Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Nov 27.
Published in final edited form as: Nature. 2017 Aug 2;548(7665):E1–E3. doi: 10.1038/nature23277

Figure 1 |. Comparative analysis of ERV expression and histone modifications at ERVs in knockout ES cell lines.

Figure 1 |

a, Mean fold change in ERV (long terminal repeat (LTR) elements annotated in UCSC RepeatMasker) expression in H3.3-knockout (KO) ES cells (two cell lines) over wild-type (WT) ES cells (one cell line) versus H3.3 enrichment in wild-type ES cells. ChIP, chromatin immunoprecipitation. b, Fold change in ERV expression in Setdb1-knockout ES cells over wild-type ES cells versus H3K9me3 enrichment in wild-type ES cells. c, Mean fold change in ERV expression in H3.3-knockout ES cells over wild-type ES cells versus fold change in ERV expression in Setdb1-knockout ES cells over wild-type ES cells. ERVs belonging to the IAP family are marked in red. Mm, mus musculus. Annotations including an ‘-int’ represent the internal regions, which are transcribed from the cognate 5′ LTR, of the annotated ERV. Only ERV groups with more than 100 family members were considered for analysis. Linear trend lines and corresponding R2 values are shown.