Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Mar 7;20(3):e0308896. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308896

Sequences within and upstream of the mouse Ets1 gene drive high level expression in B cells, but are not sufficient for consistent expression in T cells

Alyssa Kearly 1, Prontip Saelee 1, Jonathan Bard 1, Satrajit Sinha 1, Anne Satterthwaite 2, Lee Ann Garrett-Sinha 1,*
Editor: Roberto Mantovani3
PMCID: PMC11888140  PMID: 40053568

Abstract

The levels of transcription factor Ets1 are high in resting B and T cells, but are downregulated by signaling through antigen receptors and Toll-like receptors (TLRs). Loss of Ets1 in mice leads to excessive immune cell activation and development of an autoimmune syndrome and reduced Ets1 expression has been observed in human PBMCs in the context of autoimmune diseases. In B cells, Ets1 serves to prevent premature activation and differentiation to antibody-secreting cells. Given these important roles for Ets1 in the immune response, stringent control of Ets1 gene expression levels is required for homeostasis. However, the genetic regulatory elements that control expression of the Ets1 gene remain relatively unknown. Here we identify a topologically-associating domain (TAD) in the chromatin of B cells that includes the mouse Ets1 gene locus and describe an interaction hub that extends over 100 kb upstream and into the gene body. Additionally, we compile epigenetic datasets to find several putative regulatory elements within the interaction hub by identifying regions of high DNA accessibility and enrichment of active enhancer histone marks. Using reporter constructs, we determine that DNA sequences within this interaction hub are sufficient to direct reporter gene expression in lymphoid tissues of transgenic mice. Further analysis indicates that the reporter construct drives faithful expression of the reporter gene in mouse B cells, but variegated expression in T cells, suggesting the existence of T cell regulatory elements outside this region. To investigate how the downregulation of Ets1 transcription is associated with alterations in the epigenetic landscape of stimulated B cells, we performed ATAC-seq in resting and BCR-stimulated primary B cells and identified four regions within and upstream of the Ets1 locus that undergo changes in chromatin accessibility that correlate to Ets1 gene expression. Interestingly, functional analysis of several putative Ets1 regulatory elements using luciferase constructs suggested a high level of functional redundancy. Taken together our studies reveal a complex network of regulatory elements and transcription factors that coordinate the B cell-specific expression of Ets1.

Introduction

Autoimmune diseases are caused by the immune system attacking self-tissues. Genetic factors influence the development of autoimmune diseases and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been used to identify disease-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for many autoimmune diseases. GWAS has established that the human ETS1 gene is a susceptibility locus for multiple autoimmune diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis and others [1]. Ets1 mRNA levels are reduced in PBMCs isolated from patients with a variety of different autoimmune diseases [27]. Supporting a role for Ets1 in autoimmunity, mice lacking Ets1 develop a lupus-like autoimmune disease, with excessive B and T cell activation and secretion of IgM and IgG autoantibodies against self-antigens [811]. Cell-type-specific deletion of Ets1 has demonstrated cell-intrinsic roles for Ets1 in blocking the aberrant activation of both B and T cells [10,11].

Ets1 expression is high in resting lymphocytes [1214], but is downregulated by stimulation through antigen receptors or Toll-like receptors [1519]. Loss of Ets1 leads to increased B cell differentiation into antibody-secreting plasma cells [20] and forced expression of Ets1 blocks development of plasma cells [7,15,16,21]. Since the level of Ets1 in B cells is crucial to regulating the differentiation program, expression of the Ets1 gene must be tightly controlled. Maintenance of Ets1 expression in resting B cells relies heavily on inhibitory signaling pathways that limit the transduction of activating signals. B cells that lack expression of inhibitory signaling components such as inhibitory receptors CD22 or SiglecG, proximal kinase Lyn, or downstream phosphatases SHP-1 or SHIP-1 have increased BCR signaling and express lower levels of Ets1 mRNA and protein [16]. Our studies have shown that the low level of Ets1 in Lyn-/- B cells is not due to decreased stability of the Ets1 protein or mRNA [16]. Instead, BCR and TLR signaling result in a decrease in transcription of the Ets1 gene and this does not require new protein synthesis, implicating pre-formed transcription factors [17].

Transcriptional regulation of gene expression is controlled by three-dimensional chromatin architecture in the nucleus as well as the binding of cell-type specific transcription factors. As part of this process, the genome is partitioned into an array of chromatin loops generated by the combined actions of cohesin and CTCF proteins that define topologically-associated domains (TADs) [2224]. TADs counteract the formation of transcriptionally-silent heterochromatin domains [25,26] and also function to insulate promoters of genes within them from the influence of response elements outside the TAD [2730]. TADs are further sub-divided into sub-TAD regions that contain one or a few genes along with regulatory elements such as gene enhancers or silencers that bind specific transcription factors [2628]. Recently, the organization TAD structures in the Ets1 locus in mouse and human T cells have been published [31]. This analysis also identified a super-enhancer region located approximately 250 kb downstream of the Ets1 gene, which is required for CD4 + T helper 1 (Th1) differentiation [31]. In contrast to the situation in T cells, the genomic organization of the Ets1 locus and the regulatory elements and transcription factors that bind to them in B cells remain unknown.

To identify B cell TADs and sub-TADs around Ets1 and also regulatory elements that coordinate expression of Ets1, we examined chromatin interactions, epigenetic profiles and DNA accessibility in mouse B cells. To further validate the roles of the regulatory elements, we generated a bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) reporter construct in which eGFP expression was inserted under the direction of sequences from -113 kb to + 105 kb of the mouse Ets1 gene and observed reporter expression that recapitulated endogenous Ets1 in B cells, but did not fully recapitulate Ets1 expression in T cells. Four putative regulatory elements experience changes in accessibility upon BCR stimulation and motif analysis identified transcription factors that may bind to these regulatory elements. Transient transfection assays with numerous putative regulatory element sequences failed to detect sequences that individually activate or repress reporter gene transcription at an appreciable level. These results suggest the possibility that Ets1 gene transcription in B cells may be regulated by a network of multiple regulatory elements the coordinately stimulate gene transcription, rather than being reliant on one or a few dominant regulatory elements.

Materials and methods

Analysis of publicly-available Hi-C, ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq datasets

Hi-C data (GSE82144) [32] from resting mouse splenic B cells was visualized using the Juicebox desktop application [33]. ChIP-seq datasets analyzed include: CTCF ChIP-seq of mouse spleen cells (GSE29184) [34]; H3K4me1, H3K4me3 and H3K27ac ChIP-seq of FACS-sorted (CD3-, B220 + , CD19+) mouse splenic B cells (GSE60103) [35]; p300 ChIP-seq of resting mouse splenic B cells (GSE82144) [32]; and c-Jun and JunD ChIP-seq of mouse the CH12 B lymphoma cell line (GSE36030) [36]. ATAC-seq and RNA-seq datasets were retrieved from the ImmGen data series (GSE100738, ATAC-Seq and GSE109125, RNA-Seq) with the sorted immune cell populations [37]. The ImmGen cell populations analyzed were: bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells (HSC), bone marrow multi-potent progenitors (MPP), bone marrow common lymphoid progenitors (CLP), bone marrow pro-B cells (pro-B), bone marrow immature B cells (Imm B), total splenic B cells, splenic follicular B cells, splenic marginal zone B cells, splenic germinal center B cells, splenic plasma cells, naïve splenic CD4 + T cells, naïve splenic CD8 + T cells, splenic NK cells, splenic macrophages, splenic neutrophils and splenic dendritic cells (DC). Sorting parameters for these populations are listed in Yoshida et al [37]. In addition, ATAC-seq data from FACS-sorted (CD3-, B220 + , CD19+) mouse splenic B cells was also used (GSE60103) [35]. The JASPAR 2020 database of transcription factor binding sites was used to identify transcription factor motifs [38].

For human cells, the following datasets were analyzed: CD20 + B cell CTCF ChIP-seq (GSE29611) [39]; CD19 + B cell H3K27ac ChIP-seq (GSE18927) [40]; GM12878 B lymphoma H3K27ac ChIP-seq (GSE51334) and naïve B cell ATAC-seq (GSE118253) [41]. All of the datasets were visualized using the UCSC Genome Browser [42].

BAC recombineering and transgenic mouse generation

The RP23-350A20 BAC (BACPAC Resources) was recombineered according to the protocol previous described [43] using a targeting construct that contained eGFP, an SV40 polyA sequence and a neomycin/kanamycin resistance cassette between homology arms to replace the first exon of the Ets1 gene. Clones were selected and PCR-tested for eGFP insertion. FLP-FRT was induced to remove the neomycin/kanamycin resistance cassette. The final recombined BAC contains the eGFP cDNA and SV40 polyA sequence inserted in place of the first exon of the major isoform of Ets1 (mouse Ets1 isoform 1) and under the control of Ets1 gene regulatory elements.

The recombined BAC was microinjected into fertilized C57BL/6 mouse eggs by the Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (RPCCC) Gene Targeting and Transgenic Facility. BAC Transgenic (BACtg) mice were identified by PCR genotyping. All mice were house at RPCCC Lab Animal Shared Resource and experiments were performed in accordance with Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee protocol number UB1104M. Mice were euthanized by CO2 inhalation followed by cervical dislocation.

BACtg flow cytometry

Single-cell suspensions were made from the spleens of wild type and BACtg animals and stained with Ghost Dye Violet 510 (Tonbo Biosciences) and fluorescent dye-conjugated antibodies against B lineage surface markers, including B220, CD19, CD21, CD23, CD80, PDL2, Fas, PNA, CD138, and CD98, or T lineage surface markers, including CD3, CD4, and CD8. Cells were fixed and permeabilized for intracellular staining and stained with unconjugated rabbit monoclonal anti-Ets1 (D8O8A, Cell Signaling Technologies) or rabbit monoclonal IgG isotype control, followed by PE-conjugated anti-rabbit IgG. Data was collected using a LSR II flow cytometer and analyzed using FlowJo software. Samples were gated on singlets and live cells, and specific populations were identified based on marker expression.

BACtg B cell isolation, stimulation, and qPCR

Splenic B cells from BACtg and wild type littermate control mice were isolated using the EasySep Mouse B Cell Isolation Kit (StemCell Technologies) and rested for 30 minutes and then either left unstimulated or stimulated with the addition of 10 μg/ml goat anti-IgM F(ab’)2 crosslinking antibody (Jackson ImmunoResearch) for two hours before RNA isolation. Primers for qPCR include Ets1 mRNA (F-AGTCTTGTCAGTCCTTTATCAGC, R-TTTTCCTCTTTCCCCATCTCC); Ets1-pre-mRNA Ets1 pre-mRNA set A (F-TCGATCTCAAGCCGACTCTC, R-GTCTTGGGCCACCAACAGTC); eGFP (F-CCATCTTCTTCAAGGACGAC, R-GCCATGATATAGACGTTGTGG); and beta-actin (F-GCAGCTCCTTCGTTGCCGGTC, R-TTTGCACATGCCGGAGCCGTTG).

Mouse B cell ATAC-seq and identification of DARs

B cells were isolated from wild type mouse spleens and stimulated via the BCR for two hours. 100,000 cells from each sample were pelleted and stored frozen prior to ATAC-seq (Active Motif). Illumina NextSeq500 sequencing was used to generate paired-end 42 bp sequencing reads that were mapped to the mm10 genome build using the BWA algorithm with default settings [44]. Duplicate reads were removed and analysis was performed on reads that passed Illumina’s purity filter, aligned with a maximum of 2 mismatches, and mapped uniquely. Data was normalized across samples by reducing read count to that of the smallest sample. Peaks were called using the MACS2 algorithm [45]. DARs were identified by comparing the number of sequencing tags in each region and identifying regions with greater than 2-fold differences in tag count. Gene ontology analysis of genes within 10 kb of DARs was performed using DAVID [46], limited to Gene Ontology (GO)’s biological process annotation set. De novo motif analysis was performed using HOMER’s findMotifsGenome.pl program [47]. The FIMO program within the MEME Suite of tools was used to scan the four DARs for transcription factor motifs [48]. ATAC-seq data are available in the GEO database under the accession number GSE273513.

Luciferase construct design and luciferase assays

A region of the mouse Ets1 proximal promoter of 469 bp (-451 to + 17 bp) was cloned into the pGL3-Basic firefly luciferase vector. Sequences covering regions of Sites 1-6 (defined in the Results section below) were cloned upstream of this minimal promoter fragment. In addition, a shorter fragment of the minimal promoter of 193 bp (-114 to + 59 bp) was cloned into pGL3-Basic along with shorter segments of putative regulatory regions. A20 B lymphoma cells were co-transfected with 2 μg of the firefly luciferase plasmids and 0.25 μg of pRL-Renilla luciferase plasmid using Nucleofection (Lonza) and analyzed at 24 hours after transfection. Firefly luciferase activity was normalized to Renilla luciferase activity.

Results

The 3-D chromatin organization of the mouse Ets1 gene in B cells

To define topologically-associated domains (TADs) around the mouse Ets1 gene, we examined Hi-C data from a previously-published study of resting mouse B cells [49]. This analysis showed that the mouse Ets1 gene is contained within a CTCF-flanked TAD of ~ 900 kb that stretches from -445 kb to + 452 kb from the major transcriptional start site (TSS) of Ets1 (boundaries of the TAD are shaded in aqua in Fig 1A) [34]. In addition to the Ets1 gene, this TAD contains fellow Ets family member Fli1, as well as two potassium channel-encoding genes, Kcnj1 and Kcnj5. A closer look at the contact map reveals a CTCF-flanked sub-TAD stretching from -107 kb to + 244 kb (indicated by the large aqua triangle in Fig 1B). This region contains only the Ets1 gene itself, with no other known genes. Within the Ets1 sub-TAD, there is a local hub of more intense interactions that stretches from -107 kb to the end of the Ets1 gene (approximately + 62 kb from the TSS) (denoted by the smaller aqua triangle in Fig 1B). It is likely that regulatory elements crucial for B cell-specific expression of mouse Ets1 are present within the strong interaction hub. We suspect that the CTCF binding site located at -107 kb likely functions to insulate the Ets1 promoter from regulatory elements of the Fli1 gene, which is oriented in a head-to-head manner with Ets1 and separated by 154 kb (Fig 1B). Indeed, Hi-C detects little interaction between the Fli1 promoter and sequences in the Ets1 sub-TAD.

Fig 1. Identification of the Ets1 TAD and sub-TAD.

Fig 1

Chromatin interaction maps of mouse B cell Hi-C data showing the TAD (A) and sub-TAD (B) that include the Ets1 gene. The aqua triangles in (B) denote the sub-TAD within the TAD and the interaction hotspot discussed in the text. Below the interaction maps is CTCF ChIP-seq data from splenocytes. The aqua highlights denote the TAD and sub-TAD boundaries that overlap with strong CTCF enrichment. FIMO was used to identify CTCF motifs at the peaks of CTCF binding and are depicted below the CTCF ChIP-seq profiles. The CTCF binding site located at the down-stream boundary of the sub-TAD lacks a consensus CTCF motif and hence no sequence is shown at the bottom for this site.

A region extending from -113 kb to + 105 kb from the mouse Ets1 TSS -directs expression in B cells

Prior transgenic mouse studies have shown that sequences located from -5.3 kb to + 9 kb from the TSS of Ets1 were not sufficient to drive expression of a transgene in B cells or other lymphoid lineages [50]. To identify sequences that drive B cell-specific expression of Ets1, we generated BAC transgenic mice harboring a 219 kb piece of mouse DNA including sequences from -113 kb upstream of the Ets1 gene (stretching just beyond the CTCF-bound boundary) to + 105 kb downstream of the transcriptional start site. This BAC construct contains the entire local hub of robust interactions around the Ets1 gene (Fig 2A). The first exon of the Ets1 gene was replaced with an eGFP cDNA, followed by a stop codon and an SV40 polyA signal, allowing eGFP expression from the Ets1 promoter under the direction of putative regulatory elements located within the BAC (Fig 2A). Analysis of both mRNA and protein showed high eGFP expression in lymphoid tissues, including the thymus, spleen, and lymph nodes, where B and T lymphocytes are abundant and where Ets1 is normally expressed at high levels (Fig 2B,2C). Non-lymphoid tissues such as the brain and kidneys showed much lower expression as expected.

Fig 2. Design of a BAC-derived reporter construct to identify sequences required for lymphoid Ets1 expression.

Fig 2

(A) Hi-C data from mouse B cells shows that the RP23-350A20 BAC (whose extent is denoted by the light beige block flanked by dotted lines) contains the entire hotspot of most frequent interactions (smaller blue triangle in the top part of the figure). The first exon of Ets1 was replaced in the BAC by eGFP cDNA via recombineering. eGFP reporter expression is under the control of the putative response elements contained with the BAC. (B) qPCR and (C) Western blot to show expression of Ets1 and GFP in various tissues of BACtg mice and non-transgenic mice.

To compare the potential overlap in the Ets1 and eGFP expression in these BACtg mice at a cellular level, we performed intracellular flow cytometry using an antibody specific for Ets1. B220 + CD19 + B cells from both wild type mice and BACtg mice showed high levels of intracellular Ets1 expression compared to isotype control staining (Fig 3A, bottom). Mature B cell subsets within this B220 + CD19 + population, including CD23hiCD21lo follicular B cells, CD23loCD21hi marginal zone B cells, and Fas+PNA + germinal center B cells, all showed strong positive staining for both Ets1 and eGFP (Fig 3B). Ets1 is downregulated upon B cell differentiation to plasma cells [12,15,51]. In keeping with this, eGFP levels were lower in B220loCD138 + CD98 + plasma cells than in B220 + CD19 + B cells of BACtg mice (Fig 3B). However, in contrast to the B cells, eGFP expression did not fully reflect Ets1 expression in the T cell populations of BACtg mice. While both CD3 + CD4 + and CD3 + CD8 + T cells had uniformly high staining for intracellular Ets1, GFP expression showed a broad range in these populations (Fig 3B), indicating variegation of BACtg expression.

Fig 3. Expression of the BACtg eGFP in lymphoid cells.

Fig 3

(A) Flow cytometry analysis of intracellular Ets1 and eGFP in gated B220 + CD19 + B cells from spleen of wild-type non-transgenic (WT) and BAC transgenic (BACtg) mice. The top figure shows GFP staining while the bottom figure shows intracellular Ets1 staining. (B) Flow cytometry plots of intracellular Ets1 versus eGFP staining in splenic B cell subsets: follicular B cells (B220 + CD19 + CD23hiCD21lo), marginal zone B cells (B220 + CD19 + CD23loCD21hi), germinal center B cells (B220 + CD19 + Fas+PNA+), memory B cells (B220 + CD19 + CD80 + PDL2+), plasma cells (B220loCD138 + CD98+), CD4 T cells (CD3 + CD4+) and CD8 T cells (CD3 + CD8+).

BCR stimulation induces the downregulation of Ets1 in B cells, mainly through a decrease in Ets1 gene transcription [16,17]. To determine if the response elements required for this phenomenon are within the 219 kb of the BAC, B cells from the BACtg animals were isolated and stimulated ex vivo, and expression of Ets1 and eGFP were assessed. As shown in S1 Fig, stimulation by the BCR resulted in a decrease in Ets1 pre-mRNA and mRNA in B cells. Because the pre-mRNA is a short-lived product in the cells, its measurement serves as a surrogate for the transcriptional level of the Ets1 gene. In the BACtg B cells, eGFP mRNA was similarly downregulated in response to BCR stimulation, although not quite as dramatically. We surmise that the attenuated downregulation of eGFP compared to Ets1 is due to a difference in mRNA stability of the two transcripts [16,52]. Overall, eGFP expression in the mature B cell populations of these BACtg mice recapitulates that of endogenous Ets1 under both basal conditions and upon BCR stimulation.

Multiple putative regulatory elements have the potential to regulate Ets1

To identify candidate regulatory elements that might control Ets1 expression in mouse B cells, we examined epigenetic characteristics of regions included in the BAC transgene in more detail. We identified regions that had open chromatin, as defined by peaks of ATAC-seq accessibility in mouse B cells (highlighted in aqua in Fig 4A). H3K4me3 histone methylation, a mark of active promoters, was enriched at the TSS. H3K4me1 histone methylation and H3K27ac histone acetylation, both marks of active regulatory regions [53], were enriched at numerous DNA segments upstream and within the Ets1 gene. On the other hand, regions downstream of the Ets1 gene did not harbor any regions that showed enrichment for H3K27Ac or H3K4me1 in B cells. These observations, combined with the Hi-C data shown in Fig 1 and the BAC transgenic data shown in Figs 2, 3, suggest that in mouse B cells Ets1 is likely regulated by DNA sequences upstream and within the gene itself, rather than sequences located downstream of the gene.

Fig 4. The Ets1 sub-TAD region contains several putative response elements.

Fig 4

(A) Genome Browser image depicting B cell epigenetic profiles within the Ets1 sub-TAD. Datasets shown include mouse B cell ATAC-seq (accessible chromatin) and ChIP-seq for H3K27ac (active response elements), H3K4me1 (active or poised response elements), CTCF (denoting the upstream sub-TAD boundary), and H3K4me3 (active promoter). Highlighted in light blue are sequences with ATAC-seq peaks and enrichment of H3K27ac and H3K4me1. Several transcript variants of the mouse Ets1 gene are shown, but the major isoform expressed in B cells is Ets1/NM_011808.3 (B) The human Ets1 gene locus in regions homologous to the mouse BACtg. DNAse I hypersensitivity is shown below. Also shown is H3K27ac ChIP-seq (active response elements) from GM12878 B lymphoma cells, which identifies seven discrete regions of enrichment (green highlights labeled 1-7). Two transcript variants are shown, but the major isoform expressed in B cells is Ets1/NM_005238.4.

The BAC transgenic mice have variegated expression of eGFP in T cell populations, suggesting that the BAC lacks all the elements required for reproducible expression of Ets1 in T cells. In contrast to B cells which lack putative regulatory elements downstream of the Ets1 gene, ATAC-seq data from mouse T cell populations shows that T cells have accessible sites downstream of the Ets1 gene (highlighted in aqua in S2 Fig). These sites are located beyond the downstream regions included in the BAC (highlighted in yellow in S2 Fig) and could represent T cell-specific enhancers required for optimal and sustained expression. Since some of the T cells in BACtg mice express high levels of GFP, the 219 kb region of the BAC must encompass regulatory elements that can induce expression in T cells. However, these elements appear to be insufficient to prevent spreading of heterochromatin into the Ets1 locus in T cells thus resulting in variegated expression of the transgene. Recently a region located ~ 250 kb downstream of Ets1 was shown to function as a multi-enhancer for mouse Th1 cells [31].

While peaks of H3K27Ac and H3K4me1 histone marks were discrete in regions 5’ to the Ets1 gene, there was broad enrichment of these marks across the body of the mouse Ets1 gene (Fig 4A). To better define potentially important regulatory regions within the Ets1 gene itself, we examined histone marks in a human B cell line GM12878 that expresses Ets1. As shown in Fig 4B, GM12878 cells have a more discrete pattern of enrichment of H3K27Ac at seven specific regions within and around the human Ets1 gene. The sever regions were designated Sites 1-7 and contained regions of DNA sequence conservation between mouse and human, supporting the idea that they may be functionally important (S3 Fig). These regions of H3K27Ac enrichment are characterized by the presence of DNAse I hypersensitivity (Fig 4B). Site 4 corresponds to the Ets1 proximal promoter and beginning of intron 1, sequences previously tested in transgenic mice and shown to not mediate lymphoid-specific expression [50]. Thus, this region was not further analyzed. Site 1 encompasses the CTCF binding peaks located at -104 kb upstream of the mouse Ets1 promoter. Examining the location of SNPs that have been associated with lupus, we found they cluster in two regions, upstream near Site 1 and within the Ets1 gene near Site 7 and sequences downstream of it (S4 Fig). These sites are distant from the previously-described T cell-specific super-enhancer region of Ets1, which was reported to be enriched for SNPs associated with allergy [31]. In summary, there are multiple potential regulatory elements found within and upstream of the mouse Ets1 gene that may be crucial for B cell-specific expression.

Chromatin patterns in resting B cells versus plasma cells

Analysis of previously-published RNA-seq data from sorted purified mouse bone marrow progenitors [37] shows that Ets1 is expressed at low levels in hematopoietic stem cells (HSC), multi-potent progenitors (MPP) and common lymphoid progenitors (CLP), but is elevated once cells commit to the B cell lineage and again reduced in fully-differentiated plasma cells (PC) (Fig 5A). Open chromatin patterns assessed by ATAC-seq in the same sorted populations showed that there were differences in the regions of open chromatin between resting follicular (FO) B cells, where Ets1 levels are high, and PC, where Ets1 levels are low (Fig 5B). The ATAC-seq peaks located near the sub-TAD boundary where CTCF binds (-100 to -106 kb region) and the ATAC-seq peaks located in the proximal promoter of Ets1 were equally present in both FO B cells and PC. When examining the other ATAC-seq peaks, we found that peaks located at approximately -87 kb, -44 kb, -16 kb, -10 kb, + 39 kb and + 44 kb were strong in B cells, but reduced in PC (Fig 5B, blue highlighting). The differences in chromatin accessibility at these regions may indicate the presence of regulatory elements bound by activating transcription factors promoting Ets1 expression in B cells.

Fig 5. Differences in Ets1 expression in B cell subsets correlate with changes in chromatin accessibility.

Fig 5

(A) Relative expression levels of Ets1 in sort-purified cells at various stages in the differentiation from hematopoietic stem cells to mature B cells and to plasma cells based on RNA-seq data from the ImmGen immunocyte RNA-seq project (GSE109125). (B) ATAC-seq profiles for follicular (FO B) versus plasma cells (PC), based on ImmGen ATAC-seq data (GSE100738), within the sequences included in the RP23-350A20 BAC. Blue highlighted regions mark six areas with differential ATAC-seq peaks in FO B cells versus PC. Also shown are H3K27Ac peaks from bulk CD3-, B220 + , CD19 + splenic B cells.

Putative regulatory elements within and upstream of the Ets1 gene change in accessibility upon BCR stimulation

As mouse Ets1 gene transcription is decreased in response to BCR stimulation and this effect is mediated by response elements within the BAC, we explored changes in chromatin accessibility in B cells in response to BCR stimulation. The downregulation of Ets1 gene transcription occurs early after activation, within 2 hours of BCR engagement [16]. We therefore generated ATAC-seq datasets for resting mouse B cells and B cells stimulated for 2 hours with a BCR crosslinking antibody. Regions that experienced a two-fold or greater change in accessibility between resting and stimulated B cells were deemed as differentially accessible regions (DARs) (Fig 6A). Upon stimulation, changes in chromatin accessibility were induced genome-wide, with 2259 DARs increasing and 598 DARs decreasing in accessibility. The disproportionate amount of DARs increasing in accessibility versus those decreasing is in line with previous studies of immune cell ex vivo stimulation [54,55]. Genes within 10 kb of DARs that gained or lost accessibility were found to be functionally associated with immune responses and signal transduction (Fig 6B). Motif enrichment analysis revealed that DARs that gained accessibility frequently contained binding sites for AP-1 and NF-κB proteins, which are downstream effectors of pathways activated by BCR signaling, while those that lost accessibility were most highly enriched for the Ets1 motif (Fig 6C). Thus, Ets1 or other members of the Ets gene family may show decreased expression or activity in stimulated B cells. The loss of Ets1 binding in BCR-stimulated B cells is consistent with the decreased transcription of the Ets1 gene upon BCR stimulation. However, it is also likely that BCR-induced phosphorylation of the Ets1 protein, which has been shown to decrease its DNA binding activity and in T cells leads to its nuclear export [56,57], contributes to loss of Ets1 binding in stimulated B cells.

Fig 6. Identification of differentially-accessible regions (DARs) in response to BCR stimulation.

Fig 6

(A) Schematic of the experimental layout. Total splenic B cells from wild-type C57BL/6 mice were isolated and either left unstimulated or stimulated for 2 hours with BCR crosslinking antibody (anti-IgM). ATAC-seq was performed and DARs were identified. (B) Top seven biological processes identified by analyzing genome-wide DARs that either gained or lost accessibility upon BCR stimulation. Gene ontology analysis was performed on genes within 10 kb of DARs using the DAVID software. (C) Transcription factor binding motifs enriched in DARs that gained (left) or lost (right) accessibility with BCR stimulation. Genome-wide DAR sequences were analyzed by HOMER for de novo transcription factor motif discovery. Shown are the top 3 de novo motifs enriched in each set of DARs and the best matching known consensus motif.

Four ATAC-Seq peaks in the region contained within the BACtg were identified as DARs, with 2 gaining and 2 losing accessibility after 2 hours of BCR stimulation (Fig 7A, DARs highlighted in blue and red, respectively). These sites were located at -85 kb (included within Site 2 defined in Fig 4B), at + 36 and + 39 kb (included within Site 6) and at + 49 kb (included within Site 7) from the TSS. The changes in DNA accessibility could reflect stimulation-induced alterations in transcription factor binding. A decrease in accessibility upon stimulation could reflect the loss of binding of a transcriptional activator, while an increase in accessibility may be caused by increased binding of a transcriptional repressor. Both scenarios could lead to downregulation of Ets1 gene transcription.

Fig 7. DARs in the Ets1 gene locus contain motifs for B cell-relevant transcription factors.

Fig 7

(A) Shown are the ATAC-seq profiles in the Ets1 locus (within the region of the BAC transgene) in unstimulated (NT) and stimulated (αIgM) B cells. The third track shows the difference between the two datasets, with the positive peaks indicating sites that are more accessible in unstimulated and negative peaks indicating sites that are more accessible in stimulated B cells. DARs showing at least 2-fold changes in accessibility are highlighted blue for those that gained accessibility and highlighted in red for those that lost accessibility. (B) Close-up views of the DARs and transcription factor motifs they contain. FIMO was used to scan for transcription factor motifs within the four DARs. Depicted are the five highest scoring motifs. (C) ATAC-seq profiles compared with AP-1 subunits (c-Jun and JunD) ChIP-seq data from CH12 cells. The blue highlight denotes the + 49 kb DAR.

DNA sequences in the + 39 kb and + 49 kb DARs showed conservation with corresponding sequences in human Ets1 gene (S3 Fig). On the other hand, the other two mouse DAR sequences at -85 kb and + 36 kb didn’t show strong DNA sequence conservation, although these DARs were located within Sites 2 and 6 that did have regions of conserved sequence. To identify transcription factors that may bind to the four DAR sites, we used the FIMO program to scan the sequences for DNA-binding motifs. The five strongest motif matches for each site are mapped in Fig 7B. Transcription factors sites found within the DARs that lose accessibility after BCR stimulation include those for NF-κB proteins, SpiC, Smad proteins and Irf5, among others. Both sites that gained accessibility contained motifs for AP-1 family members and for Srebf2, a sterol RE-binding protein (Fig 7B). ChIP-seq data from the CH12 mouse B cell lymphoma line indicates that both c-Jun and JunD can bind at the + 49 kb DAR site that gains accessibility (Fig 7C) [36]. With the exception of Hoxd3 and Hnf4g, all of the transcription factors shown in Fig 7B are expressed in B cells [37] and could potentially be involved in regulating Ets1 transcription. These changes in chromatin accessibility that occur in response to BCR stimulation could highlight the response elements important for regulation of Ets1 expression and implicate AP-1, in particular, in its downregulation.

A selection of regulatory elements tested in transient transfections are insufficient to activate the Ets1 promoter

To determine if the potential regulatory elements identified above govern Ets1 expression, we next generated a series of luciferase reporter constructs with putative regulatory elements cloned upstream of the Ets1 minimal promoter (Fig 8). We generated two sets of constructs. In the first set, a 469 bp fragment of the Ets1 minimal promoter (451 bp to + 18 bp from the TSS) was cloned along with putative regulatory element fragments containing regions of Sites 1-3 and 5-6 (shown as blue boxes in Fig 8). The second set of constructs was more focused and included a smaller fragment of the Ets1 promoter (–114 bp to + 60 bp from the TSS) along with shorter segments of the putative regulatory elements (shown in green boxes in Fig 8). For the second set of constructs, we chose elements that were located in regions of H3K27ac enrichment and that were more accessible in either resting B cells or plasma cells (as highlighted in Fig 5B), assuming that differences in chromatin accessibility would reflect the high and low expression of Ets1 in these cell types.

Fig 8. Individual putative response elements do not mediate strong activation or repression in transient transfection assays.

Fig 8

(A) ATAC-seq profiles of follicular (FO) B cells and plasma cells (PC) in the Ets1 locus (the region contained within the BAC transgene). Highlighted in light blue are larger fragments equivalent to Sites 1-3 and 5-7 that were incorporated into luciferase constructs. Highlighted in bright green are small regions containing differentially-accessible regions comparing follicular B cells to plasma cells (as shown in Fig 5B). Highlighted in pink is the region surrounding the proximal promoter and part of first intron that were previously tested in transgenic mice and shown to be insufficient for mediating lymphocyte-specific expression. (B) General schematic of the design of the luciferase constructs. (C-D) A20 cells were transfected with firefly luciferase plasmids containing the Ets1 promoter alone or with the indicated response elements, or with empty vector, along with eF1α promoter Renilla luciferase internal control plasmid. Luciferase activity was measured 24 hours after transfection. Firefly luciferase activity was normalized to Renilla luciferase activity, then values were set relative to the plasmid with the Ets1 promoter alone. Significance was determined by one-way ANOVA. N = 2-5 replicates for each transfection.

The reporter constructs were transfected into the A20 mouse B lymphoma cell line, which expresses Ets1 and downregulates it transcriptionally in response to BCR stimulation similar to primary B cells [16,17]. Out of the putative regulatory elements tested, ranging from -110 kb upstream to + 49 kb downstream of the Ets1 TSS, none showed a strong ability to activate expression (Fig 8C,8D), although some sequences appeared able to repress transcription. The strongest activity was found with sequences in Site 2 that were able to stimulate transcription modestly at approximately 1.5-fold over the promoter alone (Fig 8C). Given that none of these sequences alone was able to direct high level expression of a reporter gene in B cells, these data suggest that Ets1 may be regulated by a combinatorial network of response elements that cooperate to stimulate gene expression in B cells.

Discussion

In mice, loss of Ets1 leads to autoimmune disease with inappropriate activation of B cells, including autoreactive B cells, and their differentiation into plasma cells that secrete antibodies [8,15,16]. Numerous autoimmune disease-associated SNPs map near the human Ets1 gene [1] and decreased Ets1 expression has been found in immune cells from autoimmune disease patients [27,58,59]. Given that aberrant expression of the Ets1 gene is found in autoimmune diseases, it is important to understand the regulatory mechanisms controlling its expression pattern.

Previous studies to examine cell-type specific regulation of the Ets1 gene focused on sequences ranging from -5.3 kb to + 9 kb with respect to the major transcriptional start site of the gene. However, these sequences fail to drive lymphocyte expression of a reporter gene in transgenic mice [50]. To determine regulatory elements for Ets1 in B cells, we first identified an 835 kb topologically-associated domain (TAD) flanked by CTCF binding sites that contains the mouse Ets1 and other genes. This large TAD region includes a smaller 289 kb CTCF-flanked sub-TAD containing only the Ets1 gene. Within the sub-TAD, Hi-C analysis shows that B cells have an interaction hotspot extending from approximately -110 kb to the end of the final exon of Ets1. The TAD structure of the mouse Ets1 gene is conserved in CD4 + T cells, as shown by Chandra et al [31].

We generated a BAC-transgenic reporter system carrying sequences from -113 kb to + 105 kb from the Ets1 TSS, which contains the Hi-C interaction hotspot of Ets1. Sequences in the BAC transgene recapitulated well the expression of Ets1 in B cells, indicating that all regulatory elements needed for B cell expression are present within the interaction hotspot. B cell activation by BCR crosslinking or incubation with TLR ligands leads to downregulation of Ets1 and this is mediated mainly at the level of gene transcription and does not require new protein synthesis [16,17]. The sequences contained in the BACtg are sufficient to mediate downregulation of the GFP reporter in response to BCR stimulation. In contrast to the pattern in B cells, the expression of eGFP in T cells from BACtg mice was variegated, suggesting the existence of further T cell-specific enhancers outside the BAC segment. Variegation of gene expression is typically due to stochastic spread of heterochromatin in a subset of cells. Thus, there may be sequences located downstream of the 3’ end of the BAC that are required in T cells, but not B cells, to prevent heterochromatin spread. A previously-described super-enhancer segment located ~ 250 kb downstream of Ets1 was shown to be essential for maximal Ets1 expression in double positive thymocytes and in Th1 cells and for proper Th1 cell differentiation [31]. This super-enhancer region is not present in the BACtg and its absence may lead to variegated expression of the GFP marker in T cells. However, it is important to note that there is also a region of accessible chromatin in T cells located at approximately + 120 kb from the Ets1 TSS that is missing from the BACtg (see S2 Fig). This sequence could also play a role in regulation of Ets1 expression in T cells.

To identify potential regulatory elements of Ets1, we examined epigenetic datasets from B cells and defined seven broad regions that have properties of regulatory sequences (Sites 1-7). All seven of these sites have regions with high DNA sequence homology between the mouse and human genomes. However, these large regions of sequence showed only weak activity in a luciferase reporter assay in A20 B lymphoma cells. To refine our analysis, we compared open chromatin regions in follicular B cells, which express high levels of Ets1, to open chromatin regions in plasma cells, which have very low levels of Ets1. This analysis identified 6 regions with differential accessibility, two of which overlapped with sequences in Sites 1-7. We tested these six shorter segments in luciferase assays, but they also failed to mediate strong activation of the promoter. Therefore, we did not identify any regions that were able to strongly activate or repress expression of a reporter gene in transient transfection assays. This result suggests the possibility that transcription of the Ets1 gene is more complicated and relies on the combinatorial action of multiple regulatory regions that must function cooperatively.

Since sequences in the BACtg were sufficient to mediate down-regulation of Ets1 gene transcription upon BCR stimulation, we identified differentially-accessible regions (DARs) in the chromatin of stimulated and unstimulated B cells. In the region surrounding the Ets1 locus, four DAR regions were identified and three of these overlapped with sequences in Sites 1-7. The two sites that gained accessibility after stimulation contained motifs for AP-1 family members. AP-1 motifs were also enriched globally in sites that gained accessibility with stimulation, in line with other studies examining stimulation-responsive chromatin and gene expression that have implicated AP-1 in mediating early genome-wide changes [60, 61]. AP-1 is activated downstream of MAPK pathways, particularly JNK and ERK, and we have previously demonstrated that JNK activity is required for Ets1 downregulation [16]. Binding of AP-1 subunits c-Jun and JunD was detected at the + 49 DAR in CH12 B lymphoma cells. While AP-1 proteins often serve to activate gene expression, considerable evidence shows that they can also serve as repressors of transcription in appropriate contexts [6266]. Thus, recruitment of AP-1 proteins to the -85 kb and + 49 kb DAR regions might serve to inhibit Ets1 gene transcription after BCR stimulation. Further studies will be needed to fully determine the role of AP-1 family proteins in the regulation of Ets1 expression.

