CTCF binding site classes exhibit distinct evolutionary, genomic, epigenomic and transcriptomic features

Table 1 Comparison of the density of histone marks surrounding CTCF binding sites in different occupancy classes

	LowOc-MedOc	MedOc-HighOc	LowOc-HighOc	LowOc-U	MedOc-U	HighOc-U
H3K4me1	0.02			0	0	0
H3K4me2	1.39E-08		3.14E-08	0	0	0
H3K4me3	6.59E-09		5.63E-11	0	0	0
H3K27me1	0.03		7.06E-03	0	0	0
H3K27me2	1.40E-03		0.02	5.88E-10	3.92E-06	3.98E-07
H3K27me3	0.04		2.23E-03		0.024	5.28E-04
H3K36me1		2.79E-04	7.08E-05	0	0	0
H3K36me3
H3K79me3	4.10E-05		1.90E-06	0	0	0
H3K9me1	1.24E-05		2.05E-05	0	0	0
H4K20me1				0	0	0
H2BK5me1				0	0	0
H2AK9ac	6.49E-03	0.05	1.47E-04	0	0	0
H4K12ac	6.08E-03		1.85E-04	0	0	0
H4K16ac	3.56E-04	0.04	2.34E-06	0	0	0
H2AZ	1.18E-06		1.08E-07	0	0	0

For each histone mark, the table shows the Wilcoxon one-sided rank-sum test P-values for tag density enrichment in one CTCF site class (call this Mi) relative to another class (call this Mj) as well as relative to the control U sites. Column headings represent the CTCF sites classes compared (i.e. Mi~Mj). Only the significant P-values are shown. Bold text indicates cases where the tag density for Mi was significantly greater than that for Mj, and italicized text indicates the opposite relation. For instance, in the 'LowOc-MedOc' column, the tag density for H3K27me3 is enriched in MedOc CTCF sites relative to LowOc sites and the null hypothesis was rejected with a P-value of 0.04.

ISSN: 1474-760X