High functional overlap between MluI cell-cycle box binding factor and Swi4/6 cell-cycle box binding factor in the G1/S transcriptional program in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

FvMbp1-Swi6 complex regulates vegetative growth, stress tolerance, and virulence in Fusarium verticillioides

The mycotoxigenic fungus Fusarium verticillioides is a common pathogen of grain and medicine that contaminates the host with fumonisin B1 (FB1) mycotoxin, poses serious threats to human and animal health. Therefore, it is crucial to unravel the regulatory mechanisms of growth, and pathogenicity of F. verticillioides. Mbp1 is a component of the MluI cell cycle box binding factor complex and acts as an APSES-type transcription factor that regulates cell cycle progression. However, no information is available regarding its role in F. verticillioides. In this study, we demonstrate that FvMbp1 interacts with FvSwi6 that acts as the cell cycle transcription factor, to form the heteromeric transcription factor complexes in F. verticillioides. Our results show that ΔFvMbp1 and ΔFvSwi6 both cause a severe reduction of vegetative growth, conidiation, and increase tolerance to diverse environmental stresses. Moreover, ΔFvMbp1 and ΔFvSwi6 dramatically decrease the virulence of the pathogen on the stalk and ear of maize. Transcriptome profiling show that FvMbp1-Swi6 complex co-regulates the expression of genes associated with multiple stress responses. These results indicate the functional importance of the FvMbp1-Swi6 complex in the filamentous fungi F. verticillioides and reveal a potential target for the effective prevention and control of Fusarium diseases.

The APSES transcription factor CfSwi6 is required for growth, cell wall integrity, and pathogenicity of Ceratocystis fimbriata

Cell wall integrity (CWI) is crucial for the growth, development, and host invasion of pathogenic fungi. The APSES transcription factor Swi6 in fungi plays a role in mediating cell wall integrity through the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway. Ceratocystis fimbriata is a notorious pathogenic fungus responsible for causing black rot in sweet potatoes. In this study, an orthologous APSES transcription factor Swi6 (CfSwi6) downstream of the CWI regulatory pathway in C. fimbriata was characterized. Deletion of CfSWI6 leads to impaired hyphal development, conidiation, and compromised cell wall integrity, resulting in a significant reduction in virulence. Transcriptome analysis revealed the involvement of CfSWI6 in various pathways, including the MAPK pathway, DNA synthesis and stress response. ChIP-seq data provided predictions of potential target genes regulated by CfSwi6. Through yeast one-hybrid, we confirmed the direct binding of CfSwi6 to the promoter of the chitin synthetase gene. In summary, these findings indicated that CfSwi6 plays an important role in the growth, development, and pathogenicity of C. fimbriata. This study provides new insights into the pathogenic mechanism of C. fimbriata in sweet potato and inspires potential strategies to control sweet potato black rot.

Evidence for novel mechanisms that control cell-cycle entry and cell size

Entry into the cell cycle in late G1 phase occurs only when sufficient growth has occurred. In budding yeast, a cyclin called Cln3 is thought to link cell-cycle entry to cell growth. Cln3 accumulates during growth in early G1 phase and eventually helps trigger expression of late G1 phase cyclins that drive cell-cycle entry. All current models for cell-cycle entry assume that expression of late G1 phase cyclins is initiated at the transcriptional level. Current models also assume that the sole function of Cln3 in cell-cycle entry is to promote transcription of late G1 phase cyclins, and that Cln3 works solely in G1 phase. Here, we show that cell cycle-dependent expression of the late G1 phase cyclin Cln2 does not require any functions of the CLN2 promoter. Moreover, Cln3 can influence accumulation of Cln2 protein via posttranscriptional mechanisms. Finally, we show that Cln3 has functions in mitosis that strongly influence cell size. Together, these discoveries reveal the existence of surprising new mechanisms that challenge current models for control of cell-cycle entry and cell size.

Control of meiotic entry by dual inhibition of a key mitotic transcription factor

The mitosis to meiosis transition requires dynamic changes in gene expression, but whether and how the mitotic transcriptional machinery is regulated during this transition is unknown. In budding yeast, SBF and MBF transcription factors initiate the mitotic gene expression program. Here, we report two mechanisms that work together to restrict SBF activity during meiotic entry: repression of the SBF-specific Swi4 subunit through LUTI-based regulation and inhibition of SBF by Whi5, a functional homolog of the Rb tumor suppressor. We find that untimely SBF activation causes downregulation of early meiotic genes and delays meiotic entry. These defects are largely driven by the SBF-target G1 cyclins, which block the interaction between the central meiotic regulator Ime1 and its cofactor Ume6. Our study provides insight into the role of SWI4LUTI in establishing the meiotic transcriptional program and demonstrates how the LUTI-based regulation is integrated into a larger regulatory network to ensure timely SBF activity.

Control of meiotic entry by dual inhibition of a key mitotic transcription factor

The mitosis to meiosis transition requires dynamic changes in gene expression, but whether and how the mitotic transcriptional machinery is regulated during this transition is unknown. In budding yeast, SBF and MBF transcription factors initiate the mitotic gene expression program. Here, we report two mechanisms that work together to restrict SBF activity during meiotic entry: repression of the SBF-specific Swi4 subunit through LUTI-based regulation and inhibition of SBF by Whi5, a homolog of the Rb tumor suppressor. We find that untimely SBF activation causes downregulation of early meiotic genes and delays meiotic entry. These defects are largely driven by the SBF-target G1 cyclins, which block the interaction between the central meiotic regulator Ime1 and its cofactor Ume6. Our study provides insight into the role of SWI4LUTI in establishing the meiotic transcriptional program and demonstrates how the LUTI-based regulation is integrated into a larger regulatory network to ensure timely SBF activity.

The microprotein Nrs1 rewires the G1/S transcriptional machinery during nitrogen limitation in budding yeast

Commitment to cell division at the end of G1 phase, termed Start in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, is strongly influenced by nutrient availability. To identify new dominant activators of Start that might operate under different nutrient conditions, we screened a genome-wide ORF overexpression library for genes that bypass a Start arrest caused by absence of the G1 cyclin Cln3 and the transcriptional activator Bck2. We recovered a hypothetical gene YLR053c, renamed NRS1 for Nitrogen-Responsive Start regulator 1, which encodes a poorly characterized 108 amino acid microprotein. Endogenous Nrs1 was nuclear-localized, restricted to poor nitrogen conditions, induced upon TORC1 inhibition, and cell cycle-regulated with a peak at Start. NRS1 interacted genetically with SWI4 and SWI6, which encode subunits of the main G1/S transcription factor complex SBF. Correspondingly, Nrs1 physically interacted with Swi4 and Swi6 and was localized to G1/S promoter DNA. Nrs1 exhibited inherent transactivation activity, and fusion of Nrs1 to the SBF inhibitor Whi5 was sufficient to suppress other Start defects. Nrs1 appears to be a recently evolved microprotein that rewires the G1/S transcriptional machinery under poor nitrogen conditions.

Commitment to cell division at the end of G1 phase in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is strongly influenced by nutrient availability. This study identifies a micro-protein that promotes G1/S transcription activation and cell cycle entry in yeast under nitrogen-limited conditions.

Exportin Crm1 is important for Swi6 nuclear shuttling and MBF transcription activation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

BACKGROUND

Swi6 acts as a transcription factor in budding yeast, functioning in two different heterodimeric complexes, SBF and MBF, that activate the expression of distinct but overlapping sets of genes. Swi6 undergoes regulated changes in nucleocytoplasmic localization throughout the cell cycle that correlate with changes in gene expression. This study investigates how nucleocytoplasmic transport by multiple transport factors may influence specific Swi6 activities.

RESULTS

Here we show that the exportin Crm1 is important for Swi6 nuclear export and activity. Loss of a putative Crm1 NES or inhibition of Crm1 activity results in changes in nucleocytoplasmic Swi6 localization. Alteration of the Crm1 NES in Swi6 results in decreased MBF-mediated gene expression, but does not affect SBF reporter expression, suggesting that export of Swi6 by Crm1 regulates a subset of Swi6 transcription activation activity. Finally, alteration of the putative Crm1 NES in Swi6 results in cells that are larger than wild type, and this increase in cell size is exacerbated by deletion of Msn5.

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide evidence that Swi6 has at least two different exportins, Crm1 and Msn5, each of which interacts with a distinct nuclear export signal. We identify a putative nuclear export signal for Crm1 within Swi6, and observe that export by Crm1 or Msn5 independently influences Swi6-regulated expression of a different subset of Swi6-controlled genes. These findings provide new insights into the complex regulation of Swi6 transcription activation activity and the role of nucleocytoplasmic shuttling in regulated gene expression.

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

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

The CWI Pathway: A Versatile Toolbox to Arrest Cell-Cycle Progression

Cell-signaling pathways are essential for cells to respond and adapt to changes in their environmental conditions. The cell-wall integrity (CWI) pathway of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is activated by environmental stresses, compounds, and morphogenetic processes that compromise the cell wall, orchestrating the appropriate cellular response to cope with these adverse conditions. During cell-cycle progression, the CWI pathway is activated in periods of polarized growth, such as budding or cytokinesis, regulating cell-wall biosynthesis and the actin cytoskeleton. Importantly, accumulated evidence has indicated a reciprocal regulation of the cell-cycle regulatory system by the CWI pathway. In this paper, we describe how the CWI pathway regulates the main cell-cycle transitions in response to cell-surface perturbance to delay cell-cycle progression. In particular, it affects the Start transcriptional program and the initiation of DNA replication at the G1/S transition, and entry and progression through mitosis. We also describe the involvement of the CWI pathway in the response to genotoxic stress and its connection with the DNA integrity checkpoint, the mechanism that ensures the correct transmission of genetic material and cell survival. Thus, the CWI pathway emerges as a master brake that stops cell-cycle progression when cells are coping with distinct unfavorable conditions.

Deletion of the MBP1 Gene, Involved in the Cell Cycle, Affects Respiration and Pseudohyphal Differentiation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Mbp1p is a component of MBF (MluI cell cycle box binding factor, Mbp1p-Swi6p) and is well known to regulate the G1-S transition of the cell cycle. However, few studies have provided clues regarding its role in fermentation. This work aimed to recognize the function of the MBP1 gene in ethanol fermentation in a wild-type industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain. MBP1 deletion caused an obvious decrease in the final ethanol concentration under oxygen-limited (without agitation), but not under aerobic, conditions (130 rpm). Furthermore, the mbp1Δ strain showed 84% and 35% decreases in respiration intensity under aerobic and oxygen-limited conditions, respectively. These findings indicate that MBP1 plays an important role in responding to variations in oxygen content and is involved in the regulation of respiration and fermentation. Unexpectedly, mbp1Δ also showed pseudohyphal growth, in which cells elongated and remained connected in a multicellular arrangement on yeast extract-peptone-dextrose (YPD) plates. In addition, mbp1Δ showed an increase in cell volume, associated with a decrease in the fraction of budded cells. These results provide more detailed information about the function of MBP1 and suggest some clues to efficiently improve ethanol production by industrially engineered yeast strains. IMPORTANCE Saccharomyces cerevisiae is an especially favorable organism used for ethanol production. However, inhibitors and high osmolarity conferred by fermentation broth, and high concentrations of ethanol as fermentation runs to completion, affect cell growth and ethanol production. Therefore, yeast strains with high performance, such as rapid growth, high tolerance, and high ethanol productivity, are highly desirable. Great efforts have been made to improve their performance by evolutionary engineering, and industrial strains may be a better start than laboratory ones for industrial-scale ethanol production. The significance of our research is uncovering the function of MBP1 in ethanol fermentation in a wild-type industrial S. cerevisiae strain, which may provide clues to engineer better-performance yeast in producing ethanol. Furthermore, the results that lacking MBP1 caused pseudohyphal growth on YPD plates could shed light on the development of xylose-fermenting S. cerevisiae, as using xylose as the sole carbon source also caused pseudohyphal growth.

Transcription Activator Swi6 Interacts with Mbp1 in MluI Cell Cycle Box-Binding Complex and Regulates Hyphal Differentiation and Virulence in Beauveria bassiana

Mbp1 protein acts as a DNA-binding protein in MluI cell cycle box-binding complex (MBF) and plays an essential role in filamentous myco-pathogen Beauveria bassiana.In the current study, BbSwi6 (a homologue of yeast Swi6) was functionally characterized in B.bassiana. Both BbSwi6 and BbMbp1 localize in the nucleus and display a direct interaction relationship which is indicated by a yeast two-hybrid assay. BbSwi6 significantly contributes to hyphal growth, asexual sporulation and virulence. On the aerial surface, ΔBbSwi6 grew slower on various nutrients and displayed abnormal conidia-producing structures, which hardly produced conidia. In liquid media, BbSwi6 loss led to 90% reduction in blastospore yield. Finally, the virulence of the ΔBbSwi6 mutant was modestly weakened with a reduction of 20% in median lethal time. Comparative transcriptomics revealed that BbSwi6 mediated different transcriptomes during fungal development into conidia and blastospores. Notably, under the indicated condition, the BbSwi6-mediated transcriptome significantly differed to that mediated by BbMbp1. Our results demonstrate that, in addition to their roles as the interactive components in MBF, BbSwi6 and BbMbp1 mediate divergent genetic pathways during morphological transitions in B. bassiana.

The budding yeast Start repressor Whi7 differs in regulation from Whi5, emerging as a major cell cycle brake in response to stress

Start is the main decision point in the eukaryotic cell cycle at which cells commit to a new round of cell division. It involves the irreversible activation of a transcriptional programme through the inactivation of Start transcriptional repressors: the retinoblastoma family in mammals, or Whi5 and its recently identified paralogue Whi7 (also known as Srl3) in budding yeast. Here, we provide a comprehensive comparison of Whi5 and Whi7 that reveals significant qualitative differences. Indeed, the expression, subcellular localization and functionality of Whi7 and Whi5 are differentially regulated. Importantly, Whi7 shows specific properties in its association with promoters not shared by Whi5, and for the first time, we demonstrate that Whi7, and not Whi5, can be the main contributor to Start inhibition such as it occurs in the response to cell wall stress. Our results help to improve understanding of the interplay between multiple differentially regulated Start repressors in order to face specific cellular conditions.

