A 2024 study established that gut microbiota-derived signals control the DNA hydroxymethylation program of innate lymphoid cell precursors (ILCPs): microbiota lower intestinal cholic acid levels, cholic acid acting through the bile-acid receptor TGR5 sustains expression of the DNA hydroxymethyltransferase TET1 in ILCPs, TET1-dependent hydroxymethylation of the Tgfbr1 promoter maintains TGF-beta signaling, and loss of this axis postnatally expands intestinal ILC1s. The study left the axis mechanistically and ecologically undefined. This problem asks for its completion: the molecular mechanism linking TGR5 activation to upregulated TET1 expression in ILCPs; the inventory of other microbiota-derived metabolites that modulate TET1 levels or the ILCP methylome; the bacterial taxa that drive the epigenetic remodeling of ILCPs and postnatal ILC1 establishment in vivo; the relative contributions of promoter, gene-body, and enhancer hydroxymethylation to transcriptional regulation during ILC differentiation; and whether the same microbiota–TET1–hydroxymethylation crosstalk operates in other mucosal immune cell lineages. No primary work resolving these components is known to date.

Background

Innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) are lymphocytes that lack adaptive antigen receptors and reside mainly at mucosal surfaces, where they act as the innate counterparts of T-helper subsets: ILC1s produce interferon-gamma, ILC2s drive type-2 (allergic) responses, and ILC3s maintain barrier immunity via IL-17 and IL-22. All subsets arise from common innate lymphoid cell precursors (ILCPs), and lineage choice is governed by lineage-defining transcription factors (for example T-bet encoded by Tbx21 for ILC1, GATA3 for ILC2, RORgamma-t encoded by Rorc for ILC3) whose expression is set during differentiation. DNA methylation — addition of a methyl group to cytosine (5-methylcytosine, 5mC), typically at CpG dinucleotides — is a heritable epigenetic mark that generally represses transcription when located at promoters. The ten-eleven translocation (TET) dioxygenases TET1–TET3 oxidize 5mC to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC), a modification that both marks active regulatory regions and initiates active DNA demethylation; in ILC biology TET1 functions as a hydroxymethyltransferase shaping 5hmC landscapes. 5hmC and 5mC can have distinct, position-dependent relationships to gene expression (promoter versus gene-body versus enhancer), and which positions matter is itself unresolved in many systems. TGF-beta signaling through its receptor component TGFBR1 is known to restrain ILC1 differentiation. Separately, gut microbiota continuously shape mucosal immunity through metabolites: microbes deconjugate and transform primary bile acids (such as cholic acid) into secondary bile acids, so clearing microbes with antibiotics increases luminal cholic acid; other microbial metabolites (short-chain fatty acids, tryptophan derivatives such as indole-3-aldehyde, I3A) tune immune-cell chromatin and differentiation. Cholic acid can signal through TGR5 (also called GPBAR1, encoded by Gpbar1), a Gs-coupled G-protein-coupled receptor that raises intracellular cAMP. Against this background, Zhang, Gao, Liu, Shao, Yu, Zhao, Qin and Wang (Nature Communications 15, 4792, 2024) reported genome-wide 5mC and 5hmC maps across ILC subsets and their precursors, and showed that: (i) TET1 suppresses ILC1 (not ILC2/ILC3) differentiation by maintaining 5hmC at the Tgfbr1 promoter and hence TGF-beta signaling; (ii) during the postnatal period, gut microbiota downregulate TET1 in ILCPs; (iii) antibiotic depletion of microbiota elevates intestinal cholic acid, and cholic acid in vitro suppresses ILCP-to-ILC1 differentiation while raising Tet1 and Tgfbr1 expression and Tgfbr1 promoter 5hmC — effects blocked by the TGR5 inhibitor SBI-115, with Gpbar1 expressed in ILCPs; and (iv) in adult mice, TET1 restrains ILC1 hyperactivation to preserve intestinal homeostasis. The authors themselves flagged what remains unknown, and none of it has been closed since: the molecular mechanism by which cholic acid–TGR5 signaling upregulates Tet1 expression in ILCPs was not dissected (receptor involvement was established only by expression and inhibitor pharmacology); metabolites other than cholic acid that sculpt the ILCP methylome were not systematically identified (tryptophan/I3A were undetectable at the weaning stage studied); the 16S ribosomal-RNA gene profiling performed (a survey of bacterial community composition by sequencing the taxonomically informative 16S rRNA gene) showed community shifts but did not causally attribute the epigenetic remodeling to any taxon; promoter 5hmC/5mC changes did not track expression for some genes, leaving gene-body and enhancer hydroxymethylation uncharacterized; and the tissue-generality picture is constrained by the authors' own observation that neither TET1 deletion nor microbial depletion altered ILC1 numbers in lung or liver, while ILCPs were detectable in intestine but not other peripheral tissues.

