Diverse epigenetic mechanisms maintain parental imprints within the embryonic and extraembryonic lineages
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJNA718635 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Dataset's files
| Action | DRS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRR14114400_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR14114400_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR14114500_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR14114500_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR14114401_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz |
Items per page: 5 1 - 5 of 296 |
Similar Datasets
Project description:Genomic imprinting and X chromosome inactivation (XCI) require epigenetic mechanisms to encode allele-specific expression, but how these specific tasks are accomplished at single loci or across chromosomal scales remains incompletely understood. Here, we systematically disrupt essential epigenetic pathways within polymorphic embryos in order to examine canonical and non-canonical genomic imprinting as well as XCI. We find that DNA methylation and Polycomb group repressors are indispensable for autosomal imprinting, albeit at distinct gene sets. Moreover, the extraembryonic ectoderm relies on a broader spectrum of imprinting mechanisms, including non-canonical targeting of maternal endogenous retrovirus (ERV)-driven promoters by the H3K9 methyltransferase G9a. We further identify Polycomb-dependent and -independent gene clusters on the imprinted X chromosome, which appear to reflect distinct domains of Xist-mediated suppression. From our data, we assemble a comprehensive inventory of the epigenetic pathways that maintain parent-specific imprinting in eutherian mammals, including an expanded view of the placental lineage.
| S-EPMC9463566 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Genomic imprinting and X chromosome inactivation (XCI) require epigenetic mechanisms to direct allele-specific expression. Despite their critical roles in embryonic development, how universal epigenetic regulators coordinate these specific tasks at single loci or across chromosome scales remains understudied. Here, we systematically disrupted essential epigenetic pathways within polymorphic F1 embryos to examine canonical and non-canonical genomic imprinting as well as X chromosome inactivation. We find that DNA methylation and Polycomb group repressors are both indispensable for autosomal imprinting, albeit at distinct gene sets. Moreover, the extraembryonic ectoderm relies on a broader spectrum of imprinting mechanisms, including non-canonical targeting of maternal endogenous retrovirus (ERV) driven promoters by the H3K9 methyltransferase G9a. We further utilize our data to identify Polycomb dependent and independent gene clusters on the imprinted X chromosome, which appears to reflect distinct domains of Xist-mediated suppression. From our data, we assemble a comprehensive inventory of the epigenetic mechanisms utilized in eutherian mammals to maintain parent-specific imprinting, including an expanded view of the placental lineage that comprises multiple unique pathways.
2021-11-12 | GSE171206 | GEO
Project description:The interplay among mitogenic signaling pathways is crucial for proper embryogenesis. These pathways collaboratively act through intracellular master regulators to determine specific cell fates. Identifying the master regulators is critical to understanding embryogenesis and to developing new applications of pluripotent stem cells. In this report, we demonstrate protein kinase C (PKC) as an intrinsic master switch between embryonic and extraembryonic cell fates in the differentiation of human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs). PKCs are essential to inducing the extraembryonic lineage downstream of various mitogenic modulators. PKC-alpha (PKCα) suppresses BMP4-induced mesoderm differentiation, and PKC-delta (PKCδ) is required for extraembryonic trophoblast cell fate. PKC activation overrides mesoderm induction conditions and leads to extraembryonic fate. In contrast, PKC inhibition leads to β-catenin activation, switching cell fate from extraembryonic to mesoderm lineages. This study establishes PKC as a central player directing the segregation of extraembryonic and embryonic lineages. The manipulation of intrinsic PKC activity could greatly enhance cell differentiation under mitogenic regulation in stem cell applications.
2022-03-08 | GSE198006 | GEO
Project description:Chimaerism and mixoploidy define the presence of cell lineages with different parental genomes or different ploidy states in a single individual. Our knowledge on their mechanistic origin results from indirect observations, often when the cell lineages have been subject to rigorous selective pressure during development. Here, we applied haplarithmisis to infer the haplotypes and the copy number of parental genomes in 116 single blastomeres comprising entire preimplantation stage bovine embryos (n=23) following in vitro fertilization. Not only abnormal fertilizations leading to triploid zygotes, but also normally fertilized zygotes can spontaneously segregate entire parental genomes into different cell lineages during cleavage of the zygote. We coin the term “heterogoneic division” to indicate the events leading to non-canonical zygotic cytokinesis segregating the parental genomes into distinct lineages. Persistence of those cell lines during development is the likely cause of chimaerism and mixoploidy in mammals.
2016-03-11 | GSE76305 | GEO
Project description:Epigenetic restriction of embryonic and extraembryonic lineages mirrors the somatic transition to cancer
| PRJNA328450 | ENA
Project description:In female mammals, one of the two X chromosomes becomes inactivated during development by X-chromosome inactivation (XCI). Although Polycomb repressive complexes (PRC) 1 and PRC2 have both been implicated in gene silencing, their exact roles in XCI during in vivo development have remained elusive. To this end, we have studied mouse embryos lacking either PRC1 or PRC2. Here we demonstrate that the loss of either PRCs has a substantial impact on maintenance of gene silencing on the inactive X (Xi) in extraembryonic tissues, with overlapping yet different genes affected, indicating potentially independent roles of the two complexes. Importantly, a lack of PRC1 does not affect PRC2/H3K27me3 accumulation and a lack of PRC2 does not impact PRC1/H2AK119ub1 accumulation on the Xi. Thus PRC1 and PRC2 contribute independently to the maintenance of XCI in early post-implantation extraembryonic lineages, revealing that both Polycomb complexes can be directly involved and differently deployed in XCI.
