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

New Drosophila promoter-associated architectural protein Mzfp1 interacts with CP190 and is required for housekeeping gene expression and insulator activity

In Drosophila, a group of zinc finger architectural proteins recruits the CP190 protein to the chromatin, an interaction that is essential for the functional activity of promoters and insulators. In this study, we describe a new architectural C2H2 protein called Madf and Zinc-Finger Protein 1 (Mzfp1) that interacts with CP190. Mzfp1 has an unusual structure that includes six C2H2 domains organized in a C-terminal cluster and two tandem MADF domains. Mzfp1 predominantly binds to housekeeping gene promoters located in both euchromatin and heterochromatin genome regions. In vivo mutagenesis studies showed that Mzfp1 is an essential protein, and both MADF domains and the CP190 interaction region are required for its functional activity. The C2H2 cluster is sufficient for the specific binding of Mzfp1 to regulatory elements, while the second MADF domain is required for Mzfp1 recruitment to heterochromatin. Mzfp1 binds to the proximal part of the Fub boundary that separates regulatory domains of the Ubx and abd-A genes in the Bithorax complex. Mzfp1 participates in Fub functions in cooperation with the architectural proteins Pita and Su(Hw). Thus, Mzfp1 is a new architectural C2H2 protein involved in the organization of active promoters and insulators in Drosophila.

lncRNA read-through regulates the BX-C insulator Fub-1

Though long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) represent a substantial fraction of the Pol II transcripts in multicellular animals, only a few have known functions. Here we report that the blocking activity of the Bithorax complex (BX-C) Fub-1 boundary is segmentally regulated by its own lncRNA. The Fub-1 boundary is located between the Ultrabithorax (Ubx) gene and the bxd/pbx regulatory domain, which is responsible for regulating Ubx expression in parasegment PS6/segment A1. Fub-1 consists of two hypersensitive sites, HS1 and HS2. HS1 is an insulator while HS2 functions primarily as an lncRNA promoter. To activate Ubx expression in PS6/A1, enhancers in the bxd/pbx domain must be able to bypass Fub-1 blocking activity. We show that the expression of the Fub-1 lncRNAs in PS6/A1 from the HS2 promoter inactivates Fub-1 insulating activity. Inactivation is due to read-through as the HS2 promoter must be directed toward HS1 to disrupt blocking.

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

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

Transcriptional Readthrough Interrupts Boundary Function in Drosophila

In higher eukaryotes, distance enhancer-promoter interactions are organized by topologically associated domains, tethering elements, and chromatin insulators/boundaries. While insulators/boundaries play a central role in chromosome organization, the mechanisms regulating their functions are largely unknown. In the studies reported here, we have taken advantage of the well-characterized Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) to study one potential mechanism for controlling boundary function. The regulatory domains of BX-C are flanked by boundaries, which block crosstalk with their neighboring domains and also support long-distance interactions between the regulatory domains and their target gene. As many lncRNAs have been found in BX-C, we asked whether readthrough transcription (RT) can impact boundary function. For this purpose, we took advantage of two BX-C boundary replacement platforms, Fab-7^attP50 and F2^attP, in which the Fab-7 and Fub boundaries, respectively, are deleted and replaced with an attP site. We introduced boundary elements, promoters, and polyadenylation signals arranged in different combinations and then assayed for boundary function. Our results show that RT can interfere with boundary activity. Since lncRNAs represent a significant fraction of Pol II transcripts in multicellular eukaryotes, it is therefore possible that RT may be a widely used mechanism to alter boundary function and regulation of gene expression.

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

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

Summary Statement

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

Transcriptional read through interrupts boundary function in Drosophila

In higher eukaryotes enhancer-promoter interactions are known to be restricted by the chromatin insulators/boundaries that delimit topologically associated domains (TADs); however, there are instances in which enhancer-promoter interactions span one or more boundary elements/TADs. At present, the mechanisms that enable cross-TAD regulatory interaction are not known. In the studies reported here we have taken advantage of the well characterized Drosophila Bithorax complex (BX-C) to study one potential mechanism for controlling boundary function and TAD organization. The regulatory domains of BX-C are flanked by boundaries which function to block crosstalk with their neighboring domains and also to support long distance interactions between the regulatory domains and their target gene. As many lncRNAs have been found in BX-C, we asked whether transcriptional readthrough can impact boundary function. For this purpose, we took advantage of two BX-C boundary replacement platforms, Fab-7 ^attP50 and F2 ^attP , in which the Fab-7 and Fub boundaries, respectively, are deleted and replaced with an attP site. We introduced boundary elements, promoters and polyadenylation signals arranged in different combinations and then assayed for boundary function. Our results show that transcriptional readthrough can interfere with boundary activity. Since lncRNAs represent a significant fraction of Pol II transcripts in multicellular eukaryotes, it is possible that many of them may function in the regulation of TAD organization.

Author Summary

Recent studies have shown that much genome in higher eukaryotes is transcribed into non-protein coding lncRNAs. It is though that lncRNAs may preform important regulatory functions, including the formation of protein complexes, organization of functional interactions between enhancers and promoters and the maintenance of open chromatin. Here we examined how transcription from promoters inserted into the Drosophila Bithorax complex can impact the boundaries that are responsible for establishing independent regulatory domains. Surprisingly, we found that even a relatively low level of transcriptional readthrough can impair boundary function. Transcription also affects the activity of enhancers located in BX-C regulatory domains. Taken together, our results raise the possibility that transcriptional readthrough may be a widely used mechanism to alter chromosome structure and regulate gene expression.

