About Enhancer
| Enhancer ID: | E_01_253 | |
| Enhancer symbol: | P2RY2 Enhancer | |
| Species: | Human | |
| Position : | chr11:72905735-72906735   |
|
| Biosample name: | MCF-7 | |
| Experiment class : | Low throughput |
| Enhancer type: | Enhancer | |
| Disease: | -- | |
| DO: | -- | |
| Mesh: | -- | |
| Distance from TSS: | >2KB | |
| Pubmed ID: | 27932455 |
| Enhancer experiment: | smFISH,ChIP,3C | |
| Enhancer experiment description: | Here we monitored the expression and localization of eRNAs derived from the enhancers of the FOXC1 and P2RY2 loci, as well as the expression of their cognate mRNAs over a time course of estrogen induction in individual MCF-7 cells by smFISH. In the uninduced state,FOXC1 and P2RY2 eRNAs were expressed at low levels, independently of MLL1 and ER . Estrogen treatment induced the transcription of eRNAs and target mRNAs with similar kinetics, and required both chromatin modiication by MLL1 and ER recruitment. Chromosome conformation capture (3C) analyses conducted in the presence or absence of enhancer-derived tran-scripts proposed that eRNAs mediate enhancer–promoter interactions (15,21,25).At this time point, 29% of antisense and 19% of sense FOXC1 eRNA–mRNA co-expressing alleles showed a separation of 100 nm or less (Figure 5B). These data show that the small percentage of active transcription sites that co-express eRNAs are infrequently transcribed within a closed enhancer–promoter loop. Furthermore, these observations suggest that looping interactions are either transient or that eRNAs are preferentially transcribed before enhancer–promoter loops are established (Figure 5C). |
About Target gene
| Target gene : | P2RY2(HP2U,P2RU1,P2U,P2U1,P2UR,P2Y2,P2Y2R) | |
| Strong evidence: | 3C | |
| Less strong evidence: | smFISH,ChIP | |
| Target gene experiment description: | Here we monitored the expression and localization of eRNAs derived from the enhancers of the FOXC1 and P2RY2 loci, as well as the expression of their cognate mRNAs over a time course of estrogen induction in individual MCF-7 cells by smFISH. In the uninduced state,FOXC1 and P2RY2 eRNAs were expressed at low levels, independently of MLL1 and ER . Estrogen treatment induced the transcription of eRNAs and target mRNAs with similar kinetics, and required both chromatin modiication by MLL1 and ER recruitment. Chromosome conformation capture (3C) analyses conducted in the presence or absence of enhancer-derived tran-scripts proposed that eRNAs mediate enhancer–promoter interactions (15,21,25).At this time point, 29% of antisense and 19% of sense FOXC1 eRNA–mRNA co-expressing alleles showed a separation of 100 nm or less (Figure 5B). These data show that the small percentage of active transcription sites that co-express eRNAs are infrequently transcribed within a closed enhancer–promoter loop. Furthermore, these observations suggest that looping interactions are either transient or that eRNAs are preferentially transcribed before enhancer–promoter loops are established (Figure 5C). |
About TF
| TF name : | -- | |
| TF experiment: | -- | |
| TF experiment description: | -- |
About Function
| Enhancer function : | eRNA accumulation at enhancer–promoter loops is not required to sustain target gene transcription. |
| Enhancer function experiment: | 3C |
| Enhancer function experiment description: |
Chromosome conformation capture (3C) analyses conducted in the presence or absence of Enhancer-derived transcripts proposed that eRNAs mediate Enhancer–promoter interactions . |
About SNP
| SNP ID: | -- | |
| SNP position: | -- |
| SNP experiment: | -- |
Enhancer associated network
The number on yellow line represents the distance between enhancer and target gene
