Skip to main content
Fig. 6 | Genome Biology

Fig. 6

From: Protection from DNA re-methylation by transcription factors in primordial germ cells and pre-implantation embryos can explain trans-generational epigenetic inheritance

Fig. 6

IAPs possess a relatively low affinity for PGC reprogramming TFs and high affinity for non-reprogramming PGC TFs. a Bar plots showing the motif enrichment of TFs expressed in E16.5m PGCs at IAP LTR regions. b Box plots comparing the TRAP affinity of TFs with evidence of DNA methylation reprogramming in PGCs vs. TFs expressed in PGCs with no evidence of DNA methylation reprogramming capabilities. c Scatterplots comparing weighted average CpG methylation in E13.5m PGCs (y-axis) to TRAP affinities (x-axis) of putative reprogramming TFs expressed in E16.5m PGCs (left column) as well as non-reprogramming TFs expressed in E16.5m PGCs (right column). The top row of scatterplots consists only of non-VM-IAPs while the bottom row of scatterplots compares VM-IAPs to non-VM-IAPs, where a line is drawn between values from VM- and non-VM- IAPs of the same class. d Example showing DNase-seq and DNA methylation levels during PGC development at an IAP LTR that has evidence of TF binding. Tracks showing the highest TRAP affinity of the E16.5m PGC putative reprogramming TFs and of the E16.5m PGC non-reprogramming TFs, at the whole IAP, are displayed under the IAP track. e Average DNA methylation levels at DNase-seq accessible vs. inaccessible IAPs. The following P value cutoffs apply to b and e: *P < .01; **P < .001; ***P < 10−5; ****P < 10−10

Back to article page