Polycomb complexes and the propagation of the methylation mark at the Drosophila ubx gene

Forecasting histone methylation by Polycomb complexes with minute-scale precision

Animals use the Polycomb system to epigenetically repress developmental genes. The repression requires trimethylation of lysine 27 of histone H3 (H3K27me3) by Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), but the dynamics of this process is poorly understood. To bridge the gap, we developed a computational model that forecasts H3K27 methylation in Drosophila with high temporal resolution and spatial accuracy of contemporary experimental techniques. Using this model, we show that pools of methylated H3K27 in dividing cells are defined by the effective concentration of PRC2 and the replication frequency. We find that the allosteric stimulation by preexisting H3K27me3 makes PRC2 better in methylating developmental genes as opposed to indiscriminate methylation throughout the genome. Applied to Drosophila development, our model argues that, in this organism, the intergenerationally inherited H3K27me3 does not "survive" rapid cycles of embryonic chromatin replication and is unlikely to transmit the memory of epigenetic repression to the offspring. Our model is adaptable to other organisms, including mice and humans.

The activity of engrailed imaginal disc enhancers is modulated epigenetically by chromatin and autoregulation

engrailed (en) encodes a homeodomain transcription factor crucial for the proper development of Drosophila embryos and adults. Like many developmental transcription factors, en expression is regulated by many enhancers, some of overlapping function, that drive expression in spatially and temporally restricted patterns. The en embryonic enhancers are located in discrete DNA fragments that can function correctly in small reporter transgenes. In contrast, the en imaginal disc enhancers (IDEs) do not function correctly in small reporter transgenes. En is expressed in the posterior compartment of wing imaginal discs; in contrast, small IDE-reporter transgenes are expressed mainly in the anterior compartment. We found that En binds to the IDEs and suggest that it may directly repress IDE function and modulate En expression levels. We identified two en IDEs, O and S. Deletion of either of these IDEs from a 79kb HA-en rescue transgene (HAen79) caused a loss-of-function en phenotype when the HAen79 transgene was the sole source of En. In contrast, flies with a deletion of the same IDEs from an endogenous en gene had no phenotype, suggesting a resiliency not seen in the HAen79 rescue transgene. Inserting a gypsy insulator in HAen79 between en regulatory DNA and flanking sequences strengthened the activity of HAen79, giving better function in both the ON and OFF transcriptional states. Altogether our data suggest that the en IDEs stimulate expression in the entire imaginal disc, and that the ON/OFF state is set by epigenetic memory set by the embryonic enhancers. This epigenetic regulation is similar to that of the Ultrabithorax IDEs and we suggest that the activity of late-acting enhancers in other genes may be similarly regulated.

Polycomb proteins translate histone methylation to chromatin folding

Epigenetic repression often involves covalent histone modifications. Yet, how the presence of a histone mark translates into changes in chromatin structure that ultimately benefits the repression is largely unclear. Polycomb group proteins comprise a family of evolutionarily conserved epigenetic repressors. They act as multi-subunit complexes one of which tri-methylates histone H3 at Lysine 27 (H3K27). Here we describe a novel Monte Carlo-Molecular Dynamics simulation framework, which we employed to discover that stochastic interaction of Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1) with tri-methylated H3K27 is sufficient to fold the methylated chromatin. Unexpectedly, such chromatin folding leads to spatial clustering of the DNA elements bound by PRC1. Our results provide further insight into mechanisms of epigenetic repression and the process of chromatin folding in response to histone methylation.

The activity of engrailed imaginal disc enhancers is modulated epigenetically by chromatin and autoregulation

engrailed (en) encodes a homeodomain transcription factor crucial for the proper development of Drosophila embryos and adults. Like many developmental transcription factors, en expression is regulated by many enhancers, some of overlapping function, that drive expression in spatially and temporally restricted patterns. The en embryonic enhancers are located in discrete DNA fragments that can function correctly in small reporter transgenes. In contrast, the en imaginal disc enhancers (IDEs) do not function correctly in small reporter transgenes. En is expressed in the posterior compartment of wing imaginal disks; small IDE-reporter transgenes are expressed in the anterior compartment, the opposite of what is expected. Our data show that the En protein binds to en IDEs, and we suggest that En directly represses IDE function. We identified two en IDEs, 'O' and 'S'. Deletion of either of these IDEs from a 79kb HA-en rescue transgene (HAen79) caused a loss-of-function en phenotype when the HAen79 transgene was the sole source of En. In contrast, flies with a deletion of the same IDEs from the endogenous en gene had no phenotype, suggesting a resiliency not seen in the HAen79 rescue transgene. Inserting a gypsy insulator in HAen79 between en regulatory DNA and flanking sequences strengthened the activity of HAen79, giving better function in both the ON and OFF transcriptional states. Altogether our data show that the en IDEs stimulate expression in the entire imaginal disc, and that the ON/OFF state is set by epigenetic regulators. Further, the endogenous locus imparts a stability to en function not seen even in a large transgene, reflecting the importance of both positive and negative epigenetic influences that act over relatively large distances in chromatin.

Single-nucleus RNA-sequencing in pre-cellularization Drosophila melanogaster embryos

Our current understanding of the regulation of gene expression in the early Drosophila melanogaster embryo comes from observations of a few genes at a time, as with in situ hybridizations, or observation of gene expression levels without regards to patterning, as with RNA-sequencing. Single-nucleus RNA-sequencing however, has the potential to provide new insights into the regulation of gene expression for many genes at once while simultaneously retaining information regarding the position of each nucleus prior to dissociation based on patterned gene expression. In order to establish the use of single-nucleus RNA sequencing in Drosophila embryos prior to cellularization, here we look at gene expression in control and insulator protein, dCTCF, maternal null embryos during zygotic genome activation at nuclear cycle 14. We find that early embryonic nuclei can be grouped into distinct clusters according to gene expression. From both virtual and published in situ hybridizations, we also find that these clusters correspond to spatial regions of the embryo. Lastly, we provide a resource of candidate differentially expressed genes that might show local changes in gene expression between control and maternal dCTCF null nuclei with no detectable differential expression in bulk. These results highlight the potential for single-nucleus RNA-sequencing to reveal new insights into the regulation of gene expression in the early Drosophila melanogaster embryo.

3D genome organisation in Drosophila

Ever since Thomas Hunt Morgan's discovery of the chromosomal basis of inheritance by using Drosophila melanogaster as a model organism, the fruit fly has remained an essential model system in studies of genome biology, including chromatin organisation. Very much as in vertebrates, in Drosophila, the genome is organised in territories, compartments and topologically associating domains (TADs). However, these domains might be formed through a slightly different mechanism than in vertebrates due to the presence of a large and potentially redundant set of insulator proteins and the minor role of dCTCF in TAD boundary formation. Here, we review the different levels of chromatin organisation in Drosophila and discuss mechanisms and factors that might be involved in TAD formation. The dynamics of TADs and enhancer-promoter interactions in the context of transcription are covered in the light of currently conflicting results. Finally, we illustrate the value of polymer modelling approaches to infer the principles governing the three-dimensional organisation of the Drosophila genome.

Chromatin accessibility profiling in Neurospora crassa reveals molecular features associated with accessible and inaccessible chromatin

BACKGROUND

Regulation of chromatin accessibility and transcription are tightly coordinated processes. Studies in yeast and higher eukaryotes have described accessible chromatin regions, but little work has been done in filamentous fungi.

RESULTS

Here we present a genome-scale characterization of accessible chromatin regions in Neurospora crassa, which revealed characteristic molecular features of accessible and inaccessible chromatin. We present experimental evidence of inaccessibility within heterochromatin regions in Neurospora, and we examine features of both accessible and inaccessible chromatin, including the presence of histone modifications, types of transcription, transcription factor binding, and relative nucleosome turnover rates. Chromatin accessibility is not strictly correlated with expression level. Accessible chromatin regions in the model filamentous fungus Neurospora are characterized the presence of H3K27 acetylation and commonly associated with pervasive non-coding transcription. Conversely, methylation of H3 lysine-36 catalyzed by ASH1 is correlated with inaccessible chromatin within promoter regions.

CONCLUSIONS

In N. crassa, H3K27 acetylation is the most predictive histone modification for open chromatin. Conversely, our data show that H3K36 methylation is a key marker of inaccessible chromatin in gene-rich regions of the genome. Our data are consistent with an expanded role for H3K36 methylation in intergenic regions of filamentous fungi compared to the model yeasts, S. cerevisiae and S. pombe, which lack homologs of the ASH1 methyltransferase.

An insulator blocks access to enhancers by an illegitimate promoter, preventing repression by transcriptional interference

Several distinct activities and functions have been described for chromatin insulators, which separate genes along chromosomes into functional units. Here, we describe a novel mechanism of functional separation whereby an insulator prevents gene repression. When the homie insulator is deleted from the end of a Drosophila even skipped (eve) locus, a flanking P-element promoter is activated in a partial eve pattern, causing expression driven by enhancers in the 3’ region to be repressed. The mechanism involves transcriptional read-through from the flanking promoter. This conclusion is based on the following. Read-through driven by a heterologous enhancer is sufficient to repress, even when homie is in place. Furthermore, when the flanking promoter is turned around, repression is minimal. Transcriptional read-through that does not produce anti-sense RNA can still repress expression, ruling out RNAi as the mechanism in this case. Thus, transcriptional interference, caused by enhancer capture and read-through when the insulator is removed, represses eve promoter-driven expression. We also show that enhancer-promoter specificity and processivity of transcription can have decisive effects on the consequences of insulator removal. First, a core heat shock 70 promoter that is not activated well by eve enhancers did not cause read-through sufficient to repress the eve promoter. Second, these transcripts are less processive than those initiated at the P-promoter, measured by how far they extend through the eve locus, and so are less disruptive. These results highlight the importance of considering transcriptional read-through when assessing the effects of insulators on gene expression.

Several distinct activities and functions have been described for chromatin insulators, which are regulatory DNA elements that separate genes along chromosomes into functional units. Here, we describe how insulators can prevent repression of one gene by preventing inappropriate transcription of another gene, without blocking read-through of transcription per se. When the insulator homie is deleted from the end of a transgenic eve locus, a flanking transposable element promoter is activated by eve enhancers, causing repression of the eve promoter. The mechanism involves transcriptional read-through from the flanking promoter, which disrupts normal eve enhancer-promoter activities. When the flanking promoter is turned around, repression of eve is minimal. Thus, transcriptional interference, caused by enhancer capture and read-through when the insulator is removed, represses the eve promoter. These results show a novel role for transcriptional read-through in the effects of insulators on gene expression.

The multiscale effects of polycomb mechanisms on 3D chromatin folding

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins silence master regulatory genes required to properly confer cell identity during the development of both Drosophila and mammals. They may act through chromatin compaction and higher-order folding of chromatin inside the cell nucleus. During the last decade, analysis on interphase chromosome architecture discovered self-interacting regions named topologically associated domains (TADs). TADs result from the 3D chromatin folding of a succession of transcribed and repressed epigenomic domains and from loop extrusion mediated by cohesin/CTCF in mammals. Polycomb silenced chromatin constitutes one type of repressed epigenomic domains which form compacted nano-compartments inside cell nuclei. Recruitment of canonical PcG proteins on chromatin relies on initial binding to discrete elements and further spreading into large chromatin domains covered with H3K27me3. Some of these discrete elements have a bivalent nature both in mammals and Drosophila and are dynamically regulated during development. Loops can occur between them, suggesting that their interaction plays both functional and structural roles. Formation of large chromatin domains covered by H3K27me3 seems crucial for PcG silencing and PcG proteins might exert their function through compaction of these domains in both mammals and flies, rather than by directly controlling the nucleosomal accessibility of discrete regulatory elements. In addition, PcG chromatin domains interact over long genomic distances, shaping a higher-order chromatin network. Therefore, PcG silencing might rely on multiscale chromatin folding to maintain cell identity during differentiation.

The Role of Insulation in Patterning Gene Expression

Development is orchestrated by regulatory elements that turn genes ON or OFF in precise spatial and temporal patterns. Many safety mechanisms prevent inappropriate action of a regulatory element on the wrong gene promoter. In flies and mammals, dedicated DNA elements (insulators) recruit protein factors (insulator binding proteins, or IBPs) to shield promoters from regulatory elements. In mammals, a single IBP called CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) is known, whereas genetic and biochemical analyses in Drosophila have identified a larger repertoire of IBPs. How insulators function at the molecular level is not fully understood, but it is currently thought that they fold chromosomes into conformations that affect regulatory element-promoter communication. Here, we review the discovery of insulators and describe their properties. We discuss recent genetic studies in flies and mice to address the question: Is gene insulation important for animal development? Comparing and contrasting observations in these two species reveal that they have different requirements for insulation, but that insulation is a conserved and critical gene regulation strategy.

H3K27me3 induces multidrug resistance in small cell lung cancer by affecting HOXA1 DNA methylation via regulation of the lncRNA HOTAIR

Background

The long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) HOX transcript antisense RNA (HOTAIR) serves as a powerful predictor of tumor progression and overall survival in patients. Our previous studies showed that HOTAIR modulated HOXA1 DNA methylation by reducing DNMT1 and DNMT3b expression in drug-resistant small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Moreover, H3 lysine 27 trimethylation (H3K27me3) is catalyzed by enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) and plays a critical role in SCLC chemoresistance. However, it is not completely clear whether H3K27me3 affects HOXA1 DNA methylation or whether this effect is mediated by HOTAIR.

Methods

The levels of EZH2 and H3K27me3 were identified in SCLC tissues by immunohistochemical (IHC) staining and in SCLC multidrug-resistant cells by Western blotting. Cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) and flow cytometry were used to detect and analyze the biological function of H3K27me3. Then, we assessed the role of HOTAIR in the regulation of EZH2 and H3K27me3 by using lentivirus and small interfering RNA. Further, bisulfite sequencing PCR was conducted to detect the methylation levels of HOXA1 DNA. Finally, Western blotting was performed to examine the regulatory role of H3K27me3 in controlling HOTAIR expression in SCLC.

