The RNA N6-methyladenosine modification landscape of human fetal tissues (original) (raw)

Data availability

MeRIP–seq, input RNA-seq and ChIP–seq data that support the findings of this study have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus under accession code GSE114150. Source data for Figs. 1–7 and Supplementary Figs. 1–7 have been provided as Supplementary Table 5. All other data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code availability

Custom codes were written in Python and R based on published software or papers, and are available on GitHub (https://github.com/XiaLabBioinformatics/m6AMethylation/).

References

  1. Dominissini, D. et al. Topology of the human and mouse m6A RNA methylomes revealed by m6A-seq. Nature 485, 201–206 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  2. Meyer, K. D. et al. Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 3’ UTRs and near stop codons. Cell 149, 1635–1646 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  3. Zhao, B. S., Roundtree, I. A. & He, C. Post-transcriptional gene regulation by mRNA modifications. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 31–42 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Liu, J. et al. A METTL3–METTL14 complex mediates mammalian nuclear RNA N 6-adenosine methylation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 10, 93–95 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  5. Jia, G. et al. N6-Methyladenosine in nuclear RNA is a major substrate of the obesity-associated FTO. Nat. Chem. Biol. 7, 885–887 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  6. Zheng, G. et al. ALKBH5 is a mammalian RNA demethylase that impacts RNA metabolism and mouse fertility. Mol. Cell 49, 18–29 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. Roundtree, I. A., Evans, M. E., Pan, T. & He, C. Dynamic RNA modifications in gene expression regulation. Cell 169, 1187–1200 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  8. Wang, X. et al. N6-Methyladenosine-dependent regulation of messenger RNA stability. Nature 505, 117–120 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
  9. Huang, H. et al. Recognition of RNA N 6-methyladenosine by IGF2BP proteins enhances mRNA stability and translation. Nat. Cell Biol. 20, 285–295 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  10. Alarcon, C. R. et al. HNRNPA2B1 is a mediator of m6A-dependent nuclear RNA processing events. Cell 162, 1299–1308 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  11. Liu, N. et al. N6-methyladenosine-dependent RNA structural switches regulate RNA–protein interactions. Nature 518, 560–564 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Ke, S. et al. m6A mRNA modifications are deposited in nascent pre-mRNA and are not required for splicing but do specify cytoplasmic turnover. Genes Dev. 31, 990–1006 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Xiao, W. et al. Nuclear m6A reader YTHDC1 regulates mRNA splicing. Mol. Cell 61, 507–519 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  14. Pendleton, K. E. et al. The U6 snRNA m6A methyltransferase METTL16 regulates SAM synthetase intron retention. Cell 169, 824–835 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  15. Wang, X. et al. N6-Methyladenosine modulates messenger RNA translation efficiency. Cell 161, 1388–1399 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  16. Zhou, J. et al. Dynamic m6A mRNA methylation directs translational control of heat shock response. Nature 526, 591–594 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  17. Meyer, K. D. et al. 5’ UTR m6A promotes cap-independent translation. Cell 163, 999–1010 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  18. Shi, H. et al. YTHDF3 facilitates translation and decay of N 6-methyladenosine-modified RNA. Cell Res. 27, 315–328 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  19. Alarcon, C. R., Lee, H., Goodarzi, H., Halberg, N. & Tavazoie, S. F. N6-Methyladenosine marks primary microRNAs for processing. Nature 519, 482–485 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  20. Xiang, Y. et al. RNA m6A methylation regulates the ultraviolet-induced DNA damage response. Nature 543, 573–576 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  21. Wang, Y. et al. N6-Methyladenosine modification destabilizes developmental regulators in embryonic stem cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 191–198 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  22. Batista, P. J. et al. m6A RNA modification controls cell fate transition in mammalian embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 15, 707–719 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  23. Geula, S. et al. m6A mRNA methylation facilitates resolution of naive pluripotency toward differentiation. Science 347, 1002–1006 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  24. Chen, T. et al. m6A RNA