Reprogramming DNA Methylation in the Mammalian Life Cycle: Building and Breaking Epigenetic Barriers

Overview

Journal Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci

Specialty Biology

Date 2012 Nov 21

PMID 23166394

Citations 195

Authors

Stefanie Seisenberger

Julian R Peat

Timothy A Hore

Fatima Santos

Wendy Dean

Wolf Reik

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

In mammalian development, epigenetic modifications, including DNA methylation patterns, play a crucial role in defining cell fate but also represent epigenetic barriers that restrict developmental potential. At two points in the life cycle, DNA methylation marks are reprogrammed on a global scale, concomitant with restoration of developmental potency. DNA methylation patterns are subsequently re-established with the commitment towards a distinct cell fate. This reprogramming of DNA methylation takes place firstly on fertilization in the zygote, and secondly in primordial germ cells (PGCs), which are the direct progenitors of sperm or oocyte. In each reprogramming window, a unique set of mechanisms regulates DNA methylation erasure and re-establishment. Recent advances have uncovered roles for the TET3 hydroxylase and passive demethylation, together with base excision repair (BER) and the elongator complex, in methylation erasure from the zygote. Deamination by AID, BER and passive demethylation have been implicated in reprogramming in PGCs, but the process in its entirety is still poorly understood. In this review, we discuss the dynamics of DNA methylation reprogramming in PGCs and the zygote, the mechanisms involved and the biological significance of these events. Advances in our understanding of such natural epigenetic reprogramming are beginning to aid enhancement of experimental reprogramming in which the role of potential mechanisms can be investigated in vitro. Conversely, insights into in vitro reprogramming techniques may aid our understanding of epigenetic reprogramming in the germline and supply important clues in reprogramming for therapies in regenerative medicine.

Citing Articles

Epigenetic signatures of intergenerational exposure to violence in three generations of Syrian refugees.

Mulligan C, Quinn E, Hamadmad D, Dutton C, Nevell L, Binder A Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):5945.

PMID: 40016245 PMC: 11868390. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-89818-z.

Inter- and Transgenerational Effects of In Ovo Stimulation with Bioactive Compounds on Cecal Tonsils and Cecal Mucosa Transcriptomes in a Chicken Model.

Ibrahim M, Bednarczyk M, Stadnicka K, Grochowska E Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(3).

PMID: 39940944 PMC: 11817890. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26031174.

Temporal and regional X-linked gene reactivation in the mouse germline reveals site-specific retention of epigenetic silencing.

Roidor C, Syx L, Beyne E, Raynaud P, Zielinski D, Teissandier A Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2025; .

PMID: 39838109 DOI: 10.1038/s41594-024-01469-2.

DEMETER DNA demethylase reshapes the global DNA methylation landscape and controls cell identity transition during plant regeneration.

Lee S, Bae S, Jeon Y, Seo P, Choi Y BMC Genomics. 2024; 25(1):1234.

PMID: 39716048 PMC: 11665089. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-024-11144-x.

Applying an evolutionary perspective to assisted reproductive technologies.

Evans J, Garcia-Gonzalez F PNAS Nexus. 2024; 3(12):pgae512.

PMID: 39691447 PMC: 11650523. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae512.

References

Maiti A, Drohat A . Thymine DNA glycosylase can rapidly excise 5-formylcytosine and 5-carboxylcytosine: potential implications for active demethylation of CpG sites. J Biol Chem. 2011; 286(41):35334-35338. PMC: 3195571. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.C111.284620. View

Beaujean N, Hartshorne G, Cavilla J, Taylor J, Gardner J, Wilmut I . Non-conservation of mammalian preimplantation methylation dynamics. Curr Biol. 2004; 14(7):R266-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2004.03.019. View

Resnick J, Bixler L, Cheng L, Donovan P . Long-term proliferation of mouse primordial germ cells in culture. Nature. 1992; 359(6395):550-1. DOI: 10.1038/359550a0. View

Brons I, Smithers L, Trotter M, Rugg-Gunn P, Sun B, Chuva de Sousa Lopes S . Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature. 2007; 448(7150):191-5. DOI: 10.1038/nature05950. View

