Variant Polycomb complexes in Drosophila consistent with ancient functional diversity

Polycomb protein binding and looping in the ON transcriptional state

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins mediate epigenetic silencing of important developmental genes by modifying histones and compacting chromatin through two major protein complexes, PRC1 and PRC2. These complexes are recruited to DNA by CpG islands (CGIs) in mammals and Polycomb response elements (PREs) in Drosophila. When PcG target genes are turned OFF, PcG proteins bind to PREs or CGIs, and PREs serve as anchors that loop together and stabilize gene silencing. Here, we address which PcG proteins bind to PREs and whether PREs mediate looping when their targets are in the ON transcriptional state. While the binding of most PcG proteins decreases at PREs in the ON state, one PRC1 component, Ph, remains bound. Further, PREs can loop to each other and with presumptive enhancers in the ON state and, like CGIs, may act as tethering elements between promoters and enhancers. Overall, our data suggest that PREs are important looping elements for developmental loci in both the ON and OFF states.

What are tethering elements?

High-resolution Micro-C maps identified a specialized class of regulatory DNAs termed 'tethering elements' (TEs) in Drosophila. These 300-500-bp elements facilitate specific long-range genomic associations or loops. The POZ-containing transcription factor GAF (GAGA-associated factor) contributes to loop formation. Tether-tether interactions accelerate Hox gene activation by distal enhancers, and coordinate transcription of duplicated genes (paralogs) through promoter-promoter associations. Some TEs engage in ultra-long-range enhancer-promoter and promoter-promoter interactions (meta-loops) in the Drosophila brain. We discuss the basis for tether-tether specificity and speculate on the occurrence of similar elements in vertebrate genomes.

DNA elements tether canonical Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 to human genes

Development of multicellular animals requires epigenetic repression by Polycomb group proteins. The latter assemble in multi-subunit complexes, of which two kinds, Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1) and Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), act together to repress key developmental genes. How PRC1 and PRC2 recognize specific genes remains an open question. Here we report the identification of several hundreds of DNA elements that tether canonical PRC1 to human developmental genes. We use the term tether to describe a process leading to a prominent presence of canonical PRC1 at certain genomic sites, although the complex is unlikely to interact with DNA directly. Detailed analysis indicates that sequence features associated with PRC1 tethering differ from those that favour PRC2 binding. Throughout the genome, the two kinds of sequence features mix in different proportions to yield a gamut of DNA elements that range from those tethering predominantly PRC1 or PRC2 to ones capable of tethering both complexes. The emerging picture is similar to the paradigmatic targeting of Polycomb complexes by Polycomb Response Elements (PREs) of Drosophila but providing for greater plasticity.

Uncoupled evolution of the Polycomb system and deep origin of non-canonical PRC1

Polycomb group proteins, as part of the Polycomb repressive complexes, are essential in gene repression through chromatin compaction by canonical PRC1, mono-ubiquitylation of histone H2A by non-canonical PRC1 and tri-methylation of histone H3K27 by PRC2. Despite prevalent models emphasizing tight functional coupling between PRC1 and PRC2, it remains unclear whether this paradigm indeed reflects the evolution and functioning of these complexes. Here, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of the presence or absence of cPRC1, nPRC1 and PRC2 across the entire eukaryotic tree of life, and find that both complexes were present in the Last Eukaryotic Common Ancestor (LECA). Strikingly, ~42% of organisms contain only PRC1 or PRC2, showing that their evolution since LECA is largely uncoupled. The identification of ncPRC1-defining subunits in unicellular relatives of animals and fungi suggests ncPRC1 originated before cPRC1, and we propose a scenario for the evolution of cPRC1 from ncPRC1. Together, our results suggest that crosstalk between these complexes is a secondary development in evolution.

Polycomb protein binding and looping mediated by Polycomb Response Elements in the ON transcriptional state

Polycomb group proteins (PcG) mediate epigenetic silencing of important developmental genes and other targets. In Drosophila, canonical PcG-target genes contain Polycomb Response Elements (PREs) that recruit PcG protein complexes including PRC2 that trimethylates H3K27 forming large H3K27me3 domains. In the OFF transcriptional state, PREs loop with each other and this looping strengthens silencing. Here we address the question of what PcG proteins bind to PREs when canonical PcG target genes are expressed, and whether PREs loop when these genes are ON. Our data show that the answer to this question is PRE-specific but general conclusions can be made. First, within a PcG-target gene, some regulatory DNA can remain covered with H3K27me3 and PcG proteins remain bound to PREs in these regions. Second, when PREs are within H3K27ac domains, PcG-binding decreases, however, this depends on the protein and PRE. The DNA binding protein GAF, and the PcG protein Ph remain at PREs even when other PcG proteins are greatly depleted. In the ON state, PREs can still loop with each other, but also form loops with presumptive enhancers. These data support the model that, in addition to their role in PcG silencing, PREs can act as "promoter-tethering elements" mediating interactions between promoter proximal PREs and distant enhancers.