Topological screen identifies hundreds of Cp190- and CTCF-dependent Drosophila chromatin insulator elements

Drosophila insulators were the first DNA elements found to regulate gene expression by delimiting chromatin contacts. We still do not know how many of them exist and what impact they have on the Drosophila genome folding. Contrary to vertebrates, there is no evidence that fly insulators block cohesin-mediated chromatin loop extrusion. Therefore, their mechanism of action remains uncertain. To bridge these gaps, we mapped chromatin contacts in Drosophila cells lacking the key insulator proteins CTCF and Cp190. With this approach, we found hundreds of insulator elements. Their study indicates that Drosophila insulators play a minor role in the overall genome folding but affect chromatin contacts locally at many loci. Our observations argue that Cp190 promotes cobinding of other insulator proteins and that the model, where Drosophila insulators block chromatin contacts by forming loops, needs revision. Our insulator catalog provides an important resource to study mechanisms of genome folding.

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

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

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

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

The Drosophila Fab-7 boundary modulates Abd-B gene activity by guiding an inversion of collinear chromatin organization and alternate promoter use

Hox genes encode transcription factors that specify segmental identities along the anteroposterior body axis. These genes are organized in clusters, where their order corresponds to their activity along the body axis, a feature known as collinearity. In Drosophila, the BX-C cluster contains the three most posterior Hox genes, where their collinear activation incorporates progressive changes in histone modifications, chromatin architecture, and use of boundary elements and cis-regulatory regions. To dissect functional hierarchies, we compare chromatin organization in cell lines and larvae, with a focus on the Abd-B gene. Our work establishes the importance of the Fab-7 boundary for insulation between 3D domains carrying different histone modifications. Interestingly, we detect a non-canonical inversion of collinear chromatin dynamics at Abd-B, with the domain of active histone modifications progressively decreasing in size. This dynamic chromatin organization differentially activates the alternative promoters of the Abd-B gene, thereby expanding the possibilities for fine-tuning of transcriptional output.

Repression of the Hox gene abd-A by ELAV-mediated Transcriptional Interference

Intergenic transcription is a common feature of eukaryotic genomes and performs important and diverse cellular functions. Here, we investigate the iab-8 ncRNA from the Drosophila Bithorax Complex and show that this RNA is able to repress the transcription of genes located at its 3’ end by a sequence-independent, transcriptional interference mechanism. Although this RNA is expressed in the early epidermis and CNS, we find that its repressive activity is limited to the CNS, where, in wild-type embryos, it acts on the Hox gene, abd-A, located immediately downstream of it. The CNS specificity is achieved through a 3’ extension of the transcript, mediated by the neuronal-specific, RNA-binding protein, ELAV. Loss of ELAV activity eliminates the 3’ extension and results in the ectopic activation of abd-A. Thus, a tissue-specific change in the length of a ncRNA is used to generate a precise pattern of gene expression in a higher eukaryote.

Although all of the cells making up complex organisms contain the same genetic material, they are nevertheless able to create the diverse tissues of the body. They do this by changing the genes they express. Thus, understanding how genes are controlled in a tissue-specific fashion is one of the primary interests of molecular genetics. Within the bithorax homeotic complex of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, we, and others, previously showed that a >92 kb-long non-coding RNA, called the iab-8 ncRNA, downregulates many important developmental genes, including its genomic downstream neighbor, the homeotic gene abd-A. This downregulation is important as its loss is linked to female sterility. Interestingly, we find that the iab-8 ncRNA regulates abd-A through a mechanism called transcriptional interference, where one gene downregulates a target gene by transcribing over it. In the case of iab-8, this process is limited to the posterior central nervous system, where the iab-8 ncRNA is specifically extended into the abd-A gene by the action of the neuronal-specific RNA binding protein, ELAV. Overall, our work highlights a largely unexplored mechanism by which tissue-specific gene regulation is achieved.

Redundant enhancers in the iab-5 domain cooperatively activate Abd-B in the A5 and A6 abdominal segments of Drosophila

The Abdominal-B (Abd-B) gene belongs to the bithorax complex and its expression is controlled by four regulatory domains, iab-5, iab-6, iab-7 and iab-8, each of which is thought to be responsible for directing the expression of Abd-B in one of the abdominal segments from A5 to A8. A variety of experiments have supported the idea that BX-C regulatory domains are functionally autonomous and that each domain is both necessary and sufficient to orchestrate the development of the segment they specify. Unexpectedly, we discovered that this model does not always hold. Instead, we find that tissue-specific enhancers located in the iab-5 domain are required for the proper activation of Abd-B not only in A5 but also in A6. Our findings indicate that the functioning of the iab-5 and iab-6 domains in development of the adult cuticle A5 and A6 in males fit better with an additive model, much like that first envisioned by Ed Lewis.

Repression of the Hox gene abd-A by ELAV-mediated Transcriptional Interference.. [DOI: 10.1101/2021.09.29.462302]

Intergenic transcription is a common feature of eukaryotic genomes and performs important and diverse cellular functions. Here, we investigate the iab-8 ncRNA from the Drosophila Bithorax Complex and show that this RNA is able to repress the transcription of genes located at its 3’ end by a sequence-independent, transcriptional interference mechanism. Although this RNA is expressed in the early epidermis and CNS, we find that its repressive activity is limited to the CNS, where in wild-type embryos, it acts on the Hox gene, abd-A located immediately downstream of it. The CNS specificity is achieved through a 3’ extension of the transcript, mediated by the neuronal-specific, RNA-binding protein, ELAV. Loss of ELAV activity eliminates the 3’ extension and results in the ectopic activation of abd-A. Thus, a tissue-specific change in the length of a ncRNA is used to generate a precise pattern of gene expression in a higher eukaryote.

