DOCSLIB.ORG

Asymmetric DNA Methylation of Cpg Dyads Is a Feature of Secondary Dmrs Associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 Imprinting Cluster in Mouse Megan Guntrum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Asymmetric DNA Methylation of Cpg Dyads Is a Feature of Secondary Dmrs Associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 Imprinting Cluster in Mouse Megan Guntrum Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Biology Faculty Research and Scholarship Biology 2017 Asymmetric DNA methylation of CpG dyads is a feature of secondary DMRs associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 imprinting cluster in mouse Megan Guntrum Ekaterina Vlasova Tamara L. Davis [email protected] Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/bio_pubs Part of the Biology Commons Custom Citation M. Guntrum, E. Vlasova and T.L. Davis 2017. "Asymmetric DNA methylation of CpG dyads is a feature of secondary DMRs associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 imprinting cluster in mouse." Epigenetics & Chromatin 10:31. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/bio_pubs/24 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Guntrum et al. Epigenetics & Chromatin (2017) 10:31 DOI 10.1186/s13072-017-0138-0 Epigenetics & Chromatin RESEARCH Open Access Asymmetric DNA methylation of CpG dyads is a feature of secondary DMRs associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 imprinting cluster in mouse Megan Guntrum, Ekaterina Vlasova and Tamara L. Davis* Abstract Background: Diferential DNA methylation plays a critical role in the regulation of imprinted genes. The diferentially methylated state of the imprinting control region is inherited via the gametes at fertilization, and is stably maintained in somatic cells throughout development, infuencing the expression of genes across the imprinting cluster. In con- trast, DNA methylation patterns are more labile at secondary diferentially methylated regions which are established at imprinted loci during post-implantation development. To investigate the nature of these more variably methylated secondary diferentially methylated regions, we adopted a hairpin linker bisulfte mutagenesis approach to examine CpG dyad methylation at diferentially methylated regions associated with the murine Dlk1/Gtl2 imprinting cluster on both complementary strands. Results: We observed homomethylation at greater than 90% of the methylated CpG dyads at the IG-DMR, which serves as the imprinting control element. In contrast, homomethylation was only observed at 67–78% of the methyl- ated CpG dyads at the secondary diferentially methylated regions; the remaining 22–33% of methylated CpG dyads exhibited hemimethylation. Conclusions: We propose that this high degree of hemimethylation could explain the variability in DNA methylation patterns at secondary diferentially methylated regions associated with imprinted loci. We further suggest that the presence of 5-hydroxymethylation at secondary diferentially methylated regions may result in hemimethylation and methylation variability as a result of passive and/or active demethylation mechanisms. Keywords: Genomic imprinting, DNA methylation, 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine, Gtl2, Gametic DMR, Somatic DMR, Epigenetics Background imprinted genes are found within clusters that contain a Genomic imprinting in mammals results in the parent CpG-rich imprinting control region (ICR) that functions of origin-specifc monoallelic expression of a subset of both to specify parental origin and to regulate imprinted genes. Achieving the appropriate balance of gene expres- expression of the genes within the cluster [3, 4]. Monoal- sion from the maternally and paternally contributed lelic expression of imprinted genes is achieved via multi- genomes via the establishment of parental allele-spe- ple mechanisms, including epigenetic modifcations such cifc imprinting marks is crucial for normal growth and DNA methylation and histone modifcations, as well as development. Terefore, it is critical to understand the the activity of long noncoding RNAs [3, 4]. mechanisms responsible for controlling the expression Diferential DNA methylation at imprinted loci has of imprinted genes. To date, approximately 150 mamma- been shown to play an important role in distinguishing lian genes have been identifed as imprinted [1, 2]. Most the parental alleles and regulating their expression [5–9]. Diferentially methylated regions (DMRs) associated *Correspondence: [email protected] with imprinted genes fall into two categories: primary Department of Biology, Bryn Mawr College, 101 N. Merion Avenue, and secondary DMRs. Primary, or gametic, DMRs serve Bryn Mawr, PA 19010‑2899, USA © The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Guntrum et al. Epigenetics & Chromatin (2017) 10:31 Page 2 of 14 as imprinting control regions (ICRs), functioning both at two additional DMRs associated with the Dlk1/Gtl2 to specify parental origin and as a shared regulatory ele- imprinting cluster: the IG-DMR, a primary DMR, and ment that controls the expression of genes throughout the Gtl2-DMR, a secondary DMR [14, 28]. We also quan- the associated imprinting cluster. Primary DMRs acquire tifed the level of 5-hydroxymethylation (5-hmC) at the DNA methylation on one of the two parental alleles dur- IG-, Gtl2- and Dlk1-DMRs to determine whether there is ing gametogenesis and remain diferentially methyl- a correlation between high levels of hemimethylation and ated from fertilization throughout development, thereby high levels of 5-hydroxymethylation. Our results support marking parental origin [3]. Te diferentially methyl- the hypothesis that high levels of 5-hmC may contribute ated state of primary DMRs can afect expression in a to methylation instability at secondary DMRs associated variety of ways. For example, primary DMRs can regu- with imprinted genes. late gene expression through their diferential ability to bind enhancer blocking proteins, thereby infuencing the Results activity of an insulator [10, 11]. In other cases, primary CpG dyads within the Gtl2‑DMR display high levels DMRs are located at promoters, where they have been of hemimethylation shown to directly infuence the expression of long non- To determine whether asymmetric methylation is coding RNAs that subsequently regulate the expression unique to the Dlk1-DMR or is a feature of other second- of other genes in the imprinting cluster [12–15]. In con- ary DMRs associated with imprinted loci, we examined trast, secondary DMRs acquire parent of origin-specifc CpG dyad methylation at the linked Gtl2-DMR. We had DNA methylation after implantation [16–19]. Secondary previously analyzed DNA methylation on the coding DMRs are generally located at promoters or within gene strand of the Gtl2-DMR and observed moderate vari- bodies, and the acquisition of parental allele-specifc ability in the methylation status, with the 5′ half of the DNA methylation at these sequences is dependent on region analyzed displaying lower average DNA methyla- diferential methylation of the associated ICR, while the tion levels than the 3′ half [28]. We therefore assessed converse is not true [8, 9, 20]. While secondary DMRs do the DNA methylation status of cytosines located in 22 not function as primary imprinting marks, methylation pairs of complementary CpG dinucleotides spanning of these regions frequently corresponds with gene silenc- this region to determine whether these CpG dyads were ing and may play a role in maintaining imprinted expres- homomethylated versus hemimethylated (Fig. 1). All of sion [17, 21–23]. our experiments were conducted using F1 hybrid tissues Te DNA methylation associated with primary DMRs collected from crosses between C57BL/6 (B6) and a spe- is very stable, with the methylated allele displaying cially derived strain containing Mus musculus castaneus 90–100% methylation at the cytosines located in CpG (CAST)-derived sequences from chromosome 12 on an dinucleotides throughout development [5, 19, 24–27]. otherwise C57BL/6 genetic background (CAST12) [18, DNA methylation at secondary DMRs is less consistent. 28], allowing us to distinguish paternally inherited alleles For example, methylation at secondary DMRs located from maternally inherited alleles based on sequence pol- at the H19 and Gtl2 promoters average 70 and 78.9%, ymorphisms (detailed in the “Methods”). respectively, as compared to methylation at their respec- We analyzed CpG dyad methylation in DNA derived tive primary DMRs, which average ~90 and 95.8% [5, from four developmental stages: 7.5 d.p.c. embryo, 14.5 28]. We recently illustrated that the highly variable DNA d.p.c. embryo, 5 d.p.p. liver and adult liver. Te DNA methylation pattern at the secondary DMR associated methylation patterns on each parental allele were con- with the imprinted Dlk1 gene is asymmetric, with 35% sistent throughout development and were also similar of the methylated CpG dyads displaying hemimethyla- in tissues obtained from reciprocal crosses (Figs. 2, 3). tion [18]. Te trend that DNA methylation is more sta- Across all four developmental stages, cytosines in CpG ble at primary DMRs than at secondary DMRs associated dinucleotides were methylated 80-93% of the time on with imprinted genes has also been observed at human paternal alleles
