Epitranscriptomics: Toward A Better Understanding of RNA Modiﬁcations
1 State Key Laboratory of Protein and Plant Gene Research, School of Life Sciences, Peking-Tsinghua Center for Life Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
2 Academy for Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
3 Synthetic and Functional Biomolecules Center, College of Chemistry and Molecular Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Received 3 November 2016; revised 18 February 2017; accepted 22 March 2017 Available online 19 May 2017
Handled by Yun-Gui Yang
Ever since theﬁrst RNA nucleoside modiﬁcation was characterized in 1957 , over 100 distinct chemical modiﬁcations have been identiﬁed in RNA to date . Most of these modi-ﬁcations were characterized in non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including tRNA, rRNA, and small nuclear RNA (snRNA) . Studies in the past few decades have located various modiﬁcations in these ncRNAs and revealed their functional roles . For instance, N 1 -methyladenosine (m 1A), which is typically found at position 58 in the tRNA T-loop of eukaryotes, functions to stabilize tRNA tertiary structure  and affect translation by regulating the associations between tRNA and polysome . Pseudouridine (W) in snRNA can ﬁne-tune branch site interactions and affect mRNA splicing , whereas W in rRNA is required for binding to the internal ribosome entry site (IRES) and hence ensuring translationalﬁdelity . 5-methylcytidine (m5 C) in tRNA can stabilize the secondary structure and maintain the anticodon stem-loop conformation [8,9]. Many of these modiﬁcations in ncRNAs are conserved across different species, further indicating their biological signiﬁcances .
Interestingly, N 6-methyladenosine (m6 A) was revealed to be also present in mRNA several decades ago , and its transcriptome-wide location has been mapped recently [12,13] (Figure 1, Table 1). m 6A modiﬁcation in mRNA has been shown to play roles in gene expression regulation through multiple pathways, including affecting the stability, translation, splicing, and secondary structure of RNA molecules [54–58]. Besides m6A, several other modiﬁcations, including N 6, 20 -O-dimethyladenosine (m 6 Am), inosine (I), m 5C, W, m 1A, and 5-hydroxylmethylcytidine (hm 5C), have also been revealed and mapped in mRNA and long ncRNA (lncRNA) [3,58,59] (Figure 1, Table 1). Recent studies have uncovered several potential biological roles for these mRNA modiﬁcations, such as W-mediated translational read-through , m1A-associated translational regulation , and inosineinduced recoding  (Table 1). Taking together, studies on RNA modiﬁcations have led to the emergence of a new ﬁeld,‘‘epitranscriptomics”, which aims to identify modiﬁcations in transcriptome and unravel their regulatory roles in biological processes .
Studies in theﬁeld of epitranscriptomics have revealed the functional importance of RNA modiﬁcations, yet many questions remain to be answered. While recent progresses in epitranscriptomics have been summarized in many excellent reviews [3,54–58,61,62], we choose to discuss future research directions that could further advance our understanding of theﬁeld (Figure 1).Figure 1 Graphic summary illustrating the key content of current status and future directions of epitranscriptomicsThe left panel shows the current status in theﬁeld of epitranscriptomics, including epitranscriptome mapping and identifying functional roles. Six types of known RNA modiﬁcations are indicated on the schematic plot of a typical mRNA, according to their preferential locations. The right panel shows the future directions of epitranscriptomics we discussed in the current article. m6A, N6-methyladenosine; I, inosine; W, pseudouridine; m 5C, 5-methylcytidine; hm5C, 5-hydroxylmethylcytidine; m 1A, N 1-methyladenosine.Improvement of epitranscriptome mapping tech nology
Interest in the functional studies of RNA modiﬁcations has been revived in recent years. The majority of these studies are highly dependent on the existing transcriptome-wide mapping methods with the utilization of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies . While the practicability of the current modiﬁcation sequencing technologies has been demonstrated by the prosperities of recent NGS-based epitranscriptomics studies [3,54–58,61,62], improvement of these technologies may further boost the studies of modiﬁcations in mRNA and lncRNA. Firstly, technologies that merely rely on the antibody-based RNA immunoprecipitation (RIP) cannot achieve single-base resolution . Take the mapping technologies for hm5 C and m 1A for example, most of the modiﬁed sites can only be detected with resolutions of wider than 50 nucleotides [38,51,52]. Knowing the exact position of a modi-ﬁcation, we are able to deduce its inﬂuence on the