Insulators, not Polycomb response elements, are required for long-range interactions between Polycomb targets in Drosophila melanogaster

Expanding the roles of chromatin insulators in nuclear architecture, chromatin organization and genome function

Of the numerous classes of elements involved in modulating eukaryotic chromosome structure and function, chromatin insulators arguably remain the most poorly understood in their contribution to these processes in vivo. Indeed, our view of chromatin insulators has evolved dramatically since their chromatin boundary and enhancer blocking properties were elucidated roughly a quarter of a century ago as a result of recent genome-wide, high-throughput methods better suited to probing the role of these elements in their native genomic contexts. The overall theme that has emerged from these studies is that chromatin insulators function as general facilitators of higher-order chromatin loop structures that exert both physical and functional constraints on the genome. In this review, we summarize the result of recent work that supports this idea as well as a number of other studies linking these elements to a diverse array of nuclear processes, suggesting that chromatin insulators exert master control over genome organization and behavior.

SSX2 is a novel DNA-binding protein that antagonizes polycomb group body formation and gene repression

Polycomb group (PcG) complexes regulate cellular identity through epigenetic programming of chromatin. Here, we show that SSX2, a germline-specific protein ectopically expressed in melanoma and other types of human cancers, is a chromatin-associated protein that antagonizes BMI1 and EZH2 PcG body formation and derepresses PcG target genes. SSX2 further negatively regulates the level of the PcG-associated histone mark H3K27me3 in melanoma cells, and there is a clear inverse correlation between SSX2/3 expression and H3K27me3 in spermatogenesis. However, SSX2 does not affect the overall composition and stability of PcG complexes, and there is no direct concordance between SSX2 and BMI1/H3K27me3 presence at regulated genes. This suggests that SSX2 antagonizes PcG function through an indirect mechanism, such as modulation of chromatin structure. SSX2 binds double-stranded DNA in a sequence non-specific manner in agreement with the observed widespread association with chromatin. Our results implicate SSX2 in regulation of chromatin structure and function.

Deletions of chromosomal regulatory boundaries are associated with congenital disease

Background

Recent data from genome-wide chromosome conformation capture analysis indicate that the human genome is divided into conserved megabase-sized self-interacting regions called topological domains. These topological domains form the regulatory backbone of the genome and are separated by regulatory boundary elements or barriers. Copy-number variations can potentially alter the topological domain architecture by deleting or duplicating the barriers and thereby allowing enhancers from neighboring domains to ectopically activate genes causing misexpression and disease, a mutational mechanism that has recently been termed enhancer adoption.

Results

We use the Human Phenotype Ontology database to relate the phenotypes of 922 deletion cases recorded in the DECIPHER database to monogenic diseases associated with genes in or adjacent to the deletions. We identify combinations of tissue-specific enhancers and genes adjacent to the deletion and associated with phenotypes in the corresponding tissue, whereby the phenotype matched that observed in the deletion. We compare this computationally with a gene-dosage pathomechanism that attempts to explain the deletion phenotype based on haploinsufficiency of genes located within the deletions. Up to 11.8% of the deletions could be best explained by enhancer adoption or a combination of enhancer adoption and gene-dosage effects.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that enhancer adoption caused by deletions of regulatory boundaries may contribute to a substantial minority of copy-number variation phenotypes and should thus be taken into account in their medical interpretation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13059-014-0423-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

dREAM co-operates with insulator-binding proteins and regulates expression at divergently paired genes

dREAM complexes represent the predominant form of E2F/RBF repressor complexes in Drosophila. dREAM associates with thousands of sites in the fly genome but its mechanism of action is unknown. To understand the genomic context in which dREAM acts we examined the distribution and localization of Drosophila E2F and dREAM proteins. Here we report a striking and unexpected overlap between dE2F2/dREAM sites and binding sites for the insulator-binding proteins CP190 and Beaf-32. Genetic assays show that these components functionally co-operate and chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments on mutant animals demonstrate that dE2F2 is important for association of CP190 with chromatin. dE2F2/dREAM binding sites are enriched at divergently transcribed genes, and the majority of genes upregulated by dE2F2 depletion represent the repressed half of a differentially expressed, divergently transcribed pair of genes. Analysis of mutant animals confirms that dREAM and CP190 are similarly required for transcriptional integrity at these gene pairs and suggest that dREAM functions in concert with CP190 to establish boundaries between repressed/activated genes. Consistent with the idea that dREAM co-operates with insulator-binding proteins, genomic regions bound by dREAM possess enhancer-blocking activity that depends on multiple dREAM components. These findings suggest that dREAM functions in the organization of transcriptional domains.

Are we there yet? Initial targeting of the Male-Specific Lethal and Polycomb group chromatin complexes in Drosophila

Chromatin-binding proteins must navigate the complex nuclear milieu to find their sites of action, and a constellation of protein factors and other properties are likely to influence targeting specificity. Despite considerable progress, the precise rules by which binding specificity is achieved have remained elusive. Here, we consider early targeting events for two groups of chromatin-binding complexes in Drosophila: the Male-Specific Lethal (MSL) and the Polycomb group (PcG) complexes. These two serve as models for understanding targeting, because they have been extensively studied and play vital roles in Drosophila, and their targets have been documented at high resolution. Furthermore, the proteins and biochemical properties of both complexes are largely conserved in multicellular organisms, including humans. While the MSL complex increases gene expression and PcG members repress genes, the two groups share many similarities such as the ability to modify their chromatin environment to create active or repressive domains, respectively. With legacies of in-depth genetic, biochemical and now genomic approaches, the MSL and PcG complexes will continue to provide tractable systems for understanding the recruitment of multiprotein chromatin complexes to their target loci.

