Fig. 2.

Gain in CpG methylation at epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT)-correlated differentially methylated CpG sites (DMCs) and GRHL2 binding sites following GRHL2 knockdown. a Bar graphs depict the frequency of methylated (β ≥ 0.8) and unmethylated (β ≤ 0.2) EMT-correlated DMCs (left), EMT+ DMCs (middle) and EMT− DMCs (right) in OVCA429 control vs. shGRHL2 cells. The p values of Fisher’s exact tests are shown for each group. b Bar graph indicates a slight increase (%) in methylated CpG (β ≥ 0.8) and a slight decrease (%) in unmethylated CpG (β ≤ 0.2) at DMCs within GRHL2 binding sites in GRHL2-knockdown cells, compared to control. The p value of Fisher’s exact test is shown. c Flow charts show the number of EMT-correlated DMCs that gain or lose methylation (p < 0.05; |∆β| > 0.2) after GRHL2 knockdown, with or without associated gene expression change. Box plots (right) depict the average expression log₂ fold changes (messenger RNA (mRNA)) of the genes in each group after GRHL2 knockdown. d Flow chart shows the number of GRHL2 binding sites that gain or lose CpG methylation (p < 0.05; |∆β| > 0.2) after GRHL2 knockdown, with or without associated gene expression change. *This group is significantly enriched (93 vs. 29), based on Fisher’s exact test (p = 0.0427). Box-plot (right) depicts the average expression log₂ fold changes (mRNA) of the genes in each group after GRHL2 knockdown. Error bars are ±s.e.m