Results

In this study, we found that EZH2 and H3K27me3 levels were markedly higher in SCLC tissues and multidrug-resistant SCLC cells. The results indicated that H3K27me3 was related to multidrug resistance. HOTAIR overexpression and knockdown showed that EZH2 and H3K27me3 were regulated by HOTAIR. Moreover, H3K27me3 affected HOXA1 DNA methylation levels. Strikingly, we found that H3K27me3 acted as a negative feedback regulator of HOTAIR.

Conclusions

Our study showed that H3K27me3 affects HOXA1 DNA methylation via HOTAIR regulation, indicating that H3K27me3 may be a potential therapy target for SCLC chemoresistance.

PTE, a novel module to target Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 to the human cyclin D2 (CCND2) oncogene

Polycomb group proteins are essential epigenetic repressors. They form multiple protein complexes of which two kinds, PRC1 and PRC2, are indispensable for repression. Although much is known about their biochemical properties, how mammalian PRC1 and PRC2 are targeted to specific genes is poorly understood. Here, we establish the cyclin D2 (CCND2) oncogene as a simple model to address this question. We provide the evidence that the targeting of PRC1 to CCND2 involves a dedicated PRC1-targeting element (PTE). The PTE appears to act in concert with an adjacent cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) island to arrange for the robust binding of PRC1 and PRC2 to repressed CCND2 Our findings pave the way to identify sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins implicated in the targeting of mammalian PRC1 complexes and provide novel link between polycomb repression and cancer.

Convergence of topological domain boundaries, insulators, and polytene interbands revealed by high-resolution mapping of chromatin contacts in the early Drosophila melanogaster embryo

High-throughput assays of three-dimensional interactions of chromosomes have shed considerable light on the structure of animal chromatin. Despite this progress, the precise physical nature of observed structures and the forces that govern their establishment remain poorly understood. Here we present high resolution Hi-C data from early Drosophila embryos. We demonstrate that boundaries between topological domains of various sizes map to DNA elements that resemble classical insulator elements: short genomic regions sensitive to DNase digestion that are strongly bound by known insulator proteins and are frequently located between divergent promoters. Further, we show a striking correspondence between these elements and the locations of mapped polytene interband regions. We believe it is likely this relationship between insulators, topological boundaries, and polytene interbands extends across the genome, and we therefore propose a model in which decompaction of boundary-insulator-interband regions drives the organization of interphase chromosomes by creating stable physical separation between adjacent domains.

How Communication Between Nucleosomes Enables Spreading and Epigenetic Memory of Histone Modifications

Nucleosomes "talk" to each other about their modification state to form extended domains of modified histones independently of the underlying DNA sequence. At the same time, DNA elements promote modification of nucleosomes in their vicinity. How do these site-specific and histone-based activities act together to regulate spreading of histone modifications along the genome? How do they enable epigenetic memory to preserve cell identity? Many models for the dynamics of repressive histone modifications emphasize the role of strong positive feedback loops, which reinforce histone modifications by recruiting histone modifiers to preexisting modifications. Recent experiments question that repressive histone modifications are self-sustained independently of their genomic context, thereby indicating that histone-based feedback is relatively weak. In the present review, current models for the dynamics of histone modifications are compared and it is suggested that limitation of histone-based feedback is key to intrinsic confinement of spreading and coexistence of short- and long-term memory at different genomic loci. See also the video abstract here: https://youtu.be/3bxr_xDEZfQ.

Hierarchical recruitment of Polycomb complexes revisited

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins epigenetically repress key developmental genes and thereby control alternative cell fates. PcG proteins act as complexes that can modify histones and these histone modifications play a role in transmitting the “memory” of the repressed state as cells divide. Here we consider mainstream models that link histone modifications to hierarchical recruitment of PcG complexes and compare them to results of a direct test of interdependence between PcG complexes for recruitment to Drosophila genes. The direct test indicates that PcG complexes do not rely on histone modifications to recognize their target genes but use them to stabilize the interactions within large chromatin domains. It also shows that multiple strategies are used to coordinate the targeting of PcG complexes to different genes, which may make the repression of these genes more or less robust.

Three-Dimensional Genome Organization and Function in Drosophila

Understanding how the metazoan genome is used during development and cell differentiation is one of the major challenges in the postgenomic era. Early studies in Drosophila suggested that three-dimensional (3D) chromosome organization plays important regulatory roles in this process and recent technological advances started to reveal connections at the molecular level. Here we will consider general features of the architectural organization of the Drosophila genome, providing historical perspective and insights from recent work. We will compare the linear and spatial segmentation of the fly genome and focus on the two key regulators of genome architecture: insulator components and Polycomb group proteins. With its unique set of genetic tools and a compact, well annotated genome, Drosophila is poised to remain a model system of choice for rapid progress in understanding principles of genome organization and to serve as a proving ground for development of 3D genome-engineering techniques.

Interdependence of PRC1 and PRC2 for recruitment to Polycomb Response Elements

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic repressors essential for control of development and cell differentiation. They form multiple complexes of which PRC1 and PRC2 are evolutionary conserved and obligatory for repression. The targeting of PRC1 and PRC2 is poorly understood and was proposed to be hierarchical and involve tri-methylation of histone H3 (H3K27me3) and/or monoubiquitylation of histone H2A (H2AK118ub). Here, we present a strict test of this hypothesis using the Drosophila model. We discover that neither H3K27me3 nor H2AK118ub is required for targeting PRC complexes to Polycomb Response Elements (PREs). We find that PRC1 can bind PREs in the absence of PRC2 but at many PREs PRC2 requires PRC1 to be targeted. We show that one role of H3K27me3 is to allow PcG complexes anchored at PREs to interact with surrounding chromatin. In contrast, the bulk of H2AK118ub is unrelated to PcG repression. These findings radically change our view of how PcG repression is targeted and suggest that PRC1 and PRC2 can communicate independently of histone modifications.

Mariner Transposons Contain a Silencer: Possible Role of the Polycomb Repressive Complex 2

Transposable elements are driving forces for establishing genetic innovations such as transcriptional regulatory networks in eukaryotic genomes. Here, we describe a silencer situated in the last 300 bp of the Mos1 transposase open reading frame (ORF) which functions in vertebrate and arthropod cells. Functional silencers are also found at similar locations within three other animal mariner elements, i.e. IS630-Tc1-mariner (ITm) DD34D elements, Himar1, Hsmar1 and Mcmar1. These silencers are able to impact eukaryotic promoters monitoring strong, moderate or low expression as well as those of mariner elements located upstream of the transposase ORF. We report that the silencing involves at least two transcription factors (TFs) that are conserved within animal species, NFAT-5 and Alx1. These cooperatively act with YY1 to trigger the silencing activity. Four other housekeeping transcription factors (TFs), neuron restrictive silencer factor (NRSF), GAGA factor (GAF) and GTGT factor (GTF), were also found to have binding sites within mariner silencers but their impact in modulating the silencer activity remains to be further specified. Interestingly, an NRSF binding site was found to overlap a 30 bp motif coding a highly conserved PHxxYSPDLAPxD peptide in mariner transposases. We also present experimental evidence that silencing is mainly achieved by co-opting the host Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 pathway. However, we observe that when PRC2 is impaired another host silencing pathway potentially takes over to maintain weak silencer activity. Mariner silencers harbour features of Polycomb Response Elements, which are probably a way for mariner elements to self-repress their transcription and mobility in somatic and germinal cells when the required TFs are expressed. At the evolutionary scale, mariner elements, through their exaptation, might have been a source of silencers playing a role in the chromatin configuration in eukaryotic genomes.

