4.7 Article

Identification and requirements of enhancers that direct gene expression during zebrafish fin regeneration

Journal

DEVELOPMENT
Volume 147, Issue 14, Pages -

Publisher

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dev.191262

Keywords

Chromatin; Enhancers; Fin regeneration; Genome-wide profiling; Regeneration; Zebrafish

Funding

  1. Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Forderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung Postdoctoral Fellowship
  2. University of Wisconsin-Madison start-up funds [AAC8355, AAC8979, AAC6429, AAG9756]
  3. National Institutes of Health [R01 AS076342, R01 GM074057]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To identify candidate tissue regeneration enhancer elements (TREES) important for zebrafish fin regeneration, we performed ATAC-seq from bulk tissue or purified fibroblasts of uninjured and regenerating caudal fins. We identified tens of thousands of DNA regions from each sample type with dynamic accessibility during regeneration, and assigned these regions to proximal genes with corresponding expression changes by RNA-seq. To determine whether these profiles reveal bona fide TREEs, we tested the sufficiency and requirements of several sequences in stable transgenic lines and mutant lines with homozygous deletions. These experiments validated new non-coding regulatory sequences near induced and/or essential genes during fin regeneration, including fgf20a, mdka and cx43, identifying distinct domains of directed expression for each confirmed TREE. Whereas deletion of the previously identified LEN enhancer abolished detectable induction of the nearby leptin b gene during regeneration, deletions of enhancers linked to fgf20a, mdka and cx43 had no effect or partially reduced gene expression. Our study generates a new resource for dissecting the regulatory mechanisms of appendage generation and reveals a range of requirements for individual TREEs in control of regeneration programs.

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