An optimization framework for unsupervised identification of rare copy number variation from SNP array data

Background

Specific chromatin characteristics, especially the modification status of the core histone proteins, are associated with active and inactive genes. There is growing evidence that genes that respond to environmental or developmental signals may possess distinct chromatin marks. Using a T cell model and both genome-wide and gene-focused approaches, we examined the chromatin characteristics of genes that respond to T cell activation.

Results

To facilitate comparison of genes with similar basal expression levels, we used expression-profiling data to bin genes according to their basal expression levels. We found that inducible genes in the lower basal expression bins, especially rapidly induced primary response genes, were more likely than their non-responsive counterparts to display the histone modifications of active genes, have RNA polymerase II (Pol II) at their promoters and show evidence of ongoing basal elongation. There was little or no evidence for the presence of active chromatin marks in the absence of promoter Pol II on these inducible genes. In addition, we identified a subgroup of genes with active promoter chromatin marks and promoter Pol II but no evidence of elongation. Following T cell activation, we find little evidence for a major shift in the active chromatin signature around inducible gene promoters but many genes recruit more Pol II and show increased evidence of elongation.

Conclusions

These results suggest that the majority of inducible genes are primed for activation by having an active chromatin signature and promoter Pol II with or without ongoing elongation.     

Defining the chromatin signature of inducible genes in T cells

Background

Specific chromatin characteristics, especially the modification status of the core histone proteins, are associated with active and inactive genes. There is growing evidence that genes that respond to environmental or developmental signals may possess distinct chromatin marks. Using a T cell model and both genome-wide and gene-focused approaches, we examined the chromatin characteristics of genes that respond to T cell activation.

Results

To facilitate comparison of genes with similar basal expression levels, we used expression-profiling data to bin genes according to their basal expression levels. We found that inducible genes in the lower basal expression bins, especially rapidly induced primary response genes, were more likely than their non-responsive counterparts to display the histone modifications of active genes, have RNA polymerase II (Pol II) at their promoters and show evidence of ongoing basal elongation. There was little or no evidence for the presence of active chromatin marks in the absence of promoter Pol II on these inducible genes. In addition, we identified a subgroup of genes with active promoter chromatin marks and promoter Pol II but no evidence of elongation. Following T cell activation, we find little evidence for a major shift in the active chromatin signature around inducible gene promoters but many genes recruit more Pol II and show increased evidence of elongation.

Conclusions

These results suggest that the majority of inducible genes are primed for activation by having an active chromatin signature and promoter Pol II with or without ongoing elongation.     

TATA and paused promoters active in differentiated tissues have distinct expression characteristics

Core promoter types differ in the extent to which RNA polymerase II (Pol II) pauses after initiation, but how this affects their tissue‐specific gene expression characteristics is not well understood. While promoters with Pol II pausing elements are active throughout development, TATA promoters are highly active in differentiated tissues. We therefore used a genomics approach on late‐stage Drosophila embryos to analyze the properties of promoter types. Using tissue‐specific Pol II ChIP‐seq, we found that paused promoters have high levels of paused Pol II throughout the embryo, even in tissues where the gene is not expressed, while TATA promoters only show Pol II occupancy when the gene is active. The promoter types are associated with different chromatin accessibility in ATAC‐seq data and have different expression characteristics in single‐cell RNA‐seq data. The two promoter types may therefore be optimized for different properties: paused promoters show more consistent expression when active, while TATA promoters have lower background expression when inactive. We propose that tissue‐specific genes have evolved to use two different strategies for their differential expression across tissues.