methylation is regulated by microRNAs and promotes reprogramming to pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 16, 289–301 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  25. Zhang, C. et al. m6A modulates haematopoietic stem and progenitor cell specification. Nature 549, 273–276 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  26. Weng, H. et al. METTL14 inhibits hematopoietic stem/progenitor differentiation and promotes leukemogenesis via mRNA m6A modification. Cell Stem Cell 22, 191–205 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  27. Xu, K. et al. Mettl3-mediated m6A regulates spermatogonial differentiation and meiosis initiation. Cell Res. 27, 1100–1114 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  28. Haussmann, I. U. et al. m6A potentiates Sxl alternative pre-mRNA splicing for robust Drosophila sex determination. Nature 540, 301–304 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  29. Lence, T. et al. m6A modulates neuronal functions and sex determination in Drosophila. Nature 540, 242–247 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  30. Zhao, B. S. et al. m6A-dependent maternal mRNA clearance facilitates zebrafish maternal-to-zygotic transition. Nature 542, 475–478 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  31. Yoon, K. J. et al. Temporal control of mammalian cortical neurogenesis by m6A methylation. Cell 171, 877–889 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  32. Li, H. B. et al. m6A mRNA methylation controls T cell homeostasis by targeting the IL-7/STAT5/SOCS pathways. Nature 548, 338–342 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  33. Vu, L. P. et al. The N 6-methyladenosine (m6A)-forming enzyme METTL3 controls myeloid differentiation of normal hematopoietic and leukemia cells. Nat. Med. 23, 1369–1376 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  34. Zhang, C. et al. Hypoxia induces the breast cancer stem cell phenotype by HIF-dependent and ALKBH5-mediated m6A-demethylation of NANOG mRNA. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E2047–E2056 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  35. Li, Z. et al. FTO plays an oncogenic role in acute myeloid leukemia as a N 6-methyladenosine RNA demethylase. Cancer Cell 31, 127–141 (2017).
    Article Google Scholar
  36. Su, R. et al. R-2HG exhibits anti-tumor activity by targeting FTO/m6A/MYC/CEBPA signaling. Cell 172, 90–105 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  37. Sun, W. J. et al. RMBase: a resource for decoding the landscape of RNA modifications from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D259–D265 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  38. Ransohoff, J. D., Wei, Y. & Khavari, P. A. The functions and unique features of long intergenic non-coding RNA. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 19, 143–157 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  39. Tilgner, H. et al. Deep sequencing of subcellular RNA fractions shows splicing to be predominantly co-transcriptional in the human genome but inefficient for lncRNAs. Genome Res. 22, 1616–1625 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  40. Hon, C. C. et al. An atlas of human long non-coding RNAs with accurate 5′ ends. Nature 543, 199–204 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  41. Majewski, J. & Pastinen, T. The study of eQTL variations by RNA-seq: from SNPs to phenotypes. Trend. Genet. 27, 72–79 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  42. Li, K. L. et al. Interaction between erythrocyte phospholipid fatty acids composition and variants of inflammation-related genes on type 2 diabetes. J. Nutrigenet. Nutrigenom. 7, 252–263 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  43. Frayling, T. M. et al. A common variant in the FTO gene is associated with body mass index and predisposes to childhood and adult obesity. Science 316, 889–894 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  44. Scott, L. J. et al. A genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in Finns detects multiple susceptibility variants. Science 316, 1341–1345 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  45. Slobodin, B. et al. Transcription impacts the efficiency of mRNA translation via co-transcriptional N6-adenosine methylation. Cell 169, 326–337 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  46. Knuckles, P. et al. RNA fate determination through cotranscriptional adenosine methylation and microprocessor binding. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 561–569 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  47. Barbieri, I. et al. Promoter-bound METTL3 maintains myeloid leukaemia by m6A-dependent translation control. Nature 552, 126–131 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  48. Bertero, A. et al. The SMAD2/3 interactome reveals that TGFβ controls m6A mRNA methylation in pluripotency. Nature 555, 256–259 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  49. The GTEx Consortium The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) pilot analysis: multitissue gene regulation in humans. Science 348, 648–660 (2015).