Load more

Recommended publications
  • H19 Lncrna Controls Gene Expression of the Imprinted Gene Network by Recruiting MBD1
    H19 lncRNA controls gene expression of the Imprinted Gene Network by recruiting MBD1 Paul Monniera,b, Clémence Martineta, Julien Pontisc, Irina Stanchevad, Slimane Ait-Si-Alic, and Luisa Dandoloa,1 aGenetics and Development Department, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale U1016, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR) 8104, University Paris Descartes, Institut Cochin, Paris 75014, France; bUniversity Paris Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 75005, France; cUniversity Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Laboratoire Epigénétique et Destin Cellulaire, CNRS UMR 7216, Paris 75013, France; and dWellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, United Kingdom Edited by Marisa Bartolomei, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, and accepted by the Editorial Board November 11, 2013 (received for review May 30, 2013) The H19 gene controls the expression of several genes within the this control is transcriptional or posttranscriptional and whether Imprinted Gene Network (IGN), involved in growth control of the these nine targets are direct or indirect targets remain elusive. embryo. However, the underlying mechanisms of this control re- Several lncRNAs interact with chromatin-modifying com- main elusive. Here, we identified the methyl-CpG–binding domain plexes and appear to exert a transcriptional control by targeting fi protein 1 MBD1 as a physical and functional partner of the H19 local chromatin modi cations at discrete genomic regions (8, 9). long noncoding RNA (lncRNA). The H19 lncRNA–MBD1 complex is In the case of imprinted clusters, the DMRs controlling the ex- fi pression of imprinted genes exhibit parent-of-origin epigenetic required for the control of ve genes of the IGN.
    [Show full text]
  • Roles of Protein Factors in Regulation of Imprinted Gene Expression
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Spring 2011 Roles of Protein Factors in Regulation of Imprinted Gene Expression Shu Lin University of Pennsylvaina, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Lin, Shu, "Roles of Protein Factors in Regulation of Imprinted Gene Expression" (2011). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1546. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1546 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1546 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Roles of Protein Factors in Regulation of Imprinted Gene Expression Abstract Genomic imprinting is an important epigenetic phenomenon in which only one parental allele is expressed. Allele-specific DNA methylation often exists in imprinted control regions (ICRs) and is required for properly imprinted expression. Imprinting control in mammals involves an insulator mechanism that requires CTCF or a long ncRNA silencing mechanism. In this dissertation, I studied functions of protein factors in genomic imprinting. First, methylated DNA binding proteins are involved in maintenance of DNA methylation at imprinted loci and required for selective silencing of one specific allele. eW showed that MBD3 was localized to paternal H19 ICR. By RNA interference experiments in preimplantation embryos, we showed that MBD3 and its NuRD complex cofactor MTA2 were required for maintenance of the paternal methylation at the H19 ICR, and for silencing of the paternal H19. MTA2 is also required for Peg3 allelic expression. These results demonstrate new roles of the NuRD complex in genomic imprinting. Moreover, I showed allele-specific associations of MBD1 and Kaiso with imprinted loci, implicating functional requirements of these proteins in imprinted regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • H19 Lncrna Controls Gene Expression of the Imprinted Gene Network by Recruiting MBD1
