Epigenomic methylome landscape of promoters in vertebrate genomes
Résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Genomic promoters are crucial gene regulatory elements 1,2 . Yet, comparative analyses of promoter architecture have been constrained by the limited resolution of GC-rich regions in short-read-based genome resources 3–6 . The Vertebrate Genomes Project (VGP) provides more complete long-read-based assemblies 7 , which further detect 5-methylcytosine signals directly from PacBio HiFi circular consensus reads 8,9 . Here, we developed a scalable computational framework to characterize DNA methylomes from HiFi data on high-quality Phase I VGP assemblies with RefSeq gene annotations for 82 vertebrate species spanning seven major taxonomic classes: mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, lobe-finned fishes, ray-finned fishes, and cartilaginous fishes. We observed a conserved, transcription start site-centered hypomethylation signature in promoters across all vertebrates, and an unexpected hypermethylation signature near gene boundaries that is discordant with transcripts. In addition to this conserved pattern, there were lineage-specific differences in promoter methylation profiles, with birds showing the most diverse patterns. These epigenetic landscapes track phylogenetic relationships more closely than tissue-type methylation differences and infer lineage-dependent widths of core promoters and broader promoters across major vertebrate classes. Our findings establish a comparative epigenomic framework for profiling promoter methylomes from long-read sequencing data.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Epigenomic methylome landscape of promoters in vertebrate genomes
- Date Crossref
- 30/03/2026
- Éditeur
- openRxiv
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.