Transposons are mobile DNA sequences that have long co-evolved with the genome of their hosts. Consequently, they are involved in the generation of mutations, as well as the creation of genes and regulatory networks. Controlling the transposon activity, and consequently its negative effects on both the host soma and germ line, is a challenge for the survival of both the host and the transposon. To silence transposons, hosts often use defence mechanisms involving DNA methylation and RNA interference pathways. Here we show that mariner transposons can self-regulate their activity by using a silencer element located in their DNA sequence. The silencer element interferes with host housekeeping protein transcription factors involved in the polycomb silencing pathways. As the regulation of chromatin configuration by polycomb is an important regulator of animal development, our findings open the possibility that mariner silencers might have been exapted during animal evolution to participate in certain regulation pathways of their hosts. Since some of the TFs involved in mariner silencer activity play a role at different stages of nervous system development and neuron differentiation, it might be possible that mariner transposons can be active during some steps of cell differentiation. Interestingly, mariner transposons (i.e. IS630-Tc1-mariner (ITm) DD34D transposons) have so far only been found in genomes of animals having a nervous system.

Localized epigenetic silencing of a damage-activated WNT enhancer limits regeneration in mature Drosophila imaginal discs

Many organisms lose the capacity to regenerate damaged tissues as they mature. Damaged Drosophila imaginal discs regenerate efficiently early in the third larval instar (L3) but progressively lose this ability. This correlates with reduced damage-responsive expression of multiple genes, including the WNT genes wingless (wg) and Wnt6. We demonstrate that damage-responsive expression of both genes requires a bipartite enhancer whose activity declines during L3. Within this enhancer, a damage-responsive module stays active throughout L3, while an adjacent silencing element nucleates increasing levels of epigenetic silencing restricted to this enhancer. Cas9-mediated deletion of the silencing element alleviates WNT repression, but is, in itself, insufficient to promote regeneration. However, directing Myc expression to the blastema overcomes repression of multiple genes, including wg, and restores cellular responses necessary for regeneration. Localized epigenetic silencing of damage-responsive enhancers can therefore restrict regenerative capacity in maturing organisms without compromising gene functions regulated by developmental signals.

Epigenetic engineering shows that a human centromere resists silencing mediated by H3K27me3/K9me3

Centromeres are embedded within heterochromatin but are transcriptionally active. Centromeric transcription and the centromere function of a human artificial chromosome resist repression mediated by nucleation of repressive marks H3K27me3 or H3K9me3 via tethering of EZH2 or the SET domain of Suv39h1, respectively.

Centromeres are characterized by the centromere-specific H3 variant CENP-A, which is embedded in chromatin with a pattern characteristic of active transcription that is required for centromere identity. It is unclear how centromeres remain transcriptionally active despite being flanked by repressive pericentric heterochromatin. To further understand centrochromatin’s response to repressive signals, we nucleated a Polycomb-like chromatin state within the centromere of a human artificial chromosome (HAC) by tethering the methyltransferase EZH2. This led to deposition of the H3K27me3 mark and PRC1 repressor binding. Surprisingly, this state did not abolish HAC centromere function or transcription, and this apparent resistance was not observed on a noncentromeric locus, where transcription was silenced. Directly tethering the reader/repressor PRC1 bypassed this resistance, inactivating the centromere. We observed analogous responses when tethering the heterochromatin Editor Suv39h1-methyltransferase domain (centromere resistance) or reader HP1α (centromere inactivation), respectively. Our results reveal that the HAC centromere can resist repressive pathways driven by H3K9me3/H3K27me3 and may help to explain how centromeres are able to resist inactivation by flanking heterochromatin.

Combinatorial interactions are required for the efficient recruitment of pho repressive complex (PhoRC) to polycomb response elements

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic repressors that control metazoan development and cell differentiation. In Drosophila, PcG proteins form five distinct complexes targeted to genes by Polycomb Response Elements (PREs). Of all PcG complexes PhoRC is the only one that contains a sequence-specific DNA binding subunit (PHO or PHOL), which led to a model that places PhoRC at the base of the recruitment hierarchy. Here we demonstrate that in vivo PHO is preferred to PHOL as a subunit of PhoRC and that PHO and PHOL associate with PREs and a subset of transcriptionally active promoters. Although the binding to the promoter sites depends on the quality of recognition sequences, the binding to PREs does not. Instead, the efficient recruitment of PhoRC to PREs requires the SFMBT subunit and crosstalk with Polycomb Repressive Complex 1. We find that human YY1 protein, the ortholog of PHO, binds sites at active promoters in the human genome but does not bind most PcG target genes, presumably because the interactions involved in the targeting to Drosophila PREs are lost in the mammalian lineage. We conclude that the recruitment of PhoRC to PREs is based on combinatorial interactions and propose that such a recruitment strategy is important to attenuate the binding of PcG proteins when the target genes are transcriptionally active. Our findings allow the appropriate placement of PhoRC in the PcG recruitment hierarchy and provide a rationale to explain why YY1 is unlikely to serve as a general recruiter of mammalian Polycomb complexes despite its reported ability to participate in PcG repression in flies.

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic repressors essential for development and cell differentiation. PcG proteins form five complexes targeted to specific genes by Polycomb Response Elements (PREs). How PcG complexes are recruited to PREs is poorly understood. Here we investigate the recruitment of PhoRC, a seemingly simple case of a complex that contains a sequence-specific DNA binding subunit: PHO (or the related protein PHOL). Unexpectedly, we find that the sequence specific binding of PHO is not a primary determinant for recruitment of PhoRC to PRE, which depends on the non-DNA binding subunit SFMBT and cross-talk with another PcG complex, PRC1. The binding of PhoRC is helped by PRC1 and, in turn, may stabilize the binding of PRC1. We propose that the recruitment based on combinatorial interactions enables the conditional binding of PcG proteins, which is important for switching the state of the target genes from repressed to active. The critical role of the cross-talk between PhoRC and PRC1 is further supported by the finding that in mammals, where the protein domains linking the two complexes are missing, the PHO ortholog YY1 has no implication in PcG repression, despite 100% conservation between DNA binding domains of YY1 and PHO.

A new world of Polycombs: unexpected partnerships and emerging functions

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic repressors that are essential for the transcriptional control of cell differentiation and development. PcG-mediated repression is associated with specific post-translational histone modifications and is thought to involve both biochemical and physical modulation of chromatin structure. Recent advances show that PcG complexes comprise a multiplicity of variants and are far more biochemically diverse than previously thought. The importance of these new PcG complexes for normal development and disease, their targeting mechanisms and their shifting roles in the course of differentiation are now the subject of investigation and the focus of this Review.

