Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Apr;42(4):e1900188.
doi: 10.1002/bies.201900188. Epub 2020 Mar 6.

Developmental Transcriptional Enhancers: A Subtle Interplay between Accessibility and Activity: Considering Quantitative Accessibility Changes between Different Regulatory States of an Enhancer Deconvolutes the Complex Relationship between Accessibility and Activity

Marta Bozek  1 , Nicolas Gompel  2
Affiliations
Review

Developmental Transcriptional Enhancers: A Subtle Interplay between Accessibility and Activity: Considering Quantitative Accessibility Changes between Different Regulatory States of an Enhancer Deconvolutes the Complex Relationship between Accessibility and Activity

Marta Bozek et al. Bioessays. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Measurements of open chromatin in specific cell types are widely used to infer the spatiotemporal activity of transcriptional enhancers. How reliable are these predictions? In this review, it is argued that the relationship between the accessibility and activity of an enhancer is insufficiently described by simply considering open versus closed chromatin, or active versus inactive enhancers. Instead, recent studies focusing on the quantitative nature of accessibility signal reveal subtle differences between active enhancers and their different inactive counterparts: the closed silenced state and the accessible primed and repressed states. While the open structure as such is not a specific indicator of enhancer activity, active enhancers display a higher degree of accessibility than the primed and repressed states. Molecular mechanisms that may account for these quantitative differences are discussed. A model that relates molecular events at an enhancer to changes in its activity and accessibility in a developing tissue is also proposed.

Keywords: ATAC-seq; accessibility; chromatin; embryonic development; enhancer; quantitative analysis; transcriptional regulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. J. Stalder, A. Larsen, J. D. Engel, M. Dolan, M. Groudine, H. Weintraub, Cell 1980, 20, 451.
    1. C. Wu, Nature 1980, 286, 854.
    1. M. J. Guertin, J. T. Lis, Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2013, 23, 116.
    1. R. E. Thurman, E. Rynes, R. Humbert, J. Vierstra, M. T. Maurano, E. Haugen, N. C. Sheffield, A. B. Stergachis, H. Wang, B. Vernot, K. Garg, S. John, R. Sandstrom, D. Bates, L. Boatman, T. K. Canfield, M. Diegel, D. Dunn, A. K. Ebersol, T. Frum, E. Giste, A. K. Johnson, E. M. Johnson, T. Kutyavin, B. Lajoie, B. K. Lee, K. Lee, D. London, D. Lotakis, S. Neph, et al., Nature 2012, 489, 75.
    1. A. P. Boyle, S. Davis, H. P. Shulha, P. Meltzer, E. H. Margulies, Z. Weng, T. S. Furey, G. E. Crawford, Cell 2008, 132, 311.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources