Nucleosomes are stably evicted from enhancers but not promoters upon induction of certain pro-inflammatory genes in mouse macrophages

Regulation of IFNβ expression: focusing on the role of its promoter and transcription regulators

IFNβ is a single-copy gene without an intron. Under normal circumstances, it shows low or no expression in cells. It is upregulated only when the body needs it or is stimulated. Stimuli bind to the pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) and pass via various signaling pathways to several basic transcriptional regulators, such as IRFs, NF-кB, and AP-1. Subsequently, the transcriptional regulators enter the nucleus and bind to regulatory elements of the IFNβ promoter. After various modifications, the position of the nucleosome is altered and the complex is assembled to activate the IFNβ expression. However, IFNβ regulation involves a complex network. For the study of immunity and diseases, it is important to understand how transcription factors bind to regulatory elements through specific forms, which elements in cells are involved in regulation, what regulation occurs during the assembly of enhancers and transcription complexes, and the possible regulatory mechanisms after transcription. Thus, this review focuses on the various regulatory mechanisms and elements involved in the activation of IFNβ expression. In addition, we discuss the impact of this regulation in biology.

HDAC1 and PRC2 mediate combinatorial control in SPI1/PU.1-dependent gene repression in murine erythroleukaemia

Although originally described as transcriptional activator, SPI1/PU.1, a major player in haematopoiesis whose alterations are associated with haematological malignancies, has the ability to repress transcription. Here, we investigated the mechanisms underlying gene repression in the erythroid lineage, in which SPI1 exerts an oncogenic function by blocking differentiation. We show that SPI1 represses genes by binding active enhancers that are located in intergenic or gene body regions. HDAC1 acts as a cooperative mediator of SPI1-induced transcriptional repression by deacetylating SPI1-bound enhancers in a subset of genes, including those involved in erythroid differentiation. Enhancer deacetylation impacts on promoter acetylation, chromatin accessibility and RNA pol II occupancy. In addition to the activities of HDAC1, polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) reinforces gene repression by depositing H3K27me3 at promoter sequences when SPI1 is located at enhancer sequences. Moreover, our study identified a synergistic relationship between PRC2 and HDAC1 complexes in mediating the transcriptional repression activity of SPI1, ultimately inducing synergistic adverse effects on leukaemic cell survival. Our results highlight the importance of the mechanism underlying transcriptional repression in leukemic cells, involving complex functional connections between SPI1 and the epigenetic regulators PRC2 and HDAC1.

Smad2/3 Activation Regulates Smad1/5/8 Signaling via a Negative Feedback Loop to Inhibit 3T3-L1 Adipogenesis

Adipose tissues (AT) expand in response to energy surplus through adipocyte hypertrophy and hyperplasia. The latter, also known as adipogenesis, is a process by which multipotent precursors differentiate to form mature adipocytes. This process is directed by developmental cues that include members of the TGF-β family. Our goal here was to elucidate, using the 3T3-L1 adipogenesis model, how TGF-β family growth factors and inhibitors regulate adipocyte development. We show that ligands of the Activin and TGF-β families, several ligand traps, and the SMAD1/5/8 signaling inhibitor LDN-193189 profoundly suppressed 3T3-L1 adipogenesis. Strikingly, anti-adipogenic traps and ligands engaged the same mechanism of action involving the simultaneous activation of SMAD2/3 and inhibition of SMAD1/5/8 signaling. This effect was rescued by the SMAD2/3 signaling inhibitor SB-431542. By contrast, although LDN-193189 also suppressed SMAD1/5/8 signaling and adipogenesis, its effect could not be rescued by SB-431542. Collectively, these findings reveal the fundamental role of SMAD1/5/8 for 3T3-L1 adipogenesis, and potentially identify a negative feedback loop that links SMAD2/3 activation with SMAD1/5/8 inhibition in adipogenic precursors.

Seven myths of how transcription factors read the cis-regulatory code

Genomics data are now being generated at large quantities, of exquisite high resolution and from single cells. They offer a unique opportunity to develop powerful machine learning algorithms, including neural networks, to uncover the rules of the cis-regulatory code. However, current modeling assumptions are often not based on state-of-the-art knowledge of the cis-regulatory code from transcription, developmental genetics, imaging and structural studies. Here I aim to fill this gap by giving a brief historical overview of the field, describing common misconceptions and providing knowledge that might help to guide computational approaches. I will describe the principles and mechanisms involved in the combinatorial requirement of transcription factor binding motifs for enhancer activity, including the role of chromatin accessibility, repressors and low-affinity motifs in the cis-regulatory code. Deciphering the cis-regulatory code would unlock an enormous amount of regulatory information in the genome and would allow us to locate cis-regulatory genetic variants involved in development and disease.

