4.7 Article

Epigenomic signatures underpin the axonal regenerative ability of dorsal root ganglia sensory neurons

Journal

NATURE NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 22, Issue 11, Pages 1913-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41593-019-0490-4

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Division of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London
  2. Wings for Life [WFL-UK-07/16]
  3. Rosetrees Trust [A1438]
  4. Leverhulme Trust [RPG-2015-092]
  5. ISRT
  6. Medical Research Council [R/R005311/1]
  7. WT [099276/Z/12/Z]
  8. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre
  9. Wellcome Trust [099276/Z/12/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust
  10. MRC [MR/T003111/1, MC_U120027516] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Axonal injury results in regenerative success or failure, depending on whether the axon lies in the peripheral or the CNS, respectively. The present study addresses whether epigenetic signatures in dorsal root ganglia discriminate between regenerative and non-regenerative axonal injury. Chromatin immunoprecipitation for the histone 3 (H3) post-translational modifications H3K9ac, H3K27ac and H3K27me3; an assay for transposase-accessible chromatin; and RNA sequencing were performed in dorsal root ganglia after sciatic nerve or dorsal column axotomy. Distinct histone acetylation and chromatin accessibility signatures correlated with gene expression after peripheral, but not central, axonal injury. DNA-footprinting analyses revealed new transcriptional regulators associated with regenerative ability. Machine-learning algorithms inferred the direction of most of the gene expression changes. Neuronal conditional deletion of the chromatin remodeler CCCTC-binding factor impaired nerve regeneration, implicating chromatin organization in the regenerative competence. Altogether, the present study offers the first epigenomic map providing insight into the transcriptional response to injury and the differential regenerative ability of sensory neurons.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available