The two regions that lost accessibility upon stimulation could represent regulatory elements bound by transcription factors responsible for maintaining Ets1 expression in resting B cells. These two regions contained potential binding sites for a variety of transcription factors including Smad proteins, NFκB family members, and Ets family member SpiC. SpiC is a member of the Ets family that has been shown to be a negative regulator of B cell function and could potentially play a role in regulation of Ets1 expression [67]. Canonical NFκB proteins are sequestered in the cytoplasm in the resting state and hence seem unlikely to mediate basal expression of Ets1 in resting B cells. On the other hand, it is possible that non-canonical NFκB signaling, such as that triggered by the BAFF receptor or CD40 receptor, contributes to the maintaining Ets1 expression in resting B cells. The Smad2/3/4 complex is activated downstream of TGFβ signaling, which has been shown to suppress B cell responses through upregulation of inhibitory signaling components [68], and mice lacking the receptor TGFβ RII have hyper-responsive B cells [69]. Therefore, the TFGβ signaling pathway is an attractive possibility for regulating basal levels of Ets1 in resting B cells. Future studies on potential roles for Smad proteins and non-canonical NFκB proteins will be important to determine whether they are involved in maintaining Ets1 in resting B cells.

We evaluated the activity of putative enhancer regions using transient transfection assays with a luciferase reporter gene. While such assays can provide valuable insights, they have limitations, including the lack of native chromatin context. Furthermore, our assays did not assess potential cooperativity between putative regulatory regions. Notably, we did not identify any enhancer regions capable of stimulating transcription in the transient transfection assays. Future studies will more effectively examine the roles of individual regulatory elements by employing CRISPR/Cas9-mediated modifications to delete and/or mutate putative enhancer segments within their natural chromosomal context.

The transcription factors responsible for maintaining high levels of Ets1 expression in resting B cells remain unclear. Our previous work showed that Foxo3a is not required for basal Ets1 expression or its downregulation upon activation [17]. Both BCR and TLR ligation reduce Ets1 expression in B cells, and we have demonstrated that IKK2 signaling is essential for this process [17]. However, neither RelA nor cRel is individually necessary for Ets1 downregulation. Ongoing studies aim to identify the specific transcription factors involved in maintaining high Ets1 levels in resting B cells, as well as those responsible for its downregulation in activated B cells.

Overall, in this report we have analyzed the regions surrounding the mouse Ets1 gene and determined that a BAC transgene carrying sequences from −113 kb to + 105 kb from the TSS is sufficient for high level and reproducible expression of a reporter gene in B cells. Unexpectedly, this region is not sufficient for maintaining consistent expression of the reporter gene in T cells and instead resulted in variegated expression in both CD4 and CD8 T cells. Therefore, there are differences in the regulatory sequences required for optimal expression in B and T cells. Further analysis of epigenetic marks and the comparison of open chromatin in resting B cells versus activated B cells as well as in follicular B cells versus plasma cells resulted in the identification of numerous regions with features of regulatory elements that could participate in controlling Ets1 expression in B cells. However, none of the elements was sufficient by itself to strongly activate or repress transcription in transient transfection assays, suggesting that Ets1 may be regulated by a network of several regulatory elements located upstream and within its introns. One limitation worth pointing out is the episomal nature and the lack of intact chromatin conformations in plasmid-based reporters that were utilized in this report. Further studies are needed to fully dissect the Ets1 cis-regulatory network and the role it may play in B cell activation.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Sequences within the RP23-350A20 BAC can mediate the BCR-induced decrease in transcription from the Ets1 promoter.

Splenic B cells were isolated from wild type and BACtg mice, and were incubated with BCR crosslinking antibody for 2 hrs. Ets1 mRNA and pre-mRNA levels as well as GFP mRNA levels were measured using qPCR and were normalized to beta-actin. N = 2 for each condition.

(TIF)

pone.0308896.s001.tif (335.5KB, tif)
S2 Fig. ATAC-seq shows that T cells contain regions of open chromatin that lie outside the region of the BACtg.

(B) ATAC-seq profiles for B cells, CD4 T cells, and CD8 T cells within the Ets1 sub-TAD. The genomic region contained in the BAC transgene is highlighted in yellow. Highlighted in aqua are accessible sites outside of the BAC that may be T cell-specific Ets1 response elements.

(TIF)

pone.0308896.s002.tif (1.2MB, tif)
S3 Fig. Sequence conservation between mouse and human genes encoding Ets1 in regions with putative response elements.

Genome Browser image depicting the ATAC-seq peaks in follicular (FO) B cells and plasma cells (PC). Orange highlighted regions are regions within Sites 1-7 that show strong sequence homology between mouse and human. Underneath are shown BLAT alignments for these segments. DNA sequence homologies outside Sites 1-7 are not shown. Also shown are the locations of the four DAR regions identified in Fig 7A, with the + 39 and + 49 kb DARs showing significant sequence conservation, while the -85 and + 36 kb DARs lack such conservation.

(TIF)

pone.0308896.s003.tif (469.9KB, tif)
S4 Fig. Locations of lupus-associated SNPs in the human Ets1 gene.

Genome Browser image depicting ATAC-seq peaks in human CD19 + B cells (top) and the H3K27Ac peaks from human GM12878 B lymphoma cells (the same peaks used to define Sites 1-7). At the bottom are shown positions of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) associated SNPs in the gene. Also shown is the location of the previously-defined Ets1 super-enhancer region where many allergy-associated SNPs are localized [31].

(TIF)

pone.0308896.s004.tif (533.2KB, tif)

Acknowledgments

We thank Alex Glather, Akinsola Oyelakin and Dr. Yungki Park (all at State University of New York at Buffalo) for helpful discussions relevant to this study. We thank Kirsten Smalley for help with animal husbandry.

Data Availability

The ATAC-seq datasets for unstimulated B cells and BCR-stimulated B cells collected for this study are publicly available in NCBI’s Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under accession number GSE273513. All other ATAC-seq, ChIP-seq and Hi-Seq datasets analyzed in this manuscript were data collected by other research groups and are all available in the GEO database under the following accession numbers: GSE82144 [32]; GSE29184 [34]; GSE60103 [35]; GSE36030 [36], GSE100738 [37]; GSE109125 [37], GSE29611 [39]; GSE18927 [40]; GSE51334; and GSE118253 [41].

Funding Statement

The funding for this project was from grant R01 AI122720 funded by the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Garrett-Sinha LA, Kearly A, Satterthwaite AB. The role of the transcription factor Ets1 in lupus and other autoimmune diseases. Crit Rev Immunol. 2016;36(6):485–510. doi: 10.1615/CritRevImmunol.2017020284 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Shan S, Dang J, Li J, Yang Z, Zhao H, Xin Q, et al. Ets1 variants confer susceptibility to ankylosing spondylitis in Han Chinese. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16(2):R87. doi: 10.1186/ar4530 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Li Y, Sun L, Lu W, Hu W, Gao J, Cheng Y, et al. Expression analysis of Ets1 gene in peripheral blood mononuclear cells with systemic lupus erythematosus by real-time reverse transcription PCR. Chin Med J (Engl). 2010;123(16):2287–8. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.2010.16.025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yang W, Shen N, Ye D-Q, Liu Q, Zhang Y, Qian X-X, et al. Genome-wide association study in Asian populations identifies variants in Ets1 and WDFY4 associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. PLoS Genet. 2010;6(2):e1000841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000841 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wei L, Zhou Q, Hou S, Bai L, Liu Y, Qi J, et al. MicroRNA-146a and Ets-1 gene polymorphisms are associated with pediatric uveitis. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e91199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091199 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Xiang N, Li X-P, Li X-M, Wang G-S, Tao J-H, Pan H-F, et al. Expression of Ets-1 and FOXP3 mRNA in CD4(+)CD25 (+) T regulatory cells from patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin Exp Med. 2014;14(4):375–81. doi: 10.1007/s10238-013-0263-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Zhang R, Pan B, Li Y, Li X. SNP rs4937333 in the miRNA-5003-binding site of the Ets1 3’-UTR decreases Ets1 expression. Front Genet. 2019;10:581. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00581 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wang D, John SA, Clements JL, Percy DH, Barton KP, Garrett-Sinha LA. Ets-1 deficiency leads to altered B cell differentiation, hyperresponsiveness to TLR9 and autoimmune disease. Int Immunol. 2005;17(9):1179–91. doi: 10.1093/intimm/dxh295 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mouly E, Chemin K, Nguyen HV, Chopin M, Mesnard L, Leite-de-Moraes M, et al. The Ets-1 transcription factor controls the development and function of natural regulatory T cells. J Exp Med. 2010;207(10):2113–25. doi: 10.1084/jem.20092153 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kim CJ, Lee C-G, Jung J-Y, Ghosh A, Hasan SN, Hwang S-M, et al. The transcription factor Ets1 suppresses T follicular helper type 2 cell differentiation to halt the onset of systemic lupus erythematosus. Immunity. 2018;49(6):1034-1048.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2018.10.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Sunshine A, Goich D, Stith A, Sortino K, Dalton J, Metcalfe S, et al. Ets1 controls the development of B cell autoimmune responses in a cell-intrinsic manner. Immunohorizons. 2019;3(7):331–40. doi: 10.4049/immunohorizons.1900033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bhattacharya D, Cheah MT, Franco CB, Hosen N, Pin CL, Sha WC, et al. Transcriptional profiling of antigen-dependent murine B cell differentiation and memory formation. J Immunol. 2007;179(10):6808–19. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.10.6808 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hollenhorst PC, Jones DA, Graves BJ. Expression profiles frame the promoter specificity dilemma of the Ets family of transcription factors. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(18):5693–702. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh906 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kassambara A, Rème T, Jourdan M, Fest T, Hose D, Tarte K, et al. GenomicScape: an easy-to-use web tool for gene expression data analysis. Application to investigate the molecular events in the differentiation of B cells into plasma cells. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11(1):e1004077. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004077 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.John SA, Clements JL, Russell LM, Garrett-Sinha LA. Ets-1 regulates plasma cell differentiation by interfering with the activity of the transcription factor Blimp-1. J Biol Chem. 2008;283(2):951–62. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M705262200 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Luo W, Mayeux J, Gutierrez T, Russell L, Getahun A, Müller J, et al. A balance between B cell receptor and inhibitory receptor signaling controls plasma cell differentiation by maintaining optimal Ets1 levels. J Immunol. 2014;193(2):909–20. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1400666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Kearly A, Ottens K, Battaglia MC, Satterthwaite AB, Garrett-Sinha LA. B cell activation results in IKK-dependent, but not c-Rel- or RelA-dependent, decreases in transcription of the B cell tolerance-inducing gene Ets1. Immunohorizons. 2022;6(11):779–89. doi: 10.4049/immunohorizons.2100065 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Pognonec P, Boulukos KE, Gesquière JC, Stéhelin D, Ghysdael J. Mitogenic stimulation of thymocytes results in the calcium-dependent phosphorylation of c-ets-1 proteins. EMBO J. 1988;7(4):977–83. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1988.tb02904.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bhat NK, Thompson CB, Lindsten T, June CH, Fujiwara S, Koizumi S, et al. Reciprocal expression of human Ets1 and Ets2 genes during T-cell activation: regulatory role for the protooncogene Ets1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87(10):3723–7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.10.3723 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Trezise S, Kong IY, Hawkins ED, Herold MJ, Willis SN, Nutt SL. An arrayed CRISPR screen of primary B cells reveals the essential elements of the antibody secretion pathway. Front Immunol. 2023;14:1089243. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1089243 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.John S, Russell L, Chin SS, Luo W, Oshima R, Garrett-Sinha LA. Transcription factor Ets1, but not the closely related factor Ets2, inhibits antibody-secreting cell differentiation. Mol Cell Biol. 2014;34(3):522–32. doi: 10.1128/MCB.00612-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lieberman-Aiden E, van Berkum NL, Williams L, Imakaev M, Ragoczy T, Telling A, et al. Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science. 2009;326(5950):289–93. doi: 10.1126/science.1181369 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rao SSP, Huntley MH, Durand NC, Stamenova EK, Bochkov ID, Robinson JT, et al. A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. Cell. 2014;159(7):1665–80. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Dixon JR, Selvaraj S, Yue F, Kim A, Li Y, Shen Y, et al. Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions. Nature. 2012;485(7398):376–80. doi: 10.1038/nature11082 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Haarhuis JHI, van der Weide RH, Blomen VA, Flach KD, Teunissen H, Willems L, et al. A Mediator-cohesin axis controls heterochromatin domain formation. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):754. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-28377-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kim YJ, Cecchini KR, Kim TH. Conserved, developmentally regulated mechanism couples chromosomal looping and heterochromatin barrier activity at the homeobox gene A locus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(18):7391–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1018279108 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dowen JM, Fan ZP, Hnisz D, Ren G, Abraham BJ, Zhang LN, et al. Control of cell identity genes occurs in insulated neighborhoods in mammalian chromosomes. Cell. 2014;159(2):374–87. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.09.030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Hanssen LLP, Kassouf MT, Oudelaar AM, Biggs D, Preece C, Downes DJ, et al. Tissue-specific CTCF-cohesin-mediated chromatin architecture delimits enhancer interactions and function in vivo. Nat Cell Biol. 2017;19(8):952–61. doi: 10.1038/ncb3573 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Lupiáñez DG, Kraft K, Heinrich V, Krawitz P, Brancati F, Klopocki E, et al. Disruptions of topological chromatin domains cause pathogenic rewiring of gene-enhancer interactions. Cell. 2015;161(5):1012–25. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Nora EP, Goloborodko A, Valton A-L, Gibcus JH, Uebersohn A, Abdennur N, et al. Targeted degradation of CTCF decouples local insulation of chromosome domains from genomic compartmentalization. Cell. 2017;169(5):930–944.e22. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Chandra A, Yoon S, Michieletto MF, Goldman N, Ferrari EK, Abedi M, et al. Quantitative control of Ets1 dosage by a multi-enhancer hub promotes Th1 cell differentiation and protects from allergic inflammation. Immunity. 2023;56(7):1451–1467.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2023.05.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Kieffer-Kwon K-R, Tang Z, Mathe E, Qian J, Sung M-H, Li G, et al. Interactome maps of mouse gene regulatory domains reveal basic principles of transcriptional regulation. Cell. 2013;155(7):1507–20. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.039 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Robinson JT, Turner D, Durand NC, Thorvaldsdóttir H, Mesirov JP, Aiden EL. Juicebox.js provides a cloud-based visualization system for Hi-C data. Cell Syst. 2018;6(2):256–258.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2018.01.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Shen Y, Yue F, McCleary DF, Ye Z, Edsall L, Kuan S, et al. A map of the cis-regulatory sequences in the mouse genome. Nature. 2012;488(7409):116–20. doi: 10.1038/nature11243 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Lara-Astiaso D, Weiner A, Lorenzo-Vivas E, Zaretsky I, Jaitin DA, David E, et al. Immunogenetics. Chromatin state dynamics during blood formation. Science. 2014;345(6199):943–9. doi: 10.1126/science.1256271 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Mouse ENCODE Consortium, Stamatoyannopoulos JA, Snyder M, Hardison R, Ren B, Gingeras T, et al. An encyclopedia of mouse DNA elements (Mouse ENCODE). Genome Biol. 2012;13(8):418. doi: 10.1186/gb-2012-13-8-418 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Yoshida H, Lareau CA, Ramirez RN, Rose SA, Maier B, Wroblewska A, et al. The cis-regulatory atlas of the mouse immune system. Cell. 2019;176(4):897–912.e20. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.12.036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Fornes O, Castro-Mondragon JA, Khan A, van der Lee R, Zhang X, Richmond PA, et al. JASPAR 2020: update of the open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(D1):D87–92. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz1001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.ENCODE Project Consortium. An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature. 2012;489(7414):57–74. doi: 10.1038/nature11247 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, Kundaje A, Meuleman W, Ernst J, Bilenky M, Yen A, et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature. 2015;518(7539):317–30. doi: 10.1038/nature14248 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Scharer CD, Blalock EL, Mi T, Barwick BG, Jenks SA, Deguchi T, et al. Epigenetic programming underpins B cell dysfunction in human SLE. Nat Immunol. 2019;20(8):1071–82. doi: 10.1038/s41590-019-0419-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Kent WJ, Sugnet CW, Furey TS, Roskin KM, Pringle TH, Zahler AM, et al. The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 2002;12(6):996–1006. doi: 10.1101/gr.229102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Warming S, Costantino N, Court DL, Jenkins NA, Copeland NG. Simple and highly efficient BAC recombineering using galK selection. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(4):e36. doi: 10.1093/nar/gni035 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Li H, Durbin R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(14):1754–60. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zhang Y, Liu T, Meyer CA, Eeckhoute J, Johnson DS, Bernstein BE, et al. Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol. 2008;9(9):R137. doi: 10.1186/gb-2008-9-9-r137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Huang DW, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA. Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nat Protoc. 2009;4(1):44–57. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2008.211 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Heinz S, Benner C, Spann N, Bertolino E, Lin YC, Laslo P, et al. Simple combinations of lineage-determining transcription factors prime cis-regulatory elements required for macrophage and B cell identities. Mol Cell. 2010;38(4):576–89. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.05.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Grant CE, Bailey TL, Noble WS. FIMO: scanning for occurrences of a given motif. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(7):1017–8. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Kieffer-Kwon K-R, Nimura K, Rao SSP, Xu J, Jung S, Pekowska A, et al. Myc regulates chromatin decompaction and nuclear architecture during B cell activation. Mol Cell. 2017;67(4):566–578.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.07.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Jorcyk CL, Garrett LJ, Maroulakou IG, Watson DK, Green JE. Multiple regulatory regions control the expression of Ets-1 in the developing mouse: vascular expression conferred by intron I. Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand). 1997;43(2):211–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.King HW, Wells KL, Shipony Z, Kathiria AS, Wagar LE, Lareau C, et al. Integrated single-cell transcriptomics and epigenomics reveals strong germinal center-associated etiology of autoimmune risk loci. Sci Immunol. 2021;6(64):eabh3768. doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.abh3768 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Sacchetti A, El Sewedy T, Nasr AF, Alberti S. Efficient GFP mutations profoundly affect mRNA transcription and translation rates. FEBS Lett. 2001;492(1–2):151–5. doi: 10.1016/s0014-5793(01)02246-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Creyghton MP, Cheng AW, Welstead GG, Kooistra T, Carey BW, Steine EJ, et al. Histone H3K27ac separates active from poised enhancers and predicts developmental state. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(50):21931–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1016071107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Calderon D, Nguyen MLT, Mezger A, Kathiria A, Müller F, Nguyen V, et al. Landscape of stimulation-responsive chromatin across diverse human immune cells. Nat Genet. 2019;51(10):1494–505. doi: 10.1038/s41588-019-0505-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Comoglio F, Simonatto M, Polletti S, Liu X, Smale ST, Barozzi I, et al. Dissection of acute stimulus-inducible nucleosome remodeling in mammalian cells. Genes Dev. 2019;33(17–18):1159–74. doi: 10.1101/gad.326348.119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Fisher CL, Ghysdael J, Cambier JC. Ligation of membrane Ig leads to calcium-mediated phosphorylation of the proto-oncogene product, Ets-1. J Immunol. 1991;146(6):1743–9. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.146.6.1743 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Tsao H-W, Tai T-S, Tseng W, Chang H-H, Grenningloh R, Miaw S-C, et al. Ets-1 facilitates nuclear entry of NFAT proteins and their recruitment to the IL-2 promoter. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(39):15776–81. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1304343110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Du C, Liu C, Kang J, Zhao G, Ye Z, Huang S, et al. MicroRNA miR-326 regulates TH-17 differentiation and is associated with the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Nat Immunol. 2009;10(12):1252–9. doi: 10.1038/ni.1798 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Wen Z, Xu L, Chen X, Xu W, Yin Z, Gao X, et al. Autoantibody induction by DNA-containing immune complexes requires HMGB1 with the TLR2/microRNA-155 pathway. J Immunol. 2013;190(11):5411–22. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1203301 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Ostuni R, Piccolo V, Barozzi I, Polletti S, Termanini A, Bonifacio S, et al. Latent enhancers activated by stimulation in differentiated cells. Cell. 2013;152(1–2):157–71. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.12.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Yukawa M, Jagannathan S, Vallabh S, Kartashov AV, Chen X, Weirauch MT, et al. AP-1 activity induced by co-stimulation is required for chromatin opening during T cell activation. J Exp Med. 2020;217(1):e20182009. doi: 10.1084/jem.20182009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Markov GJ, Mai T, Nair S, Shcherbina A, Wang YX, Burns DM, et al. AP-1 is a temporally regulated dual gatekeeper of reprogramming to pluripotency. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021;118(23):e2104841118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2104841118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Schreiber M, Kolbus A, Piu F, Szabowski A, Möhle-Steinlein U, Tian J, et al. Control of cell cycle progression by c-Jun is p53 dependent. Genes Dev. 1999;13(5):607–19. doi: 10.1101/gad.13.5.607 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Sundqvist A, Voytyuk O, Hamdi M, Popeijus HE, van der Burgt CB-, Janssen J, et al. JNK-dependent cJun phosphorylation mitigates TGFβ- and EGF-induced pre-malignant breast cancer cell invasion by suppressing AP-1-mediated transcriptional responses. Cells. 2019;8(12):1481. doi: 10.3390/cells8121481 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Bakiri L, Lallemand D, Bossy-Wetzel E, Yaniv M. Cell cycle-dependent variations in c-Jun and JunB phosphorylation: a role in the control of cyclin D1 expression. EMBO J. 2000;19(9):2056–68. doi: 10.1093/emboj/19.9.2056 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Pérez-Benavente B, Fathinajafabadi A, de la Fuente L, Gandía C, Martínez-Férriz A, Pardo-Sánchez JM, et al. New roles for AP-1/JUNB in cell cycle control and tumorigenic cell invasion via regulation of cyclin E1 and TGF-β2. Genome Biol. 2022;23(1):252. doi: 10.1186/s13059-022-02800-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Zhu X, Schweitzer BL, Romer EJ, Sulentic CEW, DeKoter RP. Transgenic expression of Spi-C impairs B-cell development and function by affecting genes associated with BCR signaling. Eur J Immunol. 2008;38(9):2587–99. doi: 10.1002/eji.200838323 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Roes J, Choi BK, Cazac BB. Redirection of B cell responsiveness by transforming growth factor beta receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(12):7241–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0731875100 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Cazac BB, Roes J. TGF-beta receptor controls B cell responsiveness and induction of IgA in vivo. Immunity. 2000;13(4):443–51. doi: 10.1016/s1074-7613(00)00044-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Roberto Mantovani

