Characterization of new regulatory elements within the Drosophila bithorax complex

The N-terminal dimerization domains of human and Drosophila CTCF have similar functionality

BACKGROUND

CTCF is highly likely to be the ancestor of proteins that contain large clusters of C2H2 zinc finger domains, and its conservation is observed across most bilaterian organisms. In mammals, CTCF is the primary architectural protein involved in organizing chromosome topology and mediating enhancer-promoter interactions over long distances. In Drosophila, CTCF (dCTCF) cooperates with other architectural proteins to establish long-range interactions and chromatin boundaries. CTCFs of various organisms contain an unstructured N-terminal dimerization domain (DD) and clusters comprising eleven zinc-finger domains of the C2H2 type. The Drosophila (dCTCF) and human (hCTCF) CTCFs share sequence homology in only five C2H2 domains that specifically bind to a conserved 15 bp motif.

RESULTS

Previously, we demonstrated that CTCFs from different organisms carry unstructured N-terminal dimerization domains (DDs) that lack sequence homology. Here we used the CTCFattP(mCh) platform to introduce desired changes in the Drosophila CTCF gene and generated a series of transgenic lines expressing dCTCF with different variants of the N-terminal domain. Our findings revealed that the functionality of dCTCF is significantly affected by the deletion of the N-terminal DD. Additionally, we observed a strong impact on the binding of the dCTCF mutant to chromatin upon deletion of the DD. However, chromatin binding was restored in transgenic flies expressing a chimeric CTCF protein with the DD of hCTCF. Although the chimeric protein exhibited lower expression levels than those of the dCTCF variants, it efficiently bound to chromatin similarly to the wild type (wt) protein.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that one of the evolutionarily conserved functions of the unstructured N-terminal dimerization domain is to recruit dCTCF to its genomic sites in vivo.

Boundary bypass activity in the abdominal-B region of the Drosophila bithorax complex is position dependent and regulated

Expression of Abdominal-B (Abd-B) in abdominal segments A5-A8 is controlled by four regulatory domains, iab-5-iab-8. Each domain has an initiator element (which sets the activity state), elements that maintain this state and tissue-specific enhancers. To ensure their functional autonomy, each domain is bracketed by boundary elements (Mcp, Fab-7, Fab-7 and Fab-8). In addition to blocking crosstalk between adjacent regulatory domains, the Fab boundaries must also have bypass activity so the relevant regulatory domains can 'jump over' intervening boundaries and activate the Abd-B promoter. In the studies reported here we have investigated the parameters governing bypass activity. We find that the bypass elements in the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries must be located in the regulatory domain that is responsible for driving Abd-B expression. We suggest that bypass activity may also be subject to regulation.

Boundary Bypass Activity in the Abdominal-B Region of the Drosophila Bithorax Complex is Position Dependent and Regulated

Expression of Abdominal-B ( Abd-B ) in abdominal segments A5 - A8 is controlled by four regulatory domains, iab-5 - iab-8 . Each domain has an initiator element (which sets the activity state), elements that maintain this state and tissue-specific enhancers. To ensure their functional autonomy, each domain is bracketed by boundary elements ( Mcp , Fab-7 , Fab-7 and Fab-8 ). In addition to blocking crosstalk between adjacent regulatory domains, the Fab boundaries must also have bypass activity so the relevant regulatory domains can "jump over" intervening boundaries and activate the Abd-B promoter. In the studies reported here we have investigated the parameters governing bypass activity. We find that the bypass elements in the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries must be located in the regulatory domain that is responsible for driving Abd-B expression. We suggest that bypass activity may also be subject to regulation.

Summary Statement

Boundaries separating Abd-B regulatory domains block crosstalk between domains and mediate their interactions with Abd-B . The latter function is location but not orientation dependent.

Mechanisms of Interaction between Enhancers and Promoters in Three Drosophila Model Systems

In higher eukaryotes, the regulation of developmental gene expression is determined by enhancers, which are often located at a large distance from the promoters they regulate. Therefore, the architecture of chromosomes and the mechanisms that determine the functional interaction between enhancers and promoters are of decisive importance in the development of organisms. Mammals and the model animal Drosophila have homologous key architectural proteins and similar mechanisms in the organization of chromosome architecture. This review describes the current progress in understanding the mechanisms of the formation and regulation of long-range interactions between enhancers and promoters at three well-studied key regulatory loci in Drosophila.

