Stb1 collaborates with other regulators to modulate the G1-specific transcriptional circuit

S. cerevisiae Cells Can Grow without the Pds5 Cohesin Subunit

During DNA replication, the newly created sister chromatids are held together until their separation at anaphase. The cohesin complex is in charge of creating and maintaining sister chromatid cohesion (SCC) in all eukaryotes. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells, cohesin is composed of two elongated proteins, Smc1 and Smc3, bridged by the kleisin Mcd1/Scc1. The latter also acts as a scaffold for three additional proteins, Scc3/Irr1, Wpl1/Rad61, and Pds5. Although the HEAT-repeat protein Pds5 is essential for cohesion, its precise function is still debated. Deletion of the ELG1 gene, encoding a PCNA unloader, can partially suppress the temperature-sensitive pds5-1 allele, but not a complete deletion of PDS5. We carried out a genetic screen for high-copy-number suppressors and another for spontaneously arising mutants, allowing the survival of a pds5Δ elg1Δ strain. Our results show that cells remain viable in the absence of Pds5 provided that there is both an elevation in the level of Mcd1 (which can be due to mutations in the CLN2 gene, encoding a G1 cyclin), and an increase in the level of SUMO-modified PCNA on chromatin (caused by lack of PCNA unloading in elg1Δ mutants). The elevated SUMO-PCNA levels increase the recruitment of the Srs2 helicase, which evicts Rad51 molecules from the moving fork, creating single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) regions that serve as sites for increased cohesin loading and SCC establishment. Thus, our results delineate a double role for Pds5 in protecting the cohesin ring and interacting with the DNA replication machinery. IMPORTANCE Sister chromatid cohesion is vital for faithful chromosome segregation, chromosome folding into loops, and gene expression. A multisubunit protein complex known as cohesin holds the sister chromatids from S phase until the anaphase stage. In this study, we explore the function of the essential cohesin subunit Pds5 in the regulation of sister chromatid cohesion. We performed two independent genetic screens to bypass the function of the Pds5 protein. We observe that Pds5 protein is a cohesin stabilizer, and elevating the levels of Mcd1 protein along with SUMO-PCNA accumulation on chromatin can compensate for the loss of the PDS5 gene. In addition, Pds5 plays a role in coordinating the DNA replication and sister chromatid cohesion establishment. This work elucidates the function of cohesin subunit Pds5, the G1 cyclin Cln2, and replication factors PCNA, Elg1, and Srs2 in the proper regulation of sister chromatid cohesion.

Interactions, structural aspects, and evolutionary perspectives of the yeast 'START'-regulatory network

Molecular signal transduction networks which conduct transcription at the G1 to S phase transition of the eukaryotic cell division cycle have been identified in diverse taxa from mammals to baker´s yeast with analogous functional organization. However, regarding some network components, such as the transcriptional regulators STB1 and WHI5, only few orthologs exist which are confined to individual Saccharomycotina species. While Whi5 has been characterized as yeast analog of human Rb protein, in the particular case of Stb1 (Sin three binding protein 1) identification of functional analogs emerges as difficult because to date its exact functionality still remains obscured. By aiming to resolve Stb1´s enigmatic role this Perspectives article especially surveys works covering relations between Cyclin/CDKs, the heteromeric transcription factor complexes SBF (Swi4/Swi6) and MBF (Mbp1/Swi6), as well as additional coregulators (Whi5, Sin3, Rpd3, Nrm1) which are collectively associated with the orderly transcription at 'Start' of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae cell cycle. In this context, interaction capacities of the Sin3-scaffold protein are widely surveyed because its four PAH domains (Paired Amphiphatic Helix) represent a 'recruitment-code' for gene-specific targeting of repressive histone deacetylase activity (Rpd3) via different transcription factors. Here Stb1 plays a role in Sin3´s action on transcription at the G1/S-boundary. Through bioinformatic analyses a potential Sin3-interaction domain (SID) was detected in Stb1, and beyond that, connections within the G1/S-regulatory network are discussed in structural and evolutionary context thereby providing conceptual perspectives.

G1 cyclin-Cdk promotes cell cycle entry through localized phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II

Cell division is thought to be initiated by cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks) inactivating key transcriptional inhibitors. In budding yeast, the G1 cyclin Cln3-Cdk1 complex is thought to directly phosphorylate the Whi5 protein, thereby releasing the transcription factor SBF and committing cells to division. We report that Whi5 is a poor substrate of Cln3-Cdk1, which instead phosphorylates the RNA polymerase II subunit Rpb1’s C-terminal domain on S5 of its heptapeptide repeats. Cln3-Cdk1 binds SBF-regulated promoters and Cln3’s function can be performed by the canonical S5 kinase Ccl1-Kin28 when synthetically recruited to SBF. Thus, we propose that Cln3-Cdk1 triggers cell division by phosphorylating Rpb1 at SBF-regulated promoters to promote transcription. Our findings blur the distinction between cell cycle and transcriptional Cdks to highlight the ancient relationship between these two processes.

Budding yeast relies on G1 cyclin specificity to couple cell cycle progression with morphogenetic development

Two models have been put forward for cyclin-dependent kinase (Cdk) control of the cell cycle. In the qualitative model, cell cycle events are ordered by distinct substrate specificities of successive cyclin waves. Alternatively, in the quantitative model, the gradual rise of Cdk activity from G1 phase to mitosis leads to ordered substrate phosphorylation at sequential thresholds. Here, we study the relative contributions of qualitative and quantitative Cdk control in Saccharomyces cerevisiae All S phase and mitotic cyclins can be replaced by a single mitotic cyclin, albeit at the cost of reduced fitness. A single cyclin can also replace all G1 cyclins to support ordered cell cycle progression, fulfilling key predictions of the quantitative model. However, single-cyclin cells fail to polarize or grow buds and thus cannot survive. Our results suggest that budding yeast has become dependent on G1 cyclin specificity to couple cell cycle progression to essential morphogenetic events.

Differential Scaling of Gene Expression with Cell Size May Explain Size Control in Budding Yeast

Yeast cells must grow to a critical size before committing to division. It is unknown how size is measured. We find that as cells grow, mRNAs for some cell-cycle activators scale faster than size, increasing in concentration, while mRNAs for some inhibitors scale slower than size, decreasing in concentration. Size-scaled gene expression could cause an increasing ratio of activators to inhibitors with size, triggering cell-cycle entry. Consistent with this, expression of the CLN2 activator from the promoter of the WHI5 inhibitor, or vice versa, interfered with cell size homeostasis, yielding a broader distribution of cell sizes. We suggest that size homeostasis comes from differential scaling of gene expression with size. Differential regulation of gene expression as a function of cell size could affect many cellular processes.

Gcn5 and Rpd3 have a limited role in the regulation of cell cycle transcripts during the G1 and S phases in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Activation of cell cycle regulated transcription during the G1-to-S transition initiates S phase entry and cell cycle commitment. The molecular mechanisms involving G1/S transcriptional regulation are well established and have been shown to be evolutionary conserved from yeast to humans. Previous work has suggested that changes to the chromatin state, specifically through histone acetylation, has an important role in the regulation of G1/S transcription in both yeast and human cells. Here we investigate the role of histone acetylation in G1/S transcriptional regulation in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Our work shows that histone acetylation at specific sites at G1/S target gene promoters peaks at the G1-to-S transition, coinciding with their peak transcription levels. Acetylation at G1/S target promoters is significantly reduced upon deletion of the previously implicated histone acetyltransferase Gcn5, but G1/S cell cycle regulated transcription is largely unaffected. The histone deacetylase Rpd3, suggested to have a role in Whi5-dependent repression, is required for full repression of G1/S target genes in the G1 and S phases. However, in the context of transcriptionally active levels during the G1-to-S transition, this seems to play a minor role in the regulation of cell cycle transcription. Our data suggests that histone acetylation might modulate the amplitude of G1/S cell cycle regulated transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, but has a limited role in its overall regulation.

Comprehensive and quantitative analysis of G1 cyclins. A tool for studying the cell cycle

In eukaryotes, the cell cycle is driven by the actions of several cyclin dependent kinases (CDKs) and an array of regulatory proteins called cyclins, due to the cyclical expression patterns of the latter. In yeast, the accepted pattern of cyclin waves is based on qualitative studies performed by different laboratories using different strain backgrounds, different growing conditions and media, and different kinds of genetic manipulation. Additionally, only the subset of cyclins regulating Cdc28 was included, while the Pho85 cyclins were excluded. We describe a comprehensive, quantitative and accurate blueprint of G₁ cyclins in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae that, in addition to validating previous conclusions, yields new findings and establishes an accurate G₁ cyclin blueprint. For the purposes of this research, we produced a collection of strains with all G₁ cyclins identically tagged using the same and most respectful procedure possible. We report the contribution of each G₁ cyclin for a broad array of growing and stress conditions, describe an unknown role for Pcl2 in heat-stress conditions and demonstrate the importance of maintaining the 3’UTR sequence of cyclins untouched during the tagging process.

Whi7 is an unstable cell-cycle repressor of the Start transcriptional program

Start is the main decision point in eukaryotic cell cycle in which cells commit to a new round of cell division. It involves the irreversible activation of a transcriptional program by G1 CDK-cyclin complexes through the inactivation of Start transcriptional repressors, Whi5 in yeast or Rb in mammals. Here we provide novel keys of how Whi7, a protein related at sequence level to Whi5, represses Start. Whi7 is an unstable protein, degraded by the SCF^Grr1 ubiquitin-ligase, whose stability is cell cycle regulated by CDK1 phosphorylation. Importantly, Whi7 associates to G1/S gene promoters in late G1 acting as a repressor of SBF-dependent transcription. Our results demonstrate that Whi7 is a genuine paralog of Whi5. In fact, both proteins collaborate in Start repression bringing to light that yeast cells, as occurs in mammalian cells, rely on the combined action of multiple transcriptional repressors to block Start transition.

The commitment of cells to a new cycle of division involves inactivation of the Start transcriptional repressor Whi5. Here the authors show that the sequence related protein Whi7 associates to G1/S gene promoters in late G1 and collaborates with Whi5 in Start repression.

Diverse roles of Dpb2, the non-catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε

Timely progression of living cells through the cell cycle is precisely regulated. This involves a series of phosphorylation events which are regulated by various cyclins, activated in coordination with the cell cycle progression. Phosphorylated proteins govern cell growth, division as well as duplication of the genetic material and transcriptional activation of genes involved in these processes. A subset of these tightly regulated genes, which depend on the MBF transcription factor and are mainly involved in DNA replication and cell division, is transiently activated at the transition from G1 to S phase. A Saccharomyces cerevisiae mutant in the Dpb2 non-catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε (Polε) demonstrates abnormalities in transcription of MBF-dependent genes even in normal growth conditions. It is, therefore, tempting to speculate that Dpb2 which, as described previously, participates in the early stages of DNA replication initiation, has an impact on the regulation of replication-related genes expression with possible implications for genomic stability.

Functional Analysis of Kinases and Transcription Factors in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Using an Integrated Overexpression Library

Kinases and transcription factors (TFs) are key modulators of important signaling pathways and their activities underlie the proper function of many basic cellular processes such as cell division, differentiation, and development. Changes in kinase and TF dosage are often associated with disease, yet a systematic assessment of the cellular phenotypes caused by the combined perturbation of kinases and TFs has not been undertaken. We used a reverse-genetics approach to study the phenotypic consequences of kinase and TF overexpression (OE) in the budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We constructed a collection of strains expressing stably integrated inducible alleles of kinases and TFs and used a variety of assays to characterize the phenotypes caused by TF and kinase OE. We used the Synthetic Genetic Array (SGA) method to examine dosage-dependent genetic interactions (GIs) between 239 gain-of-function (OE) alleles of TFs and six loss-of-function (LOF) and seven OE kinase alleles, the former identifying Synthetic Dosage Lethal (SDL) interactions and the latter testing a GI we call Double Dosage Lethality (DDL). We identified and confirmed 94 GIs between 65 OE alleles of TFs and 9 kinase alleles. Follow-up experiments validated regulatory relationships between genetically interacting pairs (Cdc28–Stb1 and Pho85–Pdr1), suggesting that GI studies involving OE alleles of regulatory proteins will be a rich source of new functional information.

Inference of gene regulation functions from dynamic transcriptome data

To quantify gene regulation, a function is required that relates transcription factor binding to DNA (input) to the rate of mRNA synthesis from a target gene (output). Such a ‘gene regulation function’ (GRF) generally cannot be measured because the experimental titration of inputs and simultaneous readout of outputs is difficult. Here we show that GRFs may instead be inferred from natural changes in cellular gene expression, as exemplified for the cell cycle in the yeast S. cerevisiae. We develop this inference approach based on a time series of mRNA synthesis rates from a synchronized population of cells observed over three cell cycles. We first estimate the functional form of how input transcription factors determine mRNA output and then derive GRFs for target genes in the CLB2 gene cluster that are expressed during G2/M phase. Systematic analysis of additional GRFs suggests a network architecture that rationalizes transcriptional cell cycle oscillations. We find that a transcription factor network alone can produce oscillations in mRNA expression, but that additional input from cyclin oscillations is required to arrive at the native behaviour of the cell cycle oscillator.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12188.001

Living cells rely on networks of genes to control their behavior, including how they grow, develop and respond to stress. Genes encode instructions needed to make proteins and other molecules, and much of the control is exerted at the first stage of protein production, known as transcription. During this process, a gene is copied to make molecules known as transcripts that may later be used as templates to make proteins.

Many genes encode proteins that act to regulate transcription. Therefore, an individual gene may receive inputs from other genes, and these inputs affect how much transcript the gene produces, which can be considered as the gene’s output. While these inputs and outputs can often be wired together to form a network, it is less clear exactly how all the different inputs at a gene interact to determine its output. These interactions are known as “gene regulation functions”, and knowing them would be an important step towards understanding gene networks, which would help us to predict how cells will behave in different situations.

Gene regulation functions are difficult to measure directly, so researchers would like to find other ways to assess them indirectly. A recently developed experimental technique called “dynamic transcriptome analysis” seemed promising as it measures both the inputs and outputs of all genes in a cell over time. Hillenbrand et al. used this technique to infer gene regulation functions with one or two inputs in yeast cells.