Homeotic Genes: Clustering, Modularity, and Diversity

Hox genes code for transcription factors and are evolutionarily conserved. They regulate a plethora of downstream targets to define the anterior-posterior (AP) body axis of a developing bilaterian embryo. Early work suggested a possible role of clustering and ordering of Hox to regulate their expression in a spatially restricted manner along the AP axis. However, the recent availability of many genome assemblies for different organisms uncovered several examples that defy this constraint. With recent advancements in genomics, the current review discusses the arrangement of Hox in various organisms. Further, we revisit their discovery and regulation in Drosophila melanogaster. We also review their regulation in different arthropods and vertebrates, with a significant focus on Hox expression in the crustacean Parahyale hawaiensis. It is noteworthy that subtle changes in the levels of Hox gene expression can contribute to the development of novel features in an organism. We, therefore, delve into the distinct regulation of these genes during primary axis formation, segment identity, and extra-embryonic roles such as in the formation of hair follicles or misregulation leading to cancer. Toward the end of each section, we emphasize the possibilities of several experiments involving various organisms, owing to the advancements in the field of genomics and CRISPR-based genome engineering. Overall, we present a holistic view of the functioning of Hox in the animal world.

Redundant enhancers in the iab-5 domain cooperatively activate Abd-B in the A5 and A6 abdominal segments of Drosophila.. [DOI: 10.1101/2021.05.22.445252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

The homeotic Abdominal-B (Abd-B) gene belongs to Bithorax complex and is regulated by four regulatory domains named iab-5, iab-6, iab-7 and iab-8, each of which is thought to be responsible for directing the expression of Abd-B in one of the abdominal segments from A5 to A8. It is assumed that male specific features of the adult cuticle in A5 is solely dependent on regulatory elements located in iab-5, while the regulatory elements in the iab-6 are both necessary and sufficient for the proper differentiation of the A6 cuticle. Unexpectedly, we found that this long held assumption is not correct. Instead, redundant tissue-specific enhancers located in the iab-5 domain are required for the proper activation of Abd-B not only in A5 but also in A6. Our study of deletions shows that the iab-5 initiator is essential for the functioning of the iab-5 enhancers in A5, as well as for the correct differentiation of A6. This requirement is circumvented by deletions that remove the initiator and most of the iab-5 regulatory domain sequences. While the remaining iab-5 enhancers are inactive in A5, they are activated in A6 and contribute to the differentiation of this segment. In this case, Abd-B stimulation by the iab-5 enhancers in A6 depends on the initiators in the iab-4 and iab-6 domains.

Summary Statement

In Drosophila, the segmental-specific expression of the homeotic gene Abdominal-B in the abdominal segments is regulated by autonomous regulatory domains. We demonstrated cooperation between these domains in activation of Abdominal-B.

Role of vertebrate GAGA associated factor (vGAF) in early development of zebrafish

Homeotic genes and their genomic organization show remarkable conservation across bilaterians. Consequently, the regulatory mechanisms, which control hox gene expression, are also highly conserved. The crucial presence of conserved GA rich motifs between Hox genes has been previously observed but what factor binds to these is still unknown. Previously we have reported that the vertebrate homologue of Drosophila Trl-GAF preferentially binds to GA rich regions in Evx2-hoxd13 intergenic region of vertebrate HoxD cluster. In this study, we show that the vertebrate-GAF (v-GAF) binds at known cis-regulatory elements in the HoxD complex of zebrafish and mouse. We further used morpholino based knockdown and CRISPR-cas9 knockout technique to deplete the v-GAF in zebrafish. We checked expression of the HoxD genes and found gain of the HoxD4 gene in GAF knockout embryos. Further, we partially rescued the morphological phenotypes in GAF depleted embryos by providing GAF mRNA. Our results show that GAF binds at intergenic regions of the HoxD complex and is important for maintaining the spatial domains of HoxD4 expression during embryonic development.

Mechanism and functional role of the interaction between CP190 and the architectural protein Pita in Drosophila melanogaster

Background

Pita is required for Drosophila development and binds specifically to a long motif in active promoters and insulators. Pita belongs to the Drosophila family of zinc-finger architectural proteins, which also includes Su(Hw) and the conserved among higher eukaryotes CTCF. The architectural proteins maintain the active state of regulatory elements and the long-distance interactions between them. In particular, Pita is involved in the formation of several boundaries between regulatory domains that controlled the expression of three hox genes in the Bithorax complex (BX-C). The CP190 protein is recruited to chromatin through interaction with the architectural proteins.

Results

Using in vitro pull-down analysis, we precisely mapped two unstructured regions of Pita that interact with the BTB domain of CP190. Then we constructed transgenic lines expressing the Pita protein of the wild-type and mutant variants lacking CP190-interacting regions. We have demonstrated that CP190-interacting region of the Pita can maintain nucleosome-free open chromatin and is critical for Pita-mediated enhancer blocking activity in BX-C. At the same time, interaction with CP190 is not required for the in vivo function of the mutant Pita protein, which binds to the same regions of the genome as the wild-type protein. Unexpectedly, we found that CP190 was still associated with the most of genome regions bound by the mutant Pita protein, which suggested that other architectural proteins were continuing to recruit CP190 to these regions.