Cortazar D, Kunz C, Selfridge J, Lettieri T, Saito Y, MacDougall E . Embryonic lethal phenotype reveals a function of TDG in maintaining epigenetic stability. Nature. 2011; 470(7334):419-23. DOI: 10.1038/nature09672. View

Smith Z, Chan M, Mikkelsen T, Gu H, Gnirke A, Regev A . A unique regulatory phase of DNA methylation in the early mammalian embryo. Nature. 2012; 484(7394):339-44. PMC: 3331945. DOI: 10.1038/nature10960. View

Lucifero D, Mann M, Bartolomei M, Trasler J . Gene-specific timing and epigenetic memory in oocyte imprinting. Hum Mol Genet. 2004; 13(8):839-49. DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddh104. View

Frauer C, Hoffmann T, Bultmann S, Casa V, Cardoso M, Antes I . Recognition of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine by the Uhrf1 SRA domain. PLoS One. 2011; 6(6):e21306. PMC: 3120858. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021306. View

Sharif J, Muto M, Takebayashi S, Suetake I, Iwamatsu A, Endo T . The SRA protein Np95 mediates epigenetic inheritance by recruiting Dnmt1 to methylated DNA. Nature. 2007; 450(7171):908-12. DOI: 10.1038/nature06397. View

10.

Branco M, Ficz G, Reik W . Uncovering the role of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in the epigenome. Nat Rev Genet. 2011; 13(1):7-13. DOI: 10.1038/nrg3080. View

11.

Tomizawa S, Kobayashi H, Watanabe T, Andrews S, Hata K, Kelsey G . Dynamic stage-specific changes in imprinted differentially methylated regions during early mammalian development and prevalence of non-CpG methylation in oocytes. Development. 2011; 138(5):811-20. PMC: 3035086. DOI: 10.1242/dev.061416. View

12.

Gu T, Guo F, Yang H, Wu H, Xu G, Liu W . The role of Tet3 DNA dioxygenase in epigenetic reprogramming by oocytes. Nature. 2011; 477(7366):606-10. DOI: 10.1038/nature10443. View

13.

Lane N, Dean W, Erhardt S, Hajkova P, Surani A, Walter J . Resistance of IAPs to methylation reprogramming may provide a mechanism for epigenetic inheritance in the mouse. Genesis. 2003; 35(2):88-93. DOI: 10.1002/gene.10168. View

14.

Glover C, Marin M, Eaves C, Helgason C, Piret J, Bryan J . Meta-analysis of differentiating mouse embryonic stem cell gene expression kinetics reveals early change of a small gene set. PLoS Comput Biol. 2006; 2(11):e158. PMC: 1664699. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020158. View

15.

Li E, Beard C, Jaenisch R . Role for DNA methylation in genomic imprinting. Nature. 1993; 366(6453):362-5. DOI: 10.1038/366362a0. View

16.

Lepikhov K, Zakhartchenko V, Hao R, Yang F, Wrenzycki C, Niemann H . Evidence for conserved DNA and histone H3 methylation reprogramming in mouse, bovine and rabbit zygotes. Epigenetics Chromatin. 2008; 1(1):8. PMC: 2590599. DOI: 10.1186/1756-8935-1-8. View

17.

Tada M, Tada T, Lefebvre L, Barton S, Surani M . Embryonic germ cells induce epigenetic reprogramming of somatic nucleus in hybrid cells. EMBO J. 1997; 16(21):6510-20. PMC: 1170256. DOI: 10.1093/emboj/16.21.6510. View

18.

Santos F, Hendrich B, Reik W, Dean W . Dynamic reprogramming of DNA methylation in the early mouse embryo. Dev Biol. 2002; 241(1):172-82. DOI: 10.1006/dbio.2001.0501. View

19.

Li E, Bestor T, Jaenisch R . Targeted mutation of the DNA methyltransferase gene results in embryonic lethality. Cell. 1992; 69(6):915-26. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90611-f. View

20.

Zamudio N, Bourchis D . Transposable elements in the mammalian germline: a comfortable niche or a deadly trap?. Heredity (Edinb). 2010; 105(1):92-104. DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2010.53. View