CRISPR/Cas9 and FLP-FRT mediated regulatory dissection of the BX-C of Drosophila melanogaster

The homeotic genes or Hox define the anterior-posterior (AP) body axis formation in bilaterians and are often present on the chromosome in an order collinear to their function across the AP axis. However, there are many cases wherein the Hox are not collinear, but their expression pattern is conserved across the AP axis. The expression pattern of Hox is attributed to the cis-regulatory modules (CRMs) consisting of enhancers, initiators, or repressor elements that regulate the genes in a segment-specific manner. In the Drosophila melanogaster Hox complex, the bithorax complex (BX-C) and even the CRMs are organized in an order that is collinear to their function in the thoracic and abdominal segments. In the present study, the regulatorily inert regions were targeted using CRISPR/Cas9 to generate a series of transgenic lines with the insertion of FRT sequences. These FRT lines are repurposed to shuffle the CRMs associated with Abd-B to generate modular deletion, duplication, or inversion of multiple CRMs. The rearrangements yielded entirely novel phenotypes in the fly suggesting the requirement of such complex manipulations to address the significance of higher order arrangement of the CRMs. The functional map and the transgenic flies generated in this study are important resources to decipher the collective ability of multiple regulatory elements in the eukaryotic genome to function as complex modules.

Mapping of functional elements of the Fab-6 boundary involved in the regulation of the Abd-B hox gene in Drosophila melanogaster

The autonomy of segment-specific regulatory domains in the Bithorax complex is conferred by boundary elements and associated Polycomb response elements (PREs). The Fab-6 boundary is located at the junction of the iab-5 and iab-6 domains. Previous studies mapped it to a nuclease hypersensitive region 1 (HS1), while the iab-6 PRE was mapped to a second hypersensitive region HS2 nearly 3 kb away. To analyze the role of HS1 and HS2 in boundary we generated deletions of HS1 or HS1 + HS2 that have attP site for boundary replacement experiments. The 1389 bp HS1 deletion can be rescued by a 529 bp core Fab-6 sequence that includes two CTCF sites. However, Fab-6 HS1 cannot rescue the HS1 + HS2 deletion or substitute for another BX-C boundary - Fab-7. For this it must be combined with a PRE, either Fab-7 HS3, or Fab-6 HS2. These findings suggest that the boundary function of Fab-6 HS1 must be bolstered by a second element that has PRE activity.

The Functions and Mechanisms of Action of Insulators in the Genomes of Higher Eukaryotes

The mechanisms underlying long-range interactions between chromatin regions and the principles of chromosomal architecture formation are currently under extensive scrutiny. A special class of regulatory elements known as insulators is believed to be involved in the regulation of specific long-range interactions between enhancers and promoters. This review focuses on the insulators of Drosophila and mammals, and it also briefly characterizes the proteins responsible for their functional activity. It was initially believed that the main properties of insulators are blocking of enhancers and the formation of independent transcription domains. We present experimental data proving that the chromatin loops formed by insulators play only an auxiliary role in enhancer blocking. The review also discusses the mechanisms involved in the formation of topologically associating domains and their role in the formation of the chromosomal architecture and regulation of gene transcription.

Insights into HP1a-Chromatin Interactions

Understanding the packaging of DNA into chromatin has become a crucial aspect in the study of gene regulatory mechanisms. Heterochromatin establishment and maintenance dynamics have emerged as some of the main features involved in genome stability, cellular development, and diseases. The most extensively studied heterochromatin protein is HP1a. This protein has two main domains, namely the chromoshadow and the chromodomain, separated by a hinge region. Over the years, several works have taken on the task of identifying HP1a partners using different strategies. In this review, we focus on describing these interactions and the possible complexes and subcomplexes associated with this critical protein. Characterization of these complexes will help us to clearly understand the implications of the interactions of HP1a in heterochromatin maintenance, heterochromatin dynamics, and heterochromatin's direct relationship to gene regulation and chromatin organization.