Problem Statement

Complete the causal account of the microbiota–TET1–DNA hydroxymethylation axis in innate lymphoid cell differentiation established by Zhang et al. (Nature Communications 15, 4792, 2024), by answering, at molecular resolution: (1) Mechanism — what is the molecular mechanism in ILCPs by which cholic-acid activation of TGR5 at the plasma membrane upregulates TET1 expression: at which level — Tet1 transcription, Tet1 mRNA stability, or both — does the regulation act, and which second-messenger and kinase cascades and downstream effectors (including, if the regulation is transcriptional, the transcription factors and cis-regulatory elements at the Tet1 locus) are required, as established by loss- and gain-of-function perturbation with rescue? (2) Metabolite breadth — which microbiota-derived metabolites besides cholic acid alter TET1 levels or the ILCP methylation/hydroxymethylation program, and with what receptors and target genes (including, but not limited to, the tryptophan/I3A pathway the source could not detect at weaning)? (3) Microbial source — which specific bacterial taxa or consortia, by their presence or absence, drive the postnatal epigenetic remodeling of ILCPs and the establishment of intestinal ILC1 populations in vivo, as shown by gnotobiotic reconstitution (colonizing germ-free animals with defined microbial communities) or equivalent causal designs? (4) cis-regulatory logic — what are the relative contributions of promoter, gene-body, and enhancer 5hmC/5mC dynamics to transcriptional regulation during ILCP-to-ILC differentiation, resolving the genes for which promoter hydroxymethylation changes did not match expression changes, through higher-resolution, locus-resolved maps? (5) Lineage generality — does microbiota–TET1–hydroxymethylation crosstalk similarly control the differentiation or function of other mucosal immune cell lineages beyond ILCs, given the source's own evidence that the postnatal ILC1 effect is intestine-specific? A complete answer supplies a connected chain from identified microbial inputs through host metabolite sensing and Tet1 regulation to specific 5hmC changes at defined target loci and measurable ILC differentiation outputs, plus the boundary of that chain across cell lineages. All five components are jointly required, each is a separately refutable sub-claim, and the enumerations in (2) and (3) are adequate when at least one additional metabolite (with its receptor and target gene) and at least one causal bacterial taxon or consortium are identified.

References

  1. Zhang X, Gao X, Liu Z, Shao F, Yu D, Zhao M, Qin X, Wang S. Microbiota regulates the TET1-mediated DNA hydroxymethylation program in innate lymphoid cell differentiation. Nature Communications 15, 4792 (2024). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-48794-0. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-48794-0
  2. Liu Z, Shao F, Zhang Q, Zhao M, Gao S, Zhang X, Yu D, Zhang J, Xia P, Wang S. Epigenetic imprinting in innate lymphoid cell precursors directs the lineage segregation of innate lymphoid cells. Nature Immunology 26(10), 1686-1698 (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41590-025-02261-0. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-025-02261-0
  3. Singh DK, Yamaguchi Y, Huang L, Saito C, Cassidy OG, Nishiyama K. TET Enzymes as Epigenetic Integrators in Intestinal Immunity, Inflammation, and Disease. Journal of Personalized Medicine 16(7), 375 (2026). DOI: 10.3390/jpm16070375. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm16070375
  4. Zhang Q, Liu Y, Li Y, Bai G, Pang J, Wu M, Li J, Zhao X, Xia Y. Implications of gut microbiota-mediated epigenetic modifications in intestinal diseases. Gut Microbes 17(1) (2025). DOI: 10.1080/19490976.2025.2508426. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2025.2508426
  5. Tao H, Geng J, Bai L, Su D, Zhao Y, Xu G, Zhang M. Regulation of innate lymphoid cell by microbial metabolites. Journal of Molecular Medicine 103(5), 491-509 (2025). DOI: 10.1007/s00109-025-02530-3. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00109-025-02530-3
  6. Kang L, Sonnenberg GF. Epigenetics control lineage decisions during hematopoiesis of innate lymphocytes. Cellular & Molecular Immunology 23(4), 347-348 (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s41423-025-01384-6. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-025-01384-6
  7. Camarena V, Sant DW, Huff TC, Mustafi S, Muir RK, Renslo AR, Monje P, Wang G. cAMP Signaling Regulates DNA Demethylation by Augmenting the Intracellular Labile Ferrous Iron Pool. bioRxiv preprint (2017). DOI: 10.1101/162743. https://doi.org/10.1101/162743
  8. Jain A, Diem EC, Lu C, Steglich M, Grychtol R, Kosanke M, Pietzsch B, Geffers R, Durisin M, Hansen G, Dittrich A, Huehn J, Floess S, Lochner M. Human ILC methylomes uncover stable lineage codes and disease-linked ILC2 regulators in allergy. bioRxiv preprint (2026). DOI: 10.64898/2026.03.12.711290. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.03.12.711290