CTCF: an architectural protein bridging genome topology and function

The eukaryotic genome is organized in the three-dimensional nuclear space in a specific manner that is both a cause and a consequence of its function. This organization is partly established by a special class of architectural proteins, of which CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) is the best characterized. Although CTCF has been assigned various roles that are often contradictory, new results now help to draw a unifying model to explain the many functions of this protein. CTCF creates boundaries between topologically associating domains in chromosomes and, within these domains, facilitates interactions between transcription regulatory sequences. Thus, CTCF links the architecture of the genome to its function.

Homeotic gene regulation: a paradigm for epigenetic mechanisms underlying organismal development

The organization of eukaryotic genome into chromatin within the nucleus eventually dictates the cell type specific expression pattern of genes. This higher order of chromatin organization is established during development and dynamically maintained throughout the life span. Developmental mechanisms are conserved in bilaterians and hence they have body plan in common, which is achieved by regulatory networks controlling cell type specific gene expression. Homeotic genes are conserved in metazoans and are crucial for animal development as they specify cell type identity along the anterior-posterior body axis. Hox genes are the best studied in the context of epigenetic regulation that has led to significant understanding of the organismal development. Epigenome specific regulation is brought about by conserved chromatin modulating factors like PcG/trxG proteins during development and differentiation. Here we discuss the conserved epigenetic mechanisms relevant to homeotic gene regulation in metazoans.

Mechanisms and proteins involved in long-distance interactions

Due to advances in genome-wide technologies, consistent distant interactions within chromosomes of higher eukaryotes have been revealed. In particular, it has been shown that enhancers can specifically and directly interact with promoters by looping out intervening sequences, which can be up to several hundred kilobases long. This review is focused on transcription factors that are supposed to be involved in long-range interactions. Available data are in agreement with the model that several known transcription factors and insulator proteins belong to an abundant but poorly studied class of proteins that are responsible for chromosomal architecture.

Chromatin immunoprecipitation indirect peaks highlight long-range interactions of insulator proteins and Pol II pausing

Eukaryotic chromosomes are partitioned into topologically associating domains (TADs) that are demarcated by distinct insulator-binding proteins (IBPs) in Drosophila. Whether IBPs regulate specific long-range contacts and how this may impact gene expression remains unclear. Here we identify "indirect peaks" of multiple IBPs that represent their distant sites of interactions through long-range contacts. Indirect peaks depend on protein-protein interactions among multiple IBPs and their common cofactors, including CP190, as confirmed by high-resolution analyses of long-range contacts. Mutant IBPs unable to interact with CP190 impair long-range contacts as well as the expression of hundreds of distant genes that are specifically flanked by indirect peaks. Regulation of distant genes strongly correlates with RNAPII pausing, highlighting how this key transcriptional stage may trap insulator-based long-range interactions. Our data illustrate how indirect peaks may decipher gene regulatory networks through specific long-range interactions.

Polycomb silencing: from linear chromatin domains to 3D chromosome folding

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are conserved chromatin factors that regulate key developmental genes. Genome wide studies have shown that PcG proteins and their associated H3K27me3 histone mark cover long genomic domains. PcG proteins and H3K27me3 accumulate in Pc nuclear foci, which are the cellular counterparts of genomic domains silenced by PcG proteins. One explanation for how large genomic domains form nuclear foci may rely on loops occurring between specific elements located within domains. However, recent improvement of the chromosome conformation capture (3C) technology, which allowed monitoring genome wide contacts depicts a more complex picture in which chromosomes are composed of many topologically associating domains (TADs). Chromatin regions marked with H3K27me3 correspond to one class of TADs and PcG proteins participate in long-range interactions of H3K27me3 TADs, whereas insulator proteins seem to be important for separating TADs and may also participate in the regulation of intra TAD architecture. Recent data converge to suggest that this hierarchical organization of chromosome domains plays an important role in genome function during cell proliferation and differentiation.

Making connections: insulators organize eukaryotic chromosomes into independent cis-regulatory networks

Insulators play a central role in subdividing the chromosome into a series of discrete topologically independent domains and in ensuring that enhancers and silencers contact their appropriate target genes. In this review we first discuss the general characteristics of insulator elements and their associated protein factors. A growing collection of insulator proteins have been identified including a family of proteins whose expression is developmentally regulated. We next consider several unexpected discoveries that require us to completely rethink how insulators function (and how they can best be assayed). These discoveries also require a reevaluation of how insulators might restrict or orchestrate (by preventing or promoting) interactions between regulatory elements and their target genes. We conclude by connecting these new insights into the mechanisms of insulator action to dynamic changes in the three-dimensional topology of the chromatin fiber and the generation of specific patterns of gene activity during development and differentiation.

Chromatin insulators and long-distance interactions in Drosophila

Data on long-distance enhancer-mediated activation of gene promoters and complex regulation of gene expression by multiple enhancers have prompted the hypothesis that the action of enhancers is restricted by insulators. Studies with transgenic lines have shown that insulators are responsible for establishing proper local interactions between regulatory elements, but not for defining independent transcriptional domains that restrict the activity of enhancers. It has also become apparent that enhancer blocking is only one of several functional activities of known insulator proteins, which also contribute to the organization of chromosome architecture and the integrity of regulatory elements.

Surviving an identity crisis: a revised view of chromatin insulators in the genomics era

The control of complex, developmentally regulated loci and partitioning of the genome into active and silent domains is in part accomplished through the activity of DNA-protein complexes termed chromatin insulators. Together, the multiple, well-studied classes of insulators in Drosophila melanogaster appear to be generally functionally conserved. In this review, we discuss recent genomic-scale experiments and attempt to reconcile these newer findings in the context of previously defined insulator characteristics based on classical genetic analyses and transgenic approaches. Finally, we discuss the emerging understanding of mechanisms of chromatin insulator regulation. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Chromatin and epigenetic regulation of animal development.

Effective blocking of the white enhancer requires cooperation between two main mechanisms suggested for the insulator function

Chromatin insulators block the action of transcriptional enhancers when interposed between an enhancer and a promoter. In this study, we examined the role of chromatin loops formed by two unrelated insulators, gypsy and Fab-7, in their enhancer-blocking activity. To test for this activity, we selected the white reporter gene that is activated by the eye-specific enhancer. The results showed that one copy of the gypsy or Fab-7 insulator failed to block the eye enhancer in most of genomic sites, whereas a chromatin loop formed by two gypsy insulators flanking either the eye enhancer or the reporter completely blocked white stimulation by the enhancer. However, strong enhancer blocking was achieved due not only to chromatin loop formation but also to the direct interaction of the gypsy insulator with the eye enhancer, which was confirmed by the 3C assay. In particular, it was observed that Mod(mdg4)-67.2, a component of the gypsy insulator, interacted with the Zeste protein, which is critical for the eye enhancer–white promoter communication. These results suggest that efficient enhancer blocking depends on the combination of two factors: chromatin loop formation by paired insulators, which generates physical constraints for enhancer–promoter communication, and the direct interaction of proteins recruited to an insulator and to the enhancer–promoter pair.

The mechanism underlying enhancer blocking by insulators is unclear. Current models suggest that insulator proteins block enhancers either by formation of chromatin loops or by direct interaction with protein complexes bound to the enhancers and promoters. Here, we tested the role of a chromatin loop in blocking the activity of two Drosophila insulators, gypsy and Fab-7. Both insulators failed to effectively block the interaction between the eye enhancer and the white promoter at most of genomic sites. Insertion of an additional gypsy copy either upstream of the eye enhancer or downstream from the white gene led to complete blocking of the enhancer–promoter communication. In contrast, flanking of the eye enhancer by Fab-7 insulators only weakly improved enhancer blocking. Such a difference in enhancer blocking may be explained by finding that Mod(mdg4)-67.2, a component of gypsy insulator, directly interacts with the Zeste protein, which is critical for enhancer–promoter communication in the white gene.

Communication of genome regulatory elements in a folded chromosome

The most popular model of gene activation by remote enhancers postulates that the enhancers interact directly with target promoters via the looping of intervening DNA fragments. This interaction is thought to be necessary for the stabilization of the Pol II pre-initiation complex and/or for the transfer of transcription factors and Pol II, which are initially accumulated at the enhancer, to the promoter. The direct interaction of enhancer(s) and promoter(s) is only possible when these elements are located in close proximity within the nuclear space. Here, we discuss the molecular mechanisms for maintaining the close proximity of the remote regulatory elements of the eukaryotic genome. The models of an active chromatin hub (ACH) and an active nuclear compartment are considered, focusing on the role of chromatin folding in juxtaposing remote DNA sequences. The interconnection between the functionally dependent architecture of the interphase chromosome and nuclear compartmentalization is also discussed.

Insulators target active genes to transcription factories and polycomb-repressed genes to polycomb bodies

Polycomb bodies are foci of Polycomb proteins in which different Polycomb target genes are thought to co-localize in the nucleus, looping out from their chromosomal context. We have shown previously that insulators, not Polycomb response elements (PREs), mediate associations among Polycomb Group (PcG) targets to form Polycomb bodies. Here we use live imaging and 3C interactions to show that transgenes containing PREs and endogenous PcG-regulated genes are targeted by insulator proteins to different nuclear structures depending on their state of activity. When two genes are repressed, they co-localize in Polycomb bodies. When both are active, they are targeted to transcription factories in a fashion dependent on Trithorax and enhancer specificity as well as the insulator protein CTCF. In the absence of CTCF, assembly of Polycomb bodies is essentially reduced to those representing genomic clusters of Polycomb target genes. The critical role of Trithorax suggests that stable association with a specialized transcription factory underlies the cellular memory of the active state.

