Transcribed enhancers lead waves of coordinated transcription in transitioning mammalian cells - PubMed (original) (raw)

. 2015 Feb 27;347(6225):1010-4.

doi: 10.1126/science.1259418. Epub 2015 Feb 12.

Carsten O Daub, Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup, Robin Andersson, Berit Lilje, Finn Drabløs, Andreas Lennartsson, Michelle Rönnerblad, Olga Hrydziuszko, Morana Vitezic, Tom C Freeman, Ahmad M N Alhendi, Peter Arner, Richard Axton, J Kenneth Baillie, Anthony Beckhouse, Beatrice Bodega, James Briggs, Frank Brombacher, Margaret Davis, Michael Detmar, Anna Ehrlund, Mitsuhiro Endoh, Afsaneh Eslami, Michela Fagiolini, Lynsey Fairbairn, Geoffrey J Faulkner, Carmelo Ferrai, Malcolm E Fisher, Lesley Forrester, Daniel Goldowitz, Reto Guler, Thomas Ha, Mitsuko Hara, Meenhard Herlyn, Tomokatsu Ikawa, Chieko Kai, Hiroshi Kawamoto, Levon M Khachigian, S Peter Klinken, Soichi Kojima, Haruhiko Koseki, Sarah Klein, Niklas Mejhert, Ken Miyaguchi, Yosuke Mizuno, Mitsuru Morimoto, Kelly J Morris, Christine Mummery, Yutaka Nakachi, Soichi Ogishima, Mariko Okada-Hatakeyama, Yasushi Okazaki, Valerio Orlando, Dmitry Ovchinnikov, Robert Passier, Margaret Patrikakis, Ana Pombo, Xian-Yang Qin, Sugata Roy, Hiroki Sato, Suzana Savvi, Alka Saxena, Anita Schwegmann, Daisuke Sugiyama, Rolf Swoboda, Hiroshi Tanaka, Andru Tomoiu, Louise N Winteringham, Ernst Wolvetang, Chiyo Yanagi-Mizuochi, Misako Yoneda, Susan Zabierowski, Peter Zhang, Imad Abugessaisa, Nicolas Bertin, Alexander D Diehl, Shiro Fukuda, Masaaki Furuno, Jayson Harshbarger, Akira Hasegawa, Fumi Hori, Sachi Ishikawa-Kato, Yuri Ishizu, Masayoshi Itoh, Tsugumi Kawashima, Miki Kojima, Naoto Kondo, Marina Lizio, Terrence F Meehan, Christopher J Mungall, Mitsuyoshi Murata, Hiromi Nishiyori-Sueki, Serkan Sahin, Sayaka Nagao-Sato, Jessica Severin, Michiel J L de Hoon, Jun Kawai, Takeya Kasukawa, Timo Lassmann, Harukazu Suzuki, Hideya Kawaji, Kim M Summers, Christine Wells; FANTOM Consortium; David A Hume, Alistair R R Forrest, Albin Sandelin, Piero Carninci, Yoshihide Hayashizaki

Transcribed enhancers lead waves of coordinated transcription in transitioning mammalian cells

Erik Arner et al. Science. 2015.

Abstract

Although it is generally accepted that cellular differentiation requires changes to transcriptional networks, dynamic regulation of promoters and enhancers at specific sets of genes has not been previously studied en masse. Exploiting the fact that active promoters and enhancers are transcribed, we simultaneously measured their activity in 19 human and 14 mouse time courses covering a wide range of cell types and biological stimuli. Enhancer RNAs, then messenger RNAs encoding transcription factors, dominated the earliest responses. Binding sites for key lineage transcription factors were simultaneously overrepresented in enhancers and promoters active in each cellular system. Our data support a highly generalizable model in which enhancer transcription is the earliest event in successive waves of transcriptional change during cellular differentiation or activation.

Copyright © 2015, American Association for the Advancement of Science.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1

Fig. 1. Time course design and definition of response classes

(A) Schematic illustration of the time course experiments included in the study, arranged according to a development tree. Germ layers are shown as boxes. Black stars indicate time series sampled with high resolution. (B) Overview of time courses according to sampling strategy. The x axis indicates time after induction. Each dot indicates CAGE sampling, typically done in biological triplicates. (C) Stylistic representation of each of the major up-regulated response patterns (classes) identified as described in the main text. The y axis shows log2 fold change versus time 0; the x axis shows time in minutes. (D) Mean expression log2 fold change across time courses for enhancers and promoters classified into each response pattern [as in (C)]. The 95% confidence intervals of means are shown. (E) Boxplots of fractions showing the preference for enhancers, TF promoters, and other promoters for respective response class. (F) Overlap between time courses in terms of enhancers and promoters in respective class. Barplots show the frequency (y axis) of the number of time courses (out of 9) sharing a specific feature (x axis).

Fig. 2

Fig. 2. Temporal shifts between enhancer and promoter activity

(A) Smoothed mean expression over time for all enhancers classified into the rapid short response group and all differentially expressed proximal (±200 kb) promoters, split by gene type. Controls for class specificity (dotted lines) constitute promoters proximal to randomly sampled enhancers from other classes. Shaded areas indicate 95% confidence intervals. (B) Example of expression timing in an enhancer-promoter pair (EGR1), showing activation of enhancers before promoter activation. MCF-7 ChIA-PET interaction data are visualized at the bottom as green lines; each line represents a cluster of ChIA-PET paired tags consisting of at least three pairs, where line end thickness is proportional to the number of paired tags in the cluster. Right panel shows the expression level of promoter and enhancer in MCF-7 cells after induction with HRG. Error bars indicate SD. (C) Left: Distribution of center of mass (CM) of expression changes (see main text) for enhancers, TF promoters, and promoters of other genes. Right: difference in CM (“shift”) between enhancers-promoter pairs linked by proximity (±200 kb) split by gene type. Black dots indicate 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles. Asterisks indicate significance (P < 1.0 × 10−106, Mann-Whitney U test). (D) The similarity of enhancer or promoter response classification (Fig. 1C) within each TAD was analyzed by calculating the frequency of identically classified enhancers or promoters in all pairwise comparisons. Frequency distributions are shown as violin plots. Controls are made by randomly sampling the same number of enhancers or promoters and calculating the classification similarity as above (repeated 100 times for each TAD). Asterisks indicate significance (P < 0.01, Mann-Whitney U test); dots represent percentiles, as in (C). (E) Fraction of enhancers that interact (by RNAPII-ChIA-PET) with promoters in unstimulated MCF-7 cells, split by enhancer response class in the MCF-7+HRG time course.

Fig. 3

Fig. 3. Motif analysis of linked enhancers and promoters over time

(A) Overlap of motifs classified as significant for driving expression in enhancers and promoters. Top row: bar plot of motif overlap odds ratios, colored by significance. Bottom row: Venn diagrams of motif set overlap. (B) Distributions of average Pearson correlation coefficient between motif activities in enhancers and promoters in all motifs investigated (black) and motifs significantly active in both enhancers and promoters (gray). (C) Distribution of shift (minutes) in motif activity center of mass (see Fig. 2D) in promoters compared to enhancers. (D) Examples of motif activity in enhancers preceding that of promoters. Motif activity is plotted as the average of activity Z scores per time point. Error bars indicate the SD.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Levine M, Cattoglio C, Tjian R. Cell. 2014;157:13–25. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bonn S, et al. Nat Genet. 2012;44:148–156. - PubMed
    1. Nord AS, et al. Cell. 2013;155:1521–1531. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stergachis AB, et al. Cell. 2013;154:888–903. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kim TK, et al. Nature. 2010;465:182–187. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources