Molecular genetic analysis of the yeast repressor Rfx1/Crt1 reveals a novel two-step regulatory mechanism

Functional characterization and comparative analysis of gene repression-mediating domains interacting with yeast pleiotropic corepressors Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1

Transcriptional corepressors Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1 are important for downregulation of gene expression by recruiting various histone deacetylases once they gain access to defined genomic locations by interaction with pathway-specific repressor proteins. In this work we systematically investigated whether 17 yeast repressor proteins (Cti6, Dal80, Fkh1, Gal80, Mig1, Mot3, Nrg1, Opi1, Rdr1, Rox1, Sko1, Ume6, Ure2, Xbp1, Yhp1, Yox1 and Whi5) representing several unrelated regulatory pathways are able to bind to Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1. Our results show that paired amphipathic helices 1 and 2 (PAH1 and PAH2) of Sin3 are functionally redundant for some regulatory pathways. WD40 domains of Tup1 proved to be sufficient for interaction with repressor proteins. Using length variants of selected repressors, we mapped corepressor interaction domains (CIDs) in vitro and assayed gene repression in vivo. Systematic comparison of CID minimal sequences allowed us to define several related positional patterns of hydrophobic amino acids some of which could be confirmed as functionally supported by site-directed mutagenesis. Although structural predictions indicated that certain CIDs may be α-helical, most repression domains appear to be randomly structured and must be considered as intrinsically disordered regions (IDR) adopting a defined conformation only by interaction with a corepressor.

Heavy metal exposure induces Yap1 and Hac1 mediated derepression of GSH1 and KAR2 by Tup1-Cyc8 complex

Heavy metal pollution is one of the most severe environmental problem. The toxicity of heavy metals is correlated with the production of increased reactive oxygen species and misfolded protein accumulation. Exposures of these metals even at low concentrations adversely affect human health. The Tup1-Cyc8 complex has been identified as a general repressor complex, is also involved in the derepression of few target genes in association with gene-specific activator proteins. Exposure to heavy metals activates the antioxidant defense mechanism, essential for cellular homeostasis. Here we present evidence that TUP1/CYC8 deleted cells are compromised to tolerate heavy metals exposure. Upon metal-induced oxidative stress, Yeast AP-1p (Yap1) recruits the Tup1-Cyc8 complex to the promoter of oxidative stress response gene GSH1 and derepresses its expression. We also found that the TUP1/CYC8 deficient cells have altered endoplasmic reticulum (ER) homeostasis and fail to activate the unfolded protein response pathway. In response to ER stress, the Tup1-Cyc8 complex, with the help of activated Hac1, binds to the promoter of ER chaperone KAR2 and activates its transcription. Altogether, our findings suggest that the Tup1-Cyc8 complex is crucial for the activation of genes that are involved in the mitigation of oxidative and ER stress during heavy metal exposure.

Hydroxyurea-The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Hydroxyurea (HU) is mostly referred to as an inhibitor of ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) and as the agent that is commonly used to arrest cells in the S-phase of the cycle by inducing replication stress. It is a well-known and widely used drug, one which has proved to be effective in treating chronic myeloproliferative disorders and which is considered a staple agent in sickle anemia therapy and—recently—a promising factor in preventing cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease. The reversibility of HU-induced replication inhibition also makes it a common laboratory ingredient used to synchronize cell cycles. On the other hand, prolonged treatment or higher dosage of hydroxyurea causes cell death due to accumulation of DNA damage and oxidative stress. Hydroxyurea treatments are also still far from perfect and it has been suggested that it facilitates skin cancer progression. Also, recent studies have shown that hydroxyurea may affect a larger number of enzymes due to its less specific interaction mechanism, which may contribute to further as-yet unspecified factors affecting cell response. In this review, we examine the actual state of knowledge about hydroxyurea and the mechanisms behind its cytotoxic effects. The practical applications of the recent findings may prove to enhance the already existing use of the drug in new and promising ways.

The activity of yeast Apn2 AP endonuclease at uracil-derived AP sites is dependent on the major carbon source

Yeast Apn2 is an AP endonuclease and DNA 3'-diesterase that belongs to the Exo III family with homology to the E. coli exonuclease III, Schizosaccharomyces pombe eth1, and human AP endonucleases APEX1 and APEX2. In the absence of Apn1, the major AP endonuclease in yeast, Apn2 can cleave the DNA backbone at an AP lesion initiating the base excision repair pathway. To study the role and relative contribution of Apn2, we took advantage of a reporter system that was previously used to delineate how uracil-derived AP sites are repaired. At this reporter, disruption of the Apn1-initiated base excision repair pathway led to a significant elevation of A:T to C:G transversions. Here we show that such highly elevated A:T to C:G transversion mutations associated with uracil residues in DNA are abolished when apn1∆ yeast cells are grown in glucose as the primary carbon source. We also show that the disruption of Apn2, either by the complete gene deletion or by the mutation of a catalytic residue, results in a similarly reduced rate of the uracil-associated mutations. Overall, our results indicate that Apn2 activity is regulated by the glucose repression pathway in yeast.

Functional analysis of Cti6 core domain responsible for recruitment of epigenetic regulators Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1

Mapping of effective protein domains is a demanding stride to disclose the functional relationship between regulatory complexes. Domain analysis of protein interactions is requisite for understanding the pleiotropic responses of the respective partners. Cti6 is a multifunctional regulator for which we could show recruitment of co-repressors Sin3, Cyc8 and Tup1. However, the responsible core domain tethering Cti6 to these co-repressors is poorly understood. Here, we report the pivotal domain of Cti6 that is indispensable for co-repressor recruitment. We substantiated that amino acids 450–506 of Cti6 bind PAH2 of Sin3. To analyse this Cti6–Sin3 Interaction Domain (CSID) in more detail, selected amino acids within CSID were replaced by alanine. It is revealed that hydrophobic amino acids V467, L481 and L491 L492 L493 are important for Cti6–Sin3 binding. In addition to PAH2 of Sin3, CSID also binds to tetratricopeptide repeats (TPR) of Cyc8. Indeed, we could demonstrate Cti6 recruitment to promoters of genes, such as RNR3 and SMF3, containing iron-responsive elements (IRE). Importantly, Sin3 is also recruited to these promoters but only in the presence of functional Cti6. Our findings provide novel insights toward the critical interaction domain in the co-regulator Cti6, which is a component of regulatory complexes that are closely related to chromatin architecture and the epigenetic status of genes that are regulated by pleiotropic co-repressors.

Transcriptional upregulation of proteasome activator Blm10 antagonizes cellular aging

Cellular aging is associated with the damage to DNA, decline in proteasome activity, loss of histones and alteration of epigenetic marks. The atypical proteasome with the activator PA200 in mammals or its ortholog Blm10 in yeast promotes the acetylation-dependent degradation of the core histones during DNA repair or spermiogenesis. We show here that loss of PA200 or Blm10 is the leading cause of the decline in proteasome activity during aging, the latter of which conversely induces the transcription of Blm10. The transcription factor Crt1 suppressed, but the proteasome subunit Rpn4 promoted, the transcription of Blm10. On the contrary to deletion of Rpn4, deletion of Crt1 elevated Blm10 transcription upon DNA damage, reduced core histone levels during aging, and prolonged replicative lifespan. These results suggest that cells can antagonize aging by up-regulating transcription of Blm10, providing important insights into the mechanisms of aging and the aging-related diseases.

Dun1, a Chk2-related kinase, is the central regulator of securin-separase dynamics during DNA damage signaling

The DNA damage checkpoint halts cell cycle progression in G2 in response to genotoxic insults. Central to the execution of cell cycle arrest is the checkpoint-induced stabilization of securin-separase complex (yeast Pds1-Esp1). The checkpoint kinases Chk1 and Chk2 (yeast Chk1 and Rad53) are thought to critically contribute to the stability of securin-separase complex by phosphorylation of securin, rendering it resistant to proteolytic destruction by the anaphase promoting complex (APC). Dun1, a Rad53 paralog related to Chk2, is also essential for checkpoint-imposed arrest. Dun1 is required for the DNA damage-induced transcription of DNA repair genes; however, its role in the execution of cell cycle arrest remains unknown. Here, we show that Dun1′s role in checkpoint arrest is independent of its involvement in the transcription of repair genes. Instead, Dun1 is necessary to prevent Pds1 destruction during DNA damage in that the Dun1-deficient cells degrade Pds1, escape G2 arrest and undergo mitosis despite the presence of checkpoint-active Chk1 and Rad53. Interestingly, proteolytic degradation of Pds1 in the absence of Dun1 is mediated not by APC but by the HECT domain-containing E3 ligase Rsp5. Our results suggest a regulatory scheme in which Dun1 prevents chromosome segregation during DNA damage by inhibiting Rsp5-mediated proteolytic degradation of securin Pds1.

Design principles for nuclease-deficient CRISPR-based transcriptional regulators

The engineering of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)-CRISPR-associated proteins continues to expand the toolkit available for genome editing, reprogramming gene regulation, genome visualisation and epigenetic studies of living organisms. In this review, the emerging design principles on the use of nuclease-deficient CRISPR-based reprogramming of gene expression will be presented. The review will focus on the designs implemented in yeast both at the level of CRISPR proteins and guide RNA (gRNA), but will lend due credits to the seminal studies performed in other species where relevant. In addition to design principles, this review also highlights applications benefitting from the use of CRISPR-mediated transcriptional regulation and discusses the future directions to further expand the toolkit for nuclease-deficient reprogramming of genomes. As such, this review should be of general interest for experimentalists to get familiarised with the parameters underlying the power of reprogramming genomic functions by use of nuclease-deficient CRISPR technologies.

Spontaneous mutations in CYC8 and MIG1 suppress the short chronological lifespan of budding yeast lacking SNF1/AMPK

Chronologically aging yeast cells are prone to adaptive regrowth, whereby mutants with a survival advantage spontaneously appear and re-enter the cell cycle in stationary phase cultures. Adaptive regrowth is especially noticeable with short-lived strains, including those defective for SNF1, the homolog of mammalian AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). SNF1 becomes active in response to multiple environmental stresses that occur in chronologically aging cells, including glucose depletion and oxidative stress. SNF1 is also required for the extension of chronological lifespan (CLS) by caloric restriction (CR) as defined as limiting glucose at the time of culture inoculation. To identify specific downstream SNF1 targets responsible for CLS extension during CR, we screened for adaptive regrowth mutants that restore chronological longevity to a short-lived snf1∆ parental strain. Whole genome sequencing of the adapted mutants revealed missense mutations in TPR motifs 9 and 10 of the transcriptional co-repressor Cyc8 that specifically mediate repression through the transcriptional repressor Mig1. Another mutation occurred in MIG1 itself, thus implicating the activation of Mig1-repressed genes as a key function of SNF1 in maintaining CLS. Consistent with this conclusion, the cyc8 TPR mutations partially restored growth on alternative carbon sources and significantly extended CLS compared to the snf1∆ parent. Furthermore, cyc8 TPR mutations reactivated multiple Mig1-repressed genes, including the transcription factor gene CAT8, which is responsible for activating genes of the glyoxylate and gluconeogenesis pathways. Deleting CAT8 completely blocked CLS extension by the cyc8 TPR mutations on CLS, identifying these pathways as key Snf1-regulated CLS determinants.

Regulation of carotenogenesis in the red yeast Xanthophyllomyces dendrorhous: the role of the transcriptional co-repressor complex Cyc8-Tup1 involved in catabolic repression

BACKGROUND

The yeast Xanthophyllomyces dendrorhous produces carotenoids of commercial interest, including astaxanthin and β-carotene. Although carotenogenesis in this yeast and the expression profiles of the genes controlling this pathway are known, the mechanisms regulating this process remain poorly understood. Several studies have demonstrated that glucose represses carotenogenesis in X. dendrorhous, suggesting that this pathway could be regulated by catabolic repression. Catabolic repression is a highly conserved regulatory mechanism in eukaryotes and has been widely studied in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Glucose-dependent repression is mainly observed at the transcriptional level and depends on the DNA-binding regulator Mig1, which recruits the co-repressor complex Cyc8-Tup1, which then represses the expression of target genes. In this work, we studied the regulation of carotenogenesis by catabolic repression in X. dendrorhous, focusing on the role of the co-repressor complex Cyc8-Tup1.

RESULTS

The X. dendrorhous CYC8 and TUP1 genes were identified, and their functions were demonstrated by heterologous complementation in S. cerevisiae. In addition, cyc8 - and tup1 - mutant strains of X. dendrorhous were obtained, and both mutations were shown to prevent the glucose-dependent repression of carotenogenesis in X. dendrorhous, increasing the carotenoid production in both mutant strains. Furthermore, the effects of glucose on the transcript levels of genes involved in carotenogenesis differed between the mutant strains and wild-type X. dendrorhous, particularly for genes involved in the synthesis of carotenoid precursors, such as HMGR, idi and FPS. Additionally, transcriptomic analyses showed that cyc8 - and tup1 - mutations affected the expression of over 250 genes in X. dendrorhous.

CONCLUSIONS

The CYC8 and TUP1 genes are functional in X. dendrorhous, and their gene products are involved in catabolic repression and carotenogenesis regulation. This study presents the first report involving the participation of Cyc8 and Tup1 in carotenogenesis regulation in yeast.

Identification of Putative Mek1 Substrates during Meiosis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Using Quantitative Phosphoproteomics

Meiotic recombination plays a key role in sexual reproduction as it generates crossovers that, in combination with sister chromatid cohesion, physically connect homologous chromosomes, thereby promoting their proper segregation at the first meiotic division. Meiotic recombination is initiated by programmed double strand breaks (DSBs) catalyzed by the evolutionarily conserved, topoisomerase-like protein Spo11. Repair of these DSBs is highly regulated to create crossovers between homologs that are distributed throughout the genome. This repair requires the presence of the mitotic recombinase, Rad51, as well as the strand exchange activity of the meiosis-specific recombinase, Dmc1. A key regulator of meiotic DSB repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the meiosis-specific kinase Mek1, which promotes interhomolog strand invasion and is required for the meiotic recombination checkpoint and the crossover/noncrossover decision. Understanding how Mek1 regulates meiotic recombination requires the identification of its substrates. Towards that end, an unbiased phosphoproteomic approach utilizing Stable Isotope Labeling by Amino Acids in Cells (SILAC) was utilized to generate a list of potential Mek1 substrates, as well as proteins containing consensus phosphorylation sites for cyclin-dependent kinase, the checkpoint kinases, Mec1/Tel1, and the polo-like kinase, Cdc5. These experiments represent the first global phosphoproteomic dataset for proteins in meiotic budding yeast.

Identifying transcription factor complexes and their roles

Motivation: Eukaryotic gene expression is controlled through molecular logic circuits that combine regulatory signals of many different factors. In particular, complexation of transcription factors (TFs) and other regulatory proteins is a prevailing and highly conserved mechanism of signal integration within critical regulatory pathways and enables us to infer controlled genes as well as the exerted regulatory mechanism. Common approaches for protein complex prediction that only use protein interaction networks, however, are designed to detect self-contained functional complexes and have difficulties to reveal dynamic combinatorial assemblies of physically interacting proteins.

Results: We developed the novel algorithm DACO that combines protein–protein interaction networks and domain–domain interaction networks with the cluster-quality metric cohesiveness. The metric is locally maximized on the holistic level of protein interactions, and connectivity constraints on the domain level are used to account for the exclusive and thus inherently combinatorial nature of the interactions within such assemblies. When applied to predicting TF complexes in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the proposed approach outperformed popular complex prediction methods by far. Furthermore, we were able to assign many of the predictions to target genes, as well as to a potential regulatory effect in agreement with literature evidence.

Availability and implementation: A prototype implementation is freely available at https://sourceforge.net/projects/dacoalgorithm/.

Contact:volkhard.helms@bioinformatik.uni-saarland.de

Supplementary information:Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

The yeast Cyc8-Tup1 complex cooperates with Hda1p and Rpd3p histone deacetylases to robustly repress transcription of the subtelomeric FLO1 gene

We demonstrate that the yeast flocculation gene, FLO1, is representative of a distinct subset of subtelomeric genes that are robustly repressed by the Cyc8–Tup1 complex. We have examined Cyc8–Tup1 localisation, histone acetylation and long-range chromatin remodelling within the extensive FLO1 upstream region. We show that Cyc8–Tup1 is localised in a DNase I hypersensitive site within an ordered array of strongly positioned nucleosomes around − 700 base pairs upstream of the transcription start site. In cyc8 deletion mutant strains, Tup1p localisation is absent, with concomitant histone hyperacetylation of adjacent regions at the FLO1 promoter. This is accompanied by extensive histone depletion across the upstream region and gene activation. The yeast histone deacetylases, Hda1p and Rpd3p, occupy the repressed FLO1 promoter region in a Cyc8–Tup1 dependent manner and coordinate histone deacetylation, nucleosome stabilisation and gene repression. Moreover, we show that the ATP-dependent chromatin remodelling complex Swi–Snf occupies the site vacated by Cyc8–Tup1 in a cyc8 mutant. These data suggest that distinctly bound Cyc8–Tup1 cooperates with Hda1p and Rpd3p to establish or maintain an extensive array of strongly positioned, deacetylated nucleosomes over the FLO1 promoter and upstream region which inhibit histone acetylation, block Swi–Snf binding and prevent transcription.

•

Cyc8–Tup1 repression activity is enriched at chromosome subtelomeric regions.

•

The subtelomeric FLO1 gene is subject to chromatin-mediated repression by Cyc8–Tup1.

•

Cyc8–Tup1 promotes long-range nucleosome positioning and histone deacetylation.

•

Hda1p and Rpd3p cooperate with Cyc8–Tup1 to facilitate this repressive chromatin.

•

Swi–Snf directs extensive nucleosome remodelling when Cyc8–Tup1 is absent.

Direct TFIIA-TFIID protein contacts drive budding yeast ribosomal protein gene transcription

We have previously shown that yeast TFIID provides coactivator function on the promoters of ribosomal protein-encoding genes (RPGs) by making direct contact with the transactivator repressor activator protein 1 (Rap1). Further, our structural studies of assemblies generated with purified Rap1, TFIID, and TFIIA on RPG enhancer-promoter DNA indicate that Rap1-TFIID interaction induces dramatic conformational rearrangements of enhancer-promoter DNA and TFIID-bound TFIIA. These data indicate a previously unknown yet critical role for yeast TFIIA in the integration of activator-TFIID contacts with promoter conformation and downstream preinitiation complex formation and/or function. Here we describe the use of systematic mutagenesis to define how specific TFIIA contacts contribute to these processes. We have verified that TFIIA is required for RPG transcription in vivo and in vitro, consistent with the existence of a critical Rap1-TFIIA-TFIID interaction network. We also identified essential points of contact for TFIIA and Rap1 within the Rap1 binding domain of the Taf4 subunit of TFIID. These data suggest a mechanism for how interactions between TFIID, TFIIA, and Rap1 contribute to the high rate of transcription initiation seen on RPGs in vivo.

FILAMENTOUS FLOWER controls lateral organ development by acting as both an activator and a repressor

BACKGROUND

The YABBY (YAB) family of transcription factors participate in a diverse range of processes that include leaf and floral patterning, organ growth, and the control of shoot apical meristem organisation and activity. How these disparate functions are regulated is not clear, but based on interactions with the LEUNIG-class of co-repressors, it has been proposed that YABs act as transcriptional repressors. In the light of recent work showing that DNA-binding proteins associated with the yeast co-repressor TUP1 can also function as activators, we have examined the transcriptional activity of the YABs.

RESULTS

Of the four Arabidopsis YABs tested in yeast, only FILAMENTOUS FLOWER (FIL) activated reporter gene expression. Similar analysis with Antirrhinum YABs identified the FIL ortholog GRAMINIFOLIA as an activator. Plant-based transactivation assays not only confirmed the potential of FIL to activate transcription, but also extended this property to the FIL paralog YABBY3 (YAB3). Subsequent transcriptomic analysis of lines expressing a steroid-inducible FIL protein revealed groups of genes that responded either positively or negatively to YAB induction. Included in the positively regulated group of genes were the polarity regulators KANADI1 (KAN1), AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR 4 (ARF4) and ASYMMETRIC LEAVES1 (AS1). We also show that modifying FIL to function as an obligate repressor causes strong yab loss-of-function phenotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively these data show that FIL functions as a transcriptional activator in plants and that this activity is involved in leaf patterning. Interestingly, our study also supports the idea that FIL can act as a repressor, as transcriptomic analysis identified negatively regulated FIL-response genes. To reconcile these observations, we propose that YABs are bifunctional transcription factors that participate in both positive and negative regulation. These findings fit a model of leaf development in which adaxial/abaxial patterning is maintained by a regulatory network consisting of positive feedback loops.

Shields up: the Tup1-Cyc8 repressor complex blocks coactivator recruitment

The Tup1-Cyc8 complex is responsible for repression of a large and diverse collection of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The predominant view has been that Tup1-Cyc8 functions as a corepressor, actively associating with regulatory proteins and organizing chromatin to block transcription. A new study by Wong and Struhl in this issue of Genes & Development (pp. 2525-2539) challenges nearly 20 years of models by demonstrating that Tup1-Cyc8 functions primarily as a shield to block DNA-binding proteins from recruiting transcriptional coactivators.

The Cyc8-Tup1 complex inhibits transcription primarily by masking the activation domain of the recruiting protein

The yeast Tup1-Cyc8 corepressor complex is recruited to promoters by DNA-binding repressors, but the mechanisms by which it inhibits expression of genes involved in various stress pathways are poorly understood. Conditional and rapid depletion of Tup1 from the nucleus leads to concurrent nucleosome depletion and histone acetylation, recruitment of coactivators (Swi/Snf, SAGA, and Mediator), and increased transcriptional activity. Conversely, coactivator dissociation occurs rapidly upon rerepression by Cyc8-Tup1, although coactivator association and transcription can be blocked even in the absence of nucleosomes. The coactivators are recruited to the sites where Tup1 was located prior to depletion, indicating that the repressor proteins that recruit Tup1 function as activators in its absence. Last, Cyc8-Tup1 can interact with activation domains in vivo. Thus, Cyc8-Tup1 regulates transcription primarily by masking and inhibiting the transcriptional activation domains of the recruiting proteins, not by acting as a corepressor. We suggest that the corepressor function of Cyc8-Tup1 makes only a modest contribution to expression of target genes, specifically to keep expression levels below the nonactivated state.

SWI/SNF and Asf1 independently promote derepression of the DNA damage response genes under conditions of replication stress

The histone chaperone Asf1 and the chromatin remodeler SWI/SNF have been separately implicated in derepression of the DNA damage response (DDR) genes in yeast cells treated with genotoxins that cause replication interference. Using genetic and biochemical approaches, we have tested if derepression of the DDR genes in budding yeast involves functional interplay between Asf1 and SWI/SNF. We find that Asf1 and SWI/SNF are both recruited to DDR genes under replication stress triggered by hydroxyurea, and have detected a soluble complex that contains Asf1 and the Snf2 subunit of SWI/SNF. SWI/SNF recruitment to DDR genes however does not require Asf1, and deletion of Snf2 does not affect Asf1 occupancy of DDR gene promoters. A checkpoint engagement defect is sufficient to explain the synthetic effect of deletion of ASF1 and SNF2 on derepression of the DDR genes in hydroxyurea-treated cells. Collectively, our results show that the DDR genes fall into a class in which Asf1 and SWI/SNF independently control transcriptional induction.

The multifunctional Ccr4-Not complex directly promotes transcription elongation

The Ccr4-Not complex has been implicated in the control of multiple steps of mRNA metabolism; however, its functions in transcription remain ambiguous. The discovery that Ccr4/Pop2 is the major cytoplasmic mRNA deadenylase and the detection of Not proteins within mRNA processing bodies have raised questions about the roles of the Ccr4-Not complex in transcription. Here we firmly establish Ccr4-Not as a positive elongation factor for RNA polymerase II (RNAPII). The Ccr4-Not complex is targeted to the coding region of genes in a transcription-dependent manner similar to RNAPII and promotes elongation in vivo. Furthermore, Ccr4-Not interacts directly with elongating RNAPII complexes and stimulates transcription elongation of arrested polymerase in vitro. Ccr4-Not can reactivate backtracked RNAPII using a mechanism different from that of the well-characterized elongation factor TFIIS. While not essential for its interaction with elongation complexes, Ccr4-Not interacts with the emerging transcript and promotes elongation in a manner dependent on transcript length, although this interaction is not required for it to bind RNAPII. Our comprehensive analysis shows that Ccr4-Not directly regulates transcription, and suggests it does so by promoting the resumption of elongation of arrested RNAPII when it encounters transcriptional blocks in vivo.

Regulators of ribonucleotide reductase inhibit Ty1 mobility in saccharomyces cerevisiae

BACKGROUND

Ty1 is a long terminal repeat retrotransposon of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, with a replication cycle similar to retrovirus replication. Structurally, Ty1 contains long terminal repeat (LTR) regions flanking the gag and pol genes that encode for the proteins that enable Ty1 mobility. Reverse transcriptase produces Ty1 complementary (c)DNA that can either be integrated back into the genome by integrase or recombined into the yeast genome through homologous recombination. The frequency of Ty1 mobility is temperature sensitive, with optimum activity occurring at 24-26°C.

RESULTS

In this study, we identified two host genes that when deleted allow for high temperature Ty1 mobility: RFX1 and SML1. The protein products of these genes are both negative regulators of the enzyme ribonucleotide reductase, a key enzyme in regulating deoxyribonucleotide triphosphate (dNTP) levels in the cell. Processing of Ty1 proteins is defective at high temperature, and processing is not improved in either rfx1 or sml1 deletion strains. Ty1 mobility at high temperature is mediated by homologous recombination of Ty1 cDNA to Ty1 elements within the yeast genome. We quantified cDNA levels in wild type, rfx1 and sml1 deletion background strains at different temperatures. Southern blot analysis demonstrated that cDNA levels were not markedly different between the wild type and mutant strains as temperatures increased, indicating that the increased Ty1 mobility is not a result of increased cDNA synthesis in the mutant strains. Homologous recombination efficiency was increased in both rfx1 and sml1 deletion strains at high temperatures; the rfx1 deletion strain also had heightened homologous recombination efficiency at permissive temperatures. In the presence of the dNTP reducing agent hydroxyurea at permissive temperatures, Ty1 mobility was stimulated in the wild type and sml1 deletion strains but not in the rfx1 deletion strain. Mobility frequency was greatly reduced in all strains at high temperature. Deletion of the S-phase checkpoint pathway Dun1 kinase, which inactivates Sml1 and Rfx1, reduced Ty1 mobility at a range of temperatures.

CONCLUSIONS

Levels of cellular dNTPs, as regulated by components of the S-phase checkpoint pathway, are a limiting factor in homologous recombination-mediated Ty1 mobility.

Sequential recruitment of SAGA and TFIID in a genomic response to DNA damage in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Eukaryotic genes respond to their environment by changing the expression of selected genes. The question we address here is whether distinct transcriptional responses to different environmental signals elicit distinct modes of assembly of the transcription machinery. In particular, we examine transcription complex assembly by the stress-directed SAGA complex versus the housekeeping assembly factor TFIID. We focus on genomic responses to the DNA damaging agent methyl methanesulfonate (MMS) in comparison to responses to acute heat shock, looking at changes in genome-wide factor occupancy measured by chromatin immunoprecipitation-microchip (ChIP-chip) and ChIP-sequencing analyses. Our data suggest that MMS-induced genes undergo transcription complex assembly sequentially, first involving SAGA and then involving a slower TFIID recruitment, whereas heat shock genes utilize the SAGA and TFIID pathways rapidly and in parallel. Also Crt1, the repressor of model MMS-inducible ribonucleotide reductase genes, was found not to play a wider role in repression of DNA damage-inducible genes. Taken together, our findings reveal a distinct involvement of gene and chromatin regulatory factors in response to DNA damage versus heat shock and suggest different implementations of the SAGA and TFIID assembly pathways that may depend upon whether a sustained or transient change in gene expression ensues.

WD40 domain divergence is important for functional differences between the fission yeast Tup11 and Tup12 co-repressor proteins

We have previously demonstrated that subsets of Ssn6/Tup target genes have distinct requirements for the Schizosaccharomyces pombe homologs of the Tup1/Groucho/TLE co-repressor proteins, Tup11 and Tup12. The very high level of divergence in the histone interacting repression domains of the two proteins suggested that determinants distinguishing Tup11 and Tup12 might be located in this domain. Here we have combined phylogenetic and structural analysis as well as phenotypic characterization, under stress conditions that specifically require Tup12, to identify and characterize the domains involved in Tup12-specific action. The results indicate that divergence in the repression domain is not generally relevant for Tup12-specific function. Instead, we show that the more highly conserved C-terminal WD40 repeat domain of Tup12 is important for Tup12-specific function. Surface amino acid residues specific for the WD40 repeat domain of Tup12 proteins in different fission yeasts are clustered in blade 3 of the propeller-like structure that is characteristic of WD40 repeat domains. The Tup11 and Tup12 proteins in fission yeasts thus provide an excellent model system for studying the functional divergence of WD40 repeat domains.

Corepressor-directed preacetylation of histone H3 in promoter chromatin primes rapid transcriptional switching of cell-type-specific genes in yeast

Switching between alternate states of gene transcription is fundamental to a multitude of cellular regulatory pathways, including those that govern differentiation. In spite of the progress in our understanding of such transitions in gene activity, a major unanswered question is how cells regulate the timing of these switches. Here, we have examined the kinetics of a transcriptional switch that accompanies the differentiation of yeast cells of one mating type into a distinct new cell type. We found that cell-type-specific genes silenced by the alpha2 repressor in the starting state are derepressed to establish the new mating-type-specific gene expression program coincident with the loss of alpha2 from promoters. This rapid derepression does not require the preloading of RNA polymerase II or a preinitiation complex but instead depends upon the Gcn5 histone acetyltransferase. Surprisingly, Gcn5-dependent acetylation of nucleosomes in the promoters of mating-type-specific genes requires the corepressor Ssn6-Tup1 even in the repressed state. Gcn5 partially acetylates the amino-terminal tails of histone H3 in repressed promoters, thereby priming them for rapid derepression upon loss of alpha2. Thus, Ssn6-Tup1 not only efficiently represses these target promoters but also functions to initiate derepression by creating a chromatin state poised for rapid activation.

A novel mechanism of antagonism between ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes regulates RNR3 expression

Gene expression depends upon the antagonistic actions of chromatin remodeling complexes. While this has been studied extensively for the enzymes that covalently modify the tails of histones, the mechanism of how ATP-dependent remodeling complexes antagonize each other to maintain the proper level of gene activity is not known. The gene encoding a large subunit of ribonucleotide reductase, RNR3, is regulated by ISW2 and SWI/SNF, complexes that repress and activate transcription, respectively. Here, we studied the functional interactions of these two complexes at RNR3. Deletion of ISW2 causes constitutive recruitment of SWI/SNF, and conditional reexpression of ISW2 causes the repositioning of nucleosomes and reduced SWI/SNF occupancy at RNR3. Thus, ISW2 is required for restriction of access of SWI/SNF to the RNR3 promoter under the uninduced condition. Interestingly, the binding of sequence-specific DNA binding factors and the general transcription machinery are unaffected by the status of ISW2, suggesting that disruption of nucleosome positioning does not cause a nonspecific increase in cross-linking of all factors to RNR3. We provide evidence that ISW2 does not act on SWI/SNF directly but excludes its occupancy by positioning nucleosomes over the promoter. Genetic disruption of nucleosome positioning by other means led to a similar phenotype, linking repressed chromatin structure to SWI/SNF exclusion. Thus, incorporation of promoters into a repressive chromatin structure is essential for prevention of the opportunistic actions of nucleosome-disrupting activities in vivo, providing a novel mechanism for maintaining tight control of gene expression.

Candida albicans RFX2 encodes a DNA binding protein involved in DNA damage responses, morphogenesis, and virulence

We previously showed that Candida albicans orf19.4590, which we have renamed RFX2, expresses a protein that is reactive with antibodies in persons with candidiasis. In this study, we demonstrate that C. albicans RFX2 shares some functional redundancy with Saccharomyces cerevisiae RFX1. Complementation of an S. cerevisiae rfx1 mutant with C. albicans RFX2 partially restored UV susceptibility and the repression of DNA damage response genes. DNA damage- and UV-induced genes RAD6 and DDR48 were derepressed in a C. albicans rfx2 null mutant strain under basal conditions, and the mutant was significantly more resistant to UV irradiation, heat shock, and ethanol than wild-type strain SC5314. The rfx2 mutant was hyperfilamentous on solid media and constitutively expressed hypha-specific genes HWP1, ALS3, HYR1, ECE1, and CEK1. The mutant also demonstrated increased invasion of solid agar and significantly increased adherence to human buccal epithelial cells. During hematogenously disseminated candidiasis, mice infected with the mutant had a significantly delayed time to death compared to the wild type. During oropharyngeal candidiasis, mice infected with the mutant had significantly lower tissue burdens in the oral cavity and esophagus at 7 days and they were less likely to develop disseminated infections because of mucosal translocation. The data demonstrate that C. albicans Rfx2p regulates DNA damage responses, morphogenesis, and virulence.

Dissection of coactivator requirement at RNR3 reveals unexpected contributions from TFIID and SAGA

The gene encoding ribonucleotide reductase 3 (RNR3) is strongly induced in response to DNA damage. Its expression is strictly dependent upon the TAF(II) subunits of TFIID, which are required for the recruitment of SWI/SNF and nucleosome remodeling. However, full activation of RNR3 also requires GCN5, the catalytic subunit of the SAGA histone acetyltransferase complex. Thus, RNR3 is dependent upon both TFIID and SAGA, two complexes that deliver TATA-binding protein (TBP) to promoters. Furthermore, unlike the majority of TFIID-dominated genes, RNR3 contains a consensus TATA-box, a feature of SAGA-regulated core promoters. Although a large fraction of the genome can be characterized as either TFIID- or SAGA-dominant, it is expected that many genes utilize both. The mechanism of activation and the relative contributions of SAGA and TFIID at genes regulated by both complexes have not been examined. Here we delineated the role of SAGA in the regulation of RNR3 and contrast it to that of TFIID. We find that SAGA components fulfill distinct functions in the regulation of RNR3. The core promoter of RNR3 is SAGA-dependent, and we provide evidence that SAGA, not TAF(II)s within TFIID, are largely responsible for TBP recruitment. This taken together with our previous work provides evidence that SAGA recruits TBP, whereas TFIID mediates chromatin remodeling. Thus, we described an unexpected shift in the division of labor between these two complexes and provide the first characterization of a gene that requires both SAGA and TFIID.

Yeast Rap1 contributes to genomic integrity by activating DNA damage repair genes

Rap1 (repressor-activator protein 1) is a multifunctional protein that controls telomere function, silencing and the activation of glycolytic and ribosomal protein genes. We have identified a novel function for Rap1, regulating the ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) genes that are required for DNA repair and telomere expansion. Both the C terminus and DNA-binding domain of Rap1 are required for the activation of the RNR genes, and the phenotypes of different Rap1 mutants suggest that it utilizes both regions to carry out distinct steps in the activation process. Recruitment of Rap1 to the RNR3 gene is dependent on activation of the DNA damage checkpoint and chromatin remodelling by SWI/SNF. The dependence on SWI/SNF for binding suggests that Rap1 acts after remodelling to prevent the repositioning of nucleosomes back to the repressed state. Furthermore, the recruitment of Rap1 requires TAF(II)s, suggesting a role for TFIID in stabilizing activator binding in vivo. We propose that Rap1 acts as a rheostat controlling nucleotide pools in response to shortened telomeres and DNA damage, providing a mechanism for fine-tuning the RNR genes during checkpoint activation.

Exposing the core promoter is sufficient to activate transcription and alter coactivator requirement at RNR3

Chromatin is a formidable barrier to transcription. Nucleosome density is lowest over the regulatory regions of active genes, and many repressed genes have a tightly positioned nucleosome over their core promoter. However, it has not been shown that nucleosome positioning is sufficient for repression or whether disrupting a core promoter nucleosome specifically can activate gene expression in the absence of activating signals. Here we show that disrupting the nucleosome over the core promoter of RNR3 is sufficient to drive preinitiation complex assembly and activate transcription in the absence of activating signals. Remodeling of chromatin over the RNR3 promoter requires the recruitment of the SWI/SNF complex by the general transcription factor TFIID. We found that disrupting the nucleosome over the RNR3 core promoter relieves its dependence on TFIID and SWI/SNF, indicating a functional link between these two complexes. These results suggest that the specific function of TAF(II)s is to direct the chromatin remodeling step through SWI/SNF recruitment, and not core promoter selectivity. Our results indicate that nucleosome placement plays a dominant role in repression and that the ability of the core promoter to position a nucleosome is a major determinant in TAF(II) dependency of genes in vivo.

Ccr4 contributes to tolerance of replication stress through control of CRT1 mRNA poly(A) tail length

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, DNA replication stress activates the replication checkpoint, which slows S-phase progression, stabilizes slowed or stalled replication forks, and relieves inhibition of the ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) complex. To identify novel genes that promote cellular viability after replication stress, the S. cerevisiae non-essential haploid gene deletion set (4812 strains) was screened for sensitivity to the RNR inhibitor hydroxyurea (HU). Strains bearing deletions in either CCR4 or CAF1/POP2, which encode components of the cytoplasmic mRNA deadenylase complex, were particularly sensitive to HU. We found that Ccr4 cooperated with the Dun1 branch of the replication checkpoint, such that ccr4Delta dun1Delta strains exhibited irreversible hypersensitivity to HU and persistent activation of Rad53. Moreover, because ccr4Delta and chk1Delta exhibited epistasis in several genetic contexts, we infer that Ccr4 and Chk1 act in the same pathway to overcome replication stress. A counterscreen for suppressors of ccr4Delta HU sensitivity uncovered mutations in CRT1, which encodes the transcriptional repressor of the DNA-damage-induced gene regulon. Whereas Dun1 is known to inhibit Crt1 repressor activity, we found that Ccr4 regulates CRT1 mRNA poly(A) tail length and may subtly influence Crt1 protein abundance. Simultaneous overexpression of RNR2, RNR3 and RNR4 partially rescued the HU hypersensitivity of a ccr4Delta dun1Delta strain, consistent with the notion that the RNR genes are key targets of Crt1. These results implicate the coordinated regulation of Crt1 via Ccr4 and Dun1 as a crucial nodal point in the response to DNA replication stress.

Histone deacetylases RPD3 and HOS2 regulate the transcriptional activation of DNA damage-inducible genes

DNA microarray and genetic studies of Saccharomyces cerevisiae have demonstrated that histone deacetylases (HDACs) are required for transcriptional activation and repression, but the mechanism by which they activate transcription remains poorly understood. We show that two HDACs, RPD3 and HOS2, are required for the activation of DNA damage-inducible genes RNR3 and HUG1. Using mutants specific for the Rpd3L complex, we show that the complex is responsible for regulating RNR3. Furthermore, unlike what was described for the GAL genes, Rpd3L regulates the activation of RNR3 by deacetylating nucleosomes at the promoter, not at the open reading frame. Rpd3 is recruited to the upstream repression sequence of RNR3, which surprisingly does not require Tup1 or Crt1. Chromatin remodeling and TFIID recruitment are largely unaffected in the Deltarpd3/Deltahos2 mutant, but the recruitment of RNA polymerase II is strongly reduced, arguing that Rpd3 and Hos2 regulate later stages in the assembly of the preinitiation complex or facilitate multiple rounds of polymerase recruitment. Furthermore, the histone H4 acetyltransferase Esa1 is required for the activation of RNR3 and HUG1. Thus, reduced or unregulated constitutive histone H4 acetylation is detrimental to promoter activity, suggesting that HDAC-dependent mechanisms are in place to reset promoters to allow high levels of transcription.