We have studied the nuclear localization of genes that are regulated by Polycomb mechanisms. The genomes of higher eukaryotes contain hundreds of genes that are regulated by Polycomb mechanisms. Once repressed by Polycomb complexes, they tend to stay repressed; but, when activated, they bind Trithorax protein and tend to maintain the active state epigenetically. Polycomb repression has been reported to make these genes associate in the nucleus to form “Polycomb bodies.” We find that this association is not caused by Polycomb complexes but by insulator elements accompanying the genes. We show that, when these genes are in the active state, the binding of Trithorax targets them to other nuclear regions where transcription occurs, so-called transcription factories. In these nuclear re-positionings the insulator provides the associative power while the state of activity determines whether a gene goes to a Polycomb body or to a transcription factory. The strong effect of Trithorax suggests the possibility that the stable association with a transcription factory it produces may account for the epigenetic memory of the active state.

Dynamic chromatin loops bridge health and disease in the nuclear landscape

The genome is dynamically organized in the nuclear space in a manner that reflects and influences nuclear functions. Developmental processes that govern the formation and maintenance of epigenetic memories are also tightly linked to adaptive changes in the physical and functional landscape of the nuclear architecture. Biological and biophysical principles governing the three-dimensional folding of chromatin are therefore central to our understanding of epigenetic regulation during adaptive responses and in complex diseases, such as cancer. Accumulating evidence points to the direction that global alterations in nuclear architecture and chromatin folding conspire with unstable epigenetic states of the primary chromatin fiber to drive the phenotypic plasticity of cancer cells.

Functional sub-division of the Drosophila genome via chromatin looping: the emerging importance of CP190

Insulators help in organizing the eukaryotic genomes into physically and functionally autonomous regions through the formation of chromatin loops. Recent findings in Drosophila and vertebrates suggest that insulators anchor multiple loci through long-distance interactions which may be mechanistically linked to insulator function. Important to such processes in Drosophila is CP190, a common co-factor of insulator complexes. CP190 is also known to associate with the nuclear matrix, components of the RNAi machinery, active promoters and borders of the repressive chromatin domains. Although CP190 plays a pivotal role in insulator function in Drosophila, vertebrates lack a probable functional equivalent of CP190 and employ CTCF as the major factor to carry out insulator function/chromatin looping. In this review, we discuss the emerging role of CP190 in tethering genome, specifically in the perspective of insulator function in Drosophila. Future studies aiming genome-wide role of CP190 in chromatin looping is likely to give important insights into the mechanism of genome organization.

The role of chromatin insulators in nuclear architecture and genome function

Eukaryotic genomes are intricately arranged into highly organized yet dynamic structures that underlie patterns of gene expression and cellular identity. The recent adaptation of novel genomic strategies for assaying nuclear architecture has significantly extended and accelerated our ability to query the nature of genome organization and the players involved. In particular, recent explorations of physical arrangements and chromatin landscapes in higher eukaryotes have demonstrated that chromatin insulators, which mediate functional interactions between regulatory elements, appear to play an important role in these processes. Here we reflect on current findings and our rapidly expanding understanding of insulators and their role in nuclear architecture and genome function.

A polycomb group protein is retained at specific sites on chromatin in mitosis

Epigenetic regulation of gene expression, including by Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins, may depend on heritable chromatin states, but how these states can be propagated through mitosis is unclear. Using immunofluorescence and biochemical fractionation, we find PcG proteins associated with mitotic chromosomes in Drosophila S2 cells. Genome-wide sequencing of chromatin immunoprecipitations (ChIP–SEQ) from mitotic cells indicates that Posterior Sex Combs (PSC) is not present at well-characterized PcG targets including Hox genes in mitosis, but does remain at a subset of interphase sites. Many of these persistent sites overlap with chromatin domain borders described by Sexton et al. (2012), which are genomic regions characterized by low levels of long range contacts. Persistent PSC binding sites flank both Hox gene clusters. We hypothesize that disruption of long-range chromatin contacts in mitosis contributes to PcG protein release from most sites, while persistent binding at sites with minimal long-range contacts may nucleate re-establishment of PcG binding and chromosome organization after mitosis.

Gene expression profiles must be maintained through the cell cycle in many situations during development. How gene expression profiles are maintained through mitosis by transcriptional regulators like the Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins is not well understood. Here we find that PcG proteins remain associated with mitotic chromatin, and a small subset of PcG binding sites throughout the genome is maintained between interphase and mitosis. These persistent binding sites preferentially overlap borders of chromatin domains. These results suggest a model in which PcG proteins retained at border sites may nucleate re-binding of PcG protein within domains after mitosis.

Tissue-specific regulation of chromatin insulator function

Chromatin insulators organize the genome into distinct transcriptional domains and contribute to cell type–specific chromatin organization. However, factors regulating tissue-specific insulator function have not yet been discovered. Here we identify the RNA recognition motif-containing protein Shep as a direct interactor of two individual components of the gypsy insulator complex in Drosophila. Mutation of shep improves gypsy-dependent enhancer blocking, indicating a role as a negative regulator of insulator activity. Unlike ubiquitously expressed core gypsy insulator proteins, Shep is highly expressed in the central nervous system (CNS) with lower expression in other tissues. We developed a novel, quantitative tissue-specific barrier assay to demonstrate that Shep functions as a negative regulator of insulator activity in the CNS but not in muscle tissue. Additionally, mutation of shep alters insulator complex nuclear localization in the CNS but has no effect in other tissues. Consistent with negative regulatory activity, ChIP–seq analysis of Shep in a CNS-derived cell line indicates substantial genome-wide colocalization with a single gypsy insulator component but limited overlap with intact insulator complexes. Taken together, these data reveal a novel, tissue-specific mode of regulation of a chromatin insulator.

Mounting evidence in human, mouse, and Drosophila demonstrates a role for the DNA–protein complexes known as chromatin insulators in orchestrating three-dimensional genome organization. Several genes that are only expressed in specific cell types display distinct chromatin configurations correlated with expression status. Recent evidence shows that chromatin insulators play a role in defining tissue-specific chromatin conformation; however, tissue-specific factors that may modulate insulator activity remain unknown. Here we identify a putative RNA–binding protein, Shep, which is expressed most highly in the CNS and interacts directly with insulator complexes. We developed a novel quantitative, tissue-specific insulator assay and found that Shep negatively regulates insulator activity in the CNS. We also find that mutation of shep alters insulator complex nuclear localization in the brain but not other tissues. Finally, we mapped Shep and gypsy insulator protein localization throughout the genome and found that Shep colocalizes with one individual insulator protein but less often than expected with an intact insulator complex. These data suggest that Shep negatively influences insulator activity in a tissue-specific manner.

A bridging model for persistence of a polycomb group protein complex through DNA replication in vitro

Epigenetic regulation may involve heritable chromatin states, but how chromatin features can be inherited through DNA replication is incompletely understood. We address this question using cell-free replication of chromatin. Previously, we showed that a Polycomb group complex, PRC1, remains continuously associated with chromatin through DNA replication. Here we investigate the mechanism of persistence. We find that a single PRC1 subunit, Posterior sex combs (PSC), can reconstitute persistence through DNA replication. PSC binds nucleosomes and self-interacts, bridging nucleosomes into a stable, oligomeric structure. Within these structures, individual PSC-chromatin contacts are dynamic. Stable association of PSC with chromatin, including through DNA replication, depends on PSC-PSC interactions. Our data suggest that labile individual PSC-chromatin contacts allow passage of the DNA replication machinery while PSC-PSC interactions prevent PSC from dissociating, allowing it to rebind to replicated chromatin. This mechanism may allow inheritance of chromatin proteins including PRC1 through DNA replication to maintain chromatin states.

Chromatin modification by PSC occurs at one PSC per nucleosome and does not require the acidic patch of histone H2A

Chromatin architecture is regulated through both enzymatic and non-enzymatic activities. For example, the Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins maintain developmental gene silencing using an array of chromatin-based mechanisms. The essential Drosophila PcG protein, Posterior Sex Combs (PSC), compacts chromatin and inhibits chromatin remodeling and transcription through a non-enzymatic mechanism involving nucleosome bridging. Nucleosome bridging is achieved through a combination of nucleosome binding and self-interaction. Precisely how PSC interacts with chromatin to bridge nucleosomes is not known and is the subject of this work. We determine the stoichiometry of PSC-chromatin interactions in compact chromatin (in which nucleosomes are bridged) using Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy (STEM). We find that full compaction occurs with one PSC per nucleosome. In addition to compacting chromatin, we show that PSC oligomerizes nucleosome arrays. PSC-mediated oligomerization of chromatin occurs at similar stoichiometry as compaction suggesting it may also involve nucleosome bridging. Interactions between the tail of histone H4 and the acidic patch of histone H2A are important for chromatin folding and oligomerization, and several chromatin proteins bind the histone H2A acidic patch. However, mutation of the acidic patch of histone H2A does not affect PSC’s ability to inhibit chromatin remodeling or bridge nucleosomes. In fact, PSC does not require nucleosomes for bridging activity but can bridge naked DNA segments. PSC clusters nucleosomes on sparsely assembled templates, suggesting it interacts preferentially with nucleosomes over bare DNA. This may be due to the ability of PSC to bind free histones. Our data are consistent with a model in which each PSC binds a nucleosome and at least one other PSC to directly bridge nucleosomes and compact chromatin, but also suggest that naked DNA can be included in compacted structures. We discuss how our data highlight the diversity of mechanisms used to modify chromatin architecture.

A repetitive elements perspective in Polycomb epigenetics

Repetitive elements comprise over two-thirds of the human genome. For a long time, these elements have received little attention since they were considered non-functional. On the contrary, recent evidence indicates that they play central roles in genome integrity, gene expression, and disease. Indeed, repeats display meiotic instability associated with disease and are located within common fragile sites, which are hotspots of chromosome re-arrangements in tumors. Moreover, a variety of diseases have been associated with aberrant transcription of repetitive elements. Overall this indicates that appropriate regulation of repetitive elements' activity is fundamental. Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic regulators that are essential for the normal development of multicellular organisms. Mammalian PcG proteins are involved in fundamental processes, such as cellular memory, cell proliferation, genomic imprinting, X-inactivation, and cancer development. PcG proteins can convey their activity through long-distance interactions also on different chromosomes. This indicates that the 3D organization of PcG proteins contributes significantly to their function. However, it is still unclear how these complex mechanisms are orchestrated and which role PcG proteins play in the multi-level organization of gene regulation. Intriguingly, the greatest proportion of Polycomb-mediated chromatin modifications is located in genomic repeats and it has been suggested that they could provide a binding platform for Polycomb proteins. Here, these lines of evidence are woven together to discuss how repetitive elements could contribute to chromatin organization in the 3D nuclear space.