Haspin kinase modulates nuclear architecture and Polycomb-dependent gene silencing

Haspin, a highly conserved kinase in eukaryotes, has been shown to be responsible for phosphorylation of histone H3 at threonine 3 (H3T3ph) during mitosis, in mammals and yeast. Here we report that haspin is the kinase that phosphorylates H3T3 in Drosophila melanogaster and it is involved in sister chromatid cohesion during mitosis. Our data reveal that haspin also phosphorylates H3T3 in interphase. H3T3ph localizes in broad silenced domains at heterochromatin and lamin-enriched euchromatic regions. Loss of haspin compromises insulator activity in enhancer-blocking assays and triggers a decrease in nuclear size that is accompanied by changes in nuclear envelope morphology. We show that haspin is a suppressor of position-effect variegation involved in heterochromatin organization. Our results also demonstrate that haspin is necessary for pairing-sensitive silencing and it is required for robust Polycomb-dependent homeotic gene silencing. Haspin associates with the cohesin complex in interphase, mediates Pds5 binding to chromatin and cooperates with Pds5-cohesin to modify Polycomb-dependent homeotic transformations. Therefore, this study uncovers an unanticipated role for haspin kinase in genome organization of interphase cells and demonstrates that haspin is required for homeotic gene regulation.

Complete reconstitution of bypass and blocking functions in a minimal artificial Fab-7 insulator from Drosophila bithorax complex

Boundaries in the bithorax complex (BX-C) delimit autonomous regulatory domains that drive parasegment-specific expression of the Hox genes Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B The Fab-7 boundary is located between the iab-6 and iab-7 domains and has two key functions: blocking cross-talk between these domains and at the same time promoting communication (boundary bypass) between iab-6 and the Abd-B promoter. Using a replacement strategy, we found that multimerized binding sites for the architectural proteins Pita, Su(Hw), and dCTCF function as conventional insulators and block cross-talk between the iab-6 and iab-7 domains; however, they lack bypass activity, and iab-6 is unable to regulate Abd-B Here we show that an ∼200-bp sequence of dHS1 from the Fab-7 boundary rescues the bypass defects of these multimerized binding sites. The dHS1 sequence is bound in embryos by a large multiprotein complex, Late Boundary Complex (LBC), that contains the zinc finger proteins CLAMP and GAF. Using deletions and mutations in critical GAGAG motifs, we show that bypass activity correlates with the efficiency of recruitment of LBC components CLAMP and GAF to the artificial boundary. These results indicate that LBC orchestrates long-distance communication between the iab-6 regulatory domain and the Abd-B gene, while the Pita, Su(Hw), and dCTCF proteins function to block local cross-talk between the neighboring regulatory domains iab-6 and iab-7.

Boundaries mediate long-distance interactions between enhancers and promoters in the Drosophila Bithorax complex

Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) is one of the best model systems for studying the role of boundaries (insulators) in gene regulation. Expression of three homeotic genes, Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B, is orchestrated by nine parasegment-specific regulatory domains. These domains are flanked by boundary elements, which function to block crosstalk between adjacent domains, ensuring that they can act autonomously. Paradoxically, seven of the BX-C regulatory domains are separated from their gene target by at least one boundary, and must “jump over” the intervening boundaries. To understand the jumping mechanism, the Mcp boundary was replaced with Fab-7 and Fab-8. Mcp is located between the iab-4 and iab-5 domains, and defines the border between the set of regulatory domains controlling abd-A and Abd-B. When Mcp is replaced by Fab-7 or Fab-8, they direct the iab-4 domain (which regulates abd-A) to inappropriately activate Abd-B in abdominal segment A4. For the Fab-8 replacement, ectopic induction was only observed when it was inserted in the same orientation as the endogenous Fab-8 boundary. A similar orientation dependence for bypass activity was observed when Fab-7 was replaced by Fab-8. Thus, boundaries perform two opposite functions in the context of BX-C–they block crosstalk between neighboring regulatory domains, but at the same time actively facilitate long distance communication between the regulatory domains and their respective target genes.

Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) is one of a few examples demonstrating in vivo role of boundary/insulator elements in organization of independent chromatin domains. BX-C contains three HOX genes, whose parasegment-specific pattern is controlled by cis-regulatory domains flanked by boundary/insulator elements. Since the boundaries ensure autonomy of adjacent domains, the presence of these elements poses a paradox: how do the domains bypass the intervening boundaries and contact their proper regulatory targets? According to the textbook model, BX-C regulatory domains are able to bypass boundaries because they harbor special promoter targeting sequences. However, contrary to this model, we show here that the boundaries themselves play an active role in directing regulatory domains to their appropriate HOX gene promoter.

Architectural protein Pita cooperates with dCTCF in organization of functional boundaries in Bithorax complex

Boundaries in the Bithorax complex (BX-C) of Drosophila delimit autonomous regulatory domains that drive parasegment-specific expression of homeotic genes. BX-C boundaries have two crucial functions: they must block crosstalk between adjacent regulatory domains and at the same time facilitate boundary bypass. The C2H2 zinc-finger protein Pita binds to several BX-C boundaries, including Fab-7 and Mcp To study Pita functions, we have used a boundary replacement strategy by substituting modified DNAs for the Fab-7 boundary, which is located between the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains. Multimerized Pita sites block iab-6↔iab-7 crosstalk but fail to support iab-6 regulation of Abd-B (bypass). In the case of Fab-7, we used a novel sensitized background to show that the two Pita-binding sites contribute to its boundary function. Although Mcp is from BX-C, it does not function appropriately when substituted for Fab-7: it blocks crosstalk but does not support bypass. Mutation of the Mcp Pita site disrupts blocking activity and also eliminates dCTCF binding. In contrast, mutation of the Mcp dCTCF site does not affect Pita binding, and this mutant boundary retains partial function.

Functional Dissection of the Blocking and Bypass Activities of the Fab-8 Boundary in the Drosophila Bithorax Complex

Functionally autonomous regulatory domains direct the parasegment-specific expression of the Drosophila Bithorax complex (BX-C) homeotic genes. Autonomy is conferred by boundary/insulator elements that separate each regulatory domain from its neighbors. For six of the nine parasegment (PS) regulatory domains in the complex, at least one boundary is located between the domain and its target homeotic gene. Consequently, BX-C boundaries must not only block adventitious interactions between neighboring regulatory domains, but also be permissive (bypass) for regulatory interactions between the domains and their gene targets. To elucidate how the BX-C boundaries combine these two contradictory activities, we have used a boundary replacement strategy. We show that a 337 bp fragment spanning the Fab-8 boundary nuclease hypersensitive site and lacking all but 83 bp of the 625 bp Fab-8 PTS (promoter targeting sequence) fully rescues a Fab-7 deletion. It blocks crosstalk between the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains, and has bypass activity that enables the two downstream domains, iab-5 and iab-6, to regulate Abdominal-B (Abd-B) transcription in spite of two intervening boundary elements. Fab-8 has two dCTCF sites and we show that they are necessary both for blocking and bypass activity. However, CTCF sites on their own are not sufficient for bypass. While multimerized dCTCF (or Su(Hw)) sites have blocking activity, they fail to support bypass. Moreover, this bypass defect is not rescued by the full length PTS. Finally, we show that orientation is critical for the proper functioning the Fab-8 replacement. Though the inverted Fab-8 boundary still blocks crosstalk, it disrupts the topology of the Abd-B regulatory domains and does not support bypass. Importantly, altering the orientation of the Fab-8 dCTCF sites is not sufficient to disrupt bypass, indicating that orientation dependence is conferred by other factors.

Boundary elements in the Bithorax complex have two seemingly contradictory activities. They must block crosstalk between neighboring regulatory domains, but at the same time be permissive (insulator bypass) for regulatory interactions between the domains and the BX-C homeotic genes. We have used a replacement strategy to investigate how they carry out these two functions. We show that a 337 bp fragment spanning the Fab-8 boundary nuclease hypersensitive site is sufficient to fully rescue a Fab-7 boundary deletion. It blocks crosstalk and supports bypass. As has been observed in transgene assays, blocking activity requires the Fab-8 dCTCF sites, while full bypass activity requires the dCTCF sites plus a small part of PTS. In transgene assays, bypass activity typically depends on the orientation of the two insulators relative to each other. A similar orientation dependence is observed for the Fab-8 replacement in BX-C. When the orientation of the Fab-8 boundary is reversed, bypass activity is lost, while blocking is unaffected. Interestingly, unlike what has been observed in mammals, reversing the orientation of only the Fab-8 dCTCF sites does not affect boundary function. This finding indicates that other Fab-8 factors must play a critical role in determining orientation. Taken together, our findings argue that carrying out the paradoxical functions of the BX-C boundaries does not require any unusual or special properties; rather BX-C boundaries utilize generic blocking and insulator bypass activities that are appropriately adapted to their regulatory context. Thus making them a good model for studying the functional properties of boundaries/insulators in their native setting.

The boundary paradox in the Bithorax complex

The parasegment-specific expression of the three Drosophila Bithorax complex homeotic genes is orchestrated by nine functionally autonomous regulatory domains. Functional autonomy depends upon special elements called boundaries or insulators that are located between each domain. The boundaries ensure the independent activity of each domain by blocking adventitious interactions with initiators, enhancers and silencers in the neighboring domains. However, this blocking activity poses a regulatory paradox--the Bithorax boundaries are also able to insulate promoters from regulatory interactions with enhancers and silencers and six of the nine Bithorax regulatory domains are separated from their target genes by at least one boundary element. Here we consider several mechanisms that have been suggested for how the Bithorax regulatory domains are able to bypass intervening boundary elements and direct the appropriate parasegment-specific temporal and spatial expression of their target gene.

Functional role of dimerization and CP190 interacting domains of CTCF protein in Drosophila melanogaster

Background

Insulators play a central role in gene regulation, chromosomal architecture and genome function in higher eukaryotes. To learn more about how insulators carry out their diverse functions, we have begun an analysis of the Drosophila CTCF (dCTCF). CTCF is one of the few insulator proteins known to be conserved from flies to man.

Results

In the studies reported here we have focused on the identification and characterization of two dCTCF protein interaction modules. The first mediates dCTCF multimerization, while the second mediates dCTCF–CP190 interactions. The multimerization domain maps in the N-terminus of the dCTCF protein and likely mediates the formation of tetrameric complexes. The CP190 interaction module encompasses a sequence ~200 amino acids long that spans the C-terminal and mediates interactions with the N-terminal BTB domain of the CP190 protein. Transgene rescue experiments showed that a dCTCF protein lacking sequences critical for CP190 interactions was almost as effective as wild type in rescuing the phenotypic effects of a dCTCF null allele. The mutation did, however, affect CP190 recruitment to specific Drosophila insulator elements and had a modest effect on dCTCF chromatin association. A protein lacking the N-terminal dCTCF multimerization domain incompletely rescued the zygotic and maternal effect lethality of the null and did not rescue the defects in Abd-B regulation evident in surviving adult dCTCF mutant flies. Finally, we show that elimination of maternally contributed dCTCF at the onset of embryogenesis has quite different effects on development and Abd-B regulation than is observed when the homozygous mutant animals develop in the presence of maternally derived dCTCF activity.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that dCTCF–CP190 interactions are less critical for the in vivo functions of the dCTCF protein than the N-terminal dCTCF–dCTCF interaction domain. We also show that the phenotypic consequences of dCTCF mutations differ depending upon when and how dCTCF activity is lost.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12915-015-0168-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Epigenetic mechanisms and boundaries in the regulation of mammalian Hox clusters