2022-10-12 | GSE168140 | GEO
Project description:One of the most important topic in mammalian embryogenesis is cell lineage segregation. Briefly, one totipotent zygote will develop into inner cell mass (ICM) and trophectoderm (TE) at blastocyst stage, then the ICM will finally develop into multiple somatic cell lineages and TE will majorly become the placenta tissue which supports and protects the development of the embryo proper. Multiple extrinsic and intrinsic regulatory pathways are involved in facilitating the appropriate development of the embryo. Epigenetic reprogramming is one of the most pervasive events during mouse embryo development(Li, 2002). Recent studies had implied that distinct features for the establishment of DNA methylation(Monk et al., 1987) and histone modifications especially H3K27me3(Liu et al., 2016) during mouse early embryo development. The re-establishment of DNA methylation in early mouse embryos starts at blastocyst stage (about embryonic day 3.5, E3.5) and peaks around the gastrulation stage, while the re-establishment of H3K27me3 exhibits a great level of dynamics and gradually increased CpG preference during pre-implantation embryo development(Liu et al., 2016). However, the underlying epigenetic mechanism concerning the lineage segregation and developmental competence restriction between the pluripotent embryo proper and the supporting extraembryonic tissues especially extraembryonic ectoderm (ExE) remains largely unknown. Surprisingly, no significant difference exists for the distribution of H3K27me3 and DNA methylation between ICM and TE in the preimplantation embryos. Therefore, it is of great importance for unveiling the interplays between H3K27me3 and DNA methylation involving in the restriction of developmental competence between embryonic cells and extraembryonic cells in post-implantation embryos.
2018-03-16 | GSE104243 | GEO
Project description:Distinct distribution of H3K27me3 and DNA methylation stabilizes the segregation of extraembryonic and embryonic lineages
| PRJNA412161 | ENA
Project description:Concerted efforts over past decades have established a thorough understanding of the canonical somatic DNA methylation landscape as well as its systematic misregulation across most human cancers. However, the underlying mechanism that directs this genome-scale transformation remains elusive, with no clear model for its acquisition or understanding of its potential developmental utility. Here we present base pair resolution analysis of global remethylation from the hypomethylated state of the preimplantation embryo into the early epiblast and extraembryonic ectoderm. We show that these two states acquire highly divergent genomic distributions: while the proximal epiblast establishes a canonical CpG-density dependent pattern found in somatic cells, the extraembryonic epigenome becomes substantially more mosaic. Moreover, this alternate pattern includes specific de novo methylation of hundreds of CpG island promoter containing genes that function in early embryonic development and are orthologously methylated across an extensive cohort of human cancers. From these data, we propose a model where the evolutionary innovation of extraembryonic tissues in eutherian mammals required cooption of DNA methylation-based suppression as an alternate pathway to the embryonically utilized Polycomb group proteins, which otherwise coordinate germ layer formation in response to extraembryonic cues at the onset of gastrulation. Moreover, we establish that this decision is made deterministically downstream of the promiscuously utilized, and frequently oncogenic, FGF signaling pathway and utilizes a novel combination of epigenetic cofactors. Recruitment of this silencing mechanism to developmental genes during cancer therefore reflects the misappropriation of an innate regulatory pathway that may be spontaneously sampled as an alternate epigenetic landscape within somatic cells.
2017-09-18 | GSE84235 | GEO
Project description:Concerted efforts over past decades have established a thorough understanding of the canonical somatic DNA methylation landscape as well as its systematic misregulation across most human cancers. However, the underlying mechanism that directs this genome-scale transformation remains elusive, with no clear model for its acquisition or understanding of its potential developmental utility. Here we present base pair resolution analysis of global remethylation from the hypomethylated state of the preimplantation embryo into the early epiblast and extraembryonic ectoderm. We show that these two states acquire highly divergent genomic distributions: while the proximal epiblast establishes a canonical CpG-density dependent pattern found in somatic cells, the extraembryonic epigenome becomes substantially more mosaic. Moreover, this alternate pattern includes specific de novo methylation of hundreds of CpG island promoter containing genes that function in early embryonic development and are orthologously methylated across an extensive cohort of human cancers. From these data, we propose a model where the evolutionary innovation of extraembryonic tissues in eutherian mammals required cooption of DNA methylation-based suppression as an alternate pathway to the embryonically utilized Polycomb group proteins, which otherwise coordinate germ layer formation in response to extraembryonic cues at the onset of gastrulation. Moreover, we establish that this decision is made deterministically downstream of the promiscuously utilized, and frequently oncogenic, FGF signaling pathway and utilizes a novel combination of epigenetic cofactors. Recruitment of this silencing mechanism to developmental genes during cancer therefore reflects the misappropriation of an innate regulatory pathway that may be spontaneously sampled as an alternate epigenetic landscape within somatic cells.
2017-09-18 | GSE98960 | GEO