me1 and H3K4me3 in the low and intermediate DNA methylation range, in which DNA methylation discriminates between enhancers and promoters, marked by H3K4me1 and H3K4me3, respectively. Low methylated regions are H3K4me3 enriched, while those with intermediate DNA methylation levels are progressively H3K4me1 enriched. Additionally, the enrichment of H3K27ac, distinguishing active from primed enhancers, follows a plateau in the lower range of the intermediate DNA methylation level, corresponding to active enhancers, and decreases linearly in the higher range of the intermediate DNA methylation. Thus, the decrease of the DNA methylation switches smoothly the state of the enhancers from a primed to an active state. We summarize these observations into a rule of thumb of one-out-of-three methylation marks: "In each genomic region only one out of these three methylation marks {DNA methylation, H3K4me1, H3K4me3} is high. If it is the DNA methylation, the region is inactive. If it is H3K4me1, the region is an enhancer, and if it is H3K4me3, the region is a promoter". To test our model, we used available genome-wide datasets of H3K4 methyltransferases knockouts. Our analysis suggests that CXXC proteins, as readers of non-methylated CpGs would regulate the "seesaw" mechanism that focuses H3K4me3 to unmethylated sites, while being repulsed from H3K4me1 decorated enhancers and CpG island shores.

conclusionsOur results show that DNA methylation discriminates promoters from enhancers through H3K4me1-H3K4me3 seesaw mechanism, and suggest its possible function in the inheritance of chromatin marks after cell division. Our analyses suggest aberrant formation of promoter-like regions and ectopic transcription of hypomethylated regions of DNA. Such mechanism process can have important implications in biological process in where it has been reported abnormal DNA methylation status such as cancer and aging.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEnhancer Elements, GeneticHistone CodePromoter Regions, GeneticAnimalsCytosineDNA-Binding ProteinsGene ExpressionHistonesMiceProtein DomainsCytosineDNA-Binding ProteinsHistonesComputational epigenomicsDNA methylationEnhancersH3K4me1H3K4me3Histone modificationsNext generation sequencingPromoters

Identifiers

PMID29233090
PMCPMC5727985
OpenAlexW2775489708

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.