  50. Bergman, Y. & Cedar, H. DNA methylation dynamics in health and disease. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 274–281 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  51. Zid, B. M. & O’Shea, E. K. Promoter sequences direct cytoplasmic localization and translation of mRNAs during starvation in yeast. Nature 514, 117–121 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  52. Bregman, A. et al. Promoter elements regulate cytoplasmic mRNA decay. Cell 147, 1473–1483 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  53. Cramer, P. et al. Coupling of transcription with alternative splicing: RNA pol II promoters modulate SF2/ASF and 9G8 effects on an exonic splicing enhancer. Mol. Cell 4, 251–258 (1999).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  54. Wan, L. et al. Scaffolding protein SPIDR/KIAA0146 connects the Bloom syndrome helicase with homologous recombination repair. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 10646–10651 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  55. Dominissini, D., Moshitch-Moshkovitz, S., Salmon-Divon, M., Amariglio, N. & Rechavi, G. Transcriptome-wide mapping of N 6-methyladenosine by m6A-seq based on immunocapturing and massively parallel sequencing. Nat. Protoc. 8, 176–189 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  56. Wan, Y. et al. Transcriptome-wide high-throughput deep m6A-seq reveals unique differential m6A methylation patterns between three organs in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genome Biol. 16, 272 (2015).
    Article Google Scholar
  57. Pertea, M., Kim, D., Pertea, G. M., Leek, J. T. & Salzberg, S. L. Transcript-level expression analysis of RNA-seq experiments with HISAT, StringTie and Ballgown. Nat. Protoc. 11, 1650–1667 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  58. Heinz, S. et al. Simple combinations of lineage-determining transcription factors prime cis-regulatory elements required for macrophage and B cell identities. Mol. Cell 38, 576–589 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  59. Cui, X. et al. Guitar: an R/Bioconductor package for gene annotation guided transcriptomic analysis of RNA-related genomic features. Biomed. Res. Int. 2016, 8367534 (2016).
    PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
  60. Wang, L. et al. Measure transcript integrity using RNA-seq data. BMC Bioinform. 17, 58 (2016).
    Article Google Scholar
  61. Ke, S. et al. m6A mRNA modifications are deposited in nascent pre-mRNA and are not required for splicing but do specify cytoplasmic turnover. Genes Dev. 31, 990–1006 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  62. Shen, S. et al. rMATS: robust and flexible detection of differential alternative splicing from replicate RNA-seq data. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E5593–E5601 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  63. Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes Nature 518, 317–330 (2015).
  64. Krzywinski, M. et al. Circos: an information aesthetic for comparative genomics. Genome Res. 19, 1639–1645 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  65. Zheng, Y. et al. m6AVar: a database of functional variants involved in m6A modification. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D139–D145 (2018).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  66. MacArthur, J. et al. The new NHGRI-EBI Catalog of published genome-wide association studies (GWAS Catalog). Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D896–D901 (2017).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  67. Maurano, M. T. et al. Systematic localization of common disease-associated variation in regulatory DNA. Science 337, 1190–1195 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  68. Yu, G., Wang, L. G. & He, Q. Y. ChIPseeker: an R/Bioconductor package for ChIP peak annotation, comparison and visualization. Bioinformatics 31, 2382–2383 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  69. Saxonov, S., Berg, P. & Brutlag, D. L. A genome-wide analysis of CpG dinucleotides in the human genome distinguishes two distinct classes of promoters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 1412–1417 (2006).
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank K. Yen for critical reading of the manuscript, and J. Chen and Z. Zuo for discussion about this project. This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFA0106700 and 2018YFC1004103), the Natural Science Foundation of China (31722034, 81671466, 81870129 and 81771643), Innovation Team in Wisdom Valley of Southern China (2015CXDT06) and Pearl River S&T Nova Program of Guangzhou (201806010009).

