Mapping genomic targets of DNA helicases by chromatin immunoprecipitation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Chl1 helicase controls replication fork progression by regulating dNTP pools

Chl1 helicase affects RPA-dependent checkpoint activation after replication fork arrest by ensuring proper dNTP levels, thereby controlling replication fork progression under stress conditions.

Eukaryotic cells have evolved a replication stress response that helps to overcome stalled/collapsed replication forks and ensure proper DNA replication. The replication checkpoint protein Mrc1 plays important roles in these processes, although its functional interactions are not fully understood. Here, we show that MRC1 negatively interacts with CHL1, which encodes the helicase protein Chl1, suggesting distinct roles for these factors during the replication stress response. Indeed, whereas Mrc1 is known to facilitate the restart of stalled replication forks, we uncovered that Chl1 controls replication fork rate under replication stress conditions. Chl1 loss leads to increased RNR1 gene expression and dNTP levels at the onset of S phase likely without activating the DNA damage response. This in turn impairs the formation of RPA-coated ssDNA and subsequent checkpoint activation. Thus, the Chl1 helicase affects RPA-dependent checkpoint activation in response to replication fork arrest by ensuring proper intracellular dNTP levels, thereby controlling replication fork progression under replication stress conditions.

Epigenetics Identifier screens reveal regulators of chromatin acylation and limited specificity of acylation antibodies

The collection of known posttranslational modifications (PTMs) has expanded rapidly with the identification of various non-acetyl histone lysine acylations, such as crotonylation, succinylation and butyrylation, yet their regulation is still not fully understood. Through an unbiased chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-based approach called Epigenetics-IDentifier (Epi-ID), we aimed to identify regulators of crotonylation, succinylation and butyrylation in thousands of yeast mutants simultaneously. However, highly correlative results led us to further investigate the specificity of the pan-K-acyl antibodies used in our Epi-ID studies. This revealed cross-reactivity and lack of specificity of pan-K-acyl antibodies in various assays. Our findings suggest that the antibodies might recognize histone acetylation in vivo, in addition to histone acylation, due to the vast overabundance of acetylation compared to other acylation modifications in cells. Consequently, our Epi-ID screen mostly identified factors affecting histone acetylation, including known (e.g. GCN5, HDA1, and HDA2) and unanticipated (MET7, MTF1, CLB3, and RAD26) factors, expanding the repertoire of acetylation regulators. Antibody-independent follow-up experiments on the Gcn5-Ada2-Ada3 (ADA) complex revealed that, in addition to acetylation and crotonylation, ADA has the ability to butyrylate histones. Thus, our Epi-ID screens revealed limits of using pan-K-acyl antibodies in epigenetics research, expanded the repertoire of regulators of histone acetylation, and attributed butyrylation activity to the ADA complex.

Natural variants suppress mutations in hundreds of essential genes

The consequence of a mutation can be influenced by the context in which it operates. For example, loss of gene function may be tolerated in one genetic background, and lethal in another. The extent to which mutant phenotypes are malleable, the architecture of modifiers and the identities of causal genes remain largely unknown. Here, we measure the fitness effects of ~ 1,100 temperature‐sensitive alleles of yeast essential genes in the context of variation from ten different natural genetic backgrounds and map the modifiers for 19 combinations. Altogether, fitness defects for 149 of the 580 tested genes (26%) could be suppressed by genetic variation in at least one yeast strain. Suppression was generally driven by gain‐of‐function of a single, strong modifier gene, and involved both genes encoding complex or pathway partners suppressing specific temperature‐sensitive alleles, as well as general modifiers altering the effect of many alleles. The emerging frequency of suppression and range of possible mechanisms suggest that a substantial fraction of monogenic diseases could be managed by modulating other gene products.

