BackgroundDNA methylation patterns are initiated by de novo DNA methyltransferases DNMT3a/3b adding methyl groups to CG dinucleotides in the hypomethylated genome of early embryos. These patterns are faithfully maintained by DNMT1 during DNA replication to ensure epigenetic inheritance across generations. However, this two-step model is based on limited data.ResultsWe generated base-resolution DNA methylomes for a series of DNMT knockout embryonic stem cells, with deep coverage at highly repetitive elements. We show that DNMT1 and DNMT3a/3b activities work complementarily and simultaneously to establish symmetric CG methylation and CHH (H = A, T or C) methylation. DNMT3a/3b can add methyl groups to daughter strands after each cycle of DNA replication. We also observe an unexpected division of labor between DNMT1 and DNMT3a/3b in suppressing retrotransposon long terminal repeats and long interspersed elements, respectively. Our data suggest that mammalian cells use a specific CG density threshold to predetermine methylation levels in wild-type cells and the magnitude of methylation reduction in DNMT knockout cells. Only genes with low CG density can be induced or, surprisingly, suppressed in the hypomethylated genome. Lastly, we do not find any association between gene body methylation and transcriptional activity.ConclusionsWe show the concerted actions of DNMT enzymes in the establishment and maintenance of methylation patterns. The finding of distinct roles of DNMT1-dependent and -independent methylation patterns in genome stability and regulation of transcription provides new insights for understanding germ cell development, neuronal diversity, and transgenerational epigenetic inheritance and will help to develop next-generation DNMT inhibitors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13059-015-0685-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Epigenetic mechanisms involving DNA methylation, histone modification, histone variants and nucleosome positioning, and noncoding RNAs regulate cell-, tissue-, and developmental stage-specific gene expression by influencing chromatin structure and modulating interactions between proteins and DNA. Epigenetic marks are mitotically inherited in somatic cells and may be altered in response to internal and external stimuli. The idea that environment-induced epigenetic changes in mammals could be inherited through the germline, independent of genetic mechanisms, has stimulated much debate. Many experimental models have been designed to interrogate the possibility of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance and provide insight into how environmental exposures influence phenotypes over multiple generations in the absence of any apparent genetic mutation. Unexpected molecular evidence has forced us to reevaluate not only our understanding of the plasticity and heritability of epigenetic factors, but of the stability of the genome as well. Recent reviews have described the difference between transgenerational and intergenerational effects; the two major epigenetic reprogramming events in the mammalian lifecycle; these two events making transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of environment-induced perturbations rare, if at all possible, in mammals; and mechanisms of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in non-mammalian eukaryotic organisms. This paper briefly introduces these topics and mainly focuses on (1) transgenerational phenotypes and epigenetic effects in mammals, (2) environment-induced intergenerational epigenetic effects, and (3) the inherent difficulties in establishing a role for epigenetic inheritance in human environmental disease.

Imprinted genes are vulnerable to environmental influences during early embryonic development, thereby contributing to the onset of disease in adulthood. Monoallelic methylation at several germline imprints has been reported as DNMT1-dependent. However, which of these two epigenetic attributes, DNMT1-dependence or allelic methylation, renders imprinted genes susceptible to environmental stressors has not been determined. Herein, we developed a new approach, referred to as NORED, to identify 2468 DNMT1-dependent DNA methylation patterns in the mouse genome. We further developed an algorithm based on a genetic variation-independent approach (referred to as MethylMosaic) to detect 2487 regions with bimodal methylation patterns. Two approaches identified 207 regions, including known imprinted germline allele-specific methylation patterns (ASMs), that were both NORED and MethylMosaic regions. Examination of methylation in four independent mouse embryonic stem cell lines shows that two regions identified by both NORED and MethylMosaic (Hcn2 and Park7) did not display parent-of-origin-dependent allelic methylation. In these four F1 hybrid cell lines, genetic variation in Cast allele at Hcn2 locus introduces a transcription factor binding site for MTF-1 that may predispose Cast allelic hypomethylation in a reciprocal cross with either C57 or 129 strains. In contrast, each allele of Hcn2 ASM in J1 inbred cell line and Park7 ASM in four F1 hybrid cell lines seems to exhibit similar propensity to be either hypo- or hypermethylated, suggesting a ‘random, switchable’ ASM. Together with published results, our data on ASMs prompted us to propose a hypothesis of regional ‘autosomal chromosome inactivation (ACI)’ that may control a subset of autosomal genes. Therefore, our results open a new avenue to understand monoallelic methylation and provide a rich resource of candidate genes to examine in environmental and nutritional exposure models.