Hox gene expression imparts segment identity to body structures along the anterior-posterior axis and is tightly governed by higher order chromatin mechanisms. Chromatin regulatory features of the homeotic complex are best defined in Drosophila melanogaster, where multiple cis-regulatory elements have been identified that ensure collinear Hox gene expression patterns in accordance with their genomic organization. Recent studies focused on delineating the epigenetic features of the vertebrate Hox clusters have helped reveal their dynamic chromatin organization and its impact on gene expression. Enrichment for the 'activating' H3K4me3 and 'repressive' H3K27me3 histone modifications is a particularly strong read-out for transcriptional status and correlates well with the evidence for chromatin loop domain structures and stage specific topological changes at these loci. However, it is not clear how such distinct domains are imposed and regulated independent of each other. Comparative analysis of the chromatin structure and organization of the homeotic gene clusters in fly and mammals is increasingly revealing the functional conservation of chromatin mediated mechanisms. Here we discuss the case for interspersed boundary elements existing within mammalian Hox clusters along with their possible roles and mechanisms of action. Recent studies suggest a role for factors other than the well characterized vertebrate boundary factor CTCF, such as the GAGA binding factor (GAF), in maintaining chromatin domains at the Hox loci. We also present data demonstrating how such regulatory elements may be involved in organizing higher order structure and demarcating active domains of gene expression at the mammalian Hox clusters.

A functional insulator screen identifies NURF and dREAM components to be required for enhancer-blocking

Chromatin insulators of higher eukaryotes functionally divide the genome into active and inactive domains. Furthermore, insulators regulate enhancer/promoter communication, which is evident from the Drosophila bithorax locus in which a multitude of regulatory elements control segment specific gene activity. Centrosomal protein 190 (CP190) is targeted to insulators by CTCF or other insulator DNA-binding factors. Chromatin analyses revealed that insulators are characterized by open and nucleosome depleted regions. Here, we wanted to identify chromatin modification and remodelling factors required for an enhancer blocking function. We used the well-studied Fab-8 insulator of the bithorax locus to apply a genome-wide RNAi screen for factors that contribute to the enhancer blocking function of CTCF and CP190. Among 78 genes required for optimal Fab-8 mediated enhancer blocking, all four components of the NURF complex as well as several subunits of the dREAM complex were most evident. Mass spectrometric analyses of CTCF or CP190 bound proteins as well as immune precipitation confirmed NURF and dREAM binding. Both co-localise with most CP190 binding sites in the genome and chromatin immune precipitation showed that CP190 recruits NURF and dREAM. Nucleosome occupancy and histone H3 binding analyses revealed that CP190 mediated NURF binding results in nucleosomal depletion at CP190 binding sites. Thus, we conclude that CP190 binding to CTCF or to other DNA binding insulator factors mediates recruitment of NURF and dREAM. Furthermore, the enhancer blocking function of insulators is associated with nucleosomal depletion and requires NURF and dREAM.

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

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

What are memories made of? How Polycomb and Trithorax proteins mediate epigenetic memory

In any biological system with memory, the state of the system depends on its history. Epigenetic memory maintains gene expression states through cell generations without a change in DNA sequence and in the absence of initiating signals. It is immensely powerful in biological systems - it adds long-term stability to gene expression states and increases the robustness of gene regulatory networks. The Polycomb group (PcG) and Trithorax group (TrxG) proteins can confer long-term, mitotically heritable memory by sustaining silent and active gene expression states, respectively. Several recent studies have advanced our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of this epigenetic memory during DNA replication and mitosis.

Ibf1 and Ibf2 are novel CP190-interacting proteins required for insulator function

Insulators are DNA-protein complexes that play a central role in chromatin organization and regulation of gene expression. In Drosophila different proteins, dCTCF, Su(Hw), and BEAF bind to specific subsets of insulators most of them having in common CP190. It has been shown that there are a number of CP190-binding sites that are not shared with any other known insulator protein, suggesting that other proteins could cooperate with CP190 to regulate insulator activity. Here we report on the identification of two previously uncharacterized proteins as CP190-interacting proteins, that we have named Ibf1 and Ibf2. These proteins localize at insulator bodies and associate with chromatin at CP190-binding sites throughout the genome. We also show that Ibf1 and Ibf2 are DNA-binding proteins that form hetero-oligomers that mediate CP190 binding to chromatin. Moreover, Ibf1 and Ibf2 are necessary for insulator activity in enhancer-blocking assays and Ibf2 null mutation cause a homeotic phenotype. Taken together our data reveal a novel pathway of CP190 recruitment to chromatin that is required for insulator activity.

