↓ Skip to main content

Histone modifications facilitate the coexpression of bidirectional promoters in rice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Histone modifications facilitate the coexpression of bidirectional promoters in rice
Published in
BMC Genomics, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-3125-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuan Fang, Lei Wang, Ximeng Wang, Qi You, Xiucai Pan, Jin Xiao, Xiu-e Wang, Yufeng Wu, Zhen Su, Wenli Zhang

Abstract

Bidirectional gene pairs are highly abundant and mostly co-regulated in eukaryotic genomes. The structural features of bidirectional promoters (BDPs) have been well studied in yeast, humans and plants. However, the underlying mechanisms responsible for the coexpression of BDPs remain understudied, especially in plants. Here, we characterized chromatin features associated with rice BDPs. Several unique chromatin features were present in rice BDPs but were missing from unidirectional promoters (UDPs), including overrepresented active histone marks, canonical nucleosomes and underrepresented H3K27me3. In particular, overrepresented active marks (H3K4ac, H4K12ac, H4K16ac, H3K4me2 and H3K36me3) were truly overrepresented in type I BDPs but not in the other two BDPs, based on a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Our analyses indicate that active marks (H3K4ac, H4K12ac, H4K16ac, H3K4me3, H3K9ac and H3K27ac) may coordinate with repressive marks (H3K27me3 and H3K9me1/3) to build a unique chromatin structure that favors the coregulation of bidirectional gene pairs. Thus, our findings help to enhance the understanding of unique epigenetic mechanisms that regulate bidirectional gene pairs and may improve the manipulation of gene pairs for crop bioengineering.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 14%
Computer Science 1 7%
Engineering 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,344,065
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#9,294
of 10,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,615
of 322,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#233
of 278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,670 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.