Skip to content
naulon
Get started

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Nov 3, 2026.

A mammalian methylation array for profiling methylation levels at conserved sequences

Adriana Arneson, Amin Haghani, Michael J. Thompson and 15 more (opens in a new tab)

Nature Communications · 2022 · CC BY

doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28355-z (opens in a new tab)

Abstract

Infinium methylation arrays are not available for the vast majority of non-human mammals. Moreover, even if species-specific arrays were available, probe differences between them would confound cross-species comparisons. To address these challenges, we developed the mammalian methylation array, a single custom array that measures up to 36k CpGs per species that are well conserved across many mammalian species. We designed a set of probes that can tolerate specific cross-species mutations. We annotate the array in over 200 species and report CpG island status and chromatin states in select species. Calibration experiments demonstrate the high fidelity in humans, rats, and mice. The mammalian methylation array has several strengths: it applies to all mammalian species even those that have not yet been sequenced, it provides deep coverage of conserved cytosines facilitating the development of epigenetic biomarkers, and it increases the probability that biological insights gained in one species will translate to others.

References 67

  1. 1.

    Smith ZD, Meissner A. DNA methylation: roles in mammalian development. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2013;14:204-220.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg3354 (opens in a new tab)

  2. 2.

    Bibikova, M. et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling using Infinium((R)) assay. Epigenomics. 1, 10.2217/epi.09.14 (2009).

    Not in our library10.2217/epi.09.14 (opens in a new tab)

  3. 3.

    Bibikova M, et al. High density DNA methylation array with single CpG site resolution. Genomics. 2011;98:288-295.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ygeno.2011.07.007 (opens in a new tab)

  4. 4.

    Meissner A, et al. Reduced representation bisulfite sequencing for comparative high-resolution DNA methylation analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:5868-5877.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gki901 (opens in a new tab)

  5. 5.

    Morselli M, et al. Targeted bisulfite sequencing for biomarker discovery. Methods. 2021;187:13-27.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ymeth.2020.07.006 (opens in a new tab)

  6. 6.
    Critical evaluation of the Illumina MethylationEPIC BeadChip microarray for whole-genome DNA methylation profiling · 2016
    No notice
  7. 7.
    The UCSC Genome Browser database: 2019 update · 2018
    No notice
  8. 8.

    Guintivano J, Aryee MJ, Kaminsky ZA. A cell epigenotype specific model for the correction of brain cellular heterogeneity bias and its application to age, brain region and major depression. Epigenetics. 2013;8:290-302.

    Not in our library10.4161/epi.23924 (opens in a new tab)

  9. 9.
    DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types · 2013
    Corrected
  10. 10.

    Horvath S, Levine AJ. HIV-1 infection accelerates age according to the epigenetic clock. J. Infect. Dis. 2015;212:1563-1573.

    Not in our library10.1093/infdis/jiv277 (opens in a new tab)

  11. 11.
    DNA methylation arrays as surrogate measures of cell mixture distribution · 2012
    No notice
  12. 12.
    Epigenetic clock for skin and blood cells applied to Hutchinson Gilford Progeria Syndrome and ex vivo studies · 2018
    No notice
  13. 13.
    An epigenetic biomarker of aging for lifespan and healthspan · 2018
    No notice
  14. 14.

    Hannum G, et al. Genome-wide methylation profiles reveal quantitative views of human aging rates. Mol. Cell. 2013;49:359-367.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.molcel.2012.10.016 (opens in a new tab)

  15. 15.

    McLean, C. Y. et al. GREAT improves functional interpretation of cis-regulatory regions. Nat. Biotechnol.28, 10.1038/nbt.1630 (2010).

    Not in our library10.1038/nbt.1630 (opens in a new tab)

  16. 16.

    Jain A, Tuteja G. TissueEnrich: tissue-specific gene enrichment analysis. Bioinformatics. 2019;35:1966-1967.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/bty890 (opens in a new tab)

  17. 17.

    Li X, Chen F, Chen Y. Gcluster: a simple-to-use tool for visualizing and comparing genome contexts for numerous genomes. Bioinformatics. 2020;36:3871-3873.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa212 (opens in a new tab)

  18. 18.

    Roadmap Epigenomics C, et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature. 2015;518:317-330.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature14248 (opens in a new tab)

  19. 19.
    Universal annotation of the human genome through integration of over a thousand epigenomic datasets · 2022
    No notice
  20. 20.

    Ernst J, Kellis M. ChromHMM: automating chromatin-state discovery and characterization. Nat. Methods. 2012;9:215-216.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.1906 (opens in a new tab)

  21. 21.

    Ernst J, Kellis M. Large-scale imputation of epigenomic datasets for systematic annotation of diverse human tissues. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015;33:364-376.

    Not in our library10.1038/nbt.3157 (opens in a new tab)

  22. 22.
    Learning a genome-wide score of human–mouse conservation at the functional genomics level · 2021
    Not checked
  23. 23.

    Siepel A, et al. Evolutionarily conserved elements in vertebrate, insect, worm, and yeast genomes. Genome Res. 2005;15:1034-1050.

    Not in our library10.1101/gr.3715005 (opens in a new tab)

  24. 24.

    Lindblad-Toh K, et al. A high-resolution map of human evolutionary constraint using 29 mammals. Nature. 2011;478:476-482.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature10530 (opens in a new tab)

  25. 25.

    Garber M, et al. Identifying novel constrained elements by exploiting biased substitution patterns. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:i54-i62.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btp190 (opens in a new tab)

  26. 26.
    Identifying a High Fraction of the Human Genome to be under Selective Constraint Using GERP++ · 2010
    No notice
  27. 27.

    Arneson A, Ernst J. Systematic discovery of conservation states for single-nucleotide annotation of the human genome. Commun. Biol. 2019;2:248.

    Not in our library10.1038/s42003-019-0488-1 (opens in a new tab)

  28. 28.

    Zhou W, Triche TJ, Laird PW, Shen H. SeSAMe: reducing artifactual detection of DNA methylation by Infinium BeadChips in genomic deletions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:e123-e123.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gky691 (opens in a new tab)

  29. 29.

    Aryee, M. J. et al. Minfi: a flexible and comprehensive bioconductor package for the analysis of Infinium DNA methylation microarrays. Bioinformatics10.1093/bioinformatics/btu049 (2014).

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btu049 (opens in a new tab)

  30. 30.

    Triche TJ, Weisenberger DJ, Van Den Berg D, Laird PW, Siegmund KD. Low-level processing of illumina infinium DNA methylation beadarrays. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:e90.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkt090 (opens in a new tab)

  31. 31.

    Needhamsen M, et al. Usability of human Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip for mouse DNA methylation studies. BMC Bioinformatics. 2017;18:486.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12859-017-1870-y (opens in a new tab)

  32. 32.

    Horvath S, et al. DNA methylation aging and transcriptomic studies in horses. Nat. Commun. 2022;13:40.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41467-021-27754-y (opens in a new tab)

  33. 33.

    Kordowitzki P, et al. Epigenetic clock and methylation study of oocytes from a bovine model of reproductive aging. Aging Cell. 2021;20:e13349.

    Not in our library10.1111/acel.13349 (opens in a new tab)

  34. 34.

    Ząbek T, et al. Methylation marks of blood leukocytes of native Hucul mares differentiated in age. Int. J. Genomics. 2019;2019:2839614.

    Not in our library10.1155/2019/2839614 (opens in a new tab)

  35. 35.

    Zhou Y, et al. Comparative whole genome DNA methylation profiling across cattle tissues reveals global and tissue-specific methylation patterns. BMC Biol. 2020;18:85.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12915-020-00793-5 (opens in a new tab)

  36. 36.

    Liu S, et al. Epigenomics and genotype-phenotype association analyses reveal conserved genetic architecture of complex traits in cattle and human. BMC Biol. 2020;18:80.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12915-020-00792-6 (opens in a new tab)

  37. 37.
    Characterizing the properties of bisulfite sequencing data: maximizing power and sensitivity to identify between-group differences in DNA methylation · 2021
    Not checked
  38. 38.
    DNA methylation predicts age and provides insight into exceptional longevity of bats · 2021
    Corrected
  39. 39.
    A beta-mixture quantile normalization method for correcting probe design bias in Illumina Infinium 450 k DNA methylation data · 2012
    No notice
  40. 40.

    Han Y, et al. New targeted approaches for epigenetic age predictions. BMC Biol. 2020;18:71.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12915-020-00807-2 (opens in a new tab)

  41. 41.

    Vaisvila R, et al. Enzymatic methyl sequencing detects DNA methylation at single-base resolution from picograms of DNA. Genome Res. 2021;31:1280-1289.

    Not in our library10.1101/gr.266551.120 (opens in a new tab)

  42. 42.

    Morris TJ, et al. ChAMP: 450k chip analysis methylation pipeline. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:428-430.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btt684 (opens in a new tab)

  43. 43.
    eFORGE v2.0: updated analysis of cell type-specific signal in epigenomic data · 2019
    No notice
  44. 44.
    An atlas of dynamic chromatin landscapes in mouse fetal development · 2020
    Corrected
  45. 45.