Gene density, transcription, and insulators contribute to the partition of the Drosophila genome into physical domains

The mechanisms responsible for the establishment of physical domains in metazoan chromosomes are poorly understood. Here we find that physical domains in Drosophila chromosomes are demarcated at regions of active transcription and high gene density that are enriched for transcription factors and specific combinations of insulator proteins. Physical domains contain different types of chromatin defined by the presence of specific proteins and epigenetic marks, with active chromatin preferentially located at the borders and silenced chromatin in the interior. Domain boundaries participate in long-range interactions that may contribute to the clustering of regions of active or silenced chromatin in the nucleus. Analysis of transgenes suggests that chromatin is more accessible and permissive to transcription at the borders than inside domains, independent of the presence of active or silencing histone modifications. These results suggest that the higher-order physical organization of chromatin may impose an additional level of regulation over classical epigenetic marks.

Packaging the fly genome: domains and dynamics

Two independent genomic approaches have recently converged to provide insight into the domain organization of the Drosophila genome. Genome-wide mapping of chromosomal proteins and histone modifications has generated detailed maps of the Drosophila chromatin landscape and has led to the identification of a number of different chromatin states and their distribution in domains across the genome. A remarkably similar domain organization is derived from whole genome mapping of chromatin interactions that reveals the segmentation of the genome into structural domains. This review focuses on our current understanding of this domain architecture which provides a foundation for our understanding of the link between chromatin organization and the dynamic activity of the genome.

Nuclear organization and genome function

Long-range interactions between transcription regulatory elements play an important role in gene activation, epigenetic silencing, and chromatin organization. Transcriptional activation or repression of developmentally regulated genes is often accomplished through tissue-specific chromatin architecture and dynamic localization between active transcription factories and repressive Polycomb bodies. However, the mechanisms underlying the structural organization of chromatin and the coordination of physical interactions are not fully understood. Insulators and Polycomb group proteins form highly conserved multiprotein complexes that mediate functional long-range interactions and have proposed roles in nuclear organization. In this review, we explore recent findings that have broadened our understanding of the function of these proteins and provide an integrative model for the roles of insulators in nuclear organization.

tDNA insulators and the emerging role of TFIIIC in genome organization

Recent findings provide evidence that tDNAs function as chromatin insulators from yeast to humans. TFIIIC, a transcription factor that interacts with the B-box in tDNAs as well as thousands of ETC sites in the genome, is responsible for insulator function. Though tDNAs are capable of enhancer-blocking and barrier activities for which insulators are defined, new insights into the relationship between insulators and chromatin structure suggest that TFIIIC serves a complex role in genome organization. We review the role of tRNA genes and TFIIIC as chromatin insulators, and highlight recent findings that have broadened our understanding of insulators in genome biology.

Nature and function of insulator protein binding sites in the Drosophila genome

Chromatin insulator elements and associated proteins have been proposed to partition eukaryotic genomes into sets of independently regulated domains. Here we test this hypothesis by quantitative genome-wide analysis of insulator protein binding to Drosophila chromatin. We find distinct combinatorial binding of insulator proteins to different classes of sites and uncover a novel type of insulator element that binds CP190 but not any other known insulator proteins. Functional characterization of different classes of binding sites indicates that only a small fraction act as robust insulators in standard enhancer-blocking assays. We show that insulators restrict the spreading of the H3K27me3 mark but only at a small number of Polycomb target regions and only to prevent repressive histone methylation within adjacent genes that are already transcriptionally inactive. RNAi knockdown of insulator proteins in cultured cells does not lead to major alterations in genome expression. Taken together, these observations argue against the concept of a genome partitioned by specialized boundary elements and suggest that insulators are reserved for specific regulation of selected genes.

Drosophila CTCF tandemly aligns with other insulator proteins at the borders of H3K27me3 domains

Several multiprotein DNA complexes capable of insulator activity have been identified in Drosophila melanogaster, yet only CTCF, a highly conserved zinc finger protein, and the transcription factor TFIIIC have been shown to function in mammals. CTCF is involved in diverse nuclear activities, and recent studies suggest that the proteins with which it associates and the DNA sequences that it targets may underlie these various roles. Here we show that the Drosophila homolog of CTCF (dCTCF) aligns in the genome with other Drosophila insulator proteins such as Suppressor of Hairy wing [SU(HW)] and Boundary Element Associated Factor of 32 kDa (BEAF-32) at the borders of H3K27me3 domains, which are also enriched for associated insulator proteins and additional cofactors. RNAi depletion of dCTCF and combinatorial knockdown of gene expression for other Drosophila insulator proteins leads to a reduction in H3K27me3 levels within repressed domains, suggesting that insulators are important for the maintenance of appropriate repressive chromatin structure in Polycomb (Pc) domains. These results shed new insights into the roles of insulators in chromatin domain organization and support recent models suggesting that insulators underlie interactions important for Pc-mediated repression. We reveal an important relationship between dCTCF and other Drosophila insulator proteins and speculate that vertebrate CTCF may also align with other nuclear proteins to accomplish similar functions.

