All cells in your body contain the same genetic information in the form of genes encoded within DNA. Yet, cells use this information in different ways so that the activities of individual genes within that DNA can vary from cell to cell. This allows identical cells to become different to each other and to adapt to changing circumstances.

A group of proteins called transcription factors control the activity of certain genes by binding to specific sites on DNA. However, this isn’t a straightforward process because DNA in human and other animal cells is usually associated with structures called nucleosomes that can block access to the DNA. Pioneer transcription factors, such as OCT4, are a specific group of transcription factors that can attach to DNA in spite of the nucleosomes, but it’s not clear how this is possible. Once pioneer transcription factors attach to DNA they can help other transcription factors to bind alongside them.

King et al. studied OCT4 in stem cells from mouse embryos to investigate how it is able to act as a pioneer transcription factor and control gene activity. The experiments show that several other transcription factors lose the ability to bind to DNA when OCT4 is absent. This leads to widespread changes in gene activity in the cells, which seems to be due to other transcription factors being unable to get past the nucleosomes to attach to the DNA.

Further experiments showed that OCT4 needs a protein called BRG1 in order to act as a pioneer transcription factor. BRG1 is an enzyme that is able to move and remove (remodel) nucleosomes attached to DNA, suggesting that normal transcription factor binding requires this activity. The next challenge is to investigate whether BRG1, or similar enzymes, are also needed by other pioneer transcription factors that are required for normal gene activity and cell identity. This will be important because many enzymes that remodel nucleosomes are disrupted in human diseases like cancer where cells lose their normal identity.

Transcription factors read DNA-encoded information to control gene transcription and define the complement of proteins a cell can produce. They achieve this by physically binding specific DNA sequence motifs in gene regulatory elements that ultimately control how RNA polymerases engage with and transcribe genes (Spitz and Furlong, 2012; Voss and Hager, 2014). In prokaryotes, transcription factors tend to function as self-contained units that recognize extended DNA sequences with high specificity and affinity (Wunderlich and Mirny, 2009). Therefore, simple sequence-based principles appear to dictate their binding in the genome. In contrast, transcription factors in higher eukaryotes recognize shorter DNA sequences and often interface with other DNA-binding transcription factors in a combinatorial manner to achieve affinity and specificity (Wunderlich and Mirny, 2009; Villar et al., 2014). In addition to the widespread requirement for combinatorial DNA binding, eukaryotic transcription factors are also confronted with the added complexity that eukaryotic DNA is wrapped around histones to form nucleosomes and chromatin (Kornberg and Lorch, 1999). The association of DNA with nucleosomes can therefore compete with DNA-binding transcription factors, limiting their ability to engage with the genome (Spitz and Furlong, 2012; Voss and Hager, 2014). Indeed, in many cases transcription factor binding appears to require pre-existing chromatin accessibility (Guertin and Lis, 2010; Biddie et al., 2011; John et al., 2011).

This chromatin barrier therefore poses a significant challenge in establishing new gene regulatory elements when cells differentiate during development. Therefore, to overcome this obstacle, cells have evolved a specialised set of transcription factors that are able to recognise their cognate motifs even when nucleosomes are present (Zaret and Carroll, 2011). This is exemplified by the forkhead box A1 (FoxA1) transcription factor, which binds to and de-compacts nucleosomal DNA in vitro (Cirillo et al., 2002) and in vivo (Holmqvist et al., 2005; Lupien et al., 2008; Iwafuchi-Doi et al., 2016). Based on this type of activity, factors like FoxA1 have been called ‘pioneer’ transcription factors as they appear to play a primary role in recognizing and shaping how new gene regulatory elements are established in previously inaccessible chromatin (Magnani et al., 2011; Zaret and Carroll, 2011). Once bound to their target sites, pioneer transcription factors appear to create accessible chromatin (Raposo et al., 2015; Schulz et al., 2015) that supports the recruitment of non-pioneer transcription factors and the formation of functional gene regulatory elements (Theodorou et al., 2013; Wapinski et al., 2013; Foo et al., 2014; Xu et al., 2014; Schulz et al., 2015). These unique features of pioneer transcription factors allow them to function as master regulators that underpin developmental transitions, cellular reprogramming, and responses to cellular signalling events.

The capacity of pioneer transcription factors to destabilise or reposition nucleosomes to facilitate chromatin accessibility at their target sites appears to be an essential feature of their activity. Initially, it was proposed that pioneer factors might achieve this by interacting specifically with nucleosomes to alter chromatin structure. For example, FoxA1 and FoxO1 structurally resemble histone H1, which has been proposed to lead to displacement of H1 and destabilisation of neighbouring nucleosomes (Cirillo et al., 2002; Hatta and Cirillo, 2007). Alternatively, it has been proposed that ATP-dependent chromatin remodellers may be required to assist pioneer transcription factors in establishing accessible chromatin (Hu et al., 2011; Marathe et al., 2013; Ceballos-Chávez et al., 2015; Swinstead et al., 2016). Nevertheless, for most pioneer transcription factors there remains limited understanding of the mechanisms by which they translate their binding within inaccessible and nucleosome-occluded chromatin into effects on chromatin structure that support additional transcription factor binding and gene regulation.

One paradigm that has been used to study pioneer transcription factor function is the cellular reprogramming of somatic cells into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) by the Yamanaka transcription factors (OCT4, SOX2, KLF4, and c-MYC) (Takahashi and Yamanaka, 2006). With the exception of c-MYC, these transcription factors are proposed to act as pioneers during cellular reprogramming and can bind their targets sites even when they are occupied by nucleosomes (Soufi et al., 2012, 2015; Chen et al., 2016). It is thought that this pioneering activity may then pave the way for nucleosome displacement and further transcription factor binding that establishes functional regulatory elements (You et al., 2011; Shakya et al., 2015; Simandi et al., 2016). While it is clear that these transcription factors have the capacity to engage with previously inaccessible regions of chromatin during iPSC reprogramming, it is unknown whether additional mechanisms are required to transition these initial engagement events into functionally mature transcription factor binding as part of the pluripotency-associated regulatory network.

To begin addressing this fundamental gap in our understanding, we have used mouse embryonic stem cells, which exist in an established pluripotent state, as a model system to dissect how the core pluripotency transcription factor OCT4 engages with target sites inside cells. In doing so we discover that OCT4 occupies sites that would otherwise be inaccessible and is required to shape the occupancy of additional pluripotency transcription factors. OCT4 achieves this by recruiting the chromatin remodelling factor BRG1 to support not only its own binding but also to stabilize further transcription factor binding events required to support pluripotency-associated gene regulation. This reveals that although OCT4 can engage with its target sites in inaccessible chromatin, the recruitment of a chromatin remodelling enzyme is a fundamental step in pluripotency transcription factor binding and gene expression. Intriguingly, OCT4-bound regulatory sites that require BRG1 are activated more slowly in response to cellular reprogramming and later during early development. Together these observations reveal that the capacity of OCT4 to cooperate with a chromatin remodeller is a key feature of its pioneering activity, and this is required to mature transcription factor binding and create functional gene regulatory elements.

Although the capacity of pioneer transcription factors to bind their sequence motifs in chromatinized DNA has been studied in detail, the mechanisms that support how individual pioneer transcription factors function to create accessible chromatin and shape regulatory element function remain poorly defined. Through studying the pioneer transcription factor OCT4, we establish that OCT4 binds to sites in mouse ESCs that would otherwise be inaccessible to shape chromatin accessibility and transcription factor binding (Figures 1 and 2). This suggests that the pioneering activities of OCT4 are required not only during reprogramming, but also in the established pluripotent state. Interestingly, chromatin accessibility formed at OCT4 binding sites relies on the chromatin remodelling factor BRG1 (Figure 3) which is recruited to these sites by OCT4 (Figure 4). The occupancy of BRG1 is then required to support efficient OCT4, SOX2 and NANOG binding and normal expression of the pluripotency-associated transcriptome (Figure 5). Importantly, this reliance on BRG1 reflects OCT4 binding dynamics during cellular reprogramming and early mouse development (Figure 6). Together these observations reveal a distinct requirement for the chromatin remodelling factor BRG1 in shaping the activity of the pioneer transcription factor OCT4 and regulating the pluripotency network in embryonic stem cells.

Pioneer transcription factors play very defined roles in shaping gene expression in response to cellular reprogramming (Soufi et al., 2012; Raposo et al., 2015; Boller et al., 2016; Chen et al., 2016), developmental stimuli, and environmental cues (Hu et al., 2011; Wu et al., 2011; Ballaré et al., 2013; Schulz et al., 2015). While considerable effort has focused on characterizing the chromatin binding activity of pioneer transcription factors, both in vitro and in vivo, the mechanisms by which individual pioneer transcription factors shape chromatin structure and support further transcription factor engagement in vivo have remained poorly understood. Our examination of OCT4 binding now provides a potential rationalization for how this pioneer transcription factor functions to form gene regulatory elements in mouse ESCs. A requirement of this process is OCT4's ability to engage with sequences in inaccessible chromatin presumably through its capacity to bind nucleosomal DNA (Figure 1; Soufi et al., 2012, 2015), suggesting that OCT4 may be able to dynamically sample its target sites throughout the genome. However, cooperation with BRG1 appears to be required for more stable OCT4 binding (Figure 5). This could be achieved through the chromatin remodelling activity of BRG1 creating transiently accessible DNA that facilitates further OCT4 binding and ultimately more stable cooperative binding with other transcription factors like SOX2 and NANOG. This general model is consistent with previous experiments that showed enhanced OCT4 binding during OCT4-SOX2-KLF4 reprogramming when BRG1 was included in the reprogramming cocktail (Singhal et al., 2010) and is in agreement with our observation that BRG1 is required for normal chromatin accessibility and OCT4 binding at otherwise inaccessible and inactive regulatory elements.

The capacity of OCT4 to recognise its target motifs in inaccessible chromatin may allow it to dynamically sample its complement of binding sites in the genome. However, like many transcription factors, OCT4 only binds stably to a subset of these sites. Our genome-wide analyses indicate that BRG1 and transcription factor co-binding events appear to be essential in stabilizing OCT4 binding and the functional maturation of OCT4-dependent regulatory elements in ESCs. Based on these observations, one would predict that co-binding transcription factors might play a central role in shaping where OCT4 stably engages with the genome in different cell types. In fitting with this possibility, when ESCs are transitioned into epiblast-like cells (EpiLCs), OCT4 stably associates with a new set of previously inaccessible sites in a manner that appears to rely on co-binding of the EpiLC-specific transcription factor OTX2 (Buecker et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2014). In the context of these and other observations, it is tempting to speculate that OCT4, through its association with BRG1, is exploited as a dynamic pioneering and chromatin remodelling module by distinct co-binding transcription factors to support the formation of cell type-specific regulatory elements during developmental transitions and reprogramming. In agreement with these general ideas, OCT4 appears to be the only Yamanaka transcription factor that cannot be substituted for in iPSC reprogramming experiments, suggesting its pioneering activity is fundamental in establishing and maintaining the pluripotency network in concert with SOX2, KLF4 and c-Myc (Nakagawa et al., 2008; Sterneckert et al., 2012), perhaps due to its cooperation with BRG1 (Singhal et al., 2010; Esch et al., 2013). This central requirement in reprogramming is also consistent with our observations that OCT4 plays an essential and BRG1-dependent role in shaping the binding of other pluripotency-associated factors at thousands of distal regulatory elements in ESCs.

One of the central features of pioneer transcription factors is their ability to alter local chromatin structure, and this is closely linked to their capacity to support further transcription factor binding and enable the functional maturation of distal regulatory elements. Yet, in most instances the defined molecular mechanisms that support these activities have remained undetermined. While some pioneer factors, such as FoxA1, can stably bind their target sites and directly alter nucleosomal structure through steric disruption of histone:DNA contacts (Cirillo et al., 2002; Hatta and Cirillo, 2007; Iwafuchi-Doi et al., 2016), the extent to which other pioneer factors might exploit such a mechanism has yet to be fully addressed. In the case of OCT4, our observations establish that its capacity to support transcription factor binding and chromatin accessibility requires the chromatin remodeller BRG1. This suggests that unlike FoxA1, OCT4 does not have an intrinsic chromatin opening activity, but requires cooperation with BRG1 to achieve this. Indeed, our work on OCT4 is generally consistent with and supported by recent work studying the pioneer factor GATA3 which appears to have similar dependency on BRG1 in creating accessible chromatin (Takaku et al., 2016). Furthermore, chromatin remodelling activity has been widely implicated in shaping nucleosome positioning and chromatin accessibility at target sites bound by other pioneer transcription factors (Hu et al., 2011; Sanalkumar et al., 2014; Ceballos-Chávez et al., 2015; Hainer and Fazzio, 2015). Together, these observations suggest that many pioneer transcription factors may rely on chromatin remodelling as a key step in supporting transcription factor binding and/or co-binding events in a manner broadly consistent with the previously proposed assisted loading model for transcription factor binding (Voss and Hager, 2014; Swinstead et al., 2016). In the context of this model, the dynamic binding, release and re-binding of transcription factors would help to maintain and stabilise transcription factor binding events, but critically, chromatin remodellers appear to be important in many cases to achieve this (reviewed recently in Swinstead et al., 2016). Clearly more work is required to understand the extent to which pioneer transcription factors use chromatin remodellers to support their pioneering activities. However, in the case of the developmental pioneer transcription factors OCT4 and GATA3, chromatin remodellers act as key component necessary for the formation and function of gene regulatory elements. These emerging observations suggest that chromatin remodelling could function as a central feature of pioneer transcription factor activity during the formation and maintenance of cell type-specific transcriptional programs during development and reprogramming.

1. 1. King HW
   2. Klose RJ

   (2017) The pioneer factor OCT4 requires the chromatin remodeller BRG1 to support gene regulatory element function in mouse embryonic stem cells

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE87822).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE87822

1. 1. ENCODE

   (2014) A comparative encyclopedia of DNA elements in the mouse genome

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE49847).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE49847
2. 1. Young R

   (2012) Enhancer Decommissioning by LSD1 During Embryonic Stem Cell Differentiation

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE27844).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE27844
3. 1. ENCODE

   (2012) DNaseI Hypersensitivity by Digital DNaseI from ENCODE/University of Washington

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE37074).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=gse37074
4. 1. Wang L
   2. Hu G
   3. Du Y

   (2014) INO80 complex in the core regulatory network governing ESC self-renewal [ChIP-Seq]

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE49137).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE49137
5. 1. Hmitou I
   2. de Dieuleveult M
   3. Depaux A
   4. Chantalat S
   5. Yen K
   6. Pugh BF
   7. Gérard M

   (2016) Genome-wide distribution and function of ATP-dependent chromatin remodelers in embryonic stem cells

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE64825).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE64825
6. 1. Xing Y
   2. Carstens R

   (2016) Multiphasic and dynamic changes in alternative splicing during induction of pluripotency are coordinated by numerous RNA binding proteins [iPS]

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE70022).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE70022
7. 1. Li M

   (2015) Expression data from OSKM-mediated 2nd reprogramming cells and the corresponding iPS cell line

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE67462).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=gse67462
8. 1. Wu J
   2. Huang B
   3. Chen H
   4. Xie W

   (2016) The landscape of accessible chromatin in mammalian pre-implantation embryos (ATAC-Seq)

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE66581).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE66581
9. 1. Lu F
   2. Liu Y
   3. Inoue A
   4. Suzuki T
   5. Zhao K
   6. Zhang Y

   (2016) Establishing Chromatin Regulatory Landscape during Mouse Preimplantation Development

   Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE76642).

   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE76642

1. 1. Adachi K
   2. Nikaido I
   3. Ohta H
   4. Ohtsuka S
   5. Ura H
   6. Kadota M
   7. Wakayama T
   8. Ueda HR
   9. Niwa H

   (2013) Context-dependent wiring of Sox2 regulatory networks for self-renewal of embryonic and trophoblast stem cells

   Molecular Cell 52:380–392.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2013.09.002

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Bailey TL
   2. Boden M
   3. Buske FA
   4. Frith M
   5. Grant CE
   6. Clementi L
   7. Ren J
   8. Li WW
   9. Noble WS

   (2009) MEME SUITE: tools for motif discovery and searching

   Nucleic Acids Research 37:W202–W208.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp335

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Ballaré C
   2. Castellano G
   3. Gaveglia L
   4. Althammer S
   5. González-Vallinas J
   6. Eyras E
   7. Le Dily F
   8. Zaurin R
   9. Soronellas D
   10. Vicent GP
   11. Beato M

   (2013) Nucleosome-driven transcription factor binding and gene regulation

   Molecular Cell 49:67–79.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2012.10.019

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Biddie SC
   2. John S
   3. Sabo PJ
   4. Thurman RE
   5. Johnson TA
   6. Schiltz RL
   7. Miranda TB
   8. Sung MH
   9. Trump S
   10. Lightman SL
   11. Vinson C
   12. Stamatoyannopoulos JA
   13. Hager GL

   (2011) Transcription factor AP1 potentiates chromatin accessibility and glucocorticoid receptor binding

   Molecular Cell 43:145–155.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2011.06.016

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Boller S
   2. Ramamoorthy S
   3. Akbas D
   4. Nechanitzky R
   5. Burger L
   6. Murr R
   7. Schübeler D
   8. Grosschedl R

   (2016) Pioneering activity of the C-Terminal domain of EBF1 shapes the chromatin landscape for B cell programming

   Immunity 44:527–541.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.02.021

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Buecker C
   2. Srinivasan R
   3. Wu Z
   4. Calo E
   5. Acampora D
   6. Faial T
   7. Simeone A
   8. Tan M
   9. Swigut T
   10. Wysocka J

   (2014) Reorganization of enhancer patterns in transition from naive to primed pluripotency

   Cell Stem Cell 14:838–853.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2014.04.003

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Buenrostro JD
   2. Giresi PG
   3. Zaba LC
   4. Chang HY
   5. Greenleaf WJ

   (2013) Transposition of native chromatin for fast and sensitive epigenomic profiling of open chromatin, DNA-binding proteins and nucleosome position

   Nature Methods 10:1213–1218.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2688

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Buganim Y
   2. Faddah DA
   3. Jaenisch R

   (2013) Mechanisms and models of somatic cell reprogramming

   Nature Reviews Genetics 14:427–439.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3473

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Bultman SJ
   2. Gebuhr TC
   3. Pan H
   4. Svoboda P
   5. Schultz RM
   6. Magnuson T

   (2006) Maternal BRG1 regulates zygotic genome activation in the mouse

   Genes & Development 20:1744–1754.

   https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1435106

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Ceballos-Chávez M
    2. Subtil-Rodríguez A
    3. Giannopoulou EG
    4. Soronellas D
    5. Vázquez-Chávez E
    6. Vicent GP
    7. Elemento O
    8. Beato M
    9. Reyes JC

    (2015) The chromatin remodeler CHD8 is required for activation of progesterone receptor-dependent enhancers

    PLOS Genetics 11:e1005174.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1005174

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Chen J
    2. Chen X
    3. Li M
    4. Liu X
    5. Gao Y
    6. Kou X
    7. Zhao Y
    8. Zheng W
    9. Zhang X
    10. Huo Y
    11. Chen C
    12. Wu Y
    13. Wang H
    14. Jiang C
    15. Gao S

    (2016) Hierarchical Oct4 binding in concert with primed epigenetic rearrangements during somatic cell reprogramming

    Cell Reports 14:1540–1554.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.01.013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Chen K
    2. Xi Y
    3. Pan X
    4. Li Z
    5. Kaestner K
    6. Tyler J
    7. Dent S
    8. He X
    9. Li W

    (2013) DANPOS: dynamic analysis of nucleosome position and occupancy by sequencing

    Genome Research 23:341–351.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.142067.112

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Chen PB
    2. Zhu LJ
    3. Hainer SJ
    4. McCannell KN
    5. Fazzio TG

    (2014) Unbiased chromatin accessibility profiling by RED-seq uncovers unique features of nucleosome variants in vivo

    BMC Genomics 15:1104–1118.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-1104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Chen X
    2. Xu H
    3. Yuan P
    4. Fang F
    5. Huss M
    6. Vega VB
    7. Wong E
    8. Orlov YL
    9. Zhang W
    10. Jiang J
    11. Loh YH
    12. Yeo HC
    13. Yeo ZX
    14. Narang V
    15. Govindarajan KR
    16. Leong B
    17. Shahab A
    18. Ruan Y
    19. Bourque G
    20. Sung WK
    21. Clarke ND
    22. Wei CL
    23. Ng HH

    (2008) Integration of external signaling pathways with the core transcriptional network in embryonic stem cells

    Cell 133:1106–1117.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.04.043

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Chronis C
    2. Fiziev P
    3. Papp B
    4. Butz S
    5. Bonora G
    6. Sabri S
    7. Ernst J
    8. Plath K

    (2017) Cooperative binding of transcription factors orchestrates reprogramming

    Cell 168:442–459.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.12.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Cieply B
    2. Park JW
    3. Nakauka-Ddamba A
    4. Bebee TW
    5. Guo Y
    6. Shang X
    7. Lengner CJ
    8. Xing Y
    9. Carstens RP

    (2016) Multiphasic and dynamic changes in alternative splicing during induction of pluripotency are coordinated by numerous RNA-Binding proteins

    Cell Reports 15:247–255.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.025

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Cirillo LA
    2. Lin FR
    3. Cuesta I
    4. Friedman D
    5. Jarnik M
    6. Zaret KS

    (2002) Opening of compacted chromatin by early developmental transcription factors HNF3 (FoxA) and GATA-4

    Molecular Cell 9:279–289.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(02)00459-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. de Dieuleveult M
    2. Yen K
    3. Hmitou I
    4. Depaux A
    5. Boussouar F
    6. Bou Dargham D
    7. Jounier S
    8. Humbertclaude H
    9. Ribierre F
    10. Baulard C
    11. Farrell NP
    12. Park B
    13. Keime C
    14. Carrière L
    15. Berlivet S
    16. Gut M
    17. Gut I
    18. Werner M
    19. Deleuze JF
    20. Olaso R
    21. Aude JC
    22. Chantalat S
    23. Pugh BF
    24. Gérard M

    (2016) Genome-wide nucleosome specificity and function of chromatin remodellers in ES cells

    Nature 530:113–116.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16505

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Ding J
    2. Xu H
    3. Faiola F
    4. Ma'ayan A
    5. Wang J

    (2012) Oct4 links multiple epigenetic pathways to the pluripotency network

    Cell Research 22:155–167.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2011.179

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Dobin A
    2. Davis CA
    3. Schlesinger F
    4. Drenkow J
    5. Zaleski C
    6. Jha S
    7. Batut P
    8. Chaisson M
    9. Gingeras TR

    (2013) STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner

    Bioinformatics 29:15–21.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Esch D
    2. Vahokoski J
    3. Groves MR
    4. Pogenberg V
    5. Cojocaru V
    6. Vom Bruch H
    7. Han D
    8. Drexler HC
    9. Araúzo-Bravo MJ
    10. Ng CK
    11. Jauch R
    12. Wilmanns M
    13. Schöler HR

    (2013) A unique Oct4 interface is crucial for reprogramming to pluripotency

    Nature Cell Biology 15:295–301.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2680

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Farcas AM
    2. Blackledge NP
    3. Sudbery I
    4. Long HK
    5. McGouran JF
    6. Rose NR
    7. Lee S
    8. Sims D
    9. Cerase A
    10. Sheahan TW
    11. Koseki H
    12. Brockdorff N
    13. Ponting CP
    14. Kessler BM
    15. Klose RJ

    (2012) KDM2B links the polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1) to recognition of CpG islands

    eLife 1:e00205.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00205

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Foo SM
    2. Sun Y
    3. Lim B
    4. Ziukaite R
    5. O'Brien K
    6. Nien CY
    7. Kirov N
    8. Shvartsman SY
    9. Rushlow CA

    (2014) Zelda potentiates morphogen activity by increasing chromatin accessibility

    Current Biology 24:1341–1346.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.04.032

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Guertin MJ
    2. Lis JT

    (2010) Chromatin landscape dictates HSF binding to target DNA elements

    PLoS Genetics 6:e1001114.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Göke J
    2. Jung M
    3. Behrens S
    4. Chavez L
    5. O'Keeffe S
    6. Timmermann B
    7. Lehrach H
    8. Adjaye J
    9. Vingron M

    (2011) Combinatorial binding in human and mouse embryonic stem cells identifies conserved enhancers active in early embryonic development

    PLoS Computational Biology 7:e1002304.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002304

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Hainer SJ
    2. Fazzio TG

    (2015) Regulation of nucleosome architecture and factor binding revealed by nuclease footprinting of the ESC genome

    Cell Reports 13:61–69.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.08.071

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Hainer SJ
    2. Gu W
    3. Carone BR
    4. Landry BD
    5. Rando OJ
    6. Mello CC
    7. Fazzio TG

    (2015) Suppression of pervasive noncoding transcription in embryonic stem cells by esBAF

    Genes & Development 29:362–378.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.253534.114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Hatta M
    2. Cirillo LA

    (2007) Chromatin opening and stable perturbation of core histone:dna contacts by FoxO1

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 282:35583–35593.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M704735200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Hay D
    2. Hughes JR
    3. Babbs C
    4. Davies JO
    5. Graham BJ
    6. Hanssen LL
    7. Kassouf MT
    8. Oudelaar AM
    9. Sharpe JA
    10. Suciu MC
    11. Telenius J
    12. Williams R
    13. Rode C
    14. Li PS
    15. Pennacchio LA
    16. Sloane-Stanley JA
    17. Ayyub H
    18. Butler S
    19. Sauka-Spengler T
    20. Gibbons RJ
    21. Smith AJ
    22. Wood WG
    23. Higgs DR

    (2016) Genetic dissection of the α-globin super-enhancer in vivo

    Nature Genetics 48:895–903.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3605

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Heinz S
    2. Benner C
    3. Spann N
    4. Bertolino E
    5. Lin YC
    6. Laslo P
    7. Cheng JX
    8. Murre C
    9. Singh H
    10. Glass CK

    (2010) Simple combinations of lineage-determining transcription factors prime cis-regulatory elements required for macrophage and B cell identities

    Molecular Cell 38:576–589.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.05.004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Ho L
    2. Jothi R
    3. Ronan JL
    4. Cui K
    5. Zhao K
    6. Crabtree GR

    (2009) An embryonic stem cell chromatin remodeling complex, esBAF, is an essential component of the core pluripotency transcriptional network

    PNAS 106:5187–5191.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812888106

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Ho L
    2. Miller EL
    3. Ronan JL
    4. Ho WQ
    5. Jothi R
    6. Crabtree GR

    (2011) esBAF facilitates pluripotency by conditioning the genome for LIF/STAT3 signalling and by regulating polycomb function

    Nature Cell Biology 13:903–913.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2285

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Holmqvist PH
    2. Belikov S
    3. Zaret KS
    4. Wrange O

    (2005) FoxA1 binding to the MMTV LTR modulates chromatin structure and transcription

    Experimental Cell Research 304:593–603.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2004.12.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Hu G
    2. Schones DE
    3. Cui K
    4. Ybarra R
    5. Northrup D
    6. Tang Q
    7. Gattinoni L
    8. Restifo NP
    9. Huang S
    10. Zhao K

    (2011) Regulation of nucleosome landscape and transcription factor targeting at tissue-specific enhancers by BRG1

    Genome Research 21:1650–1658.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.121145.111

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Iwafuchi-Doi M
    2. Donahue G
    3. Kakumanu A
    4. Watts JA
    5. Mahony S
    6. Pugh BF
    7. Lee D
    8. Kaestner KH
    9. Zaret KS

    (2016) The pioneer transcription factor FoxA maintains an accessible nucleosome configuration at enhancers for Tissue-Specific gene activation

    Molecular Cell 62:79–91.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.03.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. John S
    2. Sabo PJ
    3. Thurman RE
    4. Sung MH
    5. Biddie SC
    6. Johnson TA
    7. Hager GL
    8. Stamatoyannopoulos JA

    (2011) Chromatin accessibility pre-determines glucocorticoid receptor binding patterns

    Nature Genetics 43:264–268.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.759

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Kidder BL
    2. Palmer S
    3. Knott JG

    (2009) SWI/SNF-Brg1 regulates self-renewal and occupies core pluripotency-related genes in embryonic stem cells

    Stem Cells 27:317–328.

    https://doi.org/10.1634/stemcells.2008-0710

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Klemm JD
    2. Rould MA
    3. Aurora R
    4. Herr W
    5. Pabo CO

    (1994) Crystal structure of the Oct-1 POU domain bound to an octamer site: dna recognition with tethered DNA-binding modules

    Cell 77:21–32.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90231-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Kornberg RD
    2. Lorch Y

    (1999) Twenty-five years of the nucleosome, fundamental particle of the eukaryote chromosome

    Cell 98:285–294.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81958-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Langmead B
    2. Salzberg SL

    (2012) Fast gapped-read alignment with bowtie 2

    Nature Methods 9:357–359.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1923

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Li H
    2. Handsaker B
    3. Wysoker A
    4. Fennell T
    5. Ruan J
    6. Homer N
    7. Marth G
    8. Abecasis G
    9. Durbin R
    10. 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup

    (2009) The sequence alignment/Map format and SAMtools

    Bioinformatics 25:2078–2079.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Love MI
    2. Huber W
    3. Anders S

    (2014) Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2

    Genome Biology 15:1–21.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8

    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Lu F
    2. Liu Y
    3. Inoue A
    4. Suzuki T
    5. Zhao K
    6. Zhang Y

    (2016) Establishing chromatin regulatory landscape during mouse preimplantation development

    Cell 165:1375–1388.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.05.050

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Lupien M
    2. Eeckhoute J
    3. Meyer CA
    4. Wang Q
    5. Zhang Y
    6. Li W
    7. Carroll JS
    8. Liu XS
    9. Brown M

    (2008) FoxA1 translates epigenetic signatures into enhancer-driven lineage-specific transcription

    Cell 132:958–970.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.01.018

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Magnani L
    2. Eeckhoute J
    3. Lupien M

    (2011) Pioneer factors: directing transcriptional regulators within the chromatin environment

    Trends in Genetics 27:465–474.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2011.07.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Marathe HG
    2. Mehta G
    3. Zhang X
    4. Datar I
    5. Mehrotra A
    6. Yeung KC
    7. de la Serna IL

    (2013) SWI/SNF enzymes promote SOX10- mediated activation of myelin gene expression

    PLoS One 8:e69037.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069037

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. McLean CY
    2. Bristor D
    3. Hiller M
    4. Clarke SL
    5. Schaar BT
    6. Lowe CB
    7. Wenger AM
    8. Bejerano G

    (2010) GREAT improves functional interpretation of cis-regulatory regions

    Nature Biotechnology 28:495–501.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1630

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Nakagawa M
    2. Koyanagi M
    3. Tanabe K
    4. Takahashi K
    5. Ichisaka T
    6. Aoi T
    7. Okita K
    8. Mochiduki Y
    9. Takizawa N
    10. Yamanaka S

    (2008) Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without myc from mouse and human fibroblasts

    Nature Biotechnology 26:101–106.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1374

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Niwa H
    2. Miyazaki J
    3. Smith AG

    (2000) Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells

    Nature Genetics 24:372–376.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/74199

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Pardo M
    2. Lang B
    3. Yu L
    4. Prosser H
    5. Bradley A
    6. Babu MM
    7. Choudhary J

    (2010) An expanded Oct4 interaction network: implications for stem cell biology, development, and disease

    Cell Stem Cell 6:382–395.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2010.03.004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Picelli S
    2. Björklund AK
    3. Reinius B
    4. Sagasser S
    5. Winberg G
    6. Sandberg R

    (2014) Tn5 transposase and tagmentation procedures for massively scaled sequencing projects

    Genome Research 24:2033–2040.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.177881.114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Ramírez F
    2. Dündar F
    3. Diehl S
    4. Grüning BA
    5. Manke T

    (2014) deepTools: a flexible platform for exploring deep-sequencing data

    Nucleic Acids Research 42:W187–W191.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku365

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Raposo AA
    2. Vasconcelos FF
    3. Drechsel D
    4. Marie C
    5. Johnston C
    6. Dolle D
    7. Bithell A
    8. Gillotin S
    9. van den Berg DL
    10. Ettwiller L
    11. Flicek P
    12. Crawford GE
    13. Parras CM
    14. Berninger B
    15. Buckley NJ
    16. Guillemot F
    17. Castro DS
    18. Den Berg, D VAN

    (2015) Ascl1 coordinately regulates gene expression and the chromatin landscape during neurogenesis

    Cell Reports 10:1544–1556.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.02.025

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Saldanha AJ

    (2004) Java treeview--extensible visualization of microarray data

    Bioinformatics 20:3246–3248.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bth349

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Sanalkumar R
    2. Johnson KD
    3. Gao X
    4. Boyer ME
    5. Chang YI
    6. Hewitt KJ
    7. Zhang J
    8. Bresnick EH

    (2014) Mechanism governing a stem cell-generating cis-regulatory element

    PNAS 111:E1091–E1100.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1400065111

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Schep AN
    2. Buenrostro JD
    3. Denny SK
    4. Schwartz K
    5. Sherlock G
    6. Greenleaf WJ

    (2015) Structured nucleosome fingerprints enable high-resolution mapping of chromatin architecture within regulatory regions

    Genome Research 25:1757–1770.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.192294.115

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Schulz KN
    2. Bondra ER
    3. Moshe A
    4. Villalta JE
    5. Lieb JD
    6. Kaplan T
    7. McKay DJ
    8. Harrison MM

    (2015) Zelda is differentially required for chromatin accessibility, transcription factor binding, and gene expression in the early Drosophila embryo

    Genome Research 25:1715–1726.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.192682.115

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Shakya A
    2. Callister C
    3. Goren A
    4. Yosef N
    5. Garg N
    6. Khoddami V
    7. Nix D
    8. Regev A
    9. Tantin D

    (2015) Pluripotency transcription factor Oct4 mediates stepwise nucleosome demethylation and depletion

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 35:1014–1025.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01105-14