The Drosophila eve insulator Homie promotes eve expression and protects the adjacent gene from repression by polycomb spreading

Insulators can block the action of enhancers on promoters and the spreading of repressive chromatin, as well as facilitating specific enhancer-promoter interactions. However, recent studies have called into question whether the activities ascribed to insulators in model transgene assays actually reflect their functions in the genome. The Drosophila even skipped (eve) gene is a Polycomb (Pc) domain with a Pc-group response element (PRE) at one end, flanked by an insulator, an arrangement also seen in other genes. Here, we show that this insulator has three major functions. It blocks the spreading of the eve Pc domain, preventing repression of the adjacent gene, TER94. It prevents activation of TER94 by eve regulatory DNA. It also facilitates normal eve expression. When Homie is deleted in the context of a large transgene that mimics both eve and TER94 regulation, TER94 is repressed. This repression depends on the eve PRE. Ubiquitous TER94 expression is “replaced” by expression in an eve pattern when Homie is deleted, and this effect is reversed when the PRE is also removed. Repression of TER94 is attributable to spreading of the eve Pc domain into the TER94 locus, accompanied by an increase in histone H3 trimethylation at lysine 27. Other PREs can functionally replace the eve PRE, and other insulators can block PRE-dependent repression in this context. The full activity of the eve promoter is also dependent on Homie, and other insulators can promote normal eve enhancer-promoter communication. Our data suggest that this is not due to preventing promoter competition, but is likely the result of the insulator organizing a chromosomal conformation favorable to normal enhancer-promoter interactions. Thus, insulator activities in a native context include enhancer blocking and enhancer-promoter facilitation, as well as preventing the spread of repressive chromatin.

Insulators are specialized DNA elements that can separate the genome into functional units. Most of the current thinking about these elements comes from studies done with model transgenes. Studies of insulators within the specialized Hox gene complexes have suggested that model transgenes can reflect the normal functions of these elements in their native context. However, recent genome-wide studies have called this into question. This work analyzes the native function of an insulator that resides between the Drosophila genes eve and TER94, which are expressed in very different patterns. Also, the eve gene is a Polycomb (Pc) domain, a specialized type of chromatin that is found in many places throughout the genome. We show that this insulator has three major functions. It blocks the spreading of the eve Pc domain, preventing repression of TER94. It prevents activation of TER94 by eve regulatory DNA. It also facilitates normal eve expression. Each of these activities are consistent with those seen with model transgenes, and other known insulators can provide these functions in this context. This work provides a novel and convincing example of the normal role of insulators in regulating the eukaryotic genome, as well as providing insights into their mechanisms of action.

Genome-wide identification of chromatin transitional regions reveals diverse mechanisms defining the boundary of facultative heterochromatin

Due to the self-propagating nature of the heterochromatic modification H3K27me3, chromatin barrier activities are required to demarcate the boundary and prevent it from encroaching into euchromatic regions. Studies in Drosophila and vertebrate systems have revealed several important chromatin barrier elements and their respective binding factors. However, epigenomic data indicate that the binding of these factors are not exclusive to chromatin boundaries. To gain a comprehensive understanding of facultative heterochromatin boundaries, we developed a two-tiered method to identify the Chromatin Transitional Region (CTR), i.e. the nucleosomal region that shows the greatest transition rate of the H3K27me3 modification as revealed by ChIP-Seq. This approach was applied to identify CTRs in Drosophila S2 cells and human HeLa cells. Although many insulator proteins have been characterized in Drosophila, less than half of the CTRs in S2 cells are associated with known insulator proteins, indicating unknown mechanisms remain to be characterized. Our analysis also revealed that the peak binding of insulator proteins are usually 1–2 nucleosomes away from the CTR. Comparison of CTR-associated insulator protein binding sites vs. those in heterochromatic region revealed that boundary-associated binding sites are distinctively flanked by nucleosome destabilizing sequences, which correlates with significant decreased nucleosome density and increased binding intensities of co-factors. Interestingly, several subgroups of boundaries have enhanced H3.3 incorporation but reduced nucleosome turnover rate. Our genome-wide study reveals that diverse mechanisms are employed to define the boundaries of facultative heterochromatin. In both Drosophila and mammalian systems, only a small fraction of insulator protein binding sites co-localize with H3K27me3 boundaries. However, boundary-associated insulator binding sites are distinctively flanked by nucleosome destabilizing sequences, which correlates with significantly decreased nucleosome density and increased binding of co-factors.

Identification and Validation of a Putative Polycomb Responsive Element in the Human Genome

Epigenetic cellular memory mechanisms that involve polycomb and trithorax group of proteins are well conserved across metazoans. The cis-acting elements interacting with these proteins, however, are poorly understood in mammals. In a directed search we identified a potential polycomb responsive element with 25 repeats of YY1 binding motifthatwe designate PRE-PIK3C2B as it occurs in the first intron of human PIK3C2B gene. It down regulates reporter gene expression in HEK cells and the repression is dependent on polycomb group of proteins (PcG). We demonstrate that PRE-PIK3C2B interacts directly with YY1 in vitro and recruits PRC2 complex in vivo. The localization of PcG proteins including YY1 to PRE-PIK3C2B in HEK cells is decreased on knock-down of either YY1 or SUZ12. Endogenous PRE-PIK3C2B shows bivalent marking having H3K27me3 and H3K4me3 for repressed and active state respectively. In transgenic Drosophila, PRE-PIK3C2B down regulates mini-white expression, exhibits variegation and pairing sensitive silencing (PSS), which has not been previously demonstrated for mammalian PRE. Taken together, our results strongly suggest that PRE-PIK3C2B functions as a site of interaction for polycomb proteins.

Polycomb domain formation depends on short and long distance regulatory cues

BACKGROUND

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins dynamically define cellular identities through the epigenetic repression of key developmental genes. In Drosophila, cis-regulatory regions termed PcG response elements (PREs) act as nucleation sites for PcG proteins to create large repressive PcG domains that are marked by trimethylation of lysine 27 on histone H3 (H3K27me3). In addition to an action in cis, PREs can interact over long distances, thereby enhancing PcG dependent silencing. How PcG domains are established, which factors limit their propagation in cis, and how long range interactions of PREs in trans affect the chromatin structure is largely unknown.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We demonstrate that the insertion of a PRE-containing transgene in the Drosophila genome generates an artificial PcG domain and we analyze its organization by quantitative ChIP and ChIP-on-chip experiments. Intriguingly, a boundary element and known insulator proteins do not necessarily interfere with spreading of H3K27me3. Instead, domain borders correlate with the presence of promoter regions bound by RNA Polymerase II and active chromatin marks. In contrast, genes that are silent during early fly development get included within the PcG domain and this incorporation interferes with gene activation at later developmental stages. Moreover, trans-interaction of the transgenic PRE with its homologous endogenous PRE results in increased PcG binding, correlating with reinforced silencing of genes within the domain borders.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that higher-order organization of PcG-bound chromatin can stabilize gene silencing within PcG domains. Further we propose that multi-protein complexes associated with active promoters are able to define the limits of PcG domains. Future work aimed to pinpoint the factors providing this barrier function will be required to understand the precise molecular mechanism by which active promoter regions can act as boundaries to stop spreading of H3K27me3.