local RNA structure and investigate its downstream effects, such as alterations in protein binding . Single-base resolution mapping technology also facilitates interrogation of the potential inﬂuence of mRNA modiﬁcations on biological processes like translational recoding and microRNA (miRNA) binding. Secondly, technologies that allow absolute stoichiometric quantiﬁcation are still needed. In general, biologically essential modiﬁed sites, such as m1 A in position 1322 of 28S rRNA and position 58 of tRNA Met in humans, are modiﬁed with high stoichiometry [4,63]. With the stoichiometric information for the modiﬁed sites, researchers will be able to evaluate their biological signiﬁcances and investigate those highly-modiﬁed sites with higher priority. Of note, Molinie et al. developed a RIPbased method, namely m6A-level and isoform-characterization sequencing (m 6A-LAIC-seq). m 6A-LAIC-seq is capable of detecting m6 A in a quantitative manner , indicating that quantitative information could be extracted by a RIP-based approach when an antibody with high speciﬁcity and sensitivity is available and the immunoprecipitation procedure is optimized enough for the full-length RNA pull-down. Thirdly, technologies for detecting the ‘‘co-existence” of modiﬁcations (either identical or different) in one transcript will be very helpful to reveal the potential interplays among different modiﬁcations. However, this can hardly be achieved with current NGS-based technologies, mainly due to the inevitable RNA fragmentation step in NGS sample preparation. Fourthly, current methods for transcriptome-wide modiﬁcation mapping generally need more than 5 lg of mRNA [12,33,46–48,52,53]. If the required mRNA amount of starting materials can be reduced to the level of nanogram, it would enable the epitranscriptomic studies in the samples with limited availability (e.g., clinical samples). Besides the widely-used NGS-based approaches, the rapidly-evolving third-generation sequencing (TGS) will, hopefully, provide a better approach for transcriptome-wide modiﬁcation mapping. The single-molecule technologies, including PacBio’s single molecule real-time (SMRT) sequencing and Oxford Nanopore’s nanopore sequencing, have the potentials to directly detect modiﬁcations in the original nucleotide molecule [64,65]. These technologies have already been applied to proﬁle the modiﬁcations on DNA in mammalian and bacterial systems [66,67]. Since the signal for every single nucleotide can be captured by TGS technologies, researchers would be able to detect all the modiﬁcations (either identical or different types) at single-base resolution within a RNA molecule. Moreover, as the procedure of PCR ampliﬁcation, which may bring in bias , is no more required, quantitative information for the modiﬁed sites can also be retrieved. However, TGS technologies are still in their developing stages, thus their applicability in RNA modiﬁcation detection remains to be seen.Development of bioinformatics tools
Most of the transcriptome-wide modiﬁcation studies generate a large amount of sequencing data, bioinformatic tools are therefore greatly needed to aid the data analyses. Speciﬁcally, RIP-based transcriptome-wide mapping technologies are commonly used in epitranscriptomic studies. However, most of the currently available peak calling algorithms, such as zeroinﬂated negative binomial algorithm (ZINBA) , modelbased analysis of ChIP-seq (MACS) , and HPeak  are programed for the data of ChIP-seq or DNase-seq [70,71]. Different from such DNA sequencing data, RNA sequencing data generated from RIP assay would bear the bias of depletion in the two terminals due to the procedure of fragmentation . Moreover, the alignment of epitranscriptomic data could be complicated by various isoforms transcribed from one identical genomic locus. Therefore, peak calling tools speciﬁcally designed for RIP data is necessitated. Of note, exomePeak is an RNA-seq based approach for detecting and visualizing the antibody-based epitranscriptome data, which has taken these issues into account . However, for certain antibodybased technologies, the modiﬁcations would cause misincorporation or truncation during reverse transcription, providing additional information to elevate the resolutions [30,51,52,73]. Thus, an optimized algorithm integrating both peak detection and reverse transcription signature capture could further facilitate the modiﬁcation mapping analysis. In addition, several modiﬁcations, including m6 A, W, and m1A, would affect the Watson–Crick base-pairing, hence inﬂuencing the local RNA structure [23,48,53]. Given that RNA structure could affect the protein binding and alter the fate of RNA molecules , software for evaluating the local structure and energy changes caused by modiﬁcations would be useful as well.
Identiﬁcation of writer, eraser, and reader proteins of modiﬁcations
For modiﬁcation studies, it is important to identify the enzymes responsible for the installation and removal of a modiﬁcation (known as‘‘writer”and‘‘eraser”, respectively), as well as the modiﬁcation binding proteins (‘‘reader”). By manipulating the expression of the writer or eraser (if any) for a modiﬁcation, we can observe the global change of the modiﬁcation and further investigate the downstream biological effects. For example, many functional studies of m 6A modiﬁcation, including regulation on mRNA stability, translation efﬁciency, and exon inclusion, relied on manipulating the methyltransferases METTL3/METTL14/WTAP [55–59]. Of note, these regulatory roles of m 6A were found to be mediated by its readers, mainly the YT521-B homology (YTH) domain-containing proteins [12,55–59]. Thus, for other newly-mapped mRNA modiﬁcations besides m6 A, identiﬁcation of their wri-ter, eraser, and reader proteins would be very important and helpful in exploring their functions, as well as revealing the underlying mechanisms. The initial discovery of m6A readers relies on the RNA pull-down assay using synthesized oligonucleotides containing m6A . Such method may also be imi-tated to identify readers for other modiﬁcations. As for the screening of writer proteins, puriﬁcation of the fractions that are necessary for modifying activity from the cell extract could be a practical approach. Enzymatic activity can be evaluated through in vitro incubation of an unmodiﬁed RNA oligonucleotide with different fractions from cell extract. Such strategy proved successful in discovering METTL3 (also known as MT-A70), one component of m6 A writer . In addition, modiﬁcation enzymes may also be identiﬁed de novo through bioinformatic prediction based on the conservation of protein domains involved, followed by the experimental validation using assays like knock-down or overexpression . However, for the modiﬁcation like W, which has multiple writers, functional study could be quite complicated due to the redundancy and potential interplay of the modifying enzymes. In the case of m 5C, whose writer could target both mRNA and tRNA, it could be difﬁcult to distinguish the effect caused by the modiﬁcations in mRNA or in tRNA. Under such circumstances, assays like photoactivatable ribonucleoside-enhanced crosslinking and immunoprecipitation (PAR-CLIP) or individual-nucleotide resolution CLIP (iCLIP) could be very useful to identify the global targets of a writer.
Establishment of comprehensive database for epitran scriptomics
A comprehensive database for curating and sharing epitranscriptomic data should be established. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has built the ‘‘Roadmap Epigenomics Mapping Consortium” to integrate the public resources for epigenomics studies . This consortium also aims to standardize the experimental and computational procedures to close the gaps between different studies. Accordingly, as more important roles of RNA modiﬁcations are revealed and broader focuses are received for this area, a similar project or database should also be established for epitranscriptomics study in the near future. This would certainly help to facilitate and standardize the study of RNA modiﬁcations, hence accelerating the development of this area.
Investigation on the functions of modiﬁcations
Since m6A is the ﬁrst RNA modiﬁcation being proﬁled transcriptome-wide with its writer, eraser, and reader identiﬁed, the functional roles of this methylation have received extensive attention in theﬁeld. Hopefully, besides m6A, other modiﬁca-tions in mRNA could also share the limelight. In fact, potential functions of a certain type of modiﬁcation could be hinted by its distribution pattern. Take m1 A for example, a prominent feature of highly-enriched distribution pattern in 50 UTRs and start codon has been revealed in both humans and mice [51,52], suggesting that m1A may be involved in translational regulation. Besides, the intrinsic property of a modiﬁcation would also provide us some clues for generating new hypotheses. Modiﬁcations occurring in the Watson–Crick edge, such as m5 C and m1A, would affect the normal base pairing, hence altering the local RNA structure or causing recoding of the translated peptides [35,53]. On the other hand, besides the widely-utilized cultured cells, animal or disease models that are deﬁcient in writers, readers, or erasers also need to be established. These systems could facilitate the investigations on physiological roles of a particular modiﬁcation, such as its relations to fertility, differentiation, and pathogenicity [16,20,76–78]. Hopefully, with the help of these model systems, we can achieve a deeper understanding of the molecular mechanism underlying the pathogenesis, and develop the therapies for the diseases associated with these RNA modiﬁcations. Furthermore, the dynamic pattern of a particular modiﬁcation may have the potential to serve as a biomarker to monitor the status of the disease, provided that the correlation between a certain disease and a modiﬁcation could be illustrated. In fact, DNA modiﬁcations have already been discovered as biomarkers for the early detection of cancer . As m6A has been suggested to connect with cell differentiation and cancer formation , the possibility of mRNA modiﬁcations as biomarkers could be tested in the near future.
Integral study of different types of modiﬁcations
The study of epitranscriptome could evolve toward an integral manner that comprehensively considers the effect of multiple types of modiﬁcations in the transcriptome. Most of the current studies in epitranscriptome are focused on a single particular modiﬁcation. However, various modiﬁcations in RNA may interplay with each other, forming‘‘networks”to modulate the physiological pathways. For instance, multiple types of modiﬁcations, including m6 A, m1 A, and W, have been identi-ﬁed in MALAT1 [23,45,51,52], a nuclear speckle localized lncRNA; yet it remains unknown whether these different types of modiﬁcations would affect the installation of each other, or whether they would work together to maintain the structure or stability of MALAT1. Along with the development of transcriptome-wide mapping technologies in the foreseeable future (especially the TGS technologies), integral studies of the RNA modiﬁcations could come into play.
Collectively, the functional studies of m6A have brought an initial period of prosperity in the emerging ﬁeld of epitranscriptomics; in the meantime, several other modiﬁcations have also been identiﬁed and mapped in mRNAs and lncRNAs. We envision that with more endeavor being made in this ﬁeld, researchers will get a better understanding of RNA modiﬁcations and their functions in a more comprehensive way.
The authors declare no competingﬁnancial interests.
The authors thank Dr. Xiaoyu Li, Xiaoting Shu, and Kun Wang for their insights and comments. This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (Grant No. 2016YFC0900300) and the Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 5162012) of China awarded to CY.
 Davis FF, Allen FW. Ribonucleic acids from yeast which contain a ﬁfth nucleotide. J Biol Chem 1957;227:907–15.
 Dunin-Horkawicz S, Czerwoniec A, Gajda MJ, Feder M,Grosjean H, Bujnicki JM. MODOMICS: a database of RNA modiﬁcation pathways. Nucleic Acids Res 2006;34:D145–9.
 Li S, Mason CE. The pivotal regulatory landscape of RNA modiﬁcations. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2014;15:127–50.
 Schevitz RW, Podjarny AD, Krishanmachari N, Hughes JJ, Sigler PB, Sussman JL. Crystal structure of a eukaryotic initiator tRNA. Nature 1979;278:188–90.
 Saikia M, Fu Y, Pavon-Eternod M, He C, Pan T. Genome-wide analysis of N1 -methyladenosine modiﬁcation in human tRNAs.RNA 2010;16:1317–27.
 Yu AT, Ge J, Yu YT. Pseudouridines in spliceosomal snRNAs.Protein Cell 2011;2:712–25.
 Jack K, Bellodi C, Landry DM, Niederer RO, Meskauskas A,Musalgaonkar S, et al. RRNA pseudouridylation defects affect ribosomal ligand binding and translationalﬁdelity from yeast to human cells. Mol Cell 2011;44:660–6.
 Squires JE, Preiss T. Function and detection of 5-methylcytosine in eukaryotic RNA. Epigenomics 2010;2:709–15.
 Motorin Y, Helm M. TRNA stabilization by modiﬁed nucleo-tides. Biochemistry 2010;49:4934–44.
 Machnicka MA, Milanowska K, Osman Oglou O, Purta E,Kurkowska M, Olchowik A, et al. MODOMICS: a database of RNA modiﬁcation pathways–2013 update. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;41:D262–7.
 Desrosiers R, Friderici K, Rottman F. Identiﬁcation of methy-lated nucleosides in messenger RNA from Novikoff hepatoma cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1974;71:3971–5.
 Dominissini D, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Schwartz S, Salmon-Divon M, Ungar L, Osenberg S, et al. Topology of the human and mouse m6 A RNA methylomes revealed by m 6A-seq. Nature 2012;485:201–6.
 Meyer KD, Saletore Y, Zumbo P, Elemento O, Mason CE,Jaffrey SR. Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 30 UTRs and near stop codons. Cell 2012;149:1635–46.
 Bokar JA, Rath-Shambaugh ME, Ludwiczak R, Narayan P,Rottman F. Characterization and partial puriﬁcation of mRNA N6-adenosine methyltransferase from HeLa cell nuclei. Internal mRNA methylation requires a multisubunit complex. J Biol Chem 1994;269:17697–704.
 Liu J, Yue Y, Han D, Wang X, Fu Y, Zhang L, et al. A METTL3-METTL14 complex mediates mammalian nuclear RNA N6 -adenosine methylation. Nat Chem Biol 2014;10:93–5.
 Ping XL, Sun BF, Wang L, Xiao W, Yang X, Wang WJ, et al.Mammalian WTAP is a regulatory subunit of the RNA N6 -methyladenosine methyltransferase. Cell Res 2014;24:177–89.
 Dubin DT, Taylor RH. The methylation state of poly A-containing messenger RNA from cultured hamster cells. Nucleic Acids Res 1975;2:1653–68.
 Wei CM, Gershowitz A, Moss B. Methylated nucleotides block 50 terminus of HeLa cell messenger RNA. Cell 1975;4:379–86.
 Perry RP, Kelley DE, Friderici K, Rottman F. The methylated constituents of L cell messenger RNA: evidence for an unusual cluster at the 50 terminus. Cell 1975;4:387–94.
 Zheng G, Dahl JA, Niu Y, Fedorcsak P, Huang CM, Li CJ, et al.ALKBH5 is a mammalian RNA demethylase that impacts RNA metabolism and mouse fertility. Mol Cell 2013;49:18–29.
 Jia G, Fu Y, Zhao X, Dai Q, Zheng G, Yang Y, et al. N6-methyladenosine in nuclear RNA is a major substrate of the obesity-associated FTO. Nat Chem Biol 2011;7:885–7.
 Ke S, Alemu EA, Mertens C, Gantman EC, Fak JJ, Mele A, et al.A majority of m6 A residues are in the last exons, allowing the potential for 30 UTR regulation. Genes Dev 2015;29:2037–53.
 Liu N, Dai Q, Zheng G, He C, Parisien M, Pan T. N6-methyladenosine-dependent RNA structural switches regulate RNA-protein interactions. Nature 2015;518:560–4.
 Wang X, Lu Z, Gomez A, Hon GC, Yue Y, Han D, et al. N6-methyladenosine-dependent regulation of messenger RNA stability. Nature 2014;505:117–20.
 Wang X, Zhao BS, Roundtree IA, Lu Z, Han D, Ma H, et al. N6 -methyladenosine modulates messenger RNA translation efﬁciency. Cell 2015;161:1388–99.
 Xiao W, Adhikari S, Dahal U, Chen YS, Hao YJ, Sun BF, et al.Nuclear m 6A reader YTHDC1 regulates mRNA splicing. MolCell 2016;61:507–19.
 Liu J, Jia G. Methylation modiﬁcations in eukaryotic messenger RNA. J Genet Genomics 2014;41:21–33.
 Keith JM, Ensinger MJ, Mose B. HeLa cell RNA (2’-O-methyladenosine-N6-)-methyltransferase speciﬁc for the capped 50-end of messenger RNA. J Biol Chem 1978;253:5033–9.
 Molinie B, Wang J, Lim KS, Hillebrand R, Lu Z, Van Wittenberghe N, et al. M6 A-LAIC-seq reveals the census and complexity of the m6 A epitranscriptome. Nat Methods 2016;13:692–8.
 Linder B, Grozhik AV, Olarerin-George AO, Meydan C, Mason CE, Jaffrey SR. Single-nucleotide-resolution mapping of m 6A and m6Am throughout the transcriptome. Nat Methods 2015;12:767–72.
 Mauer J, Luo X, Blanjoie A, Jiao X, Grozhik AV, Patil DP, et al.Reversible methylation of m6 Am in the 50 cap controls mRNA stability. Nature 2017;541:371–5.
 Squires JE, Patel HR, Nousch M, Sibbritt T, Humphreys DT,Parker BJ, et al. Widespread occurrence of 5-methylcytosine in human coding and non-coding RNA. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:5023–33.
 Hussain S, Sajini AA, Blanco S, Dietmann S, Lombard P,Sugimoto Y, et al. NSun2-mediated cytosine-5 methylation of vault noncoding RNA determines its processing into regulatory small RNAs. Cell Rep 2013;4:255–61.
 Huber SM, van Delft P, Mendil L, Bachman M, Smollett K,Werner F, et al. Formation and abundance of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in RNA. ChemBioChem 2015;16:752–5.
 Hoernes TP, Clementi N, Faserl K, Glasner H, Breuker K,Lindner H, et al. Nucleotide modiﬁcations within bacterial messenger RNAs regulate their translation and are able to rewire the genetic code. Nucleic Acids Res 2015;44:852–62.
 Meyer KD, Patil DP, Zhou J, Zinoviev A, Skabkin MA,Elemento O, et al. 50 UTR m6 A promotes cap-independent translation. Cell 2015;163:999–1010.
 Fu L, Guerrero CR, Zhong N, Amato NJ, Liu Y, Liu S, et al. Tet-mediated formation of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in RNA. J Am Chem Soc 2014;136:11582–5.
 Delatte B, Wang F, Ngoc LV, Collignon E, Bonvin E, Deplus R,et al. Transcriptome-wide distribution and function of RNA hydroxymethylcytosine. Science 2016;351:282–5.
 Nishikura K. Functions and regulation of RNA editing by ADAR deaminases. Annu Rev Biochem 2010;79:321–49.
 Levanon EY, Eisenberg E, Yelin R, Nemzer S, Hallegger M,Shemesh R, et al. Systematic identiﬁcation of abundant A-to-I editing sites in the human transcriptome. Nat Biotechol 2004;22:1001–5.
 Athanasiadis A, Rich A, Maas S. Widespread A-to-I RNA editing of Alu-containing mRNAs in the human transcriptome. PLoS Biol 2004;2:e391.
 Nishikura K. A-to-I editing of coding and non-coding RNAs by ADARs. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2016;17:83–96.
 Behm M, O¨ hman M. RNA editing: a contributor to neuronal dynamics in the mammalian brain. Trends Genet 2016;32:165–75.
 Li X, Ma S, Yi C. Pseudouridine: theﬁfth RNA nucleotide with renewed interests. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2016;33:108–16.