CTCF: insights into insulator function during development

The genome of higher eukaryotes exhibits a patchwork of inactive and active genes. The nuclear protein CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) when bound to insulator sequences can prevent undesirable crosstalk between active and inactive genomic regions, and it can also shield particular genes from enhancer function, a role that has many applications in development. Exciting recent work has demonstrated roles for CTCF in, for example, embryonic, neuronal and haematopoietic development. Here, we discuss the underlying mechanisms of developmentally regulated CTCF-dependent transcription in relation to model genes, and highlight genome-wide results indicating that CTCF might play a master role in regulating both activating and repressive transcription events at sites throughout the genome.

Progressive polycomb assembly on H3K27me3 compartments generates polycomb bodies with developmentally regulated motion

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are conserved chromatin factors that maintain silencing of key developmental genes outside of their expression domains. Recent genome-wide analyses showed a Polycomb (PC) distribution with binding to discrete PcG response elements (PREs). Within the cell nucleus, PcG proteins localize in structures called PC bodies that contain PcG-silenced genes, and it has been recently shown that PREs form local and long-range spatial networks. Here, we studied the nuclear distribution of two PcG proteins, PC and Polyhomeotic (PH). Thanks to a combination of immunostaining, immuno-FISH, and live imaging of GFP fusion proteins, we could analyze the formation and the mobility of PC bodies during fly embryogenesis as well as compare their behavior to that of the condensed fraction of euchromatin. Immuno-FISH experiments show that PC bodies mainly correspond to 3D structural counterparts of the linear genomic domains identified in genome-wide studies. During early embryogenesis, PC and PH progressively accumulate within PC bodies, which form nuclear structures localized on distinct euchromatin domains containing histone H3 tri-methylated on K27. Time-lapse analysis indicates that two types of motion influence the displacement of PC bodies and chromatin domains containing H2Av-GFP. First, chromatin domains and PC bodies coordinately undergo long-range motions that may correspond to the movement of whole chromosome territories. Second, each PC body and chromatin domain has its own fast and highly constrained motion. In this motion regime, PC bodies move within volumes slightly larger than those of condensed chromatin domains. Moreover, both types of domains move within volumes much smaller than chromosome territories, strongly restricting their possibility of interaction with other nuclear structures. The fast motion of PC bodies and chromatin domains observed during early embryogenesis strongly decreases in late developmental stages, indicating a possible contribution of chromatin dynamics in the maintenance of stable gene silencing.

The three-dimensional organization of genes and associated proteins is critical for gene regulation. Polycomb group proteins are important developmental regulators controlling the expression of hundreds of genes. They are not homogeneously distributed in the cell nucleus, instead forming nuclear subcompartments called Polycomb bodies. We investigated the dynamics of Polycomb bodies during Drosophila embryonic development, demonstrating that two Polycomb proteins, Polycomb and Polyhomeotic, gradually assemble onto bodies enriched in histone H3 trimethylated on lysine 27, a hallmark of Polycomb silencing. Polycomb bodies are not the most condensed euchromatic part of the genome. Instead, a large amount of genomic chromatin is organized in a histone- and DNA–dense structure distinct from Polycomb bodies. Polycomb bodies move, meet, and split dynamically during development. Their motion has two regimes: a fast, highly constrained motion and a slower regime where multiple bodies undergo long-range coordinated movements potentially corresponding to chromosome territory movements. These regimes are not restricted to Polycomb but also extend to bulk “condensed euchromatin,” which is characterized by slower motion and a narrower radius of confinement. Both motion regimes progressively slow down during development, suggesting that regulation of chromatin dynamics may play an important role in the maintenance of gene silencing in differentiated cells.

P-element homing is facilitated by engrailed polycomb-group response elements in Drosophila melanogaster

P-element vectors are commonly used to make transgenic Drosophila and generally insert in the genome in a nonselective manner. However, when specific fragments of regulatory DNA from a few Drosophila genes are incorporated into P-transposons, they cause the vectors to be inserted near the gene from which the DNA fragment was derived. This is called P-element homing. We mapped the minimal DNA fragment that could mediate homing to the engrailed/invected region of the genome. A 1.6 kb fragment of engrailed regulatory DNA that contains two Polycomb-group response elements (PREs) was sufficient for homing. We made flies that contain a 1.5kb deletion of engrailed DNA (en^Δ1.5) in situ, including the PREs and the majority of the fragment that mediates homing. Remarkably, homing still occurs onto the en^{Δ1. 5} chromosome. In addition to homing to en, P[en] inserts near Polycomb group target genes at an increased frequency compared to P[EPgy2], a vector used to generate 18,214 insertions for the Drosophila gene disruption project. We suggest that homing is mediated by interactions between multiple proteins bound to the homing fragment and proteins bound to multiple areas of the engrailed/invected chromatin domain. Chromatin structure may also play a role in homing.

Insulators organize chromatin: emerging rules of the game

In this issue of Molecular Cell, Wood et al. (2011) provide mechanistic insight into the regulation of insulators that helps explain how they can organize chromatin in a cell type-specific fashion.

A view of nuclear Polycomb bodies

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are concentrated in nuclear foci called PcG bodies. Although some of these foci are due to the tendency of PcG binding sites in the genome to occur in linear clusters, distant PcG sites can contact one another and in some cases congregate in the same PcG body when they are repressed. Experiments using transgenes containing PcG binding sites reveal that co-localization depends on the presence of insulator elements rather than of Polycomb Response Elements (PREs) and that it can occur also when the transgenes are in the active state. A model is proposed according to which insulator proteins mediate shuttling of PcG target genes between PcG bodies when repressed to transcription factories when transcriptionally active.