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.

HP1a recruitment to promoters is independent of H3K9 methylation in Drosophila melanogaster

Heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1) proteins, recognized readers of the heterochromatin mark methylation of histone H3 lysine 9 (H3K9me), are important regulators of heterochromatin-mediated gene silencing and chromosome structure. In Drosophila melanogaster three histone lysine methyl transferases (HKMTs) are associated with the methylation of H3K9: Su(var)3-9, Setdb1, and G9a. To probe the dependence of HP1a binding on H3K9me, its dependence on these three HKMTs, and the division of labor between the HKMTs, we have examined correlations between HP1a binding and H3K9me patterns in wild type and null mutants of these HKMTs. We show here that Su(var)3-9 controls H3K9me-dependent binding of HP1a in pericentromeric regions, while Setdb1 controls it in cytological region 2L:31 and (together with POF) in chromosome 4. HP1a binds to the promoters and within bodies of active genes in these three regions. More importantly, however, HP1a binding at promoters of active genes is independent of H3K9me and POF. Rather, it is associated with heterochromatin protein 2 (HP2) and open chromatin. Our results support a hypothesis in which HP1a nucleates with high affinity independently of H3K9me in promoters of active genes and then spreads via H3K9 methylation and transient looping contacts with those H3K9me target sites.

HP1 is a key protein in heterochromatin and epigenetic silencing, a phenomenon involving chromatin condensation. It is generally accepted that HP1 forms a dimer that links two adjacent nucleosomes through interactions with histone 3 methylated at lysine 9 (H3K9me). Since HP1 also interacts with the histone lysine methyltransferases (HKMTs) generating this modification, histone H3 becomes methylated and HP1 spreading is propagated. Here, we show that HP1a in Drosophila binds to promoters of active genes on chromosome 4 and pericentromeric regions. In contrast to current dogma, this binding is independent of H3K9me. In the presence of the HKMTs and H3K9me, HP1a is also enriched within the bodies of the bound genes. These findings shed new light on the role of HP1a and the epigenetic nature of this chromatin mark. We propose that HP1a interacts independently of H3K9me with the nucleosome with high affinity, probably via the H3 histone-fold. This interaction is followed by a more transient interaction between HP1a and H3K9me, which results in spreading of the HP1a enrichment into gene bodies. Overall, the presented results and hypothesized model provide an explanation for this epigenetic mark and possibly more general insights into the relationships between chromo-domain proteins and methylated histones.

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.

Histone methylation: a dynamic mark in health, disease and inheritance

Organisms require an appropriate balance of stability and reversibility in gene expression programmes to maintain cell identity or to enable responses to stimuli; epigenetic regulation is integral to this dynamic control. Post-translational modification of histones by methylation is an important and widespread type of chromatin modification that is known to influence biological processes in the context of development and cellular responses. To evaluate how histone methylation contributes to stable or reversible control, we provide a broad overview of how histone methylation is regulated and leads to biological outcomes. The importance of appropriately maintaining or reprogramming histone methylation is illustrated by its links to disease and ageing and possibly to transmission of traits across generations.

Chromatin domain boundary element search tool for Drosophila

Chromatin domain boundary elements prevent inappropriate interaction between distant or closely spaced regulatory elements and restrict enhancers and silencers to correct target promoters. In spite of having such a general role and expected frequent occurrence genome wide, there is no DNA sequence analysis based tool to identify boundary elements. Here, we report chromatin domain Boundary Element Search Tool (cdBEST), to identify boundary elements. cdBEST uses known recognition sequences of boundary interacting proteins and looks for ‘motif clusters’. Using cdBEST, we identified boundary sequences across 12 Drosophila species. Of the 4576 boundary sequences identified in Drosophila melanogaster genome, >170 sequences are repetitive in nature and have sequence homology to transposable elements. Analysis of such sequences across 12 Drosophila genomes showed that the occurrence of repetitive sequences in the context of boundaries is a common feature of drosophilids. We use a variety of genome organization criteria and also experimental test on a subset of the cdBEST boundaries in an enhancer-blocking assay and show that 80% of them indeed function as boundaries in vivo. These observations highlight the role of cdBEST in better understanding of chromatin domain boundaries in Drosophila and setting the stage for comparative analysis of boundaries across closely related species.

Regulation of Polycomb group genes Psc and Su(z)2 in Drosophila melanogaster

Certain Polycomb group (PcG) genes are themselves targets of PcG complexes. Two of these constitute the Drosophila Psc-Su(z)2 locus, a region whose chromatin is enriched for H3K27me3 and contains several putative Polycomb response elements (PREs) that bind PcG proteins. To understand how PcG mechanisms regulate this region, the repressive function of the PcG protein binding sites was analyzed using reporter gene constructs. We find that at least two of these are functional PREs that can silence a reporter gene in a PcG-dependent manner. One of these two can also display anti-silencing activity, dependent on the context. A PcG protein binding site near the Psc promoter behaves not as a silencer but as a down-regulation module that is actually stimulated by the Pc gene product but not by other PcG products. Deletion of one of the PREs increases the expression level of Psc and Su(z)2 by twofold at late embryonic stages. We present evidence suggesting that the Psc-Su(z)2 locus is flanked by insulator elements that may protect neighboring genes from inappropriate silencing. Deletion of one of these regions results in extension of the domain of H3K27me3 into a region containing other genes, whose expression becomes silenced in the early embryo.

The role of the histone H2A ubiquitinase Sce in Polycomb repression

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins exist in multiprotein complexes that modify chromatin to repress transcription. Drosophila PcG proteins Sex combs extra (Sce; dRing) and Posterior sex combs (Psc) are core subunits of PRC1-type complexes. The Sce:Psc module acts as an E3 ligase for monoubiquitylation of histone H2A, an activity thought to be crucial for repression by PRC1-type complexes. Here, we created an Sce knockout allele and show that depletion of Sce results in loss of H2A monoubiquitylation in developing Drosophila. Genome-wide profiling identified a set of target genes co-bound by Sce and all other PRC1 subunits. Analyses in mutants lacking individual PRC1 subunits reveals that these target genes comprise two distinct classes. Class I genes are misexpressed in mutants lacking any of the PRC1 subunits. Class II genes are only misexpressed in animals lacking the Psc-Su(z)2 and Polyhomeotic (Ph) subunits but remain stably repressed in the absence of the Sce and Polycomb (Pc) subunits. Repression of class II target genes therefore does not require Sce and H2A monoubiquitylation but might rely on the ability of Psc-Su(z)2 and Ph to inhibit nucleosome remodeling or to compact chromatin. Similarly, Sce does not provide tumor suppressor activity in larval tissues under conditions in which Psc-Su(z)2, Ph and Pc show such activity. Sce and H2A monoubiquitylation are therefore only crucial for repression of a subset of genes and processes regulated by PRC1-type complexes. Sce synergizes with the Polycomb repressive deubiquitinase (PR-DUB) complex to repress transcription at class I genes, suggesting that H2A monoubiquitylation must be appropriately balanced for their transcriptional repression.

Different roles for Aurora B in condensin targeting during mitosis and meiosis

Condensin complexes are essential for mitotic and meiotic chromosome segregation. Caenorhabditis elegans, like other metazoans, has two distinct mitotic and meiotic condensin complexes (I and II), which occupy distinct chromosomal domains and perform non-redundant functions. Despite the differences in mitotic and meiotic chromosome behavior, we uncovered several conserved aspects of condensin targeting during these processes. During both mitosis and meiosis, condensin II loads onto chromosomes in early prophase, and condensin I loads at entry into prometaphase. During both mitosis and meiosis, the localization of condensin I, but not condensin II, closely parallels the localization of the chromosomal passenger kinase Aurora B (AIR-2 in C. elegans). Interestingly, condensin I and AIR-2 also colocalize on the spindle midzone during anaphase of mitosis, and between separating chromosomes during anaphase of meiosis. Consistently, AIR-2 affects the targeting of condensin I but not condensin II. However, the role AIR-2 plays in condensin I targeting during these processes is different. In mitosis, AIR-2 activity is required for chromosomal association of condensin I. By contrast, during meiosis, AIR-2 is not required for condensin I chromosomal association, but it provides cues for correct spatial targeting of the complex.

A barrier-only boundary element delimits the formation of facultative heterochromatin in Drosophila melanogaster and vertebrates

Formation of facultative heterochromatin at specific genomic loci is fundamentally important in defining cellular properties such as differentiation potential and responsiveness to developmental, physiological, and environmental stimuli. By the nature of their formation, heterochromatin and repressive histone marks propagate until the chain reaction is broken. While certain active promoters can block propagation of heterochromatin, there are also specialized DNA elements, referred to as chromatin barriers, that serve to demarcate the boundary of facultative heterochromatin formation. In this study, we identified a chromatin barrier that specifically limits the formation of repressive chromatin to a distal enhancer region so that repressive histone modifications cannot reach the promoter and promoter-proximal enhancer regions of reaper. Unlike all of the known boundary elements identified for Drosophila melanogaster, this IRER (irradiation-responsive enhancer region) left barrier (ILB) does not exhibit enhancer-blocking activity. Not only has the ILB been conserved in different Drosophila species, it can also function as an effective chromatin barrier in vertebrate cells. This suggests that the mechanism by which it functions to spatially restrict the formation of repressive chromatin marked by trimethylated H3K27 has also been conserved widely during evolution.

Plasticity in patterns of histone modifications and chromosomal proteins in Drosophila heterochromatin

Eukaryotic genomes are packaged in two basic forms, euchromatin and heterochromatin. We have examined the composition and organization of Drosophila melanogaster heterochromatin in different cell types using ChIP-array analysis of histone modifications and chromosomal proteins. As anticipated, the pericentric heterochromatin and chromosome 4 are on average enriched for the "silencing" marks H3K9me2, H3K9me3, HP1a, and SU(VAR)3-9, and are generally depleted for marks associated with active transcription. The locations of the euchromatin-heterochromatin borders identified by these marks are similar in animal tissues and most cell lines, although the amount of heterochromatin is variable in some cell lines. Combinatorial analysis of chromatin patterns reveals distinct profiles for euchromatin, pericentric heterochromatin, and the 4th chromosome. Both silent and active protein-coding genes in heterochromatin display complex patterns of chromosomal proteins and histone modifications; a majority of the active genes exhibit both "activation" marks (e.g., H3K4me3 and H3K36me3) and "silencing" marks (e.g., H3K9me2 and HP1a). The hallmark of active genes in heterochromatic domains appears to be a loss of H3K9 methylation at the transcription start site. We also observe complex epigenomic profiles of intergenic regions, repeated transposable element (TE) sequences, and genes in the heterochromatic extensions. An unexpectedly large fraction of sequences in the euchromatic chromosome arms exhibits a heterochromatic chromatin signature, which differs in size, position, and impact on gene expression among cell types. We conclude that patterns of heterochromatin/euchromatin packaging show greater complexity and plasticity than anticipated. This comprehensive analysis provides a foundation for future studies of gene activity and chromosomal functions that are influenced by or dependent upon heterochromatin.

Interactions of transcription factors with chromatin

Sequence-specific transcription factors (TFs) play a central role in regulating transcription initiation by directing the recruitment and activity of the general transcription machinery and accessory factors. It is now well established that many of the effects exerted by TFs in eukaryotes are mediated through interactions with a host of coregulators that modify the chromatin state, resulting in a more open (in case of activation) or closed conformation (in case of repression). The relationship between TFs and chromatin is a two-way street, however, as chromatin can in turn influence the recognition and binding of target sequences by TFs. The aim of this chapter is to highlight how this dynamic interplay between TF-directed remodelling of chromatin and chromatin-adjusted targeting of TF binding determines where and how transcription is initiated, and to what degree it is productive.

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

The genomic binding sites of Polycomb group (PcG) complexes have been found to cluster, forming Polycomb "bodies" or foci in mammalian or fly nuclei. These associations are thought to be driven by interactions between PcG complexes and result in enhanced repression. Here, we show that a Polycomb response element (PRE) with strong PcG binding and repressive activity cannot mediate trans interactions. In the case of the two best-studied interacting PcG targets in Drosophila, the Mcp and the Fab-7 regulatory elements, we find that these associations are not dependent on or caused by the Polycomb response elements they contain. Using functional assays and physical colocalization by in vivo fluorescence imaging or chromosome conformation capture (3C) methods, we show that the interactions between remote copies of Mcp or Fab-7 elements are dependent on the insulator activities present in these elements and not on their PREs. We conclude that insulator binding proteins rather than PcG complexes are likely to be the major determinants of the long-range higher-order organization of PcG targets in the nucleus.

Comparative analysis of chromatin binding by Sex Comb on Midleg (SCM) and other polycomb group repressors at a Drosophila Hox gene

Sex Comb on Midleg (SCM) is a transcriptional repressor in the Polycomb group (PcG), but its molecular role in PcG silencing is not known. Although SCM can interact with Polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1) in vitro, biochemical studies have indicated that SCM is not a core constituent of PRC1 or PRC2. Nevertheless, SCM is just as critical for Drosophila Hox gene silencing as canonical subunits of these well-characterized PcG complexes. To address functional relationships between SCM and other PcG components, we have performed chromatin immunoprecipitation studies using cultured Drosophila Schneider line 2 (S2) cells and larval imaginal discs. We find that SCM associates with a Polycomb response element (PRE) upstream of the Ubx gene which also binds PRC1, PRC2, and the DNA-binding PcG protein Pleiohomeotic (PHO). However, SCM is retained at this Ubx PRE despite genetic disruption or knockdown of PHO, PRC1, or PRC2, suggesting that SCM chromatin targeting does not require prior association of these other PcG components. Chromatin immunoprecipitations (IPs) to test the consequences of SCM genetic disruption or knockdown revealed that PHO association is unaffected, but reduced levels of PRE-bound PRC2 and PRC1 were observed. We discuss these results in light of current models for recruitment of PcG complexes to chromatin targets.