Forkhead transcription factor Fkh1: insights into functional regulatory domains crucial for recruitment of Sin3 histone deacetylase complex

Transcription factors are inextricably linked with histone deacetylases leading to compact chromatin. The Forkhead transcription factor Fkh1 is mainly a negative transcriptional regulator which affects cell cycle control, silencing of mating-type cassettes and induction of pseudohyphal growth in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Markedly, Fkh1 impinges chromatin architecture by recruiting large regulatory complexes. Implication of Fkh1 with transcriptional corepressor complexes remains largely unexplored. In this work we show that Fkh1 directly recruits corepressors Sin3 and Tup1 (but not Cyc8), providing evidence for its influence on epigenetic regulation. We also identified the specific domain of Fkh1 mediating Sin3 recruitment and substantiated that amino acids 51–125 of Fkh1 bind PAH2 of Sin3. Importantly, this part of Fkh1 overlaps with its Forkhead-associated domain (FHA). To analyse this domain in more detail, selected amino acids were replaced by alanine, revealing that hydrophobic amino acids L74 and I78 are important for Fkh1-Sin3 binding. In addition, we could prove Fkh1 recruitment to promoters of cell cycle genes CLB2 and SWI5. Notably, Sin3 is also recruited to these promoters but only in the presence of functional Fkh1. Our results disclose that recruitment of Sin3 to Fkh1 requires precisely positioned Fkh1/Sin3 binding sites which provide an extended view on the genetic control of cell cycle genes CLB2 and SWI5 and the mechanism of transcriptional repression by modulation of chromatin architecture at the G2/M transition.

Functional analysis of Cti6 core domain responsible for recruitment of epigenetic regulators Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1

Mapping of effective protein domains is a demanding stride to disclose the functional relationship between regulatory complexes. Domain analysis of protein interactions is requisite for understanding the pleiotropic responses of the respective partners. Cti6 is a multifunctional regulator for which we could show recruitment of co-repressors Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1. However, the responsible core domain tethering Cti6 to these co-repressors is poorly understood. Here, we report the pivotal domain of Cti6 that is indispensable for co-repressor recruitment. We substantiated that amino acids 450–506 of Cti6 bind PAH2 of Sin3. To analyse this Cti6–Sin3 Interaction Domain (CSID) in more detail, selected amino acids within CSID were replaced by alanine. It is revealed that hydrophobic amino acids V467, L481 and L491 L492 L493 are important for Cti6–Sin3 binding. In addition to PAH2 of Sin3, CSID also binds to tetratricopeptide repeats (TPR) of Cyc8. Indeed, we could demonstrate Cti6 recruitment to promoters of genes, such as RNR3 and SMF3, containing iron-responsive elements (IRE). Importantly, Sin3 is also recruited to these promoters but only in the presence of functional Cti6. Our findings provide novel insights toward the critical interaction domain in the co-regulator Cti6, which is a component of regulatory complexes that are closely related to chromatin architecture and the epigenetic status of genes that are regulated by pleiotropic co-repressors.

A genetic interaction map centered on cohesin reveals auxiliary factors involved in sister chromatid cohesion in S. cerevisiae

Eukaryotic chromosomes are replicated in interphase and the two newly duplicated sister chromatids are held together by the cohesin complex and several cohesin auxiliary factors. Sister chromatid cohesion is essential for accurate chromosome segregation during mitosis, yet has also been implicated in other processes, including DNA damage repair, transcription and DNA replication. To assess how cohesin and associated factors functionally interconnect and coordinate with other cellular processes, we systematically mapped the genetic interactions of 17 cohesin genes centered on quantitative growth measurements of >52,000 gene pairs in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae Integration of synthetic genetic interactions unveiled a cohesin functional map that constitutes 373 genetic interactions, revealing novel functional connections with post-replication repair, microtubule organization and protein folding. Accordingly, we show that the microtubule-associated protein Irc15 and the prefoldin complex members Gim3, Gim4 and Yke2 are new factors involved in sister chromatid cohesion. Our genetic interaction map thus provides a unique resource for further identification and functional interrogation of cohesin proteins. Since mutations in cohesin proteins have been associated with cohesinopathies and cancer, it may also help in identifying cohesin interactions relevant in disease etiology.

Gcn5 and Esa1 function as histone crotonyltransferases to regulate crotonylation-dependent transcription

Histone post-translational modifications (PTMs) are critical for processes such as transcription. The more notable among these are the nonacetyl histone lysine acylation modifications such as crotonylation, butyrylation, and succinylation. However, the biological relevance of these PTMs is not fully understood because their regulation is largely unknown. Here, we set out to investigate whether the main histone acetyltransferases in budding yeast, Gcn5 and Esa1, possess crotonyltransferase activity. In vitro studies revealed that the Gcn5-Ada2-Ada3 (ADA) and Esa1-Yng2-Epl1 (Piccolo NuA4) histone acetyltransferase complexes have the capacity to crotonylate histones. Mass spectrometry analysis revealed that ADA and Piccolo NuA4 crotonylate lysines in the N-terminal tails of histone H3 and H4, respectively. Functionally, we show that crotonylation selectively affects gene transcription in vivo in a manner dependent on Gcn5 and Esa1. Thus, we identify the Gcn5- and Esa1-containing ADA and Piccolo NuA4 complexes as bona fide crotonyltransferases that promote crotonylation-dependent transcription.

Cytoplasmic protein misfolding titrates Hsp70 to activate nuclear Hsf1

Hsf1 is an ancient transcription factor that responds to protein folding stress by inducing the heat-shock response (HSR) that restore perturbed proteostasis. Hsp70 chaperones negatively regulate the activity of Hsf1 via stress-responsive mechanisms that are poorly understood. Here, we have reconstituted budding yeast Hsf1-Hsp70 activation complexes and find that surplus Hsp70 inhibits Hsf1 DNA-binding activity. Hsp70 binds Hsf1 via its canonical substrate binding domain and Hsp70 regulates Hsf1 DNA-binding activity. During heat shock, Hsp70 is out-titrated by misfolded proteins derived from ongoing translation in the cytosol. Pushing the boundaries of the regulatory system unveils a genetic hyperstress program that is triggered by proteostasis collapse and involves an enlarged Hsf1 regulon. The findings demonstrate how an apparently simple chaperone-titration mechanism produces diversified transcriptional output in response to distinct stress loads.

Opi1 mediates repression of phospholipid biosynthesis by phosphate limitation in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Structural genes of phospholipid biosynthesis in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae are transcribed when precursor molecules inositol and choline (IC) are limiting. Gene expression is stimulated by the heterodimeric activator Ino2/Ino4, which binds to ICRE (inositol/choline-responsive element) promoter sequences. Activation is prevented by repressor Opi1, counteracting Ino2 when high concentrations of IC are available. Here we show that ICRE-dependent gene activation is repressed not only by an excess of IC but also under conditions of phosphate starvation. While PHO5 is activated by phosphate limitation, INO1 expression is repressed about 10-fold. Repression of ICRE-dependent genes by low phosphate is no longer observed in an opi1 mutant while repression is still effective in mutants of the PHO regulon (pho4, pho80, pho81 and pho85). In contrast, gene expression with high phosphate is reduced in the absence of pleiotropic sensor protein kinase Pho85. We could demonstrate that Pho85 binds to Opi1 in vitro and in vivo and that this interaction is increased in the presence of high concentrations of phosphate. Interestingly, Pho85 binds to two separate domains of Opi1 which have been previously shown to recruit pleiotropic corepressor Sin3 and activator Ino2, respectively. We postulate that Pho85 positively influences ICRE-dependent gene expression by phosphorylation-dependent weakening of Opi1 repressor, affecting its functional domains required for promoter recruitment and corepressor interaction. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Multiple histone deacetylases are recruited by corepressor Sin3 and contribute to gene repression mediated by Opi1 regulator of phospholipid biosynthesis in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Yeast genes of phospholipid biosynthesis are negatively regulated by repressor protein Opi1 when precursor molecules inositol and choline (IC) are available. Opi1-triggered gene repression is mediated by recruitment of the Sin3 corepressor complex. In this study, we systematically investigated the regulatory contribution of subunits of Sin3 complexes and identified Pho23 as important for IC-dependent gene repression. Two non-overlapping regions within Pho23 mediate its direct interaction with Sin3. Previous work has shown that Sin3 recruits the histone deacetylase (HDAC) Rpd3 to execute gene repression. While deletion of SIN3 strongly alleviates gene repression by IC, an rpd3 null mutant shows almost normal regulation. We thus hypothesized that various HDACs may contribute to Sin3-mediated repression of IC-regulated genes. Indeed, a triple mutant lacking HDACs, Rpd3, Hda1 and Hos1, could phenocopy a sin3 single mutant. We show that these proteins are able to contact Sin3 in vitro and in vivo and mapped three distinct HDAC interaction domains, designated HID1, HID2 and HID3. HID3, which is identical to the previously described structural motif PAH4 (paired amphipathic helix), can bind all HDACs tested. Chromatin immunoprecipitation studies finally confirmed that Hda1 and Hos1 are recruited to promoters of phospholipid biosynthetic genes INO1 and CHO2.