RNAi-independent role for Argonaute2 in CTCF/CP190 chromatin insulator function

A major role of the RNAi pathway in Schizosaccharomyces pombe is to nucleate heterochromatin, but it remains unclear whether this mechanism is conserved. To address this question in Drosophila, we performed genome-wide localization of Argonaute2 (AGO2) by chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-seq in two different embryonic cell lines and found that AGO2 localizes to euchromatin but not heterochromatin. This localization pattern is further supported by immunofluorescence staining of polytene chromosomes and cell lines, and these studies also indicate that a substantial fraction of AGO2 resides in the nucleus. Intriguingly, AGO2 colocalizes extensively with CTCF/CP190 chromatin insulators but not with genomic regions corresponding to endogenous siRNA production. Moreover, AGO2, but not its catalytic activity or Dicer-2, is required for CTCF/CP190-dependent Fab-8 insulator function. AGO2 interacts physically with CTCF and CP190, and depletion of either CTCF or CP190 results in genome-wide loss of AGO2 chromatin association. Finally, mutation of CTCF, CP190, or AGO2 leads to reduction of chromosomal looping interactions, thereby altering gene expression. We propose that RNAi-independent recruitment of AGO2 to chromatin by insulator proteins promotes the definition of transcriptional domains throughout the genome.

Setting up and maintaining differential insulators and boundaries for genomic imprinting

It is becoming increasingly clear that gene expression is strongly regulated by the surrounding chromatin and nuclear environment. Gene regulatory elements can influence expression over long distances and the genome needs mechanisms whereby transcription can be contained. Our current understanding of the mechanisms whereby insulator/boundary elements organise the genome into active and silent domains is based on chromatin looping models that separate genes and regulatory elements. Imprinted genes have parent-of-origin specific chromatin conformation that seems to be maintained in somatic tissues and reprogrammed in the germline. This review focuses on the proteins found to be present at insulator/boundary sequences at imprinted genes and examines the experimental evidence at the IGF2-H19 locus for a model in which CTCF or other proteins determine primary looping scaffolds that are maintained in most cell lineages and speculates how these loops may enable dynamic secondary associations that can activate or silence genes.

Roles of chromatin insulator proteins in higher-order chromatin organization and transcription regulation

Eukaryotic chromosomes are condensed into several hierarchical levels of complexity: DNA is wrapped around core histones to form nucleosomes, nucleosomes form a higher-order structure called chromatin, and chromatin is subsequently compartmentalized in part by the combination of multiple specific or unspecific long-range contacts. The conformation of chromatin at these three levels greatly influences DNA metabolism and transcription. One class of chromatin regulatory proteins called insulator factors may organize chromatin both locally, by setting up barriers between heterochromatin and euchromatin, and globally by establishing platforms for long-range interactions. Here, we review recent data revealing a global role of insulator proteins in the regulation of transcription through the formation of clusters of long-range interactions that impact different levels of chromatin organization.

Polycomb group proteins: repression in 3D

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are well-conserved chromatin factors that repress the transcription of their target genes. They bind to the genome at specific sites and act on chromatin through the regulation of both post-translational histone modifications and higher-order chromatin structure. Recent work has revealed that PcG-bound regulatory regions can interact with promoters and modulate their activity via mechanisms involving looping between regulatory elements and also long-distance interactions in cis or in trans (on different chromosomes). This indicates that the 3D organization of PcG proteins contributes significantly to their function. Moreover, because long-range chromosomal contacts have been shown to involve many genomic loci in addition to Polycomb target genes, their regulatory impact could extend beyond the function of Polycomb proteins.

Quantitative analysis of polycomb response elements (PREs) at identical genomic locations distinguishes contributions of PRE sequence and genomic environment

Background

Polycomb/Trithorax response elements (PREs) are cis-regulatory elements essential for the regulation of several hundred developmentally important genes. However, the precise sequence requirements for PRE function are not fully understood, and it is also unclear whether these elements all function in a similar manner. Drosophila PRE reporter assays typically rely on random integration by P-element insertion, but PREs are extremely sensitive to genomic position.

Results

We adapted the ΦC31 site-specific integration tool to enable systematic quantitative comparison of PREs and sequence variants at identical genomic locations. In this adaptation, a miniwhite (mw) reporter in combination with eye-pigment analysis gives a quantitative readout of PRE function. We compared the Hox PRE Frontabdominal-7 (Fab-7) with a PRE from the vestigial (vg) gene at four landing sites. The analysis revealed that the Fab-7 and vg PREs have fundamentally different properties, both in terms of their interaction with the genomic environment at each site and their inherent silencing abilities. Furthermore, we used the ΦC31 tool to examine the effect of deletions and mutations in the vg PRE, identifying a 106 bp region containing a previously predicted motif (GTGT) that is essential for silencing.

Conclusions

This analysis showed that different PREs have quantifiably different properties, and that changes in as few as four base pairs have profound effects on PRE function, thus illustrating the power and sensitivity of ΦC31 site-specific integration as a tool for the rapid and quantitative dissection of elements of PRE design.