Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38719804›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

MeCP2 binds to methylated DNA independently of phase separation and heterochromatin organisation.

Raphaël Pantier, Megan Brown, Sicheng Han, Katie Paton, Stephen Meek, Thomas Montavon, Nicholas Shukeir, Toni McHugh, David A Kelly, Tino Hochepied and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

14 authors.

Raphaël PantierThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8394-2372
Megan BrownThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.
Sicheng HanThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.
Katie PatonThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.
Stephen MeekThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.
Thomas MontavonMax Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Stübeweg 51, 79108, Freiburg, Germany.
Nicholas ShukeirMax Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Stübeweg 51, 79108, Freiburg, Germany.
Toni McHughThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.
David A KellyThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK.
Tino HochepiedCenter for Inflammation Research, VIB, Ghent, Belgium.
Claude LibertCenter for Inflammation Research, VIB, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6408-036X
Thomas JenuweinMax Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Stübeweg 51, 79108, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0470-0421
Tom BurdonThe Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.
Adrian BirdThe Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Michael Swann Building, Max Born Crescent, The King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK. a.bird@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8600-0372

Funding

Wellcome Trust 107930/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Correlative evidence has suggested that the methyl-CpG-binding protein MeCP2 contributes to the formation of heterochromatin condensates via liquid-liquid phase separation. This interpretation has been reinforced by the observation that heterochromatin, DNA methylation and MeCP2 co-localise within prominent foci in mouse cells. The findings presented here revise this view. MeCP2 localisation is independent of heterochromatin as MeCP2 foci persist even when heterochromatin organisation is disrupted. Additionally, MeCP2 foci fail to show hallmarks of phase separation in live cells. Importantly, we find that mouse cellular models are highly atypical as MeCP2 distribution is diffuse in most mammalian species, including humans. Notably, MeCP2 foci are absent in Mus spretus which is a mouse subspecies lacking methylated satellite DNA repeats. We conclude that MeCP2 has no intrinsic tendency to form condensates and its localisation is independent of heterochromatin. Instead, the distribution of MeCP2 in the nucleus is primarily determined by global DNA methylation patterns.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationHeterochromatinMethyl-CpG-Binding Protein 2AnimalsCell NucleusDNADNA, SatelliteHumansMicePhase SeparationProtein BindingDNADNA, SatelliteHeterochromatinMecp2 protein, mouseMethyl-CpG-Binding Protein 2

Identifiers

PMID38719804
PMCPMC11079052

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.