Conclusions

The results directly demonstrate role of CP190 in insulation and support a model in which the regulatory elements are composed of combinations of binding sites that interact with several architectural proteins with similar functions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13072-021-00391-x.

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

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

CTCF As an Example of DNA-Binding Transcription Factors Containing Clusters of C2H2-Type Zinc Fingers

In mammals, most of the boundaries of topologically associating domains and all well-studied insulators are rich in binding sites for the CTCF protein. According to existing experimental data, CTCF is a key factor in the organization of the architecture of mammalian chromosomes. A characteristic feature of the CTCF is that the central part of the protein contains a cluster consisting of eleven domains of C2H2-type zinc fingers, five of which specifically bind to a long DNA sequence conserved in most animals. The class of transcription factors that carry a cluster of C2H2-type zinc fingers consisting of five or more domains (C2H2 proteins) is widely represented in all groups of animals. The functions of most C2H2 proteins still remain unknown. This review presents data on the structure and possible functions of these proteins, using the example of the vertebrate CTCF protein and several well- characterized C2H2 proteins in Drosophila and mammals.

Molecular Lessons from the Drosophila Bithorax Complex

The Genetics Society of America's (GSA's) Edward Novitski Prize recognizes a single experimental accomplishment or a body of work in which an exceptional level of creativity, and intellectual ingenuity, has been used to design and execute scientific experiments to solve a difficult problem in genetics. The 2020 recipient is Welcome W. Bender of Harvard Medical School, recognizing his creativity and ingenuity in revealing the molecular nature and regulation of the bithorax gene complex.

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

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

The insulator functions of the Drosophila polydactyl C2H2 zinc finger protein CTCF: Necessity versus sufficiency

In mammals, a C2H2 zinc finger (C2H2) protein, CTCF, acts as the master regulator of chromosomal architecture and of the expression of Hox gene clusters. Like mammalian CTCF, the Drosophila homolog, dCTCF, localizes to boundaries in the bithorax complex (BX-C). Here, we have determined the minimal requirements for the assembly of a functional boundary by dCTCF and two other C2H2 zinc finger proteins, Pita and Su(Hw). Although binding sites for these proteins are essential for the insulator activity of BX-C boundaries, these binding sites alone are insufficient to create a functional boundary. dCTCF cannot effectively bind to a single recognition sequence in chromatin or generate a functional insulator without the help of additional proteins. In addition, for boundary elements in BX-C at least four binding sites for dCTCF or the presence of additional DNA binding factors is required to generate a functional insulator.

Distinct Elements Confer the Blocking and Bypass Functions of the Bithorax Fab-8 Boundary

Boundaries in the Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) enable the regulatory domains that drive parasegment-specific expression of the three Hox genes to function autonomously. The four regulatory domains (iab-5, iab-6, iab-7, and iab-8) that control the expression of the Abdominal-B (Abd-B) gene are located downstream of the transcription unit, and are delimited by the Mcp, Fab-6, Fab-7, and Fab-8 boundaries. These boundaries function to block cross talk between neighboring regulatory domains. In addition, three of the boundaries (Fab-6, Fab-7, and Fab-8) must also have bypass activity so that regulatory domains distal to the boundaries can contact the Abd-B promoter. In the studies reported here, we have undertaken a functional dissection of the Fab-8 boundary using a boundary-replacement strategy. Our studies indicate that the Fab-8 boundary has two separable subelements. The distal subelement blocks cross talk, but cannot support bypass. The proximal subelement has only minimal blocking activity but is able to mediate bypass. A large multiprotein complex, the LBC (large boundary complex), binds to sequences in the proximal subelement and contributes to its bypass activity. The same LBC complex has been implicated in the bypass activity of the Fab-7 boundary.

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

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

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

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

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

The Insulator Protein CTCF Is Required for Correct Hox Gene Expression, but Not for Embryonic Development in Drosophila

Insulator binding proteins (IBPs) play an important role in regulating gene expression by binding to specific DNA sites to facilitate appropriate gene regulation. There are several IBPs in Drosophila, each defined by their ability to insulate target gene promoters in transgenic assays from the activating or silencing effects of neighboring regulatory elements. Of these, only CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF) has an obvious ortholog in mammals. CTCF is essential for mammalian cell viability and is an important regulator of genome architecture. In flies, CTCF is both maternally deposited and zygotically expressed. Flies lacking zygotic CTCF die as young adults with homeotic defects, suggesting that specific Hox genes are misexpressed in inappropriate body segments. The lack of any major embryonic defects was assumed to be due to the maternal supply of CTCF protein, as maternally contributed factors are often sufficient to progress through much of embryogenesis. Here, we definitively determined the requirement of CTCF for developmental progression in Drosophila We generated animals that completely lack both maternal and zygotic CTCF and found that, contrary to expectation, these mutants progress through embryogenesis and larval life. They develop to pharate adults, which fail to eclose from their pupal case. These mutants show exacerbated homeotic defects compared to zygotic mutants, misexpressing the Hox gene Abdominal-B outside of its normal expression domain early in development. Our results indicate that loss of Drosophila CTCF is not accompanied by widespread effects on gene expression, which may be due to redundant functions with other IBPs. Rather, CTCF is required for correct Hox gene expression patterns and for the viability of adult Drosophila.