Comparing these estimates with experimental data from previous studies showed that these inferred gene regulation functions could successfully predict the output of a gene based on its inputs. Hillenbrand et al. then used these estimates to search and model a well-known genetic network that is thought to be part of the molecular clockwork that controls the timing of events that cause a cell to divide.

Currently, the approach used by Hillenbrand et al. treats gene regulation functions like “black boxes”. This means that, while an output can be predicted if the inputs are known, it cannot reveal all of the detailed mechanisms behind it. Gaining insights into the inner workings of these black boxes will require taking more data into account, such as how abundant the proteins that regulate transcription are, where they are located within cells or whether they are active or not. Therefore, the next challenge is to incorporate these kinds of data to gain a fuller picture of how gene networks operate within cells.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12188.002

Msa1 and Msa2 Modulate G1-Specific Transcription to Promote G1 Arrest and the Transition to Quiescence in Budding Yeast

Yeast that naturally exhaust their glucose source can enter a quiescent state that is characterized by reduced cell size, and high cell density, stress tolerance and longevity. The transition to quiescence involves highly asymmetric cell divisions, dramatic reprogramming of transcription and global changes in chromatin structure and chromosome topology. Cells enter quiescence from G1 and we find that there is a positive correlation between the length of G1 and the yield of quiescent cells. The Swi4 and Swi6 transcription factors, which form the SBF transcription complex and promote the G1 to S transition in cycling cells, are also critical for the transition to quiescence. Swi6 forms a second complex with Mbp1 (MBF), which is not required for quiescence. These are the functional analogues of the E2F complexes of higher eukaryotes. Loss of the RB analogue, Whi5, and the related protein Srl3/Whi7, delays G1 arrest, but it also delays recovery from quiescence. Two MBF- and SBF-Associated proteins have been identified that have little effect on SBF or MBF activity in cycling cells. We show that these two related proteins, Msa1 and Msa2, are specifically required for the transition to quiescence. Like the E2F complexes that are quiescence-specific, Msa1 and Msa2 are required to repress the transcription of many SBF target genes, including SWI4, the CLN2 cyclin and histones, specifically after glucose is exhausted from the media. They also activate transcription of many MBF target genes. msa1msa2 cells fail to G1 arrest and rapidly lose viability upon glucose exhaustion. msa1msa2 mutants that survive this transition are very large, but they attain the same thermo-tolerance and longevity of wild type quiescent cells. This indicates that Msa1 and Msa2 are required for successful transition to quiescence, but not for the maintenance of that state.

In spite of the many differences between yeast and humans, the basic strategies that regulate the cell division cycle are fundamentally conserved. In this study, we extend these parallels to include a common strategy by which cells transition from proliferation to quiescence. The decision to divide is made in the G1 phase of the cell cycle. During G1, the genes that drive DNA replication are repressed by the E2F/RB complex. When a signal to divide is received, RB is removed and the complex is activated. When cells commit to a long term, but reversible G1 arrest, or quiescence, they express a novel E2F/RB-like complex, which promotes and maintains a stable repressive state. Yeast cells contain a functional analog of E2F/RB, called SBF/Whi5, which is activated by a similar mechanism in proliferating yeast cells. In this study, we identify two novel components of the SBF/Whi5 complex whose activity is specific to the transition to quiescence. These factors, Msa1 and Msa2, repress SBF targets and are required for the long term, but reversible G1 arrest that is critical for achieving a quiescent state.

Three Rice NAC Transcription Factors Heteromerize and Are Associated with Seed Size

NACs are plant-specific transcription factors (TFs) involved in multiple aspects of development and stress. In rice, three NAC TF encoding genes, namely ONAC020, ONAC026, and ONAC023 express specifically during seed development, at extremely high levels. They exhibit significantly strong association with seed size/weight with the sequence variations located in the upstream regulatory region. Concomitantly, their expression pattern/levels during seed development vary amongst different accessions with variation in seed size. The alterations in the promoter sequences of the three genes, amongst the five rice accessions, correlate with the expression levels to a certain extent only. In terms of transcriptional properties, the three NAC TFs can activate and/or suppress downstream genes, though to different extents. Only ONAC026 is localized to the nucleus while ONAC020 and ONAC023 are targeted to the ER and cytoplasm, respectively. Interestingly, these two proteins interact with ONAC026 and the dimers localize in the nucleus. Trans-splicing between ONAC020 and ONAC026 results in three additional forms of ONAC020. The transcriptional properties including activation, repression, subcellular localization and heterodimerization of trans-spliced forms of ONAC020 and ONAC026 are different, indicating toward their role as competitors. The analysis presented in this paper helps to conclude that the three NAC genes, which are associated with seed size, have independent as well as overlapping roles during the process and can be exploited as potential targets for crop improvement.

GESearch: An Interactive GUI Tool for Identifying Gene Expression Signature

The huge amount of gene expression data generated by microarray and next-generation sequencing technologies present challenges to exploit their biological meanings. When searching for the coexpression genes, the data mining process is largely affected by selection of algorithms. Thus, it is highly desirable to provide multiple options of algorithms in the user-friendly analytical toolkit to explore the gene expression signatures. For this purpose, we developed GESearch, an interactive graphical user interface (GUI) toolkit, which is written in MATLAB and supports a variety of gene expression data files. This analytical toolkit provides four models, including the mean, the regression, the delegate, and the ensemble models, to identify the coexpression genes, and enables the users to filter data and to select gene expression patterns by browsing the display window or by importing knowledge-based genes. Subsequently, the utility of this analytical toolkit is demonstrated by analyzing two sets of real-life microarray datasets from cell-cycle experiments. Overall, we have developed an interactive GUI toolkit that allows for choosing multiple algorithms for analyzing the gene expression signatures.

Genetic instability in budding and fission yeast-sources and mechanisms

Cells are constantly confronted with endogenous and exogenous factors that affect their genomes. Eons of evolution have allowed the cellular mechanisms responsible for preserving the genome to adjust for achieving contradictory objectives: to maintain the genome unchanged and to acquire mutations that allow adaptation to environmental changes. One evolutionary mechanism that has been refined for survival is genetic variation. In this review, we describe the mechanisms responsible for two biological processes: genome maintenance and mutation tolerance involved in generations of genetic variations in mitotic cells of both Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe. These processes encompass mechanisms that ensure the fidelity of replication, DNA lesion sensing and DNA damage response pathways, as well as mechanisms that ensure precision in chromosome segregation during cell division. We discuss various factors that may influence genome stability, such as cellular ploidy, the phase of the cell cycle, transcriptional activity of a particular region of DNA, the proficiency of DNA quality control systems, the metabolic stage of the cell and its respiratory potential, and finally potential exposure to endogenous or environmental stress.

The stability of budding and fission yeast genomes is influenced by two contradictory factors: (1) the need to be fully functional, which is ensured through the replication fidelity pathways of nuclear and mitochondrial genomes through sensing and repairing DNA damage, through precise chromosome segregation during cell division; and (2) the need to acquire changes for adaptation to environmental challenges.

Spatiotemporal cascade of transcription factor binding required for promoter activation

Promoters often contain multiple binding sites for a single factor. The yeast HO gene contains nine highly conserved binding sites for the SCB (Swi4/6-dependent cell cycle box) binding factor (SBF) complex (composed of Swi4 and Swi6) in the 700-bp upstream regulatory sequence 2 (URS2) promoter region. Here, we show that the distal and proximal SBF sites in URS2 function differently. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) experiments show that SBF binds preferentially to the left side of URS2 (URS2-L), despite equivalent binding to the left-half and right-half SBF sites in vitro. SBF binding at URS2-L sites depends on prior chromatin remodeling events at the upstream URS1 region. These signals from URS1 influence chromatin changes at URS2 but only at sites within a defined distance. SBF bound at URS2-L, however, is unable to activate transcription but instead facilitates SBF binding to sites in the right half (URS2-R), which are required for transcriptional activation. Factor binding at HO, therefore, follows a temporal cascade, with SBF bound at URS2-L serving to relay a signal from URS1 to the SBF sites in URS2-R that ultimately activate gene expression. Taken together, we describe a novel property of a transcription factor that can have two distinct roles in gene activation, depending on its location within a promoter.

Topology and control of the cell-cycle-regulated transcriptional circuitry

Nearly 20% of the budding yeast genome is transcribed periodically during the cell division cycle. The precise temporal execution of this large transcriptional program is controlled by a large interacting network of transcriptional regulators, kinases, and ubiquitin ligases. Historically, this network has been viewed as a collection of four coregulated gene clusters that are associated with each phase of the cell cycle. Although the broad outlines of these gene clusters were described nearly 20 years ago, new technologies have enabled major advances in our understanding of the genes comprising those clusters, their regulation, and the complex regulatory interplay between clusters. More recently, advances are being made in understanding the roles of chromatin in the control of the transcriptional program. We are also beginning to discover important regulatory interactions between the cell-cycle transcriptional program and other cell-cycle regulatory mechanisms such as checkpoints and metabolic networks. Here we review recent advances and contemporary models of the transcriptional network and consider these models in the context of eukaryotic cell-cycle controls.

Control of cell cycle transcription during G1 and S phases

The accurate transition from G1 phase of the cell cycle to S phase is crucial for the control of eukaryotic cell proliferation, and its misregulation promotes oncogenesis. During G1 phase, growth-dependent cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) activity promotes DNA replication and initiates G1-to-S phase transition. CDK activation initiates a positive feedback loop that further increases CDK activity, and this commits the cell to division by inducing genome-wide transcriptional changes. G1-S transcripts encode proteins that regulate downstream cell cycle events. Recent work is beginning to reveal the complex molecular mechanisms that control the temporal order of transcriptional activation and inactivation, determine distinct functional subgroups of genes and link cell cycle-dependent transcription to DNA replication stress in yeast and mammals.