27 Sep 2024

PONE-D-24-32251Sequences within and upstream of the mouse Ets1 gene drive high level expression in B cells, but are not sufficient for consistent expression in T cellsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Garrett-Sinha,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. First, I have to apologize for the delay in the reviewing process. After very careful consideration, and revision by an expert in the field, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised below.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 11 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Roberto Mantovani

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements: 1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.  When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section. 3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:  [NIAID R01 AI122720NCI P30CA016056].  Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: ""The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."" If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 4. Please expand the acronym “NIAID and NCI” (as indicated in your financial disclosure) so that it states the name of your funders in full.This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 5. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: [We thank Alex Glather, Akinsola Oyelakin and Dr. Yungki Park (all at State University of New York at Buffalo) for helpful discussions relevant to this study. We thank Kirsten Smalley for help with animal husbandry. This work was funded by NIH grant R01 AI122720.]We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:  [NIAID R01 AI122720NCI P30CA016056].  Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 6. We note that you have included the phrase “data not shown” in your manuscript. Unfortunately, this does not meet our data sharing requirements. PLOS does not permit references to inaccessible data. We require that authors provide all relevant data within the paper, Supporting Information files, or in an acceptable, public repository. Please add a citation to support this phrase or upload the data that corresponds with these findings to a stable repository (such as Figshare or Dryad) and provide and URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers that may be used to access these data. Or, if the data are not a core part of the research being presented in your study, we ask that you remove the phrase that refers to these data. 7. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In this paper, the authors set out to establish the regulatory regions that control Ets1 expression in B and T cells. Through combining chromatin state mapping and BAC transgenesis, they identify a region responsible for Ets-1 expression in B cells and establish that additional sequences outside this region are required for robust expression in T cells. The latter are not pursued. Functionally, the authors test various potential regulatory regions for enhancer activity but none are obviously active in that context. Furthermore, motif analysis identifies potential TF regulators but no experiments are provided to test their functionality in B cells. Overall, this study therefore contributes to our understanding of Ets1 expression control in immune cells but is rather preliminary in nature, stopping short of providing any detailed mechanistic insights rather than the current inferences.

Generally, the data as presented are okay but there are a few places for improvement:

(1) As indicated above, some functional testing of potential TF regulators would be a step forwards.

(2) As the luciferase reporter assays are generally none informative, a better strategy would be to engineer changes in the regulatory regions either in the context of the BAC or via CRISPR in appropriate cells line models.

(3) In Fig. 4B, adding the human data is okay but the rationale in the text is not really correct. Ie this does not allow “better definition of the regions” but instead provides evidence for evolutionary conservation.

(4) In Fig. 5B, the second track should be labelled as Fo B cells. Also, what population of B cells does the bottom track come from?

(5) In Fig. 6C, the percentage of regions containing each motif should be added.

In the left table, the authors should comment on the second motif that resembles at ETS motif. On the right side, they cannot conclude this is Ets1 rather than another ETS TF, therefore the results text describing this needs rewording.

(6) I was confused by Fig. 8C. It appears here that several regions seem to be repressive in nature (ie less than promoter alone), so not sure why the results text says that none of the regions show strong repressive activity.

(7) Given that GWAS signals suggest the importance of the Ets1 locus, do any of the SNPs map to putative regulatory elements highlighted in this study? If so what is their predicted effect on activity (ideally would also be tested but as a minimum discussed).

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Mar 7;20(3):e0308896. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308896.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1


12 Nov 2024

Response to Editor Comments:

We have reformatted the manuscript to meet the PLoS One style and formatting. We included information about grant funding in the Cover Letter, as requested. Information about grant funding was removed from the Acknowledgements section. We removed reference to data not shown. We included captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of our manuscript, but also embedded them into the Supplemental Figures.

Response to Reviewer Comments:

Response to Reviewer Comments

Reviewer #1: In this paper, the authors set out to establish the regulatory regions that control Ets1 expression in B and T cells. Through combining chromatin state mapping and BAC transgenesis, they identify a region responsible for Ets-1 expression in B cells and establish that additional sequences outside this region are required for robust expression in T cells. The latter are not pursued. Functionally, the authors test various potential regulatory regions for enhancer activity but none are obviously active in that context. Furthermore, motif analysis identifies potential TF regulators but no experiments are provided to test their functionality in B cells. Overall, this study therefore contributes to our understanding of Ets1 expression control in immune cells but is rather preliminary in nature, stopping short of providing any detailed mechanistic insights rather than the current inferences.

Generally, the data as presented are okay but there are a few places for improvement:

(1) As indicated above, some functional testing of potential TF regulators would be a step forwards. (2) As the luciferase reporter assays are generally none informative, a better strategy would be to engineer changes in the regulatory regions either in the context of the BAC or via CRISPR in appropriate cells line models.

We agree with the reviewer that further studies are needed to identify relevant transcription factors and enhancer sequences needed for B cell expression. In this regard, Our lab has shown that signaling via the kinase IKK is required to downregulate Ets1 expression in response to BCR or TLR activation in B cells, although individually neither RelA nor cRel was required (see our published manuscript – PMID: 36445360). We also found that Foxo3a was not required for either the basal expression of Ets1 nor its downregulation in response to BCR ligation. We are continuing to perform follow-up experiments to examine roles for additional transcription factors (Pax5, Irf4, Ebf1, Bach2, PU.1 and Foxo1) that are expressed at high levels in resting B cells and that might be involved in regulating the basal levels of Ets1, but these studies have yet to yield conclusive results. We posit that combinatorial actions of transcription factors are likely to be at play, just as the case with the enhancers that we report in this study

The reviewer brings up a valid point about the limitations of the transient transfection system with luciferase reporter genes. We are currently developing Crispr systems to mutate putative enhancers in a B cell line. However, these studies are at a very early stage and we are planning to include them in a future publication examining Ets1 regulation in more detail.

Despite the fact that the studies reported in this manuscript have not yet identified a specific master transcription factor or enhancer segments crucial for regulating Ets1 expression, we feel that our studies still add valuable information to the knowledge of regulatory mechanisms that govern Ets1 expression. We have found that the Ets1 gene is regulated differently in B cells and T cells, something that was previously unknown. We have also found that sequences within and upstream of Ets1 are sufficient both for faithful expression in B cells, but also for stimulation induced decrease in Ets1 transcription as well as the decrease that occurs in plasma cells. We have also identified potential regulatory regions for Ets1 as marked by ATAC-seq peaks and histone marks. We have identified changes in chromatin accessibility that occur in B cells in response to BCR ligation – this experiment being a genome-wide study offers a valuable resource. While we have focused on describing such changes in the Ets1 locus, our ATAC-seq data have been submitted to the GEO databank and are available for other researchers to examine when assessing how BCR signaling alters chromatin in various gene loci.