A region of the human HOXD cluster that confers polycomb-group responsiveness

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are essential for accurate axial body patterning during embryonic development. PcG-mediated repression is conserved in metazoans and is targeted in Drosophila by Polycomb response elements (PREs). However, targeting sequences in humans have not been described. While analyzing chromatin architecture in the context of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) differentiation, we discovered a 1.8kb region between HOXD11 and HOXD12 (D11.12) that is associated with PcG proteins, becomes nuclease hypersensitive, and then shows alteration in nuclease sensitivity as hESCs differentiate. The D11.12 element repressed luciferase expression from a reporter construct and full repression required a highly conserved region and YY1 binding sites. Furthermore, repression was dependent on the PcG proteins BMI1 and EED and a YY1-interacting partner, RYBP. We conclude that D11.12 is a Polycomb-dependent regulatory region with similarities to Drosophila PREs, indicating conservation in the mechanisms that target PcG function in mammals and flies.

A comprehensive map of insulator elements for the Drosophila genome

Insulators are DNA sequences that control the interactions among genomic regulatory elements and act as chromatin boundaries. A thorough understanding of their location and function is necessary to address the complexities of metazoan gene regulation. We studied by ChIP–chip the genome-wide binding sites of 6 insulator-associated proteins—dCTCF, CP190, BEAF-32, Su(Hw), Mod(mdg4), and GAF—to obtain the first comprehensive map of insulator elements in Drosophila embryos. We identify over 14,000 putative insulators, including all classically defined insulators. We find two major classes of insulators defined by dCTCF/CP190/BEAF-32 and Su(Hw), respectively. Distributional analyses of insulators revealed that particular sub-classes of insulator elements are excluded between cis-regulatory elements and their target promoters; divide differentially expressed, alternative, and divergent promoters; act as chromatin boundaries; are associated with chromosomal breakpoints among species; and are embedded within active chromatin domains. Together, these results provide a map demarcating the boundaries of gene regulatory units and a framework for understanding insulator function during the development and evolution of Drosophila.

The spatiotemporal specificity of gene expression is controlled by interactions among regulatory proteins, cis-regulatory elements, chromatin modifications, and genes. These interactions can occur over large distances, and the mechanisms by which they are controlled are poorly understood. Insulators are DNA sequences that can both block the interaction between regulatory elements and genes, as well as block the spread of regions of modified chromatin. To date, relatively few insulators have been identified in developing Drosophila embryos. We here present the genome wide identification of over 14,000 binding sites for 6 insulator-associated proteins. We demonstrate the existence of two broad classes of insulators. Insulators of both classes are enriched at the boundaries of a particular chromatin modification. However, only insulators bound by BEAF-32, CP190, and dCTCF are enriched in regions of open chromatin or demarcate gene boundaries, with a particular enrichment between differentially expressed promoters. Furthermore, insulators of this class are enriched at points of chromosomal rearrangement among the 12 species of sequenced Drosophila, suggesting that insulator defined regulatory boundaries are evolutionarily conserved.

Alternative epigenetic chromatin states of polycomb target genes

Polycomb (PcG) regulation has been thought to produce stable long-term gene silencing. Genomic analyses in Drosophila and mammals, however, have shown that it targets many genes, which can switch state during development. Genetic evidence indicates that critical for the active state of PcG target genes are the histone methyltransferases Trithorax (TRX) and ASH1. Here we analyze the repertoire of alternative states in which PcG target genes are found in different Drosophila cell lines and the role of PcG proteins TRX and ASH1 in controlling these states. Using extensive genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis, RNAi knockdowns, and quantitative RT-PCR, we show that, in addition to the known repressed state, PcG targets can reside in a transcriptionally active state characterized by formation of an extended domain enriched in ASH1, the N-terminal, but not C-terminal moiety of TRX and H3K27ac. ASH1/TRX N-ter domains and transcription are not incompatible with repressive marks, sometimes resulting in a "balanced" state modulated by both repressors and activators. Often however, loss of PcG repression results instead in a "void" state, lacking transcription, H3K27ac, or binding of TRX or ASH1. We conclude that PcG repression is dynamic, not static, and that the propensity of a target gene to switch states depends on relative levels of PcG, TRX, and activators. N-ter TRX plays a remarkable role that antagonizes PcG repression and preempts H3K27 methylation by acetylation. This role is distinct from that usually attributed to TRX/MLL proteins at the promoter. These results have important implications for Polycomb gene regulation, the "bivalent" chromatin state of embryonic stem cells, and gene expression in development.

Polycomb group complexes--many combinations, many functions

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins are transcription regulatory proteins that control the expression of a variety of genes from early embryogenesis through birth to adulthood. PcG proteins form several complexes that are thought to collaborate to repress gene transcription. Individual PcG proteins have unique characteristics, and mutations in genes encoding different PcG proteins cause distinct phenotypes. Histone modifications have important roles in some PcG protein functions, but they are not universally required. The mechanisms of gene-specific recruitment, transcription repression, and selective derepression of genes by vertebrate PcG proteins are incompletely understood. Future studies of this enigmatic group of developmental regulators are certain to produce unanticipated discoveries.

Recruitment of Polycomb group complexes and their role in the dynamic regulation of cell fate choice

Polycomb group (PcG) protein complexes dynamically define cellular identity through the regulation of key developmental genes. Important advances in the PcG field have come from genome-wide mapping studies in a variety of tissues and cell types that have analyzed PcG protein complexes, their associated histone marks and putative mechanisms of PcG protein recruitment. We review how these analyses have contributed to our understanding of PcG protein complex targeting to chromatin and consider the importance of diverse PcG protein complex composition for gene regulation. Finally, we focus on the dynamics of PcG protein complex action during cell fate transitions and on the implications of histone modifications for cell lineage commitment.

Drosophila MSL complex globally acetylates H4K16 on the male X chromosome for dosage compensation

The Drosophila melanogaster male-specific lethal (MSL) complex binds the single male X chromosome to upregulate gene expression to equal that from the two female X chromosomes. However, it has been puzzling that approximately 25% of transcribed genes on the X chromosome do not stably recruit MSL complex. Here we find that almost all active genes on the X chromosome are associated with robust H4 Lys16 acetylation (H4K16ac), the histone modification catalyzed by the MSL complex. The distribution of H4K16ac is much broader than that of the MSL complex, and our results favor the idea that chromosome-wide H4K16ac reflects transient association of the MSL complex, occurring through spreading or chromosomal looping. Our results parallel those of localized Polycomb repressive complex and its more broadly distributed chromatin mark, trimethylated histone H3 Lys27 (H3K27me3), suggesting a common principle for the establishment of active and silenced chromatin domains.