The bithorax complex iab-7 Polycomb response element has a novel role in the functioning of the Fab-7 chromatin boundary

Expression of the three bithorax complex homeotic genes is orchestrated by nine parasegment-specific regulatory domains. Autonomy of each domain is conferred by boundary elements (insulators). Here, we have used an in situ replacement strategy to reanalyze the sequences required for the functioning of one of the best-characterized fly boundaries, Fab-7. It was initially identified by a deletion, Fab-7¹, that transformed parasegment (PS) 11 into a duplicate copy of PS12. Fab-7¹ deleted four nuclease hypersensitive sites, HS*, HS1, HS2, and HS3, located between the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains. Transgenic and P-element excision experiments mapped the boundary to HS*+HS1+HS2, while HS3 was shown to be the iab-7 Polycomb response element (PRE). Recent replacement experiments showed that HS1 is both necessary and sufficient for boundary activity when HS3 is also present in the replacement construct. Surprisingly, while HS1+HS3 combination has full boundary activity, we discovered that HS1 alone has only minimal function. Moreover, when combined with HS3, only the distal half of HS1, dHS1, is needed. A ~1,000 kD multiprotein complex containing the GAF protein, called the LBC, binds to the dHS1 sequence and we show that mutations in dHS1, that disrupt LBC binding in nuclear extracts, eliminate boundary activity and GAF binding in vivo. HS3 has binding sites for GAF and Pho proteins that are required for PRE silencing. In contrast, HS3 boundary activity only requires the GAF binding sites. LBC binding with HS3 in nuclear extracts, and GAF association in vivo, depend upon the HS3 GAF sites, but not the Pho sites. Consistent with a role for the LBC in HS3 boundary activity, the boundary function of the dHS1+HS3^mPho combination is lost when the flies are heterozygous for a mutation in the GAF gene. Taken together, these results reveal a novel function for the iab-7 PREs in chromosome architecture.

Polycomb group proteins (PcG) are important epigenetic regulators of developmental genes in all higher eukaryotes. In Drosophila, these proteins are bound to specific regulatory DNA elements called Polycomb group Response Elements (PREs). Drosophila PREs are made up of binding sites for a complex array of DNA binding proteins, including GAF and Pho. In the regulatory region of the bithorax complex (BX-C), the boundary/insulator elements organize the autonomous regulatory domains, and their active or repressed states are regulated by PREs. Here, we studied functional properties of sequences that constitute the Fab-7 boundary and the adjacent iab-7 PRE. It was previously thought that the sole function of the iab-7 PRE is to recruit PcG proteins in parasegments anterior to PS12 and silence the iab-7 domain. However, we found that the iab-7 PRE also functions as a component of the Fab-7 boundary. The boundary activity of the iab-7 PRE sequence depends upon a large complex called the LBC. We show that it is possible to reconstitute a fully functional boundary by combining the LBC binding sequences in HS1 with the iab-7 PRE. Moreover, its boundary function is independent of its PcG silencing activity.

The lncRNA male-specific abdominal plays a critical role in Drosophila accessory gland development and male fertility

Although thousands of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNA) have been identified in the genomes of higher eukaryotes, the precise function of most of them is still unclear. Here, we show that a >65 kb, male-specific, lncRNA, called male-specific abdominal (msa) is required for the development of the secondary cells of the Drosophila male accessory gland (AG). msa is transcribed from within the Drosophila bithorax complex and shares much of its sequence with another lncRNA, the iab-8 lncRNA, which is involved in the development of the central nervous system (CNS). Both lncRNAs perform much of their functions via a shared miRNA embedded within their sequences. Loss of msa, or of the miRNA it contains, causes defects in secondary cell morphology and reduces male fertility. Although both lncRNAs express the same miRNA, the phenotype in the secondary cells and the CNS seem to reflect misregulation of different targets in the two tissues.

In many animals, the male seminal fluid induces physiology changes in the mated female that increase a male’s reproductive success. These changes are often referred to as the post-mating response (PMR). In Drosophila, the seminal fluid proteins responsible for generating the PMR are made in a specialized gland, analogous to the mammalian seminal vesicle and prostate, called the accessory gland (AG). In this work, we show that a male-specific, long, non-coding RNA (lncRNA), called msa, plays a critical role in the development and function of this gland, primarily through a microRNA (miRNA) encoded within its sequence. This same miRNA had previously been shown to be expressed in the central nervous system (CNS) via an alternative promoter, where its ability to repress homeotic genes is required for both male and female fertility. Here, we present evidence that the targets of this miRNA in the AG are likely different from those found in the CNS. Thus, the same miRNA seems to have been selected to affect Drosophila fertility through two different mechanisms. Although many non-coding RNAs have now been identified, very few can be shown to have function. Our work highlights a lncRNA that has multiple biological functions, affecting cellular morphology and fertility.

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

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

Different Evolutionary Strategies To Conserve Chromatin Boundary Function in the Bithorax Complex

Chromatin boundary elements subdivide chromosomes in multicellular organisms into physically independent domains. In addition to this architectural function, these elements also play a critical role in gene regulation. Here we investigated the evolution of a Drosophila Bithorax complex boundary element called Fab-7, which is required for the proper parasegment specific expression of the homeotic Abd-B gene. Using a “gene” replacement strategy, we show that Fab-7 boundaries from two closely related species, D. erecta and D. yakuba, and a more distant species, D. pseudoobscura, are able to substitute for the melanogaster boundary. Consistent with this functional conservation, the two known Fab-7 boundary factors, Elba and LBC, have recognition sequences in the boundaries from all species. However, the strategies used for maintaining binding and function in the face of sequence divergence is different. The first is conventional, and depends upon conservation of the 8 bp Elba recognition sequence. The second is unconventional, and takes advantage of the unusually large and flexible sequence recognition properties of the LBC boundary factor, and the deployment of multiple LBC recognition elements in each boundary. In the former case, binding is lost when the recognition sequence is altered. In the latter case, sequence divergence is accompanied by changes in the number, relative affinity, and location of the LBC recognition elements.

Ever-Changing Landscapes: Transcriptional Enhancers in Development and Evolution

A class of cis-regulatory elements, called enhancers, play a central role in orchestrating spatiotemporally precise gene-expression programs during development. Consequently, divergence in enhancer sequence and activity is thought to be an important mediator of inter- and intra-species phenotypic variation. Here, we give an overview of emerging principles of enhancer function, current models of enhancer architecture, genomic substrates from which enhancers emerge during evolution, and the influence of three-dimensional genome organization on long-range gene regulation. We discuss intricate relationships between distinct elements within complex regulatory landscapes and consider their potential impact on specificity and robustness of transcriptional regulation.

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

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

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

Genome Editing: From Drosophila to Non-Model Insects and Beyond

Insect is the largest group of animals on land. Many insect species inflict economical and health losses to humans. Yet many more benefit us by helping to maintain balances in our ecosystem. The benefits that insects offer remain largely untapped, justifying our continuing efforts to develop tools to better understand their biology and to better manage their activities. Here we focus on reviewing the progresses made in the development of genome engineering tools for model insects. Instead of detailed descriptions of the molecular mechanisms underlying each technical advance, we focus our discussion on the logistics for implementing similar tools in non-model insects. Since none of the tools were developed specific for insects, similar approaches can be applied to other non-model organisms.

The boundary paradox in the Bithorax complex

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

Genome engineering: Drosophila melanogaster and beyond

A central challenge in investigating biological phenomena is the development of techniques to modify genomic DNA with nucleotide precision that can be transmitted through the germ line. Recent years have brought a boon in these technologies, now collectively known as genome engineering. Defined genomic manipulations at the nucleotide level enable a variety of reverse engineering paradigms, providing new opportunities to interrogate diverse biological functions. These genetic modifications include controlled removal, insertion, and substitution of genetic fragments, both small and large. Small fragments up to a few kilobases (e.g., single nucleotide mutations, small deletions, or gene tagging at single or multiple gene loci) to large fragments up to megabase resolution can be manipulated at single loci to create deletions, duplications, inversions, or translocations of substantial sections of whole chromosome arms. A specialized substitution of chromosomal portions that presumably are functionally orthologous between different organisms through syntenic replacement, can provide proof of evolutionary conservation between regulatory sequences. Large transgenes containing endogenous or synthetic DNA can be integrated at defined genomic locations, permitting an alternative proof of evolutionary conservation, and sophisticated transgenes can be used to interrogate biological phenomena. Precision engineering can additionally be used to manipulate the genomes of organelles (e.g., mitochondria). Novel genome engineering paradigms are often accelerated in existing, easily genetically tractable model organisms, primarily because these paradigms can be integrated in a rigorous, existing technology foundation. The Drosophila melanogaster fly model is ideal for these types of studies. Due to its small genome size, having just four chromosomes, the vast amount of cutting-edge genetic technologies, and its short life-cycle and inexpensive maintenance requirements, the fly is exceptionally amenable to complex genetic analysis using advanced genome engineering. Thus, highly sophisticated methods developed in the fly model can be used in nearly any sequenced organism. Here, we summarize different ways to perform precise inheritable genome engineering using integrases, recombinases, and DNA nucleases in the D. melanogaster. For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

The open for business model of the bithorax complex in Drosophila

After nearly 30 years of effort, Ed Lewis published his 1978 landmark paper in which he described the analysis of a series of mutations that affect the identity of the segments that form along the anterior-posterior (AP) axis of the fly (Lewis 1978). The mutations behaved in a non-canonical fashion in complementation tests, forming what Ed Lewis called a "pseudo-allelic" series. Because of this, he never thought that the mutations represented segment-specific genes. As all of these mutations were grouped to a particular area of the Drosophila third chromosome, the locus became known of as the bithorax complex (BX-C). One of the key findings of Lewis' article was that it revealed for the first time, to a wide scientific audience, that there was a remarkable correlation between the order of the segment-specific mutations along the chromosome and the order of the segments they affected along the AP axis. In Ed Lewis' eyes, the mutants he discovered affected "segment-specific functions" that were sequentially activated along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior along the body axis (the colinearity concept now cited in elementary biology textbooks). The nature of the "segment-specific functions" started to become clear when the BX-C was cloned through the pioneering chromosomal walk initiated in the mid 1980s by the Hogness and Bender laboratories (Bender et al. 1983a; Karch et al. 1985). Through this molecular biology effort, and along with genetic characterizations performed by Gines Morata's group in Madrid (Sanchez-Herrero et al. 1985) and Robert Whittle's in Sussex (Tiong et al. 1985), it soon became clear that the whole BX-C encoded only three protein-coding genes (Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B). Later, immunostaining against the Ubx protein hinted that the segment-specific functions could, in fact, be cis-regulatory elements regulating the expression of the three protein-coding genes. In 1987, Peifer, Karch, and Bender proposed a comprehensive model of the functioning of the BX-C, in which the "segment-specific functions" appear as segment-specific enhancers regulating, Ubx, abd-A, or Abd-B (Peifer et al. 1987). Key to their model was that the segmental address of these enhancers was not an inherent ability of the enhancers themselves, but was determined by the chromosomal location in which they lay. In their view, the sequential activation of the segment-specific functions resulted from the sequential opening of chromatin domains along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior. This model soon became known of as the open for business model. While the open for business model is quite easy to visualize at a conceptual level, molecular evidence to validate this model has been missing for almost 30 years. The recent publication describing the outstanding, joint effort from the Bender and Kingston laboratories now provides the missing proof to support this model (Bowman et al. 2014). The purpose of this article is to review the open for business model and take the reader through the genetic arguments that led to its elaboration.