 Li X, Zhu P, Ma S, Song J, Bai J, Sun F, et al. Chemical pulldown reveals dynamic pseudouridylation of the mammalian transcriptome. Nat Chem Biol 2015;11:592–7.
 Carlile TM, Rojas-Duran MF, Zinshteyn B, Shin H, Bartoli KM,Gilbert WV. Pseudouridine proﬁling reveals regulated mRNA pseudouridylation in yeast and human cells. Nature 2014;515:143–6.
 Schwartz S, Bernstein DA, Mumbach MR, Jovanovic M, Herbst RH, Leo´ n-Ricardo BX, et al. Transcriptome-wide mapping reveals widespread dynamic-regulated pseudouridylation of ncRNA and mRNA. Cell 2014;159:148–62.
 Arnez JG, Steitz TA. Crystal structure of unmodiﬁed tRNA Gln complexed with glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase and ATP suggests a possible role for pseudouridines in stabilization of RNA structure. Biochemistry 1994;33:7560–7.
 Ferna´ ndez IS, Ng CL, Kelley AC, Wu G, Yu YT, Ramakrishnan V. Unusual base pairing during the decoding of a stop codon by the ribosome. Nature 2013;500:107–10.
 Karijolich J, Yu YT. Converting nonsense codons into sense codons by targeted pseudouridylation. Nature 2011;474:395–8.
 Dominissini D, Nachtergaele S, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Peer E,Kol N, Ben-Haim MS, et al. The dynamic N1-methyladenosine methylome in eukaryotic messenger RNA. Nature 2016;530:441–6.
 Li X, Xiong X, Wang K, Wang L, Shu X, Ma S, et al.Transcriptome-wide mapping reveals reversible and dynamic N1-methyladenosine methylome. Nat Chem Biol 2016;12:311–6.
 El Yacoubi B, Bailly M, de Cre´ cy-Lagard V. Biosynthesis and function of posttranscriptional modiﬁcations of transfer RNAs. Annu Rev Genet 2012;46:69–95.
 Niu Y, Zhao X, Wu YS, Li MM, Wang XJ, Yang YG. N6-methyladenosine (m6A) in RNA: an old modiﬁcation with a novel epigenetic function. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics 2013;11:8–17.
 Meyer KD, Jaffrey SR. The dynamic epitranscriptome: N6-methyladenosine and gene expression control. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2014;15:313–26.
 Yue Y, Liu J, He C. RNA N6 -methyladenosine methylation in post-transcriptional gene expression regulation. Genes Dev 2015;29:1343–55.
 Liu N, Pan T. N6 -methyladenosine–encoded epitranscriptomics.Nat Struct Mol Biol 2016;23:98–102.
 Gilbert WV, Bell TA, Schaening C. Messenger RNA modiﬁca-tions: form, distribution, and function. Science 2016;352:1408–12.
 Frye M, Jaffrey SR, Pan T, Rechavi G, Suzuki T. RNA modiﬁcations: what have we learned and where are we headed? Nat Rev Genet 2016;17:365–72.
 Saletore Y, Meyer K, Korlach J, Vilfan ID, Jaffrey S, Mason CE.The birth of the Epitranscriptome: deciphering the function of RNA modiﬁcations. Genome Biol 2012;13:175.
 Song J, Yi C. Chemical modiﬁcations to RNA: a new layer of gene expression regulation. ACS Chem Biol 2017;12:316–25.
 Li X, Xiong X, Yi C. Epitranscriptome sequencing technologies:decoding RNA modiﬁcations. Nat Methods 2017;14:23–31.
 Waku T, Nakajima Y, Yokoyama W, Nomura N, Kako K,Kobayashi A, et al. NML-mediated rRNA base methylation links ribosomal subunit formation to cell proliferation in a p53dependent manner. J Cell Sci 2016;129:2382–93.
 Eid J, Fehr A, Gray J, Luong K, Lyle J, Otto G, et al. Real-time DNA sequencing from single polymerase molecules. Science 2009;323:133–8.
 Clarke J, Wu HC, Jayasinghe L, Patel A, Reid S, Bayley H.Continuous base identiﬁcation for single-molecule nanopore DNA sequencing. Nat Nanotechnol 2009;4:265–70.
 Van Dijk EL, Jaszczyszyn Y, Thermes C. Library preparation methods for next-generation sequencing: tone down the bias. Exp Cell Res 2014;322:12–20.
 Rashid NU, Giresi PG, Ibrahim JG, Sun W, Lieb JD. ZINBA integrates local covariates with DNA-seq data to identify broad and narrow regions of enrichment, even within ampliﬁed genomic regions. Genome Biol 2011;12:R67.
 Zhang Y, Liu T, Meyer CA, Eeckhoute J, Johnson DS, Bernstein BE, et al. Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol 2008;9:R137.
 Qin ZS, Yu J, Shen J, Maher CA, Hu M, Kalyana-Sundaram S,et al. HPeak: an HMM-based algorithm for deﬁning readenriched regions in ChIP-Seq data. BMC Bioinformatics 2010;11:369.
 Koohy H, Down TA, Spivakov M, Hubbard T. A comparison of peak callers used for DNase-seq data. PLoS One 2014;9:e96303.
 Wilbanks EG, Facciotti MT. Evaluation of algorithm perfor-mance in ChIP-seq peak detection. PLoS One 2010;5:e11471.
 Meng J, Cui X, Rao MK, Chen Y, Huang Y. Exome-based analysis for RNA epigenome sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2013;29:1565–7.
 Chen K, Lu Z, Wang X, Fu Y, Luo GZ, Liu N, et al. High-resolution N6 -methyladenosine m6 A map using photo-crosslink-ing-assisted m6A sequencing. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2014;54:1587–90.
 Bokar JA, Shambaugh ME, Polayes D, Matera AG, Rottman FM. Puriﬁcation and cDNA cloning of the AdoMet-binding subunit of the human mRNA N6 -adenosine-methyltransferase.RNA 1997;3:1233–47.
 Chadwick LH, The NIH. Roadmap Epigenomics Program data resource. Epigenomics 2012;4:317–24.
 Hussain S, Tuorto F, Menon S, Blanco S, Cox C, Flores JV, et al.The mouse cytosine-5 RNA methyltransferase NSun2 is a component of the chromatoid body and required for testis differentiation. Mol Cell Biol 2013;33:1561–70.
 Sarin LP, Leidel SA. Modify or die?–RNA modiﬁcation defects in metazoans. RNA Biol 2014;11:1555–67.
 Geula S, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Dominissini D, Mansour AA,Kol N, Salmon-Divon M, et al. Stem cells. m6 A mRNA methylation facilitates resolution of naı¨ ve pluripotency toward differentiation. Science 2015;347:1002–6.
 Wang J, Han X, Sun Y. DNA methylation signatures in circulating cell-free DNA as biomarkers for the early detection of cancer. Sci China Life Sci 2017;60:356–62.
 Jaffrey SR, Kharas MG. Emerging links between m6 A and misregulated mRNA methylation in cancer. Genome Med 2017;9:2.
- Transcriptional and Post-transcriptional Gene Regulation by Long Non-coding RNA
- The RNA Modiﬁcation N6 -methyladenosine and Its Implications in Human Disease
- Silencing of Transposable Elements by piRNAs in Drosophila: An Evolutionary Perspective
- Primate-speciﬁc Long Non-coding RNAs and MicroRNAs
- Non-coding Transcripts from Enhancers: New Insights into Enhancer Activity and Gene Expression Regul
- Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
- Epitranscriptomics: Toward A Better Understanding of RNA Modiﬁcations
- Enhancer-derived RNA: A Primer
- Downregulation of miR-503 Promotes ESCC Cell Proliferation, Migration, and Invasion by Targeting Cyc
- Call for Papers（四）
- Call for Papers（二）
- Call for Papers（三）
- Call for Papers（一）