Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31754138›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Untargeted histone profiling during naive conversion uncovers conserved modification markers between mouse and human.

Laura De Clerck, Jasin Taelman, Mina Popovic, Sander Willems, Margot Van der Jeught, Björn Heindryckx, Petra De Sutter, Hendrik Marks, Dieter Deforce, Maarten Dhaenens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cell Fate Decisions in the Wake of Histone H3 Deposition.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  10. Review
  11. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Laura De ClerckProGenTomics, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9465-4387
Jasin TaelmanGhent-Fertility and Stem Cell Team (G-FaST), Department for Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Mina PopovicGhent-Fertility and Stem Cell Team (G-FaST), Department for Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Sander WillemsProGenTomics, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7124-610X
Margot Van der JeughtGhent-Fertility and Stem Cell Team (G-FaST), Department for Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Björn HeindryckxGhent-Fertility and Stem Cell Team (G-FaST), Department for Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Petra De SutterGhent-Fertility and Stem Cell Team (G-FaST), Department for Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Hendrik MarksDepartment of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science, Radboud University, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences (RIMLS), 6525GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Dieter DeforceProGenTomics, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0635-661X
Maarten DhaenensProGenTomics, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. maarten.dhaenens@ugent.be.
Ghent University Hospital · BEGhent University · BERadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent progress has enabled the conversion of primed human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) to the naive state of pluripotency, resembling the well-characterized naive mouse ESCs (mESCs). However, a thorough histone epigenetic characterization of this conversion process is currently lacking, while its likeness to the mouse model has not been clearly established. Here, we profile the histone epigenome of hESCs during conversion in a time-resolved experimental design, using an untargeted mass spectrometry-based approach. In total, 23 histone post-translational modifications (hPTMs) changed significantly over time. H3K27Me3 was the most prominently increasing marker hPTM in naive hESCs. This is in line with previous reports in mouse, prompting us to compare all the shared hPTM fold changes between mouse and human, revealing a set of conserved hPTM markers for the naive state. Principally, we present the first roadmap of the changing human histone epigenome during the conversion of hESCs from the primed to the naive state. This further revealed similarities with mouse, which hint at a conserved mammalian epigenetic signature of the ground state of pluripotency.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkersCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedEpigenomeHistonesHuman Embryonic Stem CellsHumansMicePluripotent Stem CellsSignal TransductionBiomarkersHistones

Identifiers

PMID31754138
PMCPMC6872658
OpenAlexW2991049747

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.