Functional Requirements for Fab-7 Boundary Activity in the Bithorax Complex

Chromatin boundaries are architectural elements that determine the three-dimensional folding of the chromatin fiber and organize the chromosome into independent units of genetic activity. The Fab-7 boundary from the Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) is required for the parasegment-specific expression of the Abd-B gene. We have used a replacement strategy to identify sequences that are necessary and sufficient for Fab-7 boundary function in the BX-C. Fab-7 boundary activity is known to depend on factors that are stage specific, and we describe a novel ∼700-kDa complex, the late boundary complex (LBC), that binds to Fab-7 sequences that have insulator functions in late embryos and adults. We show that the LBC is enriched in nuclear extracts from late, but not early, embryos and that it contains three insulator proteins, GAF, Mod(mdg4), and E(y)2. Its DNA binding properties are unusual in that it requires a minimal sequence of >65 bp; however, other than a GAGA motif, the three Fab-7 LBC recognition elements display few sequence similarities. Finally, we show that mutations which abrogate LBC binding in vitro inactivate the Fab-7 boundary in the BX-C.

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

Background

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Electronic supplementary material

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

Highly conserved ENY2/Sus1 protein binds to Drosophila CTCF and is required for barrier activity

Chromatin insulators affect interactions between promoters and enhancers/silencers and function as barriers for the spreading of repressive chromatin. Drosophila insulator protein dCTCF marks active promoters and boundaries of many histone H3K27 trimethylation domains associated with repressed chromatin. In particular, dCTCF binds to such boundaries between the parasegment-specific regulatory domains of the Bithorax complex. Here we demonstrate that the evolutionarily conserved protein ENY2 is recruited to the zinc-finger domain of dCTCF and is required for the barrier activity of dCTCF-dependent insulators in transgenic lines. Inactivation of ENY2 by RNAi in BG3 cells leads to the spreading of H3K27 trimethylation and Pc protein at several dCTCF boundaries. The results suggest that evolutionarily conserved ENY2 is responsible for barrier activity mediated by the dCTCF protein.

Mechanisms and proteins involved in long-distance interactions

Due to advances in genome-wide technologies, consistent distant interactions within chromosomes of higher eukaryotes have been revealed. In particular, it has been shown that enhancers can specifically and directly interact with promoters by looping out intervening sequences, which can be up to several hundred kilobases long. This review is focused on transcription factors that are supposed to be involved in long-range interactions. Available data are in agreement with the model that several known transcription factors and insulator proteins belong to an abundant but poorly studied class of proteins that are responsible for chromosomal architecture.

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

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

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

Successive gain of insulator proteins in arthropod evolution

Alteration of regulatory DNA elements or their binding proteins may have drastic consequences for morphological evolution. Chromatin insulators are one example of such proteins and play a fundamental role in organizing gene expression. While a single insulator protein, CTCF (CCCTC-binding factor), is known in vertebrates, Drosophila melanogaster utilizes six additional factors. We studied the evolution of these proteins and show here that—in contrast to the bilaterian-wide distribution of CTCF—all other D. melanogaster insulators are restricted to arthropods. The full set is present exclusively in the genus Drosophila whereas only two insulators, Su(Hw) and CTCF, existed at the base of the arthropod clade and all additional factors have been acquired successively at later stages. Secondary loss of factors in some lineages further led to the presence of different insulator subsets in arthropods. Thus, the evolution of insulator proteins within arthropods is an ongoing and dynamic process that reshapes and supplements the ancient CTCF-based system common to bilaterians. Expansion of insulator systems may therefore be a general strategy to increase an organism’s gene regulatory repertoire and its potential for morphological plasticity.

A novel function for the Hox gene Abd-B in the male accessory gland regulates the long-term female post-mating response in Drosophila

In insects, products of the male reproductive tract are essential for initiating and maintaining the female post-mating response (PMR). The PMR includes changes in egg laying, receptivity to courting males, and sperm storage. In Drosophila, previous studies have determined that the main cells of the male accessory gland produce some of the products required for these processes. However, nothing was known about the contribution of the gland's other secretory cell type, the secondary cells. In the course of investigating the late functions of the homeotic gene, Abdominal-B (Abd-B), we discovered that Abd-B is specifically expressed in the secondary cells of the Drosophila male accessory gland. Using an Abd-B BAC reporter coupled with a collection of genetic deletions, we discovered an enhancer from the iab-6 regulatory domain that is responsible for Abd-B expression in these cells and that apparently works independently from the segmentally regulated chromatin domains of the bithorax complex. Removal of this enhancer results in visible morphological defects in the secondary cells. We determined that mates of iab-6 mutant males show defects in long-term egg laying and suppression of receptivity, and that products of the secondary cells are influential during sperm competition. Many of these phenotypes seem to be caused by a defect in the storage and gradual release of sex peptide in female mates of iab-6 mutant males. We also found that Abd-B expression in the secondary cells contributes to glycosylation of at least three accessory gland proteins: ovulin (Acp26Aa), CG1656, and CG1652. Our results demonstrate that long-term post-mating changes observed in mated females are not solely induced by main cell secretions, as previously believed, but that secondary cells also play an important role in male fertility by extending the female PMR. Overall, these discoveries provide new insights into how these two cell types cooperate to produce and maintain a robust female PMR.

The border between the ultrabithorax and abdominal-A regulatory domains in the Drosophila bithorax complex

The bithorax complex in Drosophila melanogaster includes three homeobox-containing genes--Ultrabithorax (Ubx), abdominal--A (abd-A), and Abdominal-B (Abd-B)-which are required for the proper differentiation of the posterior 10 segments of the body. Each of these genes has multiple distinct regulatory regions; there is one for each segmental unit of the body plan where the genes are expressed. One additional protein- coding gene in the bithorax complex, Glut3, a sugar-transporter homolog, can be deleted without phenotype. We focus here on the upstream regulatory region for Ubx, the bithoraxoid (bxd) domain, and its border with the adjacent infraabdominal-2 (iab-2) domain, which controls abdA. These two domains can be defined by the phenotypes of rearrangement breakpoints, and by the expression patterns of enhancer traps. In D. virilis, the homeotic cluster is split between Ubx and abd-A, and so the border can also be located by a sequence comparison between species. When the border region is deleted in melanogaster, the flies show a dominant phenotype called Front-ultraabdominal (Fub); the first abdominal segment is transformed into a copy of the second abdominal segment. Thus, the border blocks the spread of activation from the bxd domain into the iab-2 domain.

Long-range targeted manipulation of the Drosophila genome by site-specific integration and recombinational resolution

Significant advances in genomics underscore the importance of targeted mutagenesis for gene function analysis. Here we have developed a scheme for long-range targeted manipulation of genes in the Drosophila genome. Utilizing an attP attachment site for the phiC31 integrase previously targeted to the nbs gene, we integrated an 80-kb genomic fragment at its endogenous locus to generate a tandem duplication of the region. We achieved reduction to a single copy by inducing recombination via a site-specific DNA break. We report that, despite the large size of the DNA fragment, both plasmid integration and duplication reduction can be accomplished efficiently. Importantly, the integrating genomic fragment can serve as a venue for introducing targeted modifications to the entire region. We successfully introduced a new attachment site 70 kb from the existing attP using this two-step scheme, making a new region susceptible to targeted mutagenesis. By experimenting with different placements of the future DNA break site in the integrating vector, we established a vector configuration that facilitates the recovery of desired modifications. We also show that reduction events can occur efficiently through unequal meiotic crossing over between the large duplications. Based on our results, we suggest that a collection of 1200 lines with attachment sites inserted every 140 kb throughout the genome would render all Drosophila genes amenable to targeted mutagenesis. Excitingly, all of the components involved are likely functional in other eukaryotes, making our scheme for long-range targeted manipulation readily applicable to other systems.

The chromatin insulator CTCF and the emergence of metazoan diversity

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

Shadow enhancers: frequently asked questions about distributed cis-regulatory information and enhancer redundancy

This paper, in the form of a frequently asked questions page (FAQ), addresses outstanding questions about "shadow enhancers", quasi-redundant cis-regulatory elements, and their proposed roles in transcriptional control. Questions include: What exactly are shadow enhancers? How many genes have shadow/redundant/distributed enhancers? How redundant are these elements? What is the function of distributed enhancers? How modular are enhancers? Is it useful to study a single enhancer in isolation? In addition, a revised definition of "shadow enhancers" is proposed, and possible mechanisms of shadow enhancer function and evolution are discussed.

Genetic manipulation of genes and cells in the nervous system of the fruit fly

Research in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has led to insights in neural development, axon guidance, ion channel function, synaptic transmission, learning and memory, diurnal rhythmicity, and neural disease that have had broad implications for neuroscience. Drosophila is currently the eukaryotic model organism that permits the most sophisticated in vivo manipulations to address the function of neurons and neuronally expressed genes. Here, we summarize many of the techniques that help assess the role of specific neurons by labeling, removing, or altering their activity. We also survey genetic manipulations to identify and characterize neural genes by mutation, overexpression, and protein labeling. Here, we attempt to acquaint the reader with available options and contexts to apply these methods.

Gene expression in time and space: additive vs hierarchical organization of cis-regulatory regions

In higher eukaryotes, individual genes are often intermingled with other genes and spread out across tens to hundreds of kilobases, even though only small portions of their sequence are devoted to protein coding. Yet, in this seemingly extended and tangled mess, the cell is able to precisely regulate gene expression in both time and space. Over the past few decades, numerous elements, like enhancers, silencers and insulators have been found that shed some light on how the precise control of gene expression is achieved. Through these discoveries, an additive model of gene expression was envisioned, where the addition of the patterning details imparted by regulatory elements would create the final pattern of gene expression. Although many genes can be described using this model, recent work in the Drosophila bithorax complex suggests that this model may be somewhat simplistic and, in fact, regulatory elements sometimes seem to communicate with each other to form a functional hierarchy that is far from additive.