The impact of multiple splice sites in human L1 elements

Mutation in a primate-conserved retrotransposon reveals a noncoding RNA as a mediator of infantile encephalopathy

The human genome is densely populated with transposons and transposon-like repetitive elements. Although the impact of these transposons and elements on human genome evolution is recognized, the significance of subtle variations in their sequence remains mostly unexplored. Here we report homozygosity mapping of an infantile neurodegenerative disease locus in a genetic isolate. Complete DNA sequencing of the 400-kb linkage locus revealed a point mutation in a primate-specific retrotransposon that was transcribed as part of a unique noncoding RNA, which was expressed in the brain. In vitro knockdown of this RNA increased neuronal apoptosis, consistent with the inappropriate dosage of this RNA in vivo and with the phenotype. Moreover, structural analysis of the sequence revealed a small RNA-like hairpin that was consistent with the putative gain of a functional site when mutated. We show here that a mutation in a unique transposable element-containing RNA is associated with lethal encephalopathy, and we suggest that RNAs that harbor evolutionarily recent repetitive elements may play important roles in human brain development.

LINEs, SINEs and other retroelements: do birds of a feather flock together?

Mobile elements account for almost half of the mass of the human genome. Only the retroelements from the non-LTR (long terminal repeat) retrotransposon family, which include the LINE-1 (L1) and its non-autonomous partners, are currently active and contributing to new insertions. Although these elements seem to share the same basic amplification mechanism, the activity and success of the different types of retroelements varies. For example, Alu-induced mutagenesis is responsible for the majority of the documented instances of human disease induced by insertion of retroelements. Using copy number in mammals as an indicator, some SINEs have been vastly more successful than other retroelements, such as the retropseudogenes and even L1, likely due to differences in post-insertion selection and ability to overcome cellular controls. SINE and LINE integration can be differentially influenced by cellular factors, indicating some differences between in their amplification mechanisms. We focus on the known aspects of this group of retroelements and highlight their similarities and differences that may significantly influence their biological impact.

Expressing genes do not forget their LINEs: transposable elements and gene expression

Historically the accumulated mass of mammalian transposable elements (TEs), particularly those located within gene boundaries, was viewed as a genetic burden potentially detrimental to the genomic landscape. This notion has been strengthened by the discovery that transposable sequences can alter the architecture of the transcriptome, not only through insertion, but also long after the integration process is completed. Insertions previously considered harmless are now known to impact the expression of host genes via modification of the transcript quality or quantity, transcriptional interference, or by the control of pathways that affect the mRNA life-cycle. Conversely, several examples of the evolutionary advantageous impact of TEs on the host gene structure that diversified the cellular transcriptome are reported. TE-induced changes in gene expression can be tissue- or disease-specific, raising the possibility that the impact of TE sequences may vary during development, among normal cell types, and between normal and disease-affected tissues. The understanding of the rules and abundance of TE-interference with gene expression is in its infancy, and its contribution to human disease and/or evolution remains largely unexplored.

LINE-1 elements in structural variation and disease

The completion of the human genome reference sequence ushered in a new era for the study and discovery of human transposable elements. It now is undeniable that transposable elements, historically dismissed as junk DNA, have had an instrumental role in sculpting the structure and function of our genomes. In particular, long interspersed element-1 (LINE-1 or L1) and short interspersed elements (SINEs) continue to affect our genome, and their movement can lead to sporadic cases of disease. Here, we briefly review the types of transposable elements present in the human genome and their mechanisms of mobility. We next highlight how advances in DNA sequencing and genomic technologies have enabled the discovery of novel retrotransposons in individual genomes. Finally, we discuss how L1-mediated retrotransposition events impact human genomes.

Reprogramming somatic cells into iPS cells activates LINE-1 retroelement mobility

Long interspersed element-1 (LINE-1 or L1) retrotransposons account for nearly 17% of human genomic DNA and represent a major evolutionary force that has reshaped the structure and function of the human genome. However, questions remain concerning both the frequency and the developmental timing of L1 retrotransposition in vivo and whether the mobility of these retroelements commonly results in insertional and post-insertional mechanisms of genomic injury. Cells exhibiting high rates of L1 retrotransposition might be especially at risk for such injury. We assessed L1 mRNA expression and L1 retrotransposition in two biologically relevant cell types, human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), as well as in control parental human dermal fibroblasts (HDFs). Full-length L1 mRNA and the L1 open reading frame 1-encoded protein (ORF1p) were readily detected in hESCs and iPSCs, but not in HDFs. Sequencing analysis proved the expression of human-specific L1 element mRNAs in iPSCs. Bisulfite sequencing revealed that the increased L1 expression observed in iPSCs correlates with an overall decrease in CpG methylation in the L1 promoter region. Finally, retrotransposition of an engineered human L1 element was ~10-fold more efficient in iPSCs than in parental HDFs. These findings indicate that somatic cell reprogramming is associated with marked increases in L1 expression and perhaps increases in endogenous L1 retrotransposition, which could potentially impact the genomic integrity of the resultant iPSCs.

Restless genomes humans as a model organism for understanding host-retrotransposable element dynamics

Since their initial discovery in maize, there have been various attempts to categorize the relationship between transposable elements (TEs) and their host organisms. These have ranged from TEs being selfish parasites to their role as essential, functional components of organismal biology. Research over the past several decades has, in many respects, only served to complicate the issue even further. On the one hand, investigators have amassed substantial evidence concerning the negative effects that TE-mutagenic activity can have on host genomes and organismal fitness. On the other hand, we find an increasing number of examples, across several taxa, of TEs being incorporated into functional biological roles for their host organism. Some 45% of our own genomes are comprised of TE copies. While many of these copies are dormant, having lost their ability to mobilize, several lineages continue to actively proliferate in modern human populations. With its complement of ancestral and active TEs, the human genome exhibits key aspects of the host-TE dynamic that has played out since early on in organismal evolution. In this review, we examine what insights the particularly well-characterized human system can provide regarding the nature of the host-TE interaction.

Feedback inhibition of L1 and alu retrotransposition through altered double strand break repair kinetics

BACKGROUND

Cells adapt to various chronic toxic exposures in a multitude of ways to minimize further damage and maximize their growth potential. Expression of L1 elements in the human genome can be greatly deleterious to cells, generating numerous double strand breaks (DSBs). Cells have been reported to respond to chronic DSBs by altering the repair of these breaks, including increasing the rate of homology independent DSB repair. Retrotransposition is strongly affected by proteins involved in DSB repair. Therefore, L1 expression has the potential to be a source of chronic DSBs and thus bring about the changes in cellular environment that could ultimately restrict its own retrotransposition.

RESULTS

We demonstrate that constitutive L1 expression leads to quicker DSB repair and decreases in the retrotransposition potential of L1 and other retrotransposons dependent on L1 expression for their mobility. This cellular adaptation results in reduced sensitivity to L1 induced toxicity. These effects can be induced by constitutive expression of the functional L1 ORF2 alone, but not by the constitutive expression of an L1 open reading frame 2 with mutations to its endonuclease and reverse transcriptase domains. This adaptation correlates with the relative activity of the L1 introduced into the cells.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased number of DSBs resulting from constitutive expression of L1 results in a more rapid rate of repair. The cellular response to this L1 expression also results in attenuation of retrotransposition and reduced sensitivity of the cells to negative consequences of L1 ORF2 expression. The influence does not appear to be through RNA interference. We believe that the increased rate of DSB repair is the most likely cause of the attenuation of retrotransposition. These alterations act as a fail safe mechanism that allows cells to escape the toxicity associated with the unchecked L1 expression. This gives cells that overexpress L1, such as tumor cells, the ability to survive the high levels of expression. However, the increased rate of break repair may come at the cost of accuracy of repair of the lesion, resulting in increased genomic instability.

Mobilizing diversity: transposable element insertions in genetic variation and disease

Transposable elements (TEs) comprise a large fraction of mammalian genomes. A number of these elements are actively jumping in our genomes today. As a consequence, these insertions provide a source of genetic variation and, in rare cases, these events cause mutations that lead to disease. Yet, the extent to which these elements impact their host genomes is not completely understood. This review will summarize our current understanding of the mechanisms underlying transposon regulation and the contribution of TE insertions to genetic diversity in the germline and in somatic cells. Finally, traditional methods and emerging technologies for identifying transposon insertions will be considered.

Mobile interspersed repeats are major structural variants in the human genome

Characterizing structural variants in the human genome is of great importance, but a genome wide analysis to detect interspersed repeats has not been done. Thus, the degree to which mobile DNAs contribute to genetic diversity, heritable disease, and oncogenesis remains speculative. We perform transposon insertion profiling by microarray (TIP-chip) to map human L1(Ta) retrotransposons (LINE-1 s) genome-wide. This identified numerous novel human L1(Ta) insertional polymorphisms with highly variant allelic frequencies. We also explored TIP-chip's usefulness to identify candidate alleles associated with different phenotypes in clinical cohorts. Our data suggest that the occurrence of new insertions is twice as high as previously estimated, and that these repeats are under-recognized as sources of human genomic and phenotypic diversity. We have just begun to probe the universe of human L1(Ta) polymorphisms, and as TIP-chip is applied to other insertions such as Alu SINEs, it will expand the catalog of genomic variants even further.

All y'all need to know 'bout retroelements in cancer

Genetic instability is one of the principal hallmarks and causative factors in cancer. Human transposable elements (TE) have been reported to cause human diseases, including several types of cancer through insertional mutagenesis of genes critical for preventing or driving malignant transformation. In addition to retrotransposition-associated mutagenesis, TEs have been found to contribute even more genomic rearrangements through non-allelic homologous recombination. TEs also have the potential to generate a wide range of mutations derivation of which is difficult to directly trace to mobile elements, including double strand breaks that may trigger mutagenic genomic rearrangements. Genome-wide hypomethylation of TE promoters and significantly elevated TE expression in almost all human cancers often accompanied by the loss of critical DNA sensing and repair pathways suggests that the negative impact of mobile elements on genome stability should increase as human tumors evolve. The biological consequences of elevated retroelement expression, such as the rate of their amplification, in human cancers remain obscure, particularly, how this increase translates into disease-relevant mutations. This review is focused on the cellular mechanisms that control human TE-associated mutagenesis in cancer and summarizes the current understanding of TE contribution to genetic instability in human malignancies.

A mobile threat to genome stability: The impact of non-LTR retrotransposons upon the human genome

It is now commonly agreed that the human genome is not the stable entity originally presumed. Deletions, duplications, inversions, and insertions are common, and contribute significantly to genomic structural variations (SVs). Their collective impact generates much of the inter-individual genomic diversity observed among humans. Not only do these variations change the structure of the genome; they may also have functional implications, e.g. altered gene expression. Some SVs have been identified as the cause of genetic disorders, including cancer predisposition. Cancer cells are notorious for their genomic instability, and often show genomic rearrangements at the microscopic and submicroscopic level to which transposable elements (TEs) contribute. Here, we review the role of TEs in genome instability, with particular focus on non-LTR retrotransposons. Currently, three non-LTR retrotransposon families - long interspersed element 1 (L1), SVA (short interspersed element (SINE-R), variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR), and Alu), and Alu (a SINE) elements - mobilize in the human genome, and cause genomic instability through both insertion- and post-insertion-based mutagenesis. Due to the abundance and high sequence identity of TEs, they frequently mislead the homologous recombination repair pathway into non-allelic homologous recombination, causing deletions, duplications, and inversions. While less comprehensively studied, non-LTR retrotransposon insertions and TE-mediated rearrangements are probably more common in cancer cells than in healthy tissue. This may be at least partially attributed to the commonly seen global hypomethylation as well as general epigenetic dysfunction of cancer cells. Where possible, we provide examples that impact cancer predisposition and/or development.

