Linking the cell cycle to histone modifications: Dot1, G1/S, and cycling K79me2

Histone H3K79 demethylation by KDM2B facilitates proper DNA replication through PCNA dissociation from chromatin

Objectives

The level of histone H3 lysine 79 methylation is regulated by the cell cycle and involved in cell proliferation. KDM2B is an H3K79 demethylase. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) is a component of the DNA replication machinery. This study aimed at elucidating a molecular link between H3K79me recognition of PCNA and cell cycle control.

Materials and methods

We generated KDM2B‐depleted 293T cells and histone H3‐K79R mutant‐expressing 293T cells. Western blots were primarily utilized to examine the H3K79me level and its effect on subsequent PCNA dissociation from chromatin. We applied IP, peptide pull‐down, isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and ChIP experiments to show the PCNA binding towards methylated H3K79 and DNA replication origins. Flow cytometry, MTT, iPOND and DNA fibre assays were used to assess the necessity of KDM2B for DNA replication and cell proliferation.

Results

We revealed that KDM2B‐mediated H3K79 demethylation regulated cell cycle progression. We found that PCNA bound chromatin in an H3K79me‐dependent manner during S phase. KDM2B was responsible for the timely dissociation of PCNA from chromatin, allowing to efficient DNA replication. Depletion of KDM2B aberrantly enriched chromatin with PCNA and caused slow dissociation of residual PCNA, leading to a negative effect on cell proliferation.

Conclusions

We suggested a novel interaction between PCNA and H3K79me. Thus, our findings provide a new mechanism of KDM2B in regulation of DNA replication and cell proliferation.

Extensive and systematic rewiring of histone post-translational modifications in cancer model systems

Histone post-translational modifications (PTMs) generate a complex combinatorial code that regulates gene expression and nuclear functions, and whose deregulation has been documented in different types of cancers. Therefore, the availability of relevant culture models that can be manipulated and that retain the epigenetic features of the tissue of origin is absolutely crucial for studying the epigenetic mechanisms underlying cancer and testing epigenetic drugs. In this study, we took advantage of quantitative mass spectrometry to comprehensively profile histone PTMs in patient tumor tissues, primary cultures and cell lines from three representative tumor models, breast cancer, glioblastoma and ovarian cancer, revealing an extensive and systematic rewiring of histone marks in cell culture conditions, which includes a decrease of H3K27me2/me3, H3K79me1/me2 and H3K9ac/K14ac, and an increase of H3K36me1/me2. While some changes occur in short-term primary cultures, most of them are instead time-dependent and appear only in long-term cultures. Remarkably, such changes mostly revert in cell line- and primary cell-derived in vivo xenograft models. Taken together, these results support the use of xenografts as the most representative models of in vivo epigenetic processes, suggesting caution when using cultured cells, in particular cell lines and long-term primary cultures, for epigenetic investigations.

Regulation of histone gene expression in budding yeast

We discuss the regulation of the histone genes of the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These include genes encoding the major core histones (H3, H4, H2A, and H2B), histone H1 (HHO1), H2AZ (HTZ1), and centromeric H3 (CSE4). Histone production is regulated during the cell cycle because the cell must replicate both its DNA during S phase and its chromatin. Consequently, the histone genes are activated in late G1 to provide sufficient core histones to assemble the replicated genome into chromatin. The major core histone genes are subject to both positive and negative regulation. The primary control system is positive, mediated by the histone gene-specific transcription activator, Spt10, through the histone upstream activating sequences (UAS) elements, with help from the major G1/S-phase activators, SBF (Swi4 cell cycle box binding factor) and perhaps MBF (MluI cell cycle box binding factor). Spt10 binds specifically to the histone UAS elements and contains a putative histone acetyltransferase domain. The negative system involves negative regulatory elements in the histone promoters, the RSC chromatin-remodeling complex, various histone chaperones [the histone regulatory (HIR) complex, Asf1, and Rtt106], and putative sequence-specific factors. The SWI/SNF chromatin-remodeling complex links the positive and negative systems. We propose that the negative system is a damping system that modulates the amount of transcription activated by Spt10 and SBF. We hypothesize that the negative system mediates negative feedback on the histone genes by histone proteins through the level of saturation of histone chaperones with histone. Thus, the negative system could communicate the degree of nucleosome assembly during DNA replication and the need to shut down the activating system under replication-stress conditions. We also discuss post-transcriptional regulation and dosage compensation of the histone genes.

