4.7 Article

Analysis of developmental imprinting dynamics in primates using SNP-free methods to identify imprinting defects in cloned placenta

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL CELL
卷 56, 期 20, 页码 2826-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2021.09.012

关键词

-

资金

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. National Key Research and Development Program [2018YFA0801403, 2016YFA0101401]
  3. Major Basic Research Project of Science and Technology of Yunnan [202001BC07001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzes imprinting dynamics in primates by profiling transcriptomes, DNA methylomes, and H3K27me3 in uniparental monkey embryos. The research establishes SNP-free germline DMR identification methods, defines developmental imprinting dynamics in primates, and demonstrates imprinting defects in cloned monkey placenta, providing valuable insights for improving primate cloning techniques.
Our knowledge of genomic imprinting in primates is lagging behind that of mice largely because of the difficulties of allelic analyses in outbred animals. To understand imprinting dynamics in primates, we profiled transcriptomes, DNA methylomes, and H3K27me3 in uniparental monkey embryos. We further developed single-nucleotide-polymorphism (SNP)-free methods, TARSII and CARSII, to identify germline differentially methylated regions (DMRs) in somatic tissues. Our comprehensive analyses showed that allelic DNA methylation, but not H3K27me3, is a major mark that correlates with paternal-biasedly expressed genes (PEGs) in uniparental monkey embryos. Interestingly, primate germline DMRs are different from PEG-associated DMRs in early embryos and are enriched in placenta. Strikingly, most placenta specific germline DMRs are lost in placenta of cloned monkeys. Collectively, our study establishes SNP free germline DMR identification methods, defines developmental imprinting dynamics in primates, and demonstrates imprinting defects in cloned monkey placenta, which provides important clues for improving primate cloning.

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

4.7
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