4.8 Article

DNA methylation dynamics of the human preimplantation embryo

期刊

NATURE
卷 511, 期 7511, 页码 611-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature13581

关键词

-

资金

  1. Harvard Stem Cell Institute
  2. NIH Pioneer Award [5DP10D003958]
  3. Burroughs Wellcome Career Award at the Scientific Interface
  4. HHMI
  5. Center for Excellence in Genome Science from the NHGRI [1P50HG006193-01]
  6. New York Stem Cell Foundation
  7. [P01GM099117]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In mammals, cytosine methylation is predominantly restricted to CpG dinudeotides and stably distributed across the genome, with local, cell-type-specific regulation directed by DNA binding factors(1-3). This comparatively static landscape is in marked contrast with the events of fertilization, during which the paternal genome is globally reprogrammed. Paternal genome demethylation includes the majority of CpGs, although methylation remains detectable at several notable features(4-7). These dynamics have been extensively characterized in the mouse, with only limited observations available in other mammals, and direct measurements are required to understand the extent to which early embryonic landscapes are conserved(8-10). We present genome-scale DNA methylation maps of human preimplantation development and embryonic stem cell derivation, confirming a transient state of global hypomethylation that includes most CpGs, while sites of residual maintenance are primarily restricted to gene bodies. Although most features share similar dynamics to those in mouse, maternally contributed methylation is divergently targeted to species-specific sets of CpG island promoters that extend beyond known imprint control regions. Retrotransposon regulation is also highly diverse, and transitions from maternally to embryonically expressed elements. Together, our data confirm that paternal genome demethylation is a general attribute of early mammalian development that is characterized by distinct modes of epigenetic regulation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据