    H19 lncRNA controls gene expression of the Imprinted Gene Network by recruiting MBD1 Paul Monniera,b, Clémence Martineta, Julien Pontisc, Irina Stanchevad, Slimane Ait-Si-Alic, and Luisa Dandoloa,1 aGenetics and Development Department, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale U1016, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR) 8104, University Paris Descartes, Institut Cochin, Paris 75014, France; bUniversity Paris Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 75005, France; cUniversity Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Laboratoire Epigénétique et Destin Cellulaire, CNRS UMR 7216, Paris 75013, France; and dWellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, United Kingdom Edited by Marisa Bartolomei, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, and accepted by the Editorial Board November 11, 2013 (received for review May 30, 2013) The H19 gene controls the expression of several genes within the this control is transcriptional or posttranscriptional and whether Imprinted Gene Network (IGN), involved in growth control of the these nine targets are direct or indirect targets remain elusive. embryo. However, the underlying mechanisms of this control re- Several lncRNAs interact with chromatin-modifying com- main elusive. Here, we identified the methyl-CpG–binding domain plexes and appear to exert a transcriptional control by targeting fi protein 1 MBD1 as a physical and functional partner of the H19 local chromatin modi cations at discrete genomic regions (8, 9). long noncoding RNA (lncRNA). The H19 lncRNA–MBD1 complex is In the case of imprinted clusters, the DMRs controlling the ex- fi pression of imprinted genes exhibit parent-of-origin epigenetic required for the control of ve genes of the IGN.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetics Society News
    JULY 2016 | ISSUE 75 GENETICS SOCIETY NEWS In this issue The Genetics Society News is edited by Manuela Marescotti and items for future • Medal awarded issues can be sent to the editor, by email to • Meetings [email protected]. • Student and Travel Reports The Newsletter is published twice a year, with copy dates of July and January. Cover image: Coming of Age: The Legacy of Dolly at 20 Interview with Professor Sir Ian Wilmut. See page 19 A WORD FROM THE EDITOR A word from the editor Welcome to Issue 75 Welcome to a new issue of our could lead to a world populated newsletter. by “photocopies” of few perfect I would like to point out the people; till now, after studying interesting interview granted genetics for almost the past 20 by Professor Sir Ian Wilmut to years, I learned the real and Dr Kay Boulton and Dr Doug less catastrophic meaning of Vernimmen on the occasion of “cloning”, but, more importantly, the 20th anniversary of the birth the implications in different of Dolly the sheep. Who would fields. have thought that such a mild and Also you will find a big number gentle animal, as a sheep could of reports authored by scientists revolutionise the scientific world? that have been supported by our Her Finn Dorset and Blackface Society, to form themselves, or ‘parents’ could never have dreamt new generations of geneticists or of such great things. to progress in their research. It is funny to think for me, how Read on and enjoy. this achievement changed shape Best wishes, in my mind since 1998 when I was Manuela Marescotti just a teen-ager, believing that it Professor Sir Ian Wilmut discusses the 20th anniversary of the birth of Dolly the sheep.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosome Segregation and Structure
    This is a free sample of content from Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology. Volume LXXXII: Chromosome Segregation and Structure. Click here for more information on how to buy the book. A Conversation with Marisa Bartolomei INTERVIEWER:BETH MOOREFIELD Senior Editor, Nature Structural and Molecular Biology Marisa Bartolomei is a Professor in the Department of Cell and Developmental Biology and Co-Director of the Epigenetics Institute, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Beth Moorefield: You study a unique process of gene Beth Moorefield: How would they distinguish either of expression in mammalian cells known as genomic im- these alleles? How are they identified as maternal or pa- printing, which directs expression specifically from either ternal so that they’re differentially recognized by the tran- maternal or paternal alleles. I thought we could speak scriptional machinery? about the function of the imprinted genes and the mech- Dr. Bartolomei: That’s the question. We know that these anisms that govern their regulation. differential epigenetic modifications that are put on in the Dr. Bartolomei: Imprinting is a mammalian phenome- germline are what helps us to say, “If this comes from the non, and it affects ∼100–200 genes. It’s nicely conserved maternal allele, either express or repress off the maternal in mammals, which gives us the opportunity to use mouse allele,” or modifications that are put on in the paternal as a good model to study imprinting in humans. These germline help us to recognize something as being paternal genes have very important processes in growth, but they and either expressed or repressed.