Context-dependent role of Pho binding sites in Polycomb complex recruitment in Drosophila

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins maintain the silenced state of key developmental genes, but how these proteins are recruited to specific regions of the genome is still not completely understood. In Drosophila, PcG proteins are recruited to Polycomb response elements (PREs) comprised of a flexible array of sites for sequence-specific DNA binding proteins, "PcG recruiters," including Pho, Spps, Cg, and GAF. Pho is thought to play a central role in PcG recruitment. Early data showed that mutation of Pho binding sites in PREs in transgenes abrogated the ability of those PREs to repress gene expression. In contrast, genome-wide experiments in pho mutants or by Pho knockdown showed that PcG proteins can bind to PREs in the absence of Pho. Here, we directly addressed the importance of Pho binding sites in 2 engrailed (en) PREs at the endogenous locus and in transgenes. Our results show that Pho binding sites are required for PRE activity in transgenes with a single PRE. In a transgene, 2 PREs together lead to stronger, more stable repression and confer some resistance to the loss of Pho binding sites. Making the same mutation in Pho binding sites has little effect on PcG-protein binding at the endogenous en gene. Overall, our data support the model that Pho is important for PcG binding but emphasize how multiple PREs and chromatin environment increase the ability of PREs to function in the absence of Pho. This supports the view that multiple mechanisms contribute to PcG recruitment in Drosophila.

Recognition of H2AK119ub plays an important role in RSF1-regulated early Xenopus development

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are key regulators of gene expression and developmental programs via covalent modification of histones, but the factors that interpret histone modification marks to regulate embryogenesis are less studied. We previously identified Remodeling and Spacing Factor 1 (RSF1) as a reader of histone H2A lysine 119 ubiquitination (H2AK119ub), the histone mark deposited by Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1). In the current study, we used Xenopus laevis as a model to investigate how RSF1 affects early embryonic development and whether recognition of H2AK119ub is important for the function of RSF1. We showed that knockdown of Xenopus RSF1, rsf1, not only induced gastrulation defects as reported previously, but specific targeted knockdown in prospective neural precursors induced neural and neural crest defects, with reductions of marker genes. In addition, similar to knockdown of PRC1 components in Xenopus, the anterior-posterior neural patterning was affected in rsf1 knockdown embryos. Binding of H2AK119ub appeared to be crucial for rsf1 function, as a construct with deletion of the UAB domain, which is required for RSF1 to recognize the H2AK119ub nucleosomes, failed to rescue rsf1 morphant embryos and was less effective in interfering with early Xenopus development when ectopically expressed. Furthermore, ectopic deposition of H2AK119ub on the Smad2 target gene gsc using a ring1a-smad2 fusion protein led to ectopic recruitment of RSF1. The fusion protein was inefficient in inducing mesodermal markers in the animal region or a secondary axis when expressed in the ventral tissues. Taken together, our results reveal that rsf1 modulates similar developmental processes in early Xenopus embryos as components of PRC1 do, and that RSF1 acts at least partially through binding to the H2AK119ub mark via the UAB domain during development.

PR-DUB preserves Polycomb repression by preventing excessive accumulation of H2Aub1, an antagonist of chromatin compaction

The Polycomb repressive complexes PRC1, PRC2, and PR-DUB repress target genes by modifying their chromatin. In Drosophila, PRC1 compacts chromatin and monoubiquitinates histone H2A at lysine 118 (H2Aub1), whereas PR-DUB is a major H2Aub1 deubiquitinase, but how H2Aub1 levels must be balanced for Polycomb repression remains unclear. We show that in early embryos, H2Aub1 is enriched at Polycomb target genes, where it facilitates H3K27me3 deposition by PRC2 to mark genes for repression. During subsequent stages of development, H2Aub1 becomes depleted from these genes and is no longer enriched when Polycomb maintains them repressed. Accordingly, Polycomb targets remain repressed in H2Aub1-deficient animals. In PR-DUB catalytic mutants, high levels of H2Aub1 accumulate at Polycomb target genes, and Polycomb repression breaks down. These high H2Aub1 levels do not diminish Polycomb protein complex binding or H3K27 trimethylation but increase DNA accessibility. We show that H2Aub1 interferes with nucleosome stacking and chromatin fiber folding in vitro. Consistent with this, Polycomb repression defects in PR-DUB mutants are exacerbated by reducing PRC1 chromatin compaction activity, but Polycomb repression is restored if PRC1 E3 ligase activity is removed. PR-DUB therefore acts as a rheostat that removes excessive H2Aub1 that, although deposited by PRC1, antagonizes PRC1-mediated chromatin compaction.