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Simandi Z
    2. Horvath A
    3. Wright LC
    4. Cuaranta-Monroy I
    5. De Luca I
    6. Karolyi K
    7. Sauer S
    8. Deleuze JF
    9. Gudas LJ
    10. Cowley SM
    11. Nagy L

    (2016) OCT4 acts as an integrator of pluripotency and signal-induced differentiation

    Molecular Cell 63:647–661.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.06.039

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Singhal N
    2. Graumann J
    3. Wu G
    4. Araúzo-Bravo MJ
    5. Han DW
    6. Greber B
    7. Gentile L
    8. Mann M
    9. Schöler HR

    (2010) Chromatin-remodeling components of the BAF complex facilitate reprogramming

    Cell 141:943–955.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.04.037

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Soufi A
    2. Donahue G
    3. Zaret KS

    (2012) Facilitators and impediments of the pluripotency reprogramming factors' initial engagement with the genome

    Cell 151:994–1004.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.09.045

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Soufi A
    2. Garcia MF
    3. Jaroszewicz A
    4. Osman N
    5. Pellegrini M
    6. Zaret KS

    (2015) Pioneer transcription factors target partial DNA motifs on nucleosomes to initiate reprogramming

    Cell 161:555–568.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.03.017

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Spitz F
    2. Furlong EE

    (2012) Transcription factors: from enhancer binding to developmental control

    Nature Reviews Genetics 13:613–626.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3207

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. Software

    1. Stark R
    2. Brown G

    (2011)

    DiffBind: differential binding analysis of ChIP-Seq peak data

    Bioconductor.
65. 1. Sterneckert J
    2. Höing S
    3. Schöler HR

    (2012) Concise review: oct4 and more: the reprogramming expressway

    Stem Cells 30:15–21.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/stem.765

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Swinstead EE
    2. Paakinaho V
    3. Presman DM
    4. Hager GL

    (2016) Pioneer factors and ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling factors interact dynamically: a new perspective

    BioEssays 38:1150–1157.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201600137

    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Takahashi K
    2. Yamanaka S

    (2006) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors

    Cell 126:663–676.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.024

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Takaku M
    2. Grimm SA
    3. Shimbo T
    4. Perera L
    5. Menafra R
    6. Stunnenberg HG
    7. Archer TK
    8. Machida S
    9. Kurumizaka H
    10. Wade PA

    (2016) GATA3-dependent cellular reprogramming requires activation-domain dependent recruitment of a chromatin remodeler

    Genome Biology 17:1–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-0897-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Theodorou V
    2. Stark R
    3. Menon S
    4. Carroll JS

    (2013) GATA3 acts upstream of FOXA1 in mediating ESR1 binding by shaping enhancer accessibility

    Genome Research 23:12–22.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.139469.112

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. van den Berg DL
    2. Snoek T
    3. Mullin NP
    4. Yates A
    5. Bezstarosti K
    6. Demmers J
    7. Chambers I
    8. Poot RA

    (2010) An Oct4-centered protein interaction network in embryonic stem cells

    Cell Stem Cell 6:369–381.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2010.02.014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Villar D
    2. Flicek P
    3. Odom DT

    (2014) Evolution of transcription factor binding in metazoans - mechanisms and functional implications

    Nature Reviews Genetics 15:221–233.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3481

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Voss TC
    2. Hager GL

    (2014) Dynamic regulation of transcriptional states by chromatin and transcription factors

    Nature Reviews Genetics 15:69–81.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3623

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Wang L
    2. Du Y
    3. Ward JM
    4. Shimbo T
    5. Lackford B
    6. Zheng X
    7. Miao YL
    8. Zhou B
    9. Han L
    10. Fargo DC
    11. Jothi R
    12. Williams CJ
    13. Wade PA
    14. Hu G

    (2014) INO80 facilitates pluripotency gene activation in embryonic stem cell self-renewal, reprogramming, and blastocyst development

    Cell Stem Cell 14:575–591.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2014.02.013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Wapinski OL
    2. Vierbuchen T
    3. Qu K
    4. Lee QY
    5. Chanda S
    6. Fuentes DR
    7. Giresi PG
    8. Ng YH
    9. Marro S
    10. Neff NF
    11. Drechsel D
    12. Martynoga B
    13. Castro DS
    14. Webb AE
    15. Südhof TC
    16. Brunet A
    17. Guillemot F
    18. Chang HY
    19. Wernig M
    20. Qian y LEE
    21. Yi h NG

    (2013) Hierarchical mechanisms for direct reprogramming of fibroblasts to neurons

    Cell 155:621–635.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.09.028

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Whyte WA
    2. Bilodeau S
    3. Orlando DA
    4. Hoke HA
    5. Frampton GM
    6. Foster CT
    7. Cowley SM
    8. Young RA

    (2012) Enhancer decommissioning by LSD1 during embryonic stem cell differentiation

    Nature 482:221–225.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10805

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Wu J
    2. Huang B
    3. Chen H
    4. Yin Q
    5. Liu Y
    6. Xiang Y
    7. Zhang B
    8. Liu B
    9. Wang Q
    10. Xia W
    11. Li W
    12. Li Y
    13. Ma J
    14. Peng X
    15. Zheng H
    16. Ming J
    17. Zhang W
    18. Zhang J
    19. Tian G
    20. Xu F
    21. Chang Z
    22. Na J
    23. Yang X
    24. Xie W

    (2016) The landscape of accessible chromatin in mammalian preimplantation embryos

    Nature 534:652–657.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18606

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Wu W
    2. Cheng Y
    3. Keller CA
    4. Ernst J
    5. Kumar SA
    6. Mishra T
    7. Morrissey C
    8. Dorman CM
    9. Chen KB
    10. Drautz D
    11. Giardine B
    12. Shibata Y
    13. Song L
    14. Pimkin M
    15. Crawford GE
    16. Furey TS
    17. Kellis M
    18. Miller W
    19. Taylor J
    20. Schuster SC
    21. Zhang Y
    22. Chiaromonte F
    23. Blobel GA
    24. Weiss MJ
    25. Hardison RC

    (2011) Dynamics of the epigenetic landscape during erythroid differentiation after GATA1 restoration

    Genome Research 21:1659–1671.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.125088.111

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Wunderlich Z
    2. Mirny LA

    (2009) Different gene regulation strategies revealed by analysis of binding motifs

    Trends in Genetics 25:434–440.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2009.08.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Xu Z
    2. Chen H
    3. Ling J
    4. Yu D
    5. Struffi P
    6. Small S

    (2014) Impacts of the ubiquitous factor zelda on Bicoid-dependent DNA binding and transcription in Drosophila

    Genes & Development 28:608–621.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.234534.113

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Yang SH
    2. Kalkan T
    3. Morissroe C
    4. Marks H
    5. Stunnenberg H
    6. Smith A
    7. Sharrocks AD

    (2014) Otx2 and Oct4 drive early enhancer activation during embryonic stem cell transition from naive pluripotency

    Cell Reports 7:1968–1981.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2014.05.037

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. You JS
    2. Kelly TK
    3. De Carvalho DD
    4. Taberlay PC
    5. Liang G
    6. Jones PA

    (2011) OCT4 establishes and maintains nucleosome-depleted regions that provide additional layers of epigenetic regulation of its target genes

    PNAS 108:14497–14502.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1111309108

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Yue F
    2. Cheng Y
    3. Breschi A
    4. Vierstra J
    5. Wu W
    6. Ryba T
    7. Sandstrom R
    8. Ma Z
    9. Davis C
    10. Pope BD
    11. Shen Y
    12. Pervouchine DD
    13. Djebali S
    14. Thurman RE
    15. Kaul R
    16. Rynes E
    17. Kirilusha A
    18. Marinov GK
    19. Williams BA
    20. Trout D
    21. Amrhein H
    22. Fisher-Aylor K
    23. Antoshechkin I
    24. DeSalvo G
    25. See LH
    26. Fastuca M
    27. Drenkow J
    28. Zaleski C
    29. Dobin A
    30. Prieto P
    31. Lagarde J
    32. Bussotti G
    33. Tanzer A
    34. Denas O
    35. Li K
    36. Bender MA
    37. Zhang M
    38. Byron R
    39. Groudine MT
    40. McCleary D
    41. Pham L
    42. Ye Z
    43. Kuan S
    44. Edsall L
    45. Wu YC
    46. Rasmussen MD
    47. Bansal MS
    48. Kellis M
    49. Keller CA
    50. Morrissey CS
    51. Mishra T
    52. Jain D
    53. Dogan N
    54. Harris RS
    55. Cayting P
    56. Kawli T
    57. Boyle AP
    58. Euskirchen G
    59. Kundaje A
    60. Lin S
    61. Lin Y
    62. Jansen C
    63. Malladi VS
    64. Cline MS
    65. Erickson DT
    66. Kirkup VM
    67. Learned K
    68. Sloan CA
    69. Rosenbloom KR
    70. Lacerda de Sousa B
    71. Beal K
    72. Pignatelli M
    73. Flicek P
    74. Lian J
    75. Kahveci T
    76. Lee D
    77. Kent WJ
    78. Ramalho Santos M
    79. Herrero J
    80. Notredame C
    81. Johnson A
    82. Vong S
    83. Lee K
    84. Bates D
    85. Neri F
    86. Diegel M
    87. Canfield T
    88. Sabo PJ
    89. Wilken MS
    90. Reh TA
    91. Giste E
    92. Shafer A
    93. Kutyavin T
    94. Haugen E
    95. Dunn D
    96. Reynolds AP
    97. Neph S
    98. Humbert R
    99. Hansen RS
    100. De Bruijn M
    101. Selleri L
    102. Rudensky A
    103. Josefowicz S
    104. Samstein R
    105. Eichler EE
    106. Orkin SH
    107. Levasseur D
    108. Papayannopoulou T
    109. Chang KH
    110. Skoultchi A
    111. Gosh S
    112. Disteche C
    113. Treuting P
    114. Wang Y
    115. Weiss MJ
    116. Blobel GA
    117. Cao X
    118. Zhong S
    119. Wang T
    120. Good PJ
    121. Lowdon RF
    122. Adams LB
    123. Zhou XQ
    124. Pazin MJ
    125. Feingold EA
    126. Wold B
    127. Taylor J
    128. Mortazavi A
    129. Weissman SM
    130. Stamatoyannopoulos JA
    131. Snyder MP
    132. Guigo R
    133. Gingeras TR
    134. Gilbert DM
    135. Hardison RC
    136. Beer MA
    137. Ren B
    138. Mouse ENCODE Consortium

    (2014) A comparative encyclopedia of DNA elements in the mouse genome

    Nature 515:355–364.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13992

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Zaret KS
    2. Carroll JS

    (2011) Pioneer transcription factors: establishing competence for gene expression

    Genes & Development 25:2227–2241.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.176826.111

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Zhang X
    2. Li B
    3. Li W
    4. Ma L
    5. Zheng D
    6. Li L
    7. Yang W
    8. Chu M
    9. Chen W
    10. Mailman RB
    11. Zhu J
    12. Fan G
    13. Archer TK
    14. Wang Y

    (2014) Transcriptional repression by the BRG1-SWI/SNF complex affects the pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells

    Stem Cell Reports 3:460–474.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.07.004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Hamish W King

   Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   HWK, Conceptualization, Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5972-8926

2. Robert J Klose

   Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   RJK, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Writing—original draft, Project administration, Writing—review and editing

   For correspondence

   rob.klose@bioch.ox.ac.uk

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8726-7888

• 10,504

  views

• 1,589

  downloads

• 220

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.