Somatic expression of LINE-1 elements in human tissues

LINE-1 expression damages host DNA via insertions and endonuclease-dependent DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) that are highly toxic and mutagenic. The predominant tissue of LINE-1 expression has been considered to be the germ line. We show that both full-length and processed L1 transcripts are widespread in human somatic tissues and transformed cells, with significant variation in both L1 expression and L1 mRNA processing. This is the first demonstration that RNA processing is a major regulator of L1 activity. Many tissues also produce translatable spliced transcript (SpORF2). An Alu retrotransposition assay, COMET assays and 53BP1 foci staining show that the SpORF2 product can support functional ORF2 protein expression and can induce DNA damage in normal cells. Tests of the senescence-associated beta-galactosidase expression suggest that expression of exogenous full-length L1, or the SpORF2 mRNA alone in human fibroblasts and adult stem cells triggers a senescence-like phenotype, which is one of the reported responses to DNA damage. In contrast to previous assumptions that L1 expression is germ line specific, the increased spectrum of tissues exposed to L1-associated damage suggests a role for L1 as an endogenous mutagen in somatic tissues. These findings have potential consequences for the whole organism in the form of cancer and mammalian aging.

Unique functions of repetitive transcriptomes

Repetitive sequences occupy a huge fraction of essentially every eukaryotic genome. Repetitive sequences cover more than 50% of mammalian genomic DNAs, whereas gene exons and protein-coding sequences occupy only ~3% and 1%, respectively. Numerous genomic repeats include genes themselves. They generally encode "selfish" proteins necessary for the proliferation of transposable elements (TEs) in the host genome. The major part of evolutionary "older" TEs accumulated mutations over time and fails to encode functional proteins. However, repeats have important functions also on the RNA level. Repetitive transcripts may serve as multifunctional RNAs by participating in the antisense regulation of gene activity and by competing with the host-encoded transcripts for cellular factors. In addition, genomic repeats include regulatory sequences like promoters, enhancers, splice sites, polyadenylation signals, and insulators, which actively reshape cellular transcriptomes. TE expression is tightly controlled by the host cells, and some mechanisms of this regulation were recently decoded. Finally, capacity of TEs to proliferate in the host genome led to the development of multiple biotechnological applications.

Retroelements and their impact on genome evolution and functioning

Retroelements comprise a considerable fraction of eukaryotic genomes. Since their initial discovery by Barbara McClintock in maize DNA, retroelements have been found in genomes of almost all organisms. First considered as a "junk DNA" or genomic parasites, they were shown to influence genome functioning and to promote genetic innovations. For this reason, they were suggested as an important creative force in the genome evolution and adaptation of an organism to altered environmental conditions. In this review, we summarize the up-to-date knowledge of different ways of retroelement involvement in structural and functional evolution of genes and genomes, as well as the mechanisms generated by cells to control their retrotransposition.

LINE dancing in the human genome: transposable elements and disease

Transposable elements (TEs) have been consistently underestimated in their contribution to genetic instability and human disease. TEs can cause human disease by creating insertional mutations in genes, and also contributing to genetic instability through non-allelic homologous recombination and introduction of sequences that evolve into various cis-acting signals that alter gene expression. Other outcomes of TE activity, such as their potential to cause DNA double-strand breaks or to modulate the epigenetic state of chromosomes, are less fully characterized. The currently active human transposable elements are members of the non-LTR retroelement families, LINE-1, Alu (SINE), and SVA. The impact of germline insertional mutagenesis by TEs is well established, whereas the rate of post-insertional TE-mediated germline mutations and all forms of somatic mutations remain less well quantified. The number of human diseases discovered to be associated with non-allelic homologous recombination between TEs, and particularly between Alu elements, is growing at an unprecedented rate. Improvement in the technology for detection of such events, as well as the mounting interest in the research and medical communities in resolving the underlying causes of the human diseases with unknown etiology, explain this increase. Here, we focus on the most recent advances in understanding of the impact of the active human TEs on the stability of the human genome and its relevance to human disease.

