ArticleeLife2022
Systematic analysis of naturally occurring insertions and deletions that alter transcription factor spacing identifies tolerant and sensitive transcription factor pairs.
Article in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis for Association of Interleukin 4 VNTR Polymorphism with Rheumatoid Arthritis Risk and Severity.Biochemical genetics · 2023Pooled it
- Multi-omics dissection of FOXA1 reveals cancer-type-specific transcriptional networks and functional risk variants.iScience · 2026Article
- CNEwrap: a scalable toolkit with a novel algorithm for large-scale genome-wide accelerated conserved non-coding elements detection.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Cross-species prediction reveals chromatin regions with increased accessibility in humans.Science advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Pan-genome analysis reveals structural variation- associated expression and evolutionary diversity of theFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Pangenome-Wide Identification, Evolutionary Analysis of Maize ZmPLD Gene Family, and Functional Validation of ZmPLD15 in Cold Stress Tolerance.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Mutations Upstream of ppp2ca Affect Body Weight in Asian Seabass.Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Genetic Variations in theCells · 2024Article
- TIANA: transcription factors cooperativity inference analysis with neural attention.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- bHLH transcription factors cooperate with chromatin remodelers to regulate cell fate decisions during Arabidopsis stomatal development.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Transcription factor-binding k-mer analysis clarifies the cell type dependency of binding specificities and cis-regulatory SNPs in humans.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Characterization of sequence determinants of enhancer function using natural genetic variation.eLife · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regulation of gene expression requires the combinatorial binding of sequence-specific transcription factors (TFs) at promoters and enhancers. Prior studies showed that alterations in the spacing between TF binding sites can influence promoter and enhancer activity. However, the relative importance of TF spacing alterations resulting from naturally occurring insertions and deletions (InDels) has not been systematically analyzed. To address this question, we first characterized the genome-wide spacing relationships of 73 TFs in human K562 cells as determined by ChIP-seq (chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing). We found a dominant pattern of a relaxed range of spacing between collaborative factors, including 45 TFs exclusively exhibiting relaxed spacing with their binding partners. Next, we exploited millions of InDels provided by genetically diverse mouse strains and human individuals to investigate the effects of altered spacing on TF binding and local histone acetylation. These analyses suggested that spacing alterations resulting from naturally occurring InDels are generally tolerated in comparison to genetic variants directly affecting TF binding sites. To experimentally validate this prediction, we introduced synthetic spacing alterations between PU.1 and C/EBPβ binding sites at six endogenous genomic loci in a macrophage cell line. Remarkably, collaborative binding of PU.1 and C/EBPβ at these locations tolerated changes in spacing ranging from 5 bp increase to >30 bp decrease. Collectively, these findings have implications for understanding mechanisms underlying enhancer selection and for the interpretation of non-coding genetic variation.
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.