    [Show full text]
  • CTCF Binding Site Sequence Differences Are Associated with Unique Regulatory and Functional Trends During Embryonic Stem Cell Differentiation Robert N
    774–789 Nucleic Acids Research, 2014, Vol. 42, No. 2 Published online 10 October 2013 doi:10.1093/nar/gkt910 CTCF binding site sequence differences are associated with unique regulatory and functional trends during embryonic stem cell differentiation Robert N. Plasschaert1,Se´ bastien Vigneau1, Italo Tempera2, Ravi Gupta2, Jasna Maksimoska2, Logan Everett3, Ramana Davuluri2, Ronen Mamorstein2, Paul M. Lieberman2, David Schultz2, Sridhar Hannenhalli4,* and Marisa S. Bartolomei1,* 1Department of Cell & Developmental Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA, 2Program of Gene Expression and Regulation, The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA, 3Department of Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA and 4Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA Received October 11, 2012; Revised September 13, 2013; Accepted September 18, 2013 ABSTRACT control of CTCF is dependent in part on specific CTCF (CCCTC-binding factor) is a highly conserved motifs within its binding site. multifunctional DNA-binding protein with thousands of binding sites genome-wide. Our previous work suggested that differences in CTCF’s binding site INTRODUCTION sequence may affect the regulation of CTCF recruit- CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) is an essential zinc-finger ment and its function. To investigate this possibility, transcription factor (TF) that shows high conservation we characterized changes in genome-wide CTCF from flies to mammals and exhibits nearly ubiquitous ex- binding and gene expression during differentiation pression in all tissue types (1). Having tens of thousands of of mouse embryonic stem cells. After separating binding sites in these genomes, CTCF exhibits a wide and variable effect on gene expression.
    [Show full text]
  • Germ Cells and the Potential Impacts of Epigenomic Drugs[Version 1; Peer
    F1000Research 2018, 7(F1000 Faculty Rev):1967 Last updated: 17 JUL 2019 REVIEW Out of sight, out of mind? Germ cells and the potential impacts of epigenomic drugs [version 1; peer review: 3 approved] Ellen G. Jarred1,2, Heidi Bildsoe1,2, Patrick S. Western 1,2 1Centre for Reproductive Health, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia 2Department of Molecular and Translational Science, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia First published: 21 Dec 2018, 7(F1000 Faculty Rev):1967 ( Open Peer Review v1 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15935.1) Latest published: 21 Dec 2018, 7(F1000 Faculty Rev):1967 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.15935.1) Reviewer Status Abstract Invited Reviewers Epigenetic modifications, including DNA methylation and histone 1 2 3 modifications, determine the way DNA is packaged within the nucleus and regulate cell-specific gene expression. The heritability of these version 1 modifications provides a memory of cell identity and function. Common published dysregulation of epigenetic modifications in cancer has driven substantial 21 Dec 2018 interest in the development of epigenetic modifying drugs. Although these drugs have the potential to be highly beneficial for patients, they act systemically and may have “off-target” effects in other cells such as the F1000 Faculty Reviews are written by members of patients’ sperm or eggs. This review discusses the potential for epigenomic the prestigious F1000 Faculty. They are drugs to impact on the germline epigenome and subsequent offspring and commissioned and are peer reviewed before aims to foster further examination into the possible effects of these drugs on publication to ensure that the final, published version gametes.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE NAME TITLE BIRTHDATE Richard M. Schultz Charles and William L Day Distinguished March 20, 1949