Functional overlap among distinct G1/S inhibitory pathways allows robust G1 arrest by yeast mating pheromones

Multiple, functionally overlapping regulatory circuits control the sensitivity of the G1/S transition to yeast pheromones. In the absence of the Cdk inhibitor Far1, pheromone-induced G1 arrest depends on the p27 analogue Sic1, transcriptional repression by the Rb analogues Whi5 and Stb1, and induced degradation of the CLN1 transcription factor Tec1.

In budding yeast, mating pheromones arrest the cell cycle in G1 phase via a pheromone-activated Cdk-inhibitor (CKI) protein, Far1. Alternate pathways must also exist, however, because deleting the cyclin CLN2 restores pheromone arrest to far1∆ cells. Here we probe whether these alternate pathways require the G1/S transcriptional repressors Whi5 and Stb1 or the CKI protein Sic1, whose metazoan analogues (Rb or p27) antagonize cell cycle entry. Removing Whi5 and Stb1 allows partial escape from G1 arrest in far1∆ cln2∆ cells, along with partial derepression of G1/S genes, which implies a repressor-independent route for inhibiting G1/S transcription. This route likely involves pheromone-induced degradation of Tec1, a transcriptional activator of the cyclin CLN1, because Tec1 stabilization also causes partial G1 escape in far1∆ cln2∆ cells, and this is additive with Whi5/Stb1 removal. Deleting SIC1 alone strongly disrupts Far1-independent G1 arrest, revealing that inhibition of B-type cyclin-Cdk activity can empower weak arrest pathways. Of interest, although far1∆ cln2∆ sic1∆ cells escaped G1 arrest, they lost viability during pheromone exposure, indicating that G1 exit is deleterious if the arrest signal remains active. Overall our findings illustrate how multiple distinct G1/S-braking mechanisms help to prevent premature cell cycle commitment and ensure a robust signal-induced G1 arrest.

Protein kinase CK2 holoenzyme promotes start-specific transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the entrance into S phase requires the activation of a specific burst of transcription, which depends on SBF (SCB binding factor, Swi4/Swi6) and MBF (MCB binding factor, Mbp1/Swi6) complexes. CK2 is a pleiotropic kinase involved in several cellular processes, including the regulation of the cell cycle. CK2 is composed of two catalytic subunits (α and α') and two regulatory subunits (β and β'), both of which are required to form the active holoenzyme. Here we investigate the function of the CK2 holoenzyme in Start-specific transcription. The ckb1Δ ckb2Δ mutant strain, bearing deletions of both genes encoding CK2 regulatory subunits, shows a delay of S-phase entrance due to a severe reduction of the expression of SBF- and MBF-dependent genes. This transcriptional defect is caused by an impaired recruitment of Swi6 and Swi4 to G1 gene promoters. Moreover, CK2 α and β' subunits interact with RNA polymerase II, whose binding to G1 promoters is positively regulated by the CK2 holoenzyme. Collectively, these findings suggest a novel role for the CK2 holoenzyme in the activation of G1 transcription.

Dancing the cell cycle two-step: regulation of yeast G1-cell-cycle genes by chromatin structure

The chromatin structure at a promoter can define how a gene is regulated. Studies of two yeast genes expressed in the G1 phase of the cell cycle, HO and CLN2, have provided important paradigms for transcriptional regulation. Although the SBF (Swi4/Swi6 box factor) transcription factor activates both genes, the chromatin landscapes that regulate SBF binding are different. Specifically, the CLN2 promoter is constitutively available for SBF binding, whereas HO has a complex two-step promoter in which chromatin changes in one region allow SBF to bind at a downstream location. These studies reveal the role of chromatin in defining the regulatory properties of promoters.

Binding specificity of the G1/S transcriptional regulators in budding yeast

BACKGROUND

G1/S transcriptional regulation in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae depends on three main transcriptional components, Swi4, Swi6 and Mbp1. These proteins constitute two transcription factor complexes that regulate over 300 G1/S transcripts, namely SBF (Swi4-Swi6) and MBF (Mbp1-Swi6). SBF and MBF are involved in regulating largely non-overlapping sets of G1/S genes via clearly distinct mechanisms.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Here we establish and confirm protein-protein and protein-DNA interactions using specific polyclonal antisera to whole Swi6 and to the C-terminal domains of related proteins Swi4 and Mbp1. Our data confirm the protein-protein binding specificity of Swi4 and Mbp1 to Swi6 but not to each other, and support the binding specificity of the transcriptional inhibitor Whi5 to SBF and of the corepressor Nrm1 to MBF. We also show the DNA binding preference of Swi4 to the CLN2 promoter and Mbp1 to the RNR1 promoter, while Swi6 binds both promoters. Finally, we establish the binding dynamics of Swi4 and Whi5 to the CLN2 promoter during the cell cycle.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

These data confirm the binding specificity of the G1/S transcriptional regulators. Whereas previous observations were made using tagged Swi4, Swi6 and Mbp1, here we use specific polyclonal antisera to reestablish the protein-protein and protein-DNA interactions of these G1/S transcriptional components. Our data also reveal the dynamic changes in promoter binding of Swi4 during the cell cycle, which suggests a possible positive feedback loop involving Swi4.

Repressive chromatin affects factor binding at yeast HO (homothallic switching) promoter

The yeast HO gene is tightly regulated, with multiple activators and coactivators needed to overcome repressive chromatin structures that form over this promoter. Coactivator binding is strongly interdependent, as loss of one factor sharply reduces recruitment of other factors. The Rpd3(L) histone deacetylase is recruited to HO at two distinct times during the cell cycle, first by Ash1 to the URS1 region of the promoter and then by SBF/Whi5/Stb1 to URS2. SBF itself is localized to only a subset of its potential binding sites in URS2, and this localization takes longer and is less robust than at other SBF target genes, suggesting that binding to the HO promoter is limited by chromatin structures that dynamically change as the cell cycle progresses. Ash1 only binds at the URS1 region of the promoter, but an ash1 mutation results in markedly increased binding of SBF and Rpd3(L) at URS2, some 450 bp distant from the site of Ash1 binding, suggesting these two regions of the promoter interact. An ash1 mutation also results in increased coactivator recruitment, Swi/Snf and Mediator localization in the absence of the normally required Gcn5 histone acetyltransferase, and HO expression even in the presence of a taf1 mutation affecting TFIID activity that otherwise blocks HO transcription. Ash1 therefore appears to play a central role in generating the strongly repressive environment at the HO promoter, which limits the binding of several coactivators at URS2 and TATA region.

The transcriptional network activated by Cln3 cyclin at the G1-to-S transition of the yeast cell cycle

Background

The G1-to-S transition of the cell cycle in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae involves an extensive transcriptional program driven by transcription factors SBF (Swi4-Swi6) and MBF (Mbp1-Swi6). Activation of these factors ultimately depends on the G1 cyclin Cln3.

Results

To determine the transcriptional targets of Cln3 and their dependence on SBF or MBF, we first have used DNA microarrays to interrogate gene expression upon Cln3 overexpression in synchronized cultures of strains lacking components of SBF and/or MBF. Secondly, we have integrated this expression dataset together with other heterogeneous data sources into a single probabilistic model based on Bayesian statistics. Our analysis has produced more than 200 transcription factor-target assignments, validated by ChIP assays and by functional enrichment. Our predictions show higher internal coherence and predictive power than previous classifications. Our results support a model whereby SBF and MBF may be differentially activated by Cln3.

Conclusions

Integration of heterogeneous genome-wide datasets is key to building accurate transcriptional networks. By such integration, we provide here a reliable transcriptional network at the G1-to-S transition in the budding yeast cell cycle. Our results suggest that to improve the reliability of predictions we need to feed our models with more informative experimental data.

The Rts1 regulatory subunit of protein phosphatase 2A is required for control of G1 cyclin transcription and nutrient modulation of cell size

The key molecular event that marks entry into the cell cycle is transcription of G1 cyclins, which bind and activate cyclin-dependent kinases. In yeast cells, initiation of G1 cyclin transcription is linked to achievement of a critical cell size, which contributes to cell-size homeostasis. The critical cell size is modulated by nutrients, such that cells growing in poor nutrients are smaller than cells growing in rich nutrients. Nutrient modulation of cell size does not work through known critical regulators of G1 cyclin transcription and is therefore thought to work through a distinct pathway. Here, we report that Rts1, a highly conserved regulatory subunit of protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A), is required for normal control of G1 cyclin transcription. Loss of Rts1 caused delayed initiation of bud growth and delayed and reduced accumulation of G1 cyclins. Expression of the G1 cyclin CLN2 from an inducible promoter rescued the delayed bud growth in rts1Delta cells, indicating that Rts1 acts at the level of transcription. Moreover, loss of Rts1 caused altered regulation of Swi6, a key component of the SBF transcription factor that controls G1 cyclin transcription. Epistasis analysis revealed that Rts1 does not work solely through several known critical upstream regulators of G1 cyclin transcription. Cells lacking Rts1 failed to undergo nutrient modulation of cell size. Together, these observations demonstrate that Rts1 is a key player in pathways that link nutrient availability, cell size, and G1 cyclin transcription. Since Rts1 is highly conserved, it may function in similar pathways in vertebrates.