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Shan Xiao, Shuo Cao, Qitao Huang, Linjian Xia.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Developmental Biology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
    Shan Xiao, Shuo Cao, Mingqiang Deng, Mengtian Yang, Guiru Jia, Xiaona Liu, Junfang Shi, Weishi Wang, Yuan Li, Sun Liu, Haoran Zhu, Kaifen Tan & Laixin Xia
  2. Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
    Qitao Huang & Mei Zhong
  3. School of Basic Medical Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
    Linjian Xia & Chunjiang He
  4. Hygiene Detection Center, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
    Qizhi Luo

Authors

  1. Shan Xiao
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. Shuo Cao
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  3. Qitao Huang
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  4. Linjian Xia
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  5. Mingqiang Deng
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  6. Mengtian Yang
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  7. Guiru Jia
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  8. Xiaona Liu
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  9. Junfang Shi
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  10. Weishi Wang
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  11. Yuan Li
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  12. Sun Liu
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  13. Haoran Zhu
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  14. Kaifen Tan
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  15. Qizhi Luo
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  16. Mei Zhong
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  17. Chunjiang He
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  18. Laixin Xia
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.X. and Laixin X. conceived the research. M.Z., C.H. and Laixin X. designed and supervised the project. S.X., Q.H., X.L., J.S., W.W., Y.L., G.J., M.D., S.L., H.Z., M.Y., K.T. and Q.L. performed experiments. S.X., S.C. and Linjian X. conducted bioinformatics analysis. S.X. and Laixin X. wrote the manuscript with input from all authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence toMei Zhong, Chunjiang He or Laixin Xia.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Whole-transcriptome profiling profiling of m6As in major human tissues using an improved MeRIP procedure.

a. The non-specific rate (left) of MeRIP using normal or competitive washing. The non-specific IP rate was calculated from the LC/MS-MS data using the ratio of m(6)A/A in the input sample divided by that in the IP sample. Meanwhile, ssRNA with or without m(6)A was used to validated the signal to noise ratio of these two methods (right). Enrichment of IPed versus input RNA is normalize against ssRNA without m(6)A. Two independent experiments were performed with bar representing the average value (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). b. Similarity (Pearson’s correlation) of gene expression levels between each pair of samples. The FPKM of genes from input were used. The samples were hierarchically clustered (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). c. Fraction of overlapped m(6)A peaks called by MACS2 and MeTPeak/moving-window. d. Sequence logo and p value of deduced consensus motif of m(6)As in each tissue. n= 36461, 27866, 45503, 26163, 24180, 29174, 38444, 21780 m(6)As in brain, heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, placenta and stomach respectively, binomial distribution test (see methods for details). e. Distribution of m(6)A peaks surrounding the CDS in mRNA regions in each tissue. f. The fraction of m(6)A peaks in heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, placenta, and stomach in the 5′ UTR, CDS, intron, stop codon, 3′ UTR, promoter, and intergenic regions.

Supplementary Figure 2 m6As on intronic regions in human tissues.

a. MeRIP enrichment (upper) and expression level (lower) of m(6)A-negative (blue) and positive (orange) intronic regions in liver and stomach. Both the enrichment of IPed versus input RNA and the expression level are normalized against GAPDH. MeRIP-qPCR and qPCR were performed once with two technical replicates obtained and shown (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). b. Sequence logo and p value of deduced consensus motif of 81981 intronic m(6)As with strand information. Binomial distribution test (see methods for details). c. Ratio of uniquely mapped reads in intronic regions. Biologically independent samples n=3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2 in brain, heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, placenta and stomach, respectively (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). d. Fraction of intronic m(6)As in each tissue determined in a rigorously way as described in methods. e. Histogram of completed splicing index (coSI) values for internal exon in each tissue.

Supplementary Figure 3 Differential m6As among human tissues.

a. Circos plot of tissue-differential m(6)As across the genome in brain (orange), heart (blue), kidney (green), liver (gray), lung (acen), muscle (purple), placenta (red), and stomach (yellow), respectively.b. MeRIP enrichment (upper) and expression level (lower) of two lung-differential m(6)A peaks on ECT2L and WNT4, and one stomach-differential peak on TMEM184A. Enrichment of IPed versus input RNA and the expression level is normalize against ZNF384, which is a conserved m(6)A peak across all tissues. MeRIP-qPCR and qPCR were performed once with two technical replicates obtained and shown.NA means the RNA level is too low to be detected by qPCR (see source data in Supplementary Table 5).

Supplementary Figure 4 m6As on lincRNA in human tissues.

a. MeRIP enrichment (upper) and expression level (lower) of m(6)A-negative and positive regions on e-lincRNA and other lincRNA in lung and stomach. Enrichment of IPed versus input RNA and the expression level is normalize against GAPDH. MeRIP-qPCR and qPCR were performed once with three technical replicates obtained and shown (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). b. Sequence logo and p value of deduced consensus motif of 226588 m(6)As with strand information resided in mRNA. Binomial distribution test. c. Number of mRNA modified by m(6)A or not in each tissue.

