4.8 Article

Reduced representation bisulfite sequencing for comparative high-resolution DNA methylation analysis

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 33, Issue 18, Pages 5868-5877

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gki901

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [R01CA087869] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE [U54HG003067] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NCI NIH HHS [5R01CA87869, R01 CA087869] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NHGRI NIH HHS [U54 HG003067, HG03067-02] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe a large-scale random approach termed reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) for analyzing and comparing genomic methylation patterns. BglII restriction fragments were size-selected to 500-600 bp, equipped with adapters, treated with bisulfite, PCR amplified, cloned and sequenced. We constructed RRBS libraries from murine ES cells and from ES cells lacking DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and 3b and with knocked-down (kd) levels of Dnmt1 (Dnmt[1(kd),3a(-/-),3b(-/-)]). Sequencing of 960 RRBS clones from Dnmt[1(kd),3a(-/-),3b(-/-)] cells generated 343 kb of non-redundant bisulfite sequence covering 66212 cytosines in the genome. All but 38 cytosines had been converted to uracil indicating a conversion rate of > 99.9%. Of the remaining cytosines 35 were found in CpG and 3 in CpT dinucleotides. Non-CpG methylation was > 250-fold reduced compared with wild-type ES cells, consistent with a role for Dnmt3a and/or Dnmt3b in CpA and CpT methylation. Closer inspection revealed neither a consensus sequence around the methylated sites nor evidence for clustering of residual methylation in the genome. Our findings indicate random loss rather than specific maintenance of methylation in Dnmt[1(kd),3a(-/-),3b(-/-)] cells. Near-complete bisulfite conversion and largely unbiased representation of RRBS libraries suggest that random shotgun bisulfite sequencing can be scaled to a genome-wide approach.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available