2014
DOI: 10.1105/tpc.114.133140
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic Perturbation of the Maize Methylome

Abstract: DNA methylation can play important roles in the regulation of transposable elements and genes. A collection of mutant alleles for 11 maize (Zea mays) genes predicted to play roles in controlling DNA methylation were isolated through forward-or reverse-genetic approaches. Low-coverage whole-genome bisulfite sequencing and high-coverage sequence-capture bisulfite sequencing were applied to mutant lines to determine context-and locus-specific effects of these mutations on DNA methylation profiles. Plants containi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
194
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 172 publications
(206 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
11
194
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The average percentages of methylation of CG, CHG and CHH contexts in leaf were 89.7%, 59.1% and 2.1%, respectively (Supplementary Table 24). The genome CG and CHG methylation levels are about the same as those in maize (86.4%, 70.9%) 33 , and are much higher than those in B. distachyon (56.5%, 35.3%) 34 and rice (44%, 24%) 35 . This is consistent with previous observations indicating a positive correlation between genome size, TE content and genomic methylation levels 36 .…”
Section: −13mentioning
confidence: 64%
“…The average percentages of methylation of CG, CHG and CHH contexts in leaf were 89.7%, 59.1% and 2.1%, respectively (Supplementary Table 24). The genome CG and CHG methylation levels are about the same as those in maize (86.4%, 70.9%) 33 , and are much higher than those in B. distachyon (56.5%, 35.3%) 34 and rice (44%, 24%) 35 . This is consistent with previous observations indicating a positive correlation between genome size, TE content and genomic methylation levels 36 .…”
Section: −13mentioning
confidence: 64%
“…Assuming that TE RNA levels accurately reflect transcription rates, this difference in experimental results indicates that the mechanisms of TE repression among meristematic and differentiated cell types are distinct. Consistent with the limited cytosine methylation changes seen in the absence of maize RPD1 (Parkinson et al 2007;Erhard et al 2013;Li et al 2014), Pol IV plays a potentially redundant role in repressing most TE transcription in whole seedlings although a fraction appear to be directly controlled by Pol IV action(s). The genomic and/or molecular features that distinguish these two general classes remain to be identified.…”
Section: Pol IV Affects Gene Regulationmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…The disparate impacts of rpd1/NRPD1A mutations in maize vs. Brassicaceae representatives are potentially related to different genomic TE contents as TE sequences are greatly expanded in maize compared to both Arabidopsis ) and B. rapa (Wang et al 2011). However, recently reported cytosine methylome profiles (Li et al 2014) indicate maize TEs are as equally well methylated in the absence of Pol IV as their Arabidopsis counterparts (Stroud et al 2013), predicting that Pol IV-dependent cytosine methylation is not required to maintain TE silencing. The developmental defects observed in rpd1 mutants are both distinct and nonheritable (Parkinson et al 2007) and therefore unlikely to be related to TE-derived mutations.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The ectopic CHH methylation may be caused by an internal balancing mechanism to compensate for the extensive loss of CHG and CG methylation found in heterochromatic TEs due to the loss of OsDDM1 function. Considering that DRM2 or RdDM seems not to be required for CHH methylation of heterochromatic or long TEs in Arabidopsis and maize (Zemach et al, 2013;Li et al, 2014), the ectopic CHH methylation in heterochromatic TEs may be mediated by a CMT2-like activity that was shown to methylate CHH in heterochromatic regions in Arabidopsis (Zemach et al, 2013). However, the osddm1a/1b mutation clearly reduced CHH methylation of small TEs (i.e.…”
Section: Function Of Osddm1 In Te and Teg Methylationmentioning
confidence: 99%