Finally, it is also important to note that journal information for PLoS One states that “We evaluate research on the basis of scientific validity, strong methodology, and high ethical standards—not perceived significance. Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research, replication studies, negative and null results are all in scope”. We feel that our manuscript currently meets this criterion for publication.

(3) In Fig. 4B, adding the human data is okay but the rationale in the text is not really correct. i.e. this does not allow “better definition of the regions” but instead provides evidence for evolutionary conservation.

We thank the reviewer for their thoughtful insights. We have modified this section of the text to better reflect the rationale.

(4) In Fig. 5B, the second track should be labelled as Fo B cells. Also, what population of B cells does the bottom track come from?

We have relabeled the figure. The bottom track in this figure is from data collected as part of this study (PMID: 25103404). It represents bulk CD3-, B220+, CD19+ B cells isolated from mouse spleen, which has been noted.

(5) In Fig. 6C, the percentage of regions containing each motif should be added.

In the left table, the authors should comment on the second motif that resembles at ETS motif. On the right side, they cannot conclude this is Ets1 rather than another ETS TF, therefore the results text describing this needs rewording.

These motifs were discerned using the motif-finding algorithm HOMER (http://homer.ucsd.edu/homer/introduction/basics.html). HOMER scores motifs by looking for sequences with differential enrichment between two sets of sequences. In our case these two sets are DAR sequences from unstimulated versus stimulated B cells. HOMER calculates a p value for enrichment of known transcription motifs, but does not provide a value for the percentage of sequences containing a particular motif. Given the very small p values of the listed transcription factors, it is likely that they are strongly enriched.

To identify potential transcription factors binding to the enriched sequences, HOMER uses the TRANSFAC database. TRANSFAC contains experimentally-determined motifs for many transcription factors including various members of the Ets gene family. While the core Ets binding motif is similar among the various Ets family members, the flanking sequences are somewhat different. Using the TRANSFAC database, HOMER found that the best match to the enriched sequence was the Ets1 binding motif. However, we do agree that other related transcription factors in the Ets gene family may also bind to this sequence. For that reason, we have revised the text to include this point.

(6) I was confused by Fig. 8C. It appears here that several regions seem to be repressive in nature (ie less than promoter alone), so not sure why the results text says that none of the regions show strong repressive activity.

The reviewers is correct and we have revised the text accordingly.

(7) Given that GWAS signals suggest the importance of the Ets1 locus, do any of the SNPs map to putative regulatory elements highlighted in this study? If so what is their predicted effect on activity (ideally would also be tested but as a minimum discussed).

Several disease-associated SNPs do map close to or within putative enhancer regions. We’ve included a new figure showing where the SNPs associated with lupus map (new Supplemental Figure S5).

(8) Additional information for reviewer:

It should also be noted that some changes have been made to format the revised manuscript according to guidelines for PLoS One. As part of this effort, we have moved the figure legends into the main body of the text just under the paragraph in which they are first mentioned. This is consistent with the recommended formatting style for this journal - https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf. The Supplemental Figure Legends are at the end of the manuscript and also included in the Supplemental figures themselves.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.pdf

pone.0308896.s006.pdf (53.1KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Roberto Mantovani

22 Nov 2024

PONE-D-24-32251R1Sequences within and upstream of the mouse Ets1 gene drive high level expression in B cells, but are not sufficient for consistent expression in T cellsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Garrett-Sinha,

Thank you for re-submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After further consideration, we feel that it has merit but it still does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 06 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Roberto Mantovani

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1:  Most things have been addressed.

I appreciate this is PLOSONE and there are criteria for publication, and my initial comments were based on making the paper more conclusive rather than suggestive. I do take the arguments they make but it would be useful to add caveats about the limitations of the approach (ie surrounding previous points 1 and 2 about more appropriate definitive assays).

One this not addressed was "In Fig. 6C, the percentage of regions containing each motif should be added.

In the left table, the authors should comment on the second motif that resembles at

ETS motif. " The authors have not commented on the ETS-like motif. For the percentage of regions with motifs issue, then this is still useful to include as it provides a feel for what proportion of the effect is driven by a particular TF. You can get highly enriched regions in a low percentage of regions if the genomic back ground is also low for example. Again, this is not essential but just helps the reader to gauge the influence of ETS TFs.

new Supplemental Figure S5 was not included or referred to in the revised manuscript so was impossible to evaluate.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Mar 7;20(3):e0308896. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308896.r005

Author response to Decision Letter 2


24 Nov 2024

Response to Reviewer Comments

Reviewer #1: Most things have been addressed.

I appreciate this is PLOSONE and there are criteria for publication, and my initial comments were based on making the paper more conclusive rather than suggestive. I do take the arguments they make but it would be useful to add caveats about the limitations of the approach (ie surrounding previous points 1 and 2 about more appropriate definitive assays).

We have added some sentences to address this on pages 22-23 of the revised paper.

One this not addressed was "In Fig. 6C, the percentage of regions containing each motif should be added.

While we would like to address this point, unfortunately the software used to identify motifs (HOMER software - http://homer.ucsd.edu/homer/) does not provide the percentage of sequences that contain a motif. It simply identifies motifs that are over-represented in one dataset (e.g., stimulated B cells) as compared to the other dataset (e.g., unstimulated B cells) and gives a p value for the significance of the over-representation. The p values for the motifs we list are all very small, indicating that these sequences are highly enriched in one dataset or the other. But we cannot provide a percentage of sites that contain those particular motifs.

In the left table, the authors should comment on the second motif that resembles at

ETS motif. " The authors have not commented on the ETS-like motif. For the percentage of regions with motifs issue, then this is still useful to include as it provides a feel for what proportion of the effect is driven by a particular TF. You can get highly enriched regions in a low percentage of regions if the genomic back ground is also low for example. Again, this is not essential but just helps the reader to gauge the influence of ETS TFs.

We agree with the reviewer’s point, but unfortunately as described above, we have no information on the percentages of sequences with a particular motif.

new Supplemental Figure S5 was not included or referred to in the revised manuscript so was impossible to evaluate.

Sorry, this was a mistake on our part. The extra figure is Supplemental Figure 4, which was included in the figures along with a figure legend, but was not referenced in the text. We have added sentences on page 14 of the manuscript to refer to the new figure.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.docx

pone.0308896.s007.docx (18.6KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Roberto Mantovani

12 Dec 2024

Sequences within and upstream of the mouse Ets1 gene drive high level expression in B cells, but are not sufficient for consistent expression in T cells

PONE-D-24-32251R2

Dear Dr. Garrett-Sinha,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Roberto Mantovani

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Roberto Mantovani

PONE-D-24-32251R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Garrett-Sinha,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Roberto Mantovani

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Sequences within the RP23-350A20 BAC can mediate the BCR-induced decrease in transcription from the Ets1 promoter.

    Splenic B cells were isolated from wild type and BACtg mice, and were incubated with BCR crosslinking antibody for 2 hrs. Ets1 mRNA and pre-mRNA levels as well as GFP mRNA levels were measured using qPCR and were normalized to beta-actin. N = 2 for each condition.

    (TIF)

    pone.0308896.s001.tif (335.5KB, tif)
    S2 Fig. ATAC-seq shows that T cells contain regions of open chromatin that lie outside the region of the BACtg.

    (B) ATAC-seq profiles for B cells, CD4 T cells, and CD8 T cells within the Ets1 sub-TAD. The genomic region contained in the BAC transgene is highlighted in yellow. Highlighted in aqua are accessible sites outside of the BAC that may be T cell-specific Ets1 response elements.

    (TIF)

    pone.0308896.s002.tif (1.2MB, tif)
    S3 Fig. Sequence conservation between mouse and human genes encoding Ets1 in regions with putative response elements.

    Genome Browser image depicting the ATAC-seq peaks in follicular (FO) B cells and plasma cells (PC). Orange highlighted regions are regions within Sites 1-7 that show strong sequence homology between mouse and human. Underneath are shown BLAT alignments for these segments. DNA sequence homologies outside Sites 1-7 are not shown. Also shown are the locations of the four DAR regions identified in Fig 7A, with the + 39 and + 49 kb DARs showing significant sequence conservation, while the -85 and + 36 kb DARs lack such conservation.

    (TIF)

    pone.0308896.s003.tif (469.9KB, tif)
    S4 Fig. Locations of lupus-associated SNPs in the human Ets1 gene.

    Genome Browser image depicting ATAC-seq peaks in human CD19 + B cells (top) and the H3K27Ac peaks from human GM12878 B lymphoma cells (the same peaks used to define Sites 1-7). At the bottom are shown positions of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) associated SNPs in the gene. Also shown is the location of the previously-defined Ets1 super-enhancer region where many allergy-associated SNPs are localized [31].

    (TIF)

    pone.0308896.s004.tif (533.2KB, tif)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.pdf

    pone.0308896.s006.pdf (53.1KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewer.docx

    pone.0308896.s007.docx (18.6KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The ATAC-seq datasets for unstimulated B cells and BCR-stimulated B cells collected for this study are publicly available in NCBI’s Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under accession number GSE273513. All other ATAC-seq, ChIP-seq and Hi-Seq datasets analyzed in this manuscript were data collected by other research groups and are all available in the GEO database under the following accession numbers: GSE82144 [32]; GSE29184 [34]; GSE60103 [35]; GSE36030 [36], GSE100738 [37]; GSE109125 [37], GSE29611 [39]; GSE18927 [40]; GSE51334; and GSE118253 [41].


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES