ArticleGenome research2018
Genome-wide determinants of sequence-specific DNA binding of general regulatory factors.
Article in Genome research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- GHT-SELEX demonstrates unexpectedly high intrinsic sequence specificity and complex DNA binding of many human transcription factors.Nature methods · 2026Article
- Light-based footprinting of a eukaryotic genome.Science advances · 2026Article
- ScriptManager: a platform for scalable and reproducible high-resolution analysis of genomics datasets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- An intricate functional relationship between NuA4 and Sfp1 regulates ribosome biogenesis in response to nutrient availability.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2026Article
- Native nucleosome-positioning elements as alternatives to the 601 sequence for nucleosome repositioning studies.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Variations in flanking or less conserved positions of Reb1 and Abf1 consensus binding sites lead to major changes in their ability to modulate nucleosome sliding activity.Biological research · 2025Article
- MCM2-7 loading-dependent ORC release ensures genome-wide origin licensing.Nature communications · 2024Article
- General regulatory factors exert differential effects on nucleosome sliding activity of the ISW1a complex.Biological research · 2024Article
- Species-aware DNA language models capture regulatory elements and their evolution.Genome biology · 2024Article
- The arginine methyltransferase Prmt1 coordinates the germline arginine methylome essential for spermatogonial homeostasis and male fertility.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Article
- Basic helix-loop-helix pioneer factors interact with the histone octamer to invade nucleosomes and generate nucleosome-depleted regions.Molecular cell · 2023Article
- Predicting which genes will respond to transcription factor perturbations.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- Evolution of transcription factor binding through sequence variations and turnover of binding sites.Genome research · 2022Article
- Transcriptional control of ribosome biogenesis in yeast: links to growth and stress signals.Biochemical Society transactions · 2021Review
- Cytomegalovirus late transcription factor target sequence diversity orchestrates viral early to late transcription.PLoS pathogens · 2021Article
- Genome information processing by the INO80 chromatin remodeler positions nucleosomes.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Ruler elements in chromatin remodelers set nucleosome array spacing and phasing.Nature communications · 2021Article
- An all-to-all approach to the identification of sequence-specific readers for epigenetic DNA modifications on cytosine.Nature communications · 2021Article
- DNA Double Strand Break Repair and Its Control by Nucleosome Remodeling.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
General regulatory factors (GRFs), such as Reb1, Abf1, Rap1, Mcm1, and Cbf1, positionally organize yeast chromatin through interactions with a core consensus DNA sequence. It is assumed that sequence recognition via direct base readout suffices for specificity and that spurious nonfunctional sites are rendered inaccessible by chromatin. We tested these assumptions through genome-wide mapping of GRFs in vivo and in purified biochemical systems at near-base pair (bp) resolution using several ChIP-exo-based assays. We find that computationally predicted DNA shape features (e.g., minor groove width, helix twist, base roll, and propeller twist) that are not defined by a unique consensus sequence are embedded in the nonunique portions of GRF motifs and contribute critically to sequence-specific binding. This dual source specificity occurs at GRF sites in promoter regions where chromatin organization starts. Outside of promoter regions, strong consensus sites lack the shape component and consequently lack an intrinsic ability to bind cognate GRFs, without regard to influences from chromatin. However, sites having a weak consensus and low intrinsic affinity do exist in these regions but are rendered inaccessible in a chromatin environment. Thus, GRF site-specificity is achieved through integration of favorable DNA sequence and shape readouts in promoter regions and by chromatin-based exclusion from fortuitous weak sites within gene bodies. This study further revealed a severe G/C nucleotide cross-linking selectivity inherent in all formaldehyde-based ChIP assays, which includes ChIP-seq. However, for most tested proteins, G/C selectivity did not appreciably affect binding site detection, although it does place limits on the quantitativeness of occupancy levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.