Biochemical and Cellular Analysis Reveals Ligand Binding Specificities, a Molecular Basis for Ligand Recognition, and Membrane Association-dependent Activities of Cripto-1 and Cryptic

Transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) pathways are key determinants of cell fate in animals. Their basic mechanism of action is simple. However, to produce cell-specific responses, TGF-β pathways are heavily regulated by secondary factors, such as membrane-associated EGF-CFC family proteins. Cellular activities of EGF-CFC proteins have been described, but their molecular functions, including how the mammalian homologs Cripto-1 and Cryptic recognize and regulate TGF-β family ligands, are less clear. Here we use purified human Cripto-1 and mouse Cryptic produced in mammalian cells to show that these two EGF-CFC homologs have distinct, highly specific ligand binding activities. Cripto-1 interacts with BMP-4 in addition to its known partner Nodal, whereas Cryptic interacts only with Activin B. These interactions depend on the integrity of the protein, as truncated or deglycosylated Cripto-1 lacked BMP-4 binding activity. Significantly, Cripto-1 and Cryptic blocked binding of their cognate ligands to type I and type II TGF-β receptors, indicating that Cripto-1 and Cryptic contact ligands at their receptor interaction surfaces and, thus, that they could inhibit their ligands. Indeed, soluble Cripto-1 and Cryptic inhibited ligand signaling in various cell-based assays, including SMAD-mediated luciferase reporter gene expression, and differentiation of a multipotent stem cell line. But in agreement with previous work, the membrane bound form of Cripto-1 potentiated signaling, revealing a critical role of membrane association for its established cellular activity. Thus, our studies provide new insights into the mechanism of ligand recognition by this enigmatic family of membrane-anchored TGF-β family signaling regulators and link membrane association with their signal potentiating activities.

Chromatin Remodeler Recruitment during Macrophage Differentiation Facilitates Transcription Factor Binding to Enhancers in Mature Cells

We show how enhancers of macrophage-specific genes are rendered accessible in differentiating macrophages to allow their induction in mature cells in response to an appropriate stimulus. Using a lentiviral knockdown approach in primary differentiating macrophages from mouse bone marrow, we demonstrate that enhancers of Il12b and Il1a are kept relatively lowly occupied by nucleosomes and accessible through recruitment of the nucleosome remodeler BAF/PBAF. Our results using an inducible cell line that expresses an estrogen receptor fusion of the macrophage-specific transcription factor PU.1 (PUER) show that BAF/PBAF recruitment to these enhancers is a consequence of translocation of PUER to the nucleus in the presence of tamoxifen, and we speculate that remodeler recruitment may be directly mediated by PU.1. In the absence of BAF/PBAF recruitment, nucleosome occupancy at the enhancer of Il12b (and to a lesser extent at Il1a) reaches high levels in bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMDMs), and the enhancers are not fully cleared of nucleosomes upon LPS induction, resulting in impaired gene expression. Analysis of Il12b expression in single cells suggests that recruitment of the remodeler is necessary for high levels of transcription from the same promoter, and we propose that remodelers function by increasing nucleosome turnover to facilitate transcription factor over nucleosome binding in a process we have termed "remodeler-assisted competition."

The Lineage-Specific Transcription Factor PU.1 Prevents Polycomb-Mediated Heterochromatin Formation at Macrophage-Specific Genes

Lineage-specific transcription factors (TFs) are important determinants of cellular identity, but their exact mode of action has remained unclear. Here we show using a macrophage differentiation system that the lineage-specific TF PU.1 keeps macrophage-specific genes accessible during differentiation by preventing Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) binding to transcriptional regulatory elements. We demonstrate that the distal enhancer of a gene becomes bound by PRC2 as cells differentiate in the absence of PU.1 binding and that the gene is wrapped into heterochromatin, which is characterized by increased nucleosome occupancy and H3K27 trimethylation. This renders the gene inaccessible to the transcriptional machinery and prevents induction of the gene in response to an external signal in mature cells. In contrast, if PU.1 is bound at the transcriptional regulatory region of a gene during differentiation, PRC2 is not recruited, nucleosome occupancy is kept low, and the gene can be induced in mature macrophages. Similar results were obtained at the enhancers of other macrophage-specific genes that fail to bind PU.1 as an estrogen receptor fusion (PUER) in this system. These results show that one role of PU.1 is to exclude PRC2 and to prevent heterochromatin formation at macrophage-specific genes.