Natural history of the eukaryotic chromatin protein methylation system

In eukaryotes, methylation of nucleosomal histones and other nuclear proteins is a central aspect of chromatin structure and dynamics. The past 15 years have seen an enormous advance in our understanding of the biochemistry of these modifications, and of their role in establishing the epigenetic code. We provide a synthetic overview, from an evolutionary perspective, of the main players in the eukaryotic chromatin protein methylation system, with an emphasis on catalytic domains. Several components of the eukaryotic protein methylation system had their origins in bacteria. In particular, the Rossmann fold protein methylases (PRMTs and DOT1), and the LSD1 and jumonji-related demethylases and oxidases, appear to have emerged in the context of bacterial peptide methylation and hydroxylation systems. These systems were originally involved in synthesis of peptide secondary metabolites, such as antibiotics, toxins, and siderophores. The peptidylarginine deiminases appear to have been acquired by animals from bacterial enzymes that modify cell-surface proteins. SET domain methylases, which display the β-clip fold, apparently first emerged in prokaryotes from the SAF superfamily of carbohydrate-binding domains. However, even in bacteria, a subset of the SET domains might have evolved a chromatin-related role in conjunction with a BAF60a/b-like SWIB domain protein and topoisomerases. By the time of the last eukaryotic common ancestor, multiple SET and PRMT methylases were already in place and are likely to have mediated methylation at the H3K4, H3K9, H3K36, and H4K20 positions, and carried out both asymmetric and symmetric arginine dimethylation. Inference of H3K27 methylation in the ancestral eukaryote appears uncertain, though it was certainly in place a little later in eukaryotic evolution. Current data suggest that unlike SET methylases, which are universally present in eukaryotes, demethylases are not. They appear to be absent in the earliest-branching eukaryotic lineages, and emerged later along with several other chromatin proteins, such as the Dot1-methylase, prior to divergence of the kinetoplastid-heterolobosean lineage from the remaining eukaryotes. This period also corresponds to the point of origin of DNA cytosine methylation by DNMT1. Origin of major lineages of SET domains such as the Trithorax, Su(var)3-9, Ash1, SMYD, and TTLL12 and E(Z) might have played the initial role in the establishment of multiple distinct heterochromatic and euchromatic states that are likely to have been present, in some form, through much of eukaryotic evolution. Elaboration of these chromatin states might have gone hand-in-hand with acquisition of multiple jumonji-related and LSD1-like demethylases, and functional linkages with the DNA methylation and RNAi systems. Throughout eukaryotic evolution, there were several lineage-specific expansions of SET domain proteins, which might be related to a special transcription regulation process in trypanosomes, acquisition of new meiotic recombination hotspots in animals, and methylation and associated modifications of the diatom silaffin proteins involved in silica biomineralization. The use of specific domains to "read" the methylation marks appears to have been present in the ancestral eukaryote itself. Of these the chromo-like domains appear to have been acquired from bacterial secreted proteins that might have a role in binding cell-surface peptides or peptidoglycan. Domain architectures of the primary enzymes involved in the eukaryotic protein methylation system indicate key features relating to interactions with each other and other modifications in chromatin, such as acetylation. They also emphasize the profound functional distinction between the role of demethylation and deacetylation in regulation of chromatin dynamics.

The histone methyltransferase Dot1 is required for DNA damage repair and proper development in Dictyostelium

Posttranslational histone modifications play an important role in modulating gene expression and chromatin structure. Here we report the identification of histone H3K79 dimethylation in the simple eukaryote Dictyostelium discoideum. We have deleted the D. discoideum Dot1/KMT4 homologue and demonstrate that it is the sole enzyme responsible for histone H3K79me2. Cells lacking Dot1 are reduced in growth and delayed in development, but do not show apparent changes in cell cycle regulation. Furthermore, our results indicate that Dot1 contributes to UV damage resistance and DNA repair in D. discoideum. In summary, the data support the view that the machinery controlling the setting of histone marks is evolutionary highly conserved and provide evidence that D. discoideum is a suitable model system to analyze these modifications and their functions during development and differentiation.

Spt10 and Swi4 control the timing of histone H2A/H2B gene activation in budding yeast

The expression of the histone genes is regulated during the cell cycle to provide histones for nucleosome assembly during DNA replication. In budding yeast, histones H2A and H2B are expressed from divergent promoters at the HTA1-HTB1 and HTA2-HTB2 loci. Here, we show that the major activator of HTA1-HTB1 is Spt10, a sequence-specific DNA binding protein with a putative histone acetyltransferase (HAT) domain. Spt10 binds to two pairs of upstream activation sequence (UAS) elements in the HTA1-HTB1 promoter: UAS1 and UAS2 drive HTA1 expression, and UAS3 and UAS4 drive HTB1 expression. UAS3 and UAS4 also contain binding sites for the cell cycle regulator SBF (an Swi4-Swi6 heterodimer), which overlap the Spt10 binding sites. The binding of Spt10 and binding of SBF to UAS3 and UAS4 are mutually exclusive in vitro. Both SBF and Spt10 are bound in cells arrested with α-factor, apparently awaiting a signal to activate transcription. Soon after the removal of α-factor, SBF initiates a small, early peak of HTA1 and HTB1 transcription, which is followed by a much larger peak due to Spt10. Both activators dissociate from the HTA1-HTB1 promoter after expression has been activated. Thus, SBF and Spt10 cooperate to control the timing of HTA1-HTB1 expression.

Covalent histone modifications--miswritten, misinterpreted and mis-erased in human cancers

Post-translational modification of histones provides an important regulatory platform for processes such as gene transcription and DNA damage repair. It has become increasingly apparent that the misregulation of histone modification, which is caused by the deregulation of factors that mediate the modification installation, removal and/or interpretation, actively contributes to human cancer. In this Review, we summarize recent advances in understanding the interpretation of certain histone methylations by plant homeodomain finger-containing proteins, and how misreading, miswriting and mis-erasing of histone methylation marks can be associated with oncogenesis and progression. These observations provide us with a greater mechanistic understanding of epigenetic alterations in human cancers and might also help direct new therapeutic interventions in the future.