Posts Tagged ‘enhancer’

promoter/enhancer categorization and Encyclopedia

Saturday, July 1st, 2017

Genome-wide characterization of..promoters w…enhancer functions Blurs distinction betw these, suggests flexibility

Genome-wide characterization of mammalian promoters with distal enhancer functions

Lan T M Dao,
Ariel O Galindo-Albarrán,
Jaime A Castro-Mondragon,
Charlotte Andrieu-Soler,
Alejandra Medina-Rivera,
Charbel Souaid,
Guillaume Charbonnier,
Aurélien Griffon,
Laurent Vanhille,
Tharshana Stephen,
Jaafar Alomairi,
David Martin,
Magali Torres,
Nicolas Fernandez,
Eric Soler,
Jacques van Helden,
Denis Puthier
& Salvatore Spicuglia

Promoting transcription over long distances

Rui R Catarino,
Christoph Neumayr
& Alexander Stark

Nature Genetics 49, 972–973 (2017) doi:10.1038/ng.3904
28 June 2017

“Should we be surprised that promoters can function as enhancers—or better—that enhancers and promoter regions can overlap? Probably not: the habit of annotating different genomic regions with distinct labels ignores the fact that DNA sequences typically encode different genetic functions in a rather flexible manner. Enhancers and promoters are determined by the presence of short degenerate motifs, and even protein-coding regions display flexibility due to the degeneracy of the genetic code. Therefore, a single DNA sequence can encode different types of functions, including enhancer function of protein-coding regions or—as shown now—enhancer function of

Enhancer Evolution across 20 Mammalian Species: Cell

Saturday, November 28th, 2015

#Enhancer Evolution across 20 Mammal[s is faster than for promoters] by @PaulFlicek lab H3K27ac & H3K4me3 #chipseq

Inferring gene regulatory logic from high-throughput measurements of thousands of systematically designed promoters : Nature Biotechnology : Nature Publishing Group

Wednesday, June 10th, 2015

Segal cites: Measurements of 1000s of…designed promoters Num. binding sites correlated w/ expr., for 1st few #ICSG2015

Unraveling determinants of transcription factor binding outside the core binding site

Monday, June 8th, 2015

Segal cites: Determinants of TF binding outside the core binding site Large-scale measurement of affinity #ICSG2015

Extensive evolutionary changes in regulatory element activity during human origins are associated with altered gene expression and positive selection. PLoS Genet. 2012

Sunday, April 12th, 2015

Changes in [DHS] #regulatory element activity…[over 3 primates] associated w/ altered…expression & pos. selection

DHS across 3 primates finds species specific sites associated with differential expression & positive selection

Shibata Y, Sheffield NC, Fedrigo O, Babbitt CC, Wortham M, Tewari AK, London D, Song L, Lee BK, Iyer VR, Parker SC, Margulies EH, Wray GA, Furey TS, Crawford GE*. Extensive evolutionary changes in regulatory element activity during human origins are
associated with altered gene expression and positive selection. PLoS Genet. 2012 Jun; 8(6):e1002789. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002789. Epub 2012 Jun 28. PubMed PMID: 22761590; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3386175

SUMMARY (from csds):

The study is focused on analyzing genotype-phenotype correlation by looking at the evolution of DHS sites across three primate genomes: human, chimp and macaque. By comparing the data they were able to identify common DHS sites across the three species (sites that show similar DHS levels) and also species-specific sites. All the assays were supported by ChiP experiments. The study identified >2000 regulatory elements that were gained/lost since the divergence of
human and chimp. Looking at DNase and RNAseq data the authors show that the enrichment of regulatory elements next to genes with species-specific expression, suggests that the gain or loss of DHS sites impacts transcript abundance. The human DHS sites were enhanced for chromatin marks predictive of enhancers, while common regions were preferentially associated with promoters and insulators. By looking at species specificity, they found that species-specific DHS gains are cell type specific while both species specific DHS gains and losses are subject to positive selection. The common DHS sites are conserved and are suggested to have roles involving transcription and general housekeeping.

Circadian Enhancers Coordinate Multiple Phases of Rhythmic Gene Transcription In Vivo

Sunday, April 5th, 2015

Circadian #Enhancers Coordinate… Rhythmic… Transcription
Periodicity helps find #eRNAs/enhancers & their targets

Evolution at Two Levels: On Genes and Form

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014

Evolution at 2 Levels: Genes &
Form Reg evol likely for genes in mult tissues, w. pleiotropic coding SNPs & mult CRMs


One critical parameter that affects the relative contribution of different genetic mechanisms to anatomical variation is the pleiotropy of mutations []. In general, it is expected that mutations with greater pleiotropic effects will have more deleterious effects on organismal fitness and will be a less common source of variation in form than mutations with less widespread effects.

Over the past 30 years, several key features of gene structure, function, and regulation in multicellular organisms have emerged that govern the pleiotropy of mutations and thus shape the capacity of species to generate anatomical variation and to evolve (see ). Because of these features, mutations in different genes and different parts of genes (that is, non-coding and coding sequences) can differ
dramatically in their degree of pleiotropy. For example, a mutation in the coding region of a transcription factor that functions in multiple tissues may directly affect all of the genes the protein regulates. In contrast, a mutation in a single cis-regulatory element will affect gene expression only in the domain governed by that element.

The most influential single publication of this era, however, was Susumu Ohno’s book Evolution by Gene Duplication []. Ohno focused on the importance of gene redundancy in allowing “forbidden” mutations to occur that could impart new functions to proteins. His opening motto, “natural selection merely modified, while redundancy created,” reflected a view of natural selection as a largely purifying, conservative process. Ohno insisted that “allelic mutations of already existing gene loci cannot account for major changes in evolution.”

…the estimated rate of gene duplication is about once per gene per 100 million years []. This figure suggests that gene duplication can contribute to genome evolution over longer spans of evolutionary time (for example, greater than 50 million years)….

The human FOXP2 gene encodes a transcription factor, and mutations at the locus were discovered to be associated with a speech and language disorder…. While it would certainly be convenient if the two changes in the FOXP2 protein were functional, the additional hypothesis must be considered that functional regulatory changes might have occurred at theFOXP2 locus. In weighing alternative hypotheses of FOXP2 or any gene’s potential involvement in the evolution of form (or neural circuitry), we should ask the following questions. (i) Is the gene product used in multiple tissues? (ii) Are mutations in the coding sequence known or likely to be pleiotropic? (iii) Does the locus contain multiple cis-regulatory elements?

If the answers are yes to all of these questions, then regulatory sequence evolution is the more likely mode of evolution than coding sequence evolution.