Figure 5
Figure 5. Cell type–specific enhancers. (A) Motif composition of cell type–specific active enhancers in eRA+Treg compared with eTconv. Shown are extracted de novo motifs, their hypergeometric P value, and the best matching known motif families (with the similarity score to the best matching known motif in parentheses). (B) An overview of the produced ChIP-seq data are illustrated by a UCSC genome browser graph (http://genome.ucsc.edu/) of a 60-kb region of the IL2RA promoter. (C) Venn diagrams for genome-wide TF binding events of ETS1, FOXP3, RUNX1, and STAT5 in eRA+Treg and eTconv. (D) ChIP-seq signal strength of STAT5, FOXP3, ETS1, and RUNX1 in eRA+Treg- and eTconv-specific active H3K27ac-marked enhancer candidates.

Cell type–specific enhancers. (A) Motif composition of cell type–specific active enhancers in eRA+Treg compared with eTconv. Shown are extracted de novo motifs, their hypergeometric P value, and the best matching known motif families (with the similarity score to the best matching known motif in parentheses). (B) An overview of the produced ChIP-seq data are illustrated by a UCSC genome browser graph (http://genome.ucsc.edu/) of a 60-kb region of the IL2RA promoter. (C) Venn diagrams for genome-wide TF binding events of ETS1, FOXP3, RUNX1, and STAT5 in eRA+Treg and eTconv. (D) ChIP-seq signal strength of STAT5, FOXP3, ETS1, and RUNX1 in eRA+Treg- and eTconv-specific active H3K27ac-marked enhancer candidates.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal