4.7 Article

Transcription and enhancer profiling in human monocyte subsets

期刊

BLOOD
卷 123, 期 17, 页码 E90-E99

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2013-02-484188

关键词

-

资金

  1. MEXT
  2. MEXT, Japan
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG Re1310/9, Re1310/13]
  4. BayImmuNet
  5. Jose Carreras Foundation (FACS-Sorting Facility)
  6. Rudolf Bartling Foundation
  7. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/D/20251969, BB/I024801/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. BBSRC [BB/I024801/1, BBS/E/D/20251969] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human blood monocytes comprise at least 3 subpopulations that differ in phenotype and function. Here, we present the first in-depth regulome analysis of human classical (CD14(++)CD16(-)), intermediate (CD14(+)CD16(+)), and nonclassical (CD14(dim)CD16(+)) monocytes. Cap analysis of gene expression adapted to Helicos single-molecule sequencing was used to map transcription start sites throughout the genome in all 3 subsets. In addition, global maps of H3K4me1 and H3K27ac deposition were generated for classical and nonclassical monocytes defining enhanceosomes of the 2 major subsets. We identified differential regulatory elements (including promoters and putative enhancers) that were associated with subset-specific motif signatures corresponding to different transcription factor activities and exemplarily validated novel downstream enhancer elements at the CD14 locus. In addition to known subset-specific features, pathway analysis revealed marked differences in metabolic gene signatures. Whereas classical monocytes expressed higher levels of genes involved in carbohydrate metabolism, priming them for anaerobic energy production, nonclassical monocytes expressed higher levels of oxidative pathway components and showed a higher mitochondrial routine activity. Our findings describe promoter/enhancer landscapes and provide novel insights into the specific biology of human monocyte subsets.

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