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

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

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

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

Polycomb group response elements in Drosophila and vertebrates

Polycomb group genes (PcG) encode a group of about 16 proteins that were first identified in Drosophila as repressors of homeotic genes. PcG proteins are present in all metazoans and are best characterized as transcriptional repressors. In Drosophila, these proteins are known as epigenetic regulators because they remember, but do not establish, the patterned expression state of homeotic genes throughout development. PcG proteins, in general, are not DNA binding proteins, but act in protein complexes to repress transcription at specific target genes. How are PcG proteins recruited to the DNA? In Drosophila, there are specific regulatory DNA elements called Polycomb group response elements (PREs) that bring PcG protein complexes to the DNA. Drosophila PREs are made up of binding sites for a complex array of DNA binding proteins. Functional PRE assays in transgenes have shown that PREs act in the context of other regulatory DNA and PRE activity is highly dependent on genomic context. Drosophila PREs tend to regulate genes with a complex array of regulatory DNA in a cell or tissue-specific fashion and it is the interplay between regulatory DNA that dictates PRE function. In mammals, PcG proteins are more diverse and there are multiple ways to recruit PcG complexes, including RNA-mediated recruitment. In this review, we discuss evidence for PREs in vertebrates and explore similarities and differences between Drosophila and vertebrate PREs.

The chromatin insulator CTCF and the emergence of metazoan diversity

The great majority of metazoans belong to bilaterian phyla. They diversified during a short interval in Earth's history known as the Cambrian explosion, ~540 million years ago. However, the genetic basis of these events is poorly understood. Here we argue that the vertebrate genome organizer CTCF (CCCTC-binding factor) played an important role for the evolution of bilaterian animals. We provide evidence that the CTCF protein and a genome-wide abundance of CTCF-specific binding motifs are unique to bilaterian phyla, but absent in other eukaryotes. We demonstrate that CTCF-binding sites within vertebrate and Drosophila Hox gene clusters have been maintained for several hundred million years, suggesting an ancient origin of the previously known interaction between Hox gene regulation and CTCF. In addition, a close correlation between the presence of CTCF and Hox gene clusters throughout the animal kingdom suggests conservation of the Hox-CTCF link across the Bilateria. On the basis of these findings, we propose the existence of a Hox-CTCF kernel as principal organizer of bilaterian body plans. Such a kernel could explain (i) the formation of Hox clusters in Bilateria, (ii) the diversity of bilaterian body plans, and (iii) the uniqueness and time of onset of the Cambrian explosion.

Disruption of the abdominal-B promoter tethering element results in a loss of long-range enhancer-directed Hox gene expression in Drosophila

There are many examples within gene complexes of transcriptional enhancers interacting with only a subset of target promoters. A number of molecular mechanisms including promoter competition, insulators and chromatin looping are thought to play a role in regulating these interactions. At the Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C), the IAB5 enhancer specifically drives gene expression only from the Abdominal-B (Abd-B) promoter, even though the enhancer and promoter are 55 kb apart and are separated by at least three insulators. In previous studies, we discovered that a 255 bp cis-regulatory module, the promoter tethering element (PTE), located 5′ of the Abd-B transcriptional start site is able to tether IAB5 to the Abd-B promoter in transgenic embryo assays. In this study we examine the functional role of the PTE at the endogenous BX-C using transposon-mediated mutagenesis. Disruption of the PTE by P element insertion results in a loss of enhancer-directed Abd-B expression during embryonic development and a homeotic transformation of abdominal segments. A partial deletion of the PTE and neighboring upstream genomic sequences by imprecise excision of the P element also results in a similar loss of Abd-B expression in embryos. These results demonstrate that the PTE is an essential component of the regulatory network at the BX-C and is required in vivo to mediate specific long-range enhancer-promoter interactions.