Supplementary Figure 5 eQTL and GWAS SNPs are associated with fetal tissue m6As.

a. Odds ratio of eQTL SNPs enriched in m(6)As across all HapMap SNPs in corresponding tissues. n = 682487.04, 978250.18, 699224.11, 676464.39, 765139.26, 765776.76, 1391369.53, 1392390.1, 1395465.56, 1397037.35, 1394019.17, 1393978.32, 1396518.69, 1399635.18, 1404775.28, 1400517.83, 1398627.95, 1395485.53, 1392218 bases from the top down, respectively, two-sided Fisher’s exact test, P < 0.05 (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). b. Distribution of eQTL SNPs located in m(6)As in heart, liver, lung, muscle, and stomach in the 5′ UTR, CDS, intron, stop codon, 3′ UTR, promoter, and intergenic regions. c. Representative eQTL SNP on gene WNT2B (left) and GWAS SNP on gene HNF1A-AS1 (right). Normalized reads densities of MeRIP-Seq and Input-Seq of different tissues are shown. Reads of Input-Seq and MeRIP-Seq were gray and colored, respectively. All biological replicates are shown. Levels were normalized by the number of reads in each sample. Range is shown at the right side of the ‘brain-1’ track. The MeRIP-Seq was performed two or three times for each tissue type as indicated, and all replicates were shown. d. Enrichment of IPed versus input RNA of SNP-associated m(6)A peaks was normalized to GAPDH. MeRIP-qPCR was performed once with three technical replicates obtained and shown (see source data in Supplementary Table 5).

Supplementary Figure 6 Genes enriched in m6As have CpG-rich promoters.

a. Western blots of FLAG or ß-ACTIN from SFB-METTL3 Hela cells before and after doxycycline induced expression. Unprocessed data is shown in Supplementary Figure 8. The western blot was performed twice with similar results, and a representative figure was shown. b. Enrichment of METTL3 occupancy in the promoters of m(6)A modified genes over unmodified genes. N = 19801, 18676, 18439, 18030, 17567, 17374, 17778 and 17303 genes in brain, heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, placenta and stomach, respectively. One-sided fisher’s exact test, P <2.2E-16 (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). c. Guitar plot of m(6)As distribution on genes with CpG-rich or poor promoters.

Supplementary Figure 7 The CpG status of promoters is involved in m6A methylation.

a. m(6)A distribution on mouse gene Ankrd9 and Zbtb42. Normalized reads densities of IP (orange) versus input (gray) were shown. b. RNA expression level of POU5F1/EEF1A1-Ankrd9/Zbtb42 in Hela cells. The expression level of Ankrd9 or Zbtb42 was first normalize to ACTB, and then relative to that with EEF1A1 promoters. Error bars represent mean s.d. from three independent experiments (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). c. Protein level of Ankrd9/Zbtb42, ACTB, IRF1, SMAD7 and GAPDH in promoter-displaced Hela cells. MYC tag placed before Ankrd9 or Zbtb42 coding regions was used to determine the protein level of them. Unprocessed data is shown in Supplementary Figure 8. The western blot was performed twice with similar results, and a representative figure was shown. d. Expression level of POU5F1/EEF1A1-Ankrd9/Zbtb42 in HEK293 cells. The relative expression level of Ankrd9 or Zbtb42 was judged as aforementioned. Two independent experiments were shown (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). e. Protein level of Ankrd9/Zbtb42, ACTB, IRF1 and GAPDH in promoter-displaced HEK293 cells. Unprocessed data is shown in Supplementary Figure 8. The western blot was performed twice with similar results, and a representative figure was shown. f. The relative m6A levels of ACTB, Ankrd9 and Zbtb42 in promoter displaced HEK293 cells were firstly normalized to their own inputs and then relative to GAPDH in corresponding cells. The experiments were performed twice (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). g. Lifetime of Ankrd9, Zbtb42, and IRF1 in promoter-displaced HEK293 cells after actinomycin D treatment. The plotted points represented the individual data from two independent experiments (see source data in Supplementary Table 5). h. Depth of CEBPZ and SMAD2 ChIP-Seq fragments (per bp per peak) around CpG-rich or CpG-poor TSS regions.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xiao, S., Cao, S., Huang, Q. et al. The RNA _N_6-methyladenosine modification landscape of human fetal tissues.Nat Cell Biol 21, 651–661 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-019-0315-4

Download citation