Highlighted Article: Cells can use the interplay between functionally redundant but differentially regulated cell-cycle repressors in order to confer new repression capabilities and to respond to specific cellular conditions.

G1/S transcription factors assemble in increasing numbers of discrete clusters through G1 phase

In budding yeast, the transcription factors SBF and MBF activate a large program of gene expression in late G1 phase that underlies commitment to cell division, termed Start. SBF/MBF are limiting with respect to target promoters in small G1 phase cells and accumulate as cells grow, raising the questions of how SBF/MBF are dynamically distributed across the G1/S regulon and how this impacts the Start transition. Super-resolution Photo-Activatable Localization Microscopy (PALM) mapping of the static positions of SBF/MBF subunits in fixed cells revealed each transcription factor was organized into discrete clusters containing approximately eight copies regardless of cell size and that the total number of clusters increased as cells grew through G1 phase. Stochastic modeling using reasonable biophysical parameters recapitulated growth-dependent SBF/MBF clustering and predicted TF dynamics that were confirmed in live cell PALM experiments. This spatio-temporal organization of SBF/MBF may help coordinate activation of G1/S regulon and the Start transition.

Improved recovery of cell-cycle gene expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae from regulatory interactions in multiple omics data

BACKGROUND

Gene expression is regulated by DNA-binding transcription factors (TFs). Together with their target genes, these factors and their interactions collectively form a gene regulatory network (GRN), which is responsible for producing patterns of transcription, including cyclical processes such as genome replication and cell division. However, identifying how this network regulates the timing of these patterns, including important interactions and regulatory motifs, remains a challenging task.

RESULTS

We employed four in vivo and in vitro regulatory data sets to investigate the regulatory basis of expression timing and phase-specific patterns cell-cycle expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Specifically, we considered interactions based on direct binding between TF and target gene, indirect effects of TF deletion on gene expression, and computational inference. We found that the source of regulatory information significantly impacts the accuracy and completeness of recovering known cell-cycle expressed genes. The best approach involved combining TF-target and TF-TF interactions features from multiple datasets in a single model. In addition, TFs important to multiple phases of cell-cycle expression also have the greatest impact on individual phases. Important TFs regulating a cell-cycle phase also tend to form modules in the GRN, including two sub-modules composed entirely of unannotated cell-cycle regulators (STE12-TEC1 and RAP1-HAP1-MSN4).

CONCLUSION

Our findings illustrate the importance of integrating both multiple omics data and regulatory motifs in order to understand the significance regulatory interactions involved in timing gene expression. This integrated approached allowed us to recover both known cell-cycles interactions and the overall pattern of phase-specific expression across the cell-cycle better than any single data set. Likewise, by looking at regulatory motifs in the form of TF-TF interactions, we identified sets of TFs whose co-regulation of target genes was important for cell-cycle expression, even when regulation by individual TFs was not. Overall, this demonstrates the power of integrating multiple data sets and models of interaction in order to understand the regulatory basis of established biological processes and their associated gene regulatory networks.

Bidirectional histone-gene promoters in Aspergillus: characterization and application for multi-gene expression

Background

Filamentous fungi are important producers of enzymes and bioactive secondary metabolites and are exploited for industrial purposes. Expression and characterization of biosynthetic pathways requires stable expression of multiple genes in the production host. Fungal promoters are indispensable for the accomplishment of this task, and libraries of promoters that show functionality across diverse fungal species facilitate synthetic biology approaches, pathway expression, and cell-factory construction.

Results

In this study, we characterized the intergenic region between the genes encoding histones H4.1 and H3, from five phylogenetically diverse species of Aspergillus, as bidirectional promoters (Ph4h3). By expression of the genes encoding fluorescent proteins mRFP1 and mCitrine, we show at the translational and transcriptional level that this region from diverse species is applicable as strong and constitutive bidirectional promoters in Aspergillus nidulans. Bioinformatic analysis showed that the divergent gene orientation of h4.1 and h3 appears maintained among fungi, and that the Ph4h3 display conserved DNA motifs among the investigated 85 Aspergilli. Two of the heterologous Ph4h3s were utilized for single-locus expression of four genes from the putative malformin producing pathway from Aspergillus brasiliensis in A. nidulans. Strikingly, heterologous expression of mlfA encoding the non-ribosomal peptide synthetase is sufficient for biosynthesis of malformins in A. nidulans, which indicates an iterative use of one adenylation domain in the enzyme. However, this resulted in highly stressed colonies, which was reverted to a healthy phenotype by co-expressing the residual four genes from the putative biosynthetic gene cluster.

Conclusions

Our study has documented that Ph4h