Initiator elements function to determine the activity state of BX-C enhancers

A >300 kb cis-regulatory region is required for the proper expression of the three bithorax complex (BX-C) homeotic genes. Based on genetic and transgenic analysis, a model has been proposed in which the numerous BX-C cis-regulatory elements are spatially restricted through the activation or repression of parasegment-specific chromatin domains. Particular early embryonic enhancers, called initiators, have been proposed to control this complex process. Here, in order to better understand the process of domain activation, we have undertaken a systematic in situ dissection of the iab-6 cis-regulatory domain using a new method, called InSIRT. Using this method, we create and genetically characterize mutations affecting iab-6 function, including mutations specifically modifying the iab-6 initiator. Through our mutagenesis of the iab-6 initiator, we provide strong evidence that initiators function not to directly control homeotic gene expression but rather as domain control centers to determine the activity state of the enhancers and silencers within a cis-regulatory domain.

Understanding how genes become activated is one of the primary areas of research in modern biology. In order to decipher the DNA components required for this process, scientists have traditionally turned to transgenic reporter assays, where DNA elements are removed from their native environment and placed next to a simplified reporter gene to monitor transcriptional activation. Although this approach is powerful, it can result in artifacts stemming from the channelization of regulatory element activities into predetermined classes. In this manuscript, we investigate the biological role of elements from the Drosophila bithorax complex, called initiators. In transgenic assays, these elements have been categorized as enhancers. However, genetic analysis suggests that, in situ, these elements perform a far more complex function. Here, using a new method to repeatedly target a genetic locus for mutagenesis, we show that initiators function as control elements that coordinate the activity of nearby enhancers and silencers. Overall, our study highlights how gene expression can be controlled through a hierarchical arrangement of cis-regulatory elements.

Selective interactions of boundaries with upstream region of Abd-B promoter in Drosophila bithorax complex and role of dCTCF in this process

Expression of the genes Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B of the bithorax complex depends on its cis-regulatory region, which is divided into discrete functional domains (iab). Boundary/insulator elements, named Mcp, Fab-6, Fab-7 and Fab-8 (PTS/F8), have been identified at the borders of the iab domains. Recently, binding sites for a Drosophila homolog of the vertebrate insulator protein CTCF have been identified in Mcp, Fab-6 and Fab-8 and also in several regions that correspond to predicted boundaries, Fab-3 and Fab-4 in particular. Taking into account the inability of the yeast GAL4 activator to stimulate the white promoter when the activator and the promoter are separated by a 5-kb yellow gene, we have tested functional interactions between the boundaries. The results show that all dCTCF-containing boundaries interact with each other. However, inactivation of dCTCF binding sites in Mcp, Fab-6 and PTS/F8 only partially reduces their ability to interact, suggesting the presence of additional protein(s) supporting distant interactions between the boundaries. Interestingly, only Fab-6, Fab-7 (which contains no dCTCF binding sites) and PTS/F8 interact with the upstream region of the Abd-B promoter. Thus, the boundaries might be involved in supporting the specific interactions between iab enhancers and promoters of the bithorax complex.

Binding site number variation and high-affinity binding consensus of Myb-SANT-like transcription factor Adf-1 in Drosophilidae

There is a growing interest in the evolution of transcription factor binding sites and corresponding functional change of transcriptional regulation. In this context, we have examined the structural changes of the ADF-1 binding sites at the Adh promoters of Drosophila funebris and D. virilis. We detected an expanded footprinted region in D. funebris that contains various adjacent binding sites with different binding affinities. ADF-1 was described to direct sequence-specific DNA binding to sites consisting of the multiple trinucleotide repeat . The ADF-1 recognition sites with high binding affinity differ from this trinucleotide repeat consensus sequence and a new consensus sequence is proposed for the high-affinity ADF-1 binding sites. In vitro transcription experiments with the D. funebris and D. virilis ADF-1 binding regions revealed that stronger ADF-1 binding to the expanded D. funebris ADF-1 binding region only moderately lead to increased transcriptional activity of the Adh gene. The potential of this regional expansion is discussed in the context of different ADF-1 cellular concentrations and maintenance of the ADF-1 stimulus. Altogether, evolutionary change of ADF-1 binding regions involves both, rearrangements of complex binding site cluster and also nucleotide substitutions within sites that lead to different binding affinities.