The impact of retrotransposons on human genome evolution

Their ability to move within genomes gives transposable elements an intrinsic propensity to affect genome evolution. Non-long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons--including LINE-1, Alu and SVA elements--have proliferated over the past 80 million years of primate evolution and now account for approximately one-third of the human genome. In this Review, we focus on this major class of elements and discuss the many ways that they affect the human genome: from generating insertion mutations and genomic instability to altering gene expression and contributing to genetic innovation. Increasingly detailed analyses of human and other primate genomes are revealing the scale and complexity of the past and current contributions of non-LTR retrotransposons to genomic change in the human lineage.

Many LINE1 elements contribute to the transcriptome of human somatic cells

Over 600 LINE 1 elements are shown to be transcribed in humans; 400 of these are full-length elements in the reference genome.

Background

While LINE1 (L1) retroelements comprise nearly 20% of the human genome, the majority are thought to have been rendered transcriptionally inactive, due to either mutation or epigenetic suppression. How many L1 elements 'escape' these forms of repression and contribute to the transcriptome of human somatic cells? We have cloned out expressed sequence tags corresponding to the 5' and 3' flanks of L1 elements in order to characterize the population of elements that are being actively transcribed. We also examined expression of a select number of elements in different individuals.

Results

We isolated expressed sequence tags from human lymphoblastoid cell lines corresponding to 692 distinct L1 element sites, including 410 full-length elements. Four of the expression tagged sites corresponding to full-length elements from the human specific L1Hs subfamily were examined in European-American individuals and found to be differentially expressed in different family members.

Conclusions

A large number of different L1 element sites are expressed in human somatic tissues, and this expression varies among different individuals. Paradoxically, few elements were tagged at high frequency, indicating that the majority of expressed L1s are transcribed at low levels. Based on our preliminary expression studies of a limited number of elements in a single family, we predict a significant degree of inter-individual transcript-level polymorphism in this class of sequence.

(Epi)genomics and neurodevelopment in schizophrenia: monozygotic twins discordant for schizophrenia augment the search for disease-related (epi)genomic alterations

Unlike stunning breakthroughs in the identification of genes for Mendelian disorders during the last three decades, gene identification in most complex disorders has been full of twists and turns and little progress. Doing more of the same will not guarantee success. The lessons learned argue for a need to reconsider genetic models that are appropriate for the disorder in question along with an interdisciplinary, systematic approach using genomic methods that have now become possible. We will use schizophrenia as an example to review the genetic progress to date that has been disappointing. We will argue that the causation of this complex disease may involve heterogeneous genomic changes of major effect. We will provide three approaches, retroviral transpositions, methylation, and copy number variations, to test this hypothesis. We will present arguments to suggest that such experiments will be most effective if undertaken on monozygotic twins. It will include our experience with associated experiments on the monozygotic twins discordant for schizophrenia. The results support that (epi)genomic changes of major effect, rather than accumulation of mutations of small effect, underlie the causation of this complex disease. More important, this experimental strategy will be an effective strategy for studies on other complex (behavioural) disorders as well.

The take and give between retrotransposable elements and their hosts

Retrotransposons mobilize via RNA intermediates and usually carry with them the agent of their mobility, reverse transcriptase. Retrotransposons are streamlined, and therefore rely on host factors to proliferate. However, retrotransposons are exposed to cellular forces that block their paths. For this review, we have selected for our focus elements from among target-primed (TP) retrotransposons, also called non-LTR retrotransposons, and extrachromosomally-primed (EP) retrotransposons, also called LTR retrotransposons. The TP retrotransposons considered here are group II introns, LINEs and SINEs, whereas the EP elements considered are the Ty and Tf retrotransposons, with a brief comparison to retroviruses. Recurring themes for these elements, in hosts ranging from bacteria to humans, are tie-ins of the retrotransposons to RNA metabolism, DNA replication and repair, and cellular stress. Likewise, there are parallels among host-cell defenses to combat rampant retrotransposon spread. The interactions between the retrotransposon and the host, and their coevolution to balance the tension between retrotransposon proliferation and host survival, form the basis of this review.