    Horvath, S., Haghani, A., Arneson, A. & Ernst, J. Mammalian Methylation Consortium. 10.5281/zenodo.5711978https://github.com/shorvath/MammalianMethylationConsortium/tree/v1.0.0 (2021).

    Not in our library

  46. 46.

    Lu, A. T. et al. Universal DNA methylation age across mammalian tissues. Preprint at bioRxiv10.1101/2021.01.18.426733 (2021).

    Not in our library

  47. 47.

    Prado NA, et al. Epigenetic clock and methylation studies in elephants. Aging Cell. 2021;20:e13414.

    Not in our library10.1111/acel.13414 (opens in a new tab)

  48. 48.

    Sugrue VJ, et al. Castration delays epigenetic aging and feminizes DNA methylation at androgen-regulated loci. eLife. 2021;10:e64932.

    Not in our library10.7554/elife.64932 (opens in a new tab)

  49. 49.

    Schachtschneider, K. M. et al. Epigenetic clock and DNA methylation analysis of porcine models of aging and obesity. GeroScience10.1007/s11357-021-00439-6 (2021).

    Not in our library10.1007/s11357-021-00439-6 (opens in a new tab)

  50. 50.
    Multi-species and multi-tissue methylation clocks for age estimation in toothed whales and dolphins · 2021
    Not checked
  51. 51.

    Horvath S, et al. DNA methylation clocks tick in naked mole rats but queens age more slowly than nonbreeders. Nat. Aging. 2022;2:46-59.

    Not in our library10.1038/s43587-021-00152-1 (opens in a new tab)

  52. 52.

    Larison B, et al. Epigenetic models developed for plains zebras predict age in domestic horses and endangered equids. Commun. Biol. 2021;4:1412.

    Not in our library10.1038/s42003-021-02935-z (opens in a new tab)

  53. 53.

    Haghani, A. et al. DNA methylation networks underlying mammalian traits. Preprint at bioRxiv10.1101/2021.03.16.435708 (2021).

    Not in our library

  54. 54.
    The UCSC Genome Browser database: 2015 update · 2014
    No notice
  55. 55.

    Farrell, C., Thompson, M., Tosevska, A., Oyetunde, A. & Pellegrini, M. BiSulfite Bolt: a bisulfite sequencing analysis platform. Gigascience10, 10.1093/gigascience/giab033 (2021).

    Not in our library10.1093/gigascience/giab033 (opens in a new tab)

  56. 56.
    QuasR: quantification and annotation of short reads in R · 2014
    No notice
  57. 57.

    Smith JJ, et al. A chromosome-scale assembly of the axolotl genome. Genome Res. 2019;29:317-324.

    Not in our library10.1101/gr.241901.118 (opens in a new tab)

  58. 58.

    Nowoshilow S, et al. The axolotl genome and the evolution of key tissue formation regulators. Nature. 2018;554:50-55.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature25458 (opens in a new tab)

  59. 59.

    Yu G, Wang LG, He QY. ChIPseeker: an R/Bioconductor package for ChIP peak annotation, comparison and visualization. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:2382-2383.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btv145 (opens in a new tab)

  60. 60.
    Ensembl 2020 · 2019
    No notice
  61. 61.

    Quinlan AR, Hall IM. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:841-842.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btq033 (opens in a new tab)

  62. 62.

    Gomez-Martin C, Lebron R, Oliver JL, Hackenberg M. Prediction of CpG islands as an intrinsic clustering property found in many eukaryotic DNA sequences and its relation to DNA methylation. Methods Mol. Biol. 2018;1766:31-47.

    Not in our library10.1007/978-1-4939-7768-0_3 (opens in a new tab)

  63. 63.

    Pedersen, B. S., Eyring, K., De, S., Yang, I. V. & Schwartz, D. A. Fast and accurate alignment of long bisulfite-seq reads. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.1129 (2014).

    Not in our library

  64. 64.

    Uhlén M, et al. Proteomics. Tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science. 2015;347:1260419.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1260419 (opens in a new tab)

  65. 65.

    Yue F, et al. A comparative encyclopedia of DNA elements in the mouse genome. Nature. 2014;515:355-364.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature13992 (opens in a new tab)

  66. 66.
    Preprocessing, normalization and integration of the Illumina HumanMethylationEPIC array with minfi · 2016
    No notice
  67. 67.
    Comparison of whole-genome bisulfite sequencing library preparation strategies identifies sources of biases affecting DNA methylation data · 2018
    Corrected

Cited by papers we hold 5

Questions about this paper

We email you if it is retracted, withdrawn, corrected or flagged.

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.