4.7 Article

The enhancer and promoter landscape of human regulatory and conventional T-cell subpopulations

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 123, Issue 17, Pages E68-E78

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2013-02-486944

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
  2. MEXT
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [[KFO] 146]
  4. BayImmuNet grant
  5. Jose Carreras Foundation (FACS-Sorting Facility)
  6. Rudolf Bartling Foundation
  7. Innovative Cell Biology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CD4(+)CD25(+)FOXP3(+) human regulatory T cells (Tregs) are essential for self-tolerance and immune homeostasis. Here, we describe the promoterome of CD4(+)CD25(high)CD45RA(+) naive and CD4(+)CD25(high)CD45RA(-) memory Tregs and their CD25(-) conventional T-cell (Tconv) counterparts both before and after in vitro expansion by cap analysis of gene expression (CAGE) adapted to single-molecule sequencing (HeliScopeCAGE). We performed comprehensive comparative digital gene expression analyses and revealed novel transcription start sites, of which several were validated as alternative promoters of known genes. For all in vitro expanded subsets, we additionally generated global maps of poised and active enhancer elements marked by histone H3 lysine 4 monomethylation and histone H3 lysine 27 acetylation, describe their cell type-specific motif signatures, and evaluate the role of candidate transcription factors STAT5, FOXP3, RUNX1, and ETS1 in both Treg- and Tconv-specific enhancer architectures. Network analyses of gene expression data revealed additional candidate transcription factors contributing to cell type specificity and a transcription factor network in Tregs that is dominated by FOXP3 interaction partners and targets. In summary, we provide a comprehensive and easily accessible resource of gene expression and gene regulation in human Treg and Tconv subpopulations.

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