    CURRICULUM VITAE NAME TITLE BIRTHDATE Richard M. Schultz Charles and William L Day Distinguished March 20, 1949 Professor Emeritus of Biology TELEPHONE: 267-239-3515 e-mail: [email protected] EDUCATION YEAR INSTITUTION AND LOCATION DEGREE CONFERRED AREA Brandeis University, Waltham, MA B.A. 1971 Biology Harvard University, Cambridge, MA Ph.D. 1975 Biochemistry RESEARCH/PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2017-present Research Professor UC, Davis 2016-2017 Visiting Professor UC, Davis 2016-present Charles and William L. Day U. of Penn Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Biology 2008-2014 Associate Dean for the U. of Penn Natural Sciences 2004-2008 Chair, DePartment of Biology U. of Penn 2007-2016 Charles and William L. Day U. of Penn Distinguished Professor of Biology Biology 2001-2007 Patricia Williams Term Chair U of Penn 1990-1995 Chair, Biology Graduate GrouP U. of Penn 1990-present Professor of Biology U. of Penn 1984-1990 Associate Professor of Biology U. of Penn 1978-1984 Assistant Professor of Biology U. of Penn 1975-1978 Post-Doctoral Fellow of the Harvard Medical School, Rockefeller Foundation in the lab of Paul Wassarman HONORS ReciPient of the Jan Purkinje Medal from The Czech Academy of Sciences (1994) Elected Fellow of AAAS (1996) NIH MERIT Award (1997-2007) Director, Society for the Study of ReProduction (2001-2004) Visiting Scholar, The Jackson Lab (2003) Society for ReProduction and Fertility Research Award (2005) Chair, Scientific Advisory Board, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine in Münster (2006-2014) ReciPient
    [Show full text]
  • Penn Symposium in Honor of Ralph L
    CELEBRATING 50 YEARS OF SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGHS AT PENN VET August 24 - 25, 2012 PENN SYMPOSIUM In honor of Ralph L. Brinster, VMD, PhD Ralph Brinster’s accomplishments as a teacher, trainer of young scientists and the development of academic programs at Penn Vet have been truly phenomenal. Message FROM PROVOST VINCENT PRICE It is a pleasure to congratulate Ralph Brinster on his extraordinary fifty years at Penn. He embodies the highest values of our university, in his commitments to teaching, mentoring, and the power of fundamental research to address the most profound and far-reaching questions. His innovations have defined whole fields of inquiry, spurred critical new technologies, and transformed the study of human biology and disease. At the same time, his work vividly demonstrates what we most seek to instill in our students - the dynamism and creativity of the intellectual enterprise, and the combination of curiosity, creativity, and tireless investigation that makes academic research vital and exciting. On behalf of the Penn community, we are honored by his presence, his legacy, and his ongoing influence on our university and on the scientific community around the world. PENN SYMPOSIUM: In honor of Ralph L. Brinster, VMD, PhD | 1 Message FROM DEAN HENDRICKS I am honored to write this letter for the Symposium to Honor Dr. Ralph L. Brinster. Dr. Brinster has been involved with my career here at the School of Veterinary Medicine since the very beginning. He interviewed me when I applied to the Veterinary Medicine Scientist Training Program (VMSTP) in 1974 and I have admired him throughout my own 38 years with Penn Vet.
    [Show full text]
  • Folami Y. Ideraabdullah, Ph.D. Work Address: University of North
    Ideraabdullah, Folami Y., page 1 5/10/16 CURRICULUM VITAE PERSONAL INFORMATION: Name: Folami Y. Ideraabdullah, Ph.D. Work Address: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Nutrition Research Institute, 500 Laureate Drive, Room 2103 Kannapolis, NC 28081 Phone: (704) 250-5039 Email: [email protected] Website: https://www.med.unc.edu/genetics/faculty/folami-ideraabdullah Home Address: 143 Scenic Dr. NE, Concord, NC 28025 Phone: (919) 619-3216 EDUCATION: 2007 – 2012 Postdoctoral training, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 2002 – 2007 Ph.D Genetics and Molecular Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 1997 – 2001 B.S in Biology (Genetics option), Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 11/2013-present Assistant Professor, Department of Nutrition (secondary), Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC • Genetic basis of epigenetic response to environment 1/2013-present Assistant Professor, Department of Genetics (primary), School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC • Genetic basis of epigenetic response to environment 7/2007-12/2012 Postdoctoral Researcher, Dr. Marisa Bartolomei’s laboratory, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA • Mouse models of human imprinting disorders 8/2003 –7/2007 Graduate Research Assistant, Dr. Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena’s laboratory, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC • Genetic diversity among inbred mouse strains • Mapping loci responsible for parent of origin dependent phenotypes 1/2001-1/2002 Undergraduate Research Assistant, Dr. Andrew Clark's laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA • Genetic interactions in the Drosophila innate immune response pathway 1999 & 2000 Summer Undergraduate Research Intern, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Breakthroughs in Reproduction and Development · Nouvelles Avancées En Reproduction Et Développement
    _____________________________________________________________________________ BREAKTHROUGHS IN REPRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT · NOUVELLES AVANCÉES EN REPRODUCTION ET DÉVELOPPEMENT Research Day Centre for Research in Reproduction and Development (CRRD) at McGill Tuesday, May 16, 2017 McGill New Residence Hall 3625, avenue du Parc Montréal, Québec ______________________________________________________________________________ We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of our sponsors! Gold Silver Remember to visit their booths throughout the day and get your raffle ticket stamped for a chance at a prize! BREAKTHROUGHS IN REPRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT Research Day 2017 Centre for Research in Reproduction and Development (CRRD) at McGill Tuesday, May 16, 2017 New Residence Hall, 3625, avenue du Parc, Montréal, Québec 8:00-8:45 Registration and Coffee / Poster set-up 8:45-9:00 Opening Remarks: Dr. Daniel Bernard 9:00-9:45 Trainee Oral Presentations Session I (Chairs: Matthew Ford and Deepak Tanwar) O-01. Angus Macaulay, “MCAK mediated error correction in the early embryo prevents mosaic aneuploidy” O-02. Sophia Rahimi, “Effect of folic acid supplementation on adverse morphological and epigenetic outcomes in offspring conceived using assisted reproduction” O-03. Keith Siklenka, “Histone H3K4me3 is implicated in paternal epigenetic inheritance” 9:45-11:00 Morning Break and Poster Session I (judging 10-11) P-01. Emilie Brûlé, “Does IGSF1 play a role in thyroid hormone transport?” P-03. Luisina Ongaro, “Activins stimulate human follicle-stimulating hormone ß (Fshb) expression via a FOXL2-dependent mechanism in pituitaries of transgenic mice” P-05. Chirine Toufaily, “Gαq/11 and Gαs play important and distinct roles in gonadotrope cells in vivo” P-07. Brandon Vaz, “The role of X-chromosome asynapsis in the elimination of murine oocytes” P-09.
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Methyltransferase 1O Functions During Preimplantation Development to Preclude a Profound Level of Epigenetic Variation
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Developmental Biology 324 (2008) 139–150 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Developmental Biology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/developmentalbiology DNA methyltransferase 1o functions during preimplantation development to preclude a profound level of epigenetic variation M. Cecilia Cirio a, Josee Martel b, Mellissa Mann c, Marc Toppings b, Marisa Bartolomei c, Jacquetta Trasler b, J. Richard Chaillet a,⁎ a Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA b Montreal Children's Hospital of the McGill University Health Centre, Department of Pediatrics, Department of Human Genetics, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, McGill University, Montreal, Québec H3H 1P3, Canada c Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA article info abstract Article history: Most mouse embryos developing in the absence of the oocyte-derived DNA methyltransferase 1o (DNMT1o- Received for publication 11 July 2008 deficient embryos) have significant delays in development and a wide range of anatomical abnormalities. To Revised 12 September 2008 understand the timing and molecular basis of such variation, we studied pre- and post-implantation DNA Accepted 15 September 2008 methylation as a gauge of epigenetic variation among these embryos. DNMT1o-deficient embryos showed Available online 25 September 2008 extensive differences in the levels of methylation in differentially methylated domains (DMDs) of imprinted Keywords: genes at the 8-cell stage. Because of independent assortment of the methylated and unmethylated fi Imprinting chromatids created by the loss of DNMT1o, the de cient embryos were found to be mosaics of cells with Epigenetics different, but stable epigenotypes (DNA methylation patterns).
    [Show full text]