ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026
Histone Modifications in Mammalian Early Embryos.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early mammalian development entails one of the most extensive and physiologically relevant episodes of epigenomic reprogramming. Following fertilization, two highly specialized gametic epigenomes are reset to establish a totipotent zygotic state and are subsequently reorganized to enable lineage specification and pluripotency. A central component of this transition is the dynamic regulation of histone modifications that mark transcriptionally active and inactive chromatin. Studies in mouse embryos have revealed a distinctive sequence of events in which noncanonical, oocyte- and embryo-specific chromatin states are transiently established and then progressively replaced by canonical, somatic-like patterns around zygotic genome activation. However, comparative analyses across mammals demonstrate that several of these features, including broad noncanonical histone domains and Polycomb-mediated imprinting, are not universally conserved and differ substantially in humans and other species. In this chapter, we summarize recent findings on the dynamics of active and inactive histone marks during early embryogenesis, with a focus on principles derived from the mouse model and their limitations. We discuss how histone modifications contribute to transcriptional competence, repression, and lineage priming, how these processes vary across species, and how they together constitute an epigenomic "rebooting" that balances the erasure of parental memory with the preservation of essential regulatory information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42455443What 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.