The E2F functional analogue SBF recruits the Rpd3(L) HDAC, via Whi5 and Stb1, and the FACT chromatin reorganizer, to yeast G1 cyclin promoters

Regulation of the CLN1 and CLN2 G1 cyclin genes controls cell cycle progression. The SBF activator binds to these promoters but is kept inactive by the Whi5 and Stb1 inhibitors. The Cdc28 cyclin-dependent kinase phosphorylates Whi5, ending the inhibition. Our chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) experiments show that SBF, Whi5 and Stb1 recruit both Cdc28 and the Rpd3(L) histone deacetylase to CLN promoters, extending the analogy with mammalian G1 cyclin promoters in which Rb recruits histone deacetylases. Finally, we show that the SBF subunit Swi6 recruits the FACT chromatin reorganizer to SBF- and MBF-regulated genes. Mutations affecting FACT reduce the transient nucleosome eviction seen at these promoters during a normal cell cycle and also reduce expression. Temperature-sensitive mutations affecting FACT and Cdc28 can be suppressed by disruption of STB1 and WHI5, suggesting that one critical function of FACT and Cdc28 is overcoming chromatin repression at G1 cyclin promoters. Thus, SBF recruits complexes to promoters that either enhance (FACT) or repress (Rpd3L) accessibility to chromatin, and also recruits the kinase that activates START.

Dual regulation by pairs of cyclin-dependent protein kinases and histone deacetylases controls G1 transcription in budding yeast

START-dependent transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is regulated by two transcription factors SBF and MBF, whose activity is controlled by the binding of the repressor Whi5. Phosphorylation and removal of Whi5 by the cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) Cln3-Cdc28 alleviates the Whi5-dependent repression on SBF and MBF, initiating entry into a new cell cycle. This Whi5-SBF/MBF transcriptional circuit is analogous to the regulatory pathway in mammalian cells that features the E2F family of G1 transcription factors and the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein (Rb). Here we describe genetic and biochemical evidence for the involvement of another CDK, Pcl-Pho85, in regulating G1 transcription, via phosphorylation and inhibition of Whi5. We show that a strain deleted for both PHO85 and CLN3 has a slow growth phenotype, a G1 delay, and is severely compromised for SBF-dependent reporter gene expression, yet all of these defects are alleviated by deletion of WHI5. Our biochemical and genetic tests suggest Whi5 mediates repression in part through interaction with two histone deacetylases (HDACs), Hos3 and Rpd3. In a manner analogous to cyclin D/CDK4/6, which phosphorylates Rb in mammalian cells disrupting its association with HDACs, phosphorylation by the early G1 CDKs Cln3-Cdc28 and Pcl9-Pho85 inhibits association of Whi5 with the HDACs. Contributions from multiple CDKs may provide the precision and accuracy necessary to activate G1 transcription when both internal and external cues are optimal.

Sin3 is involved in cell size control at Start in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells control their cell size at a point in late G(1) called Start. Here, we describe a negative role for the Sin3/Rpd3 histone deacetylase complex in the regulation of cell size at Start. Initiation of G(1)/S-specific transcription of CLN1, CLN2 and PCL1 in a sin3Delta strain occurs at a reduced cell size compared with a wild-type strain. In addition, inactivation of the transcriptional regulator SIN3 partially suppressed a cln3Delta mutant, causing sin3Deltacln3Delta double mutants to start the cell cycle at wild-type size. Chromatin immunoprecipitation results demonstrate that Sin3 and Rpd3 are recruited to promoters of SBF (Swi4/Swi6)-regulated genes, and reveal that binding of Sin3 to SBF-specific promoters is cell-cycle regulated. We observe that transcriptional repression of SBF-dependent genes in early G(1) coincides with the recruitment of Sin3 to specific promoters, whereas binding of Sin3 is abolished from Swi4/Swi6-regulated promoters when transcription is activated at the G(1) to S phase transition. We conclude that the Sin3/Rpd3 histone deacetylase complex helps to prevent premature activation of the S phase in daughter cells.

Identification of yeast transcriptional regulation networks using multivariate random forests

The recent availability of whole-genome scale data sets that investigate complementary and diverse aspects of transcriptional regulation has spawned an increased need for new and effective computational approaches to analyze and integrate these large scale assays. Here, we propose a novel algorithm, based on random forest methodology, to relate gene expression (as derived from expression microarrays) to sequence features residing in gene promoters (as derived from DNA motif data) and transcription factor binding to gene promoters (as derived from tiling microarrays). We extend the random forest approach to model a multivariate response as represented, for example, by time-course gene expression measures. An analysis of the multivariate random forest output reveals complex regulatory networks, which consist of cohesive, condition-dependent regulatory cliques. Each regulatory clique features homogeneous gene expression profiles and common motifs or synergistic motif groups. We apply our method to several yeast physiological processes: cell cycle, sporulation, and various stress conditions. Our technique displays excellent performance with regard to identifying known regulatory motifs, including high order interactions. In addition, we present evidence of the existence of an alternative MCB-binding pathway, which we confirm using data from two independent cell cycle studies and two other physioloigical processes. Finally, we have uncovered elaborate transcription regulation refinement mechanisms involving PAC and mRRPE motifs that govern essential rRNA processing. These include intriguing instances of differing motif dosages and differing combinatorial motif control that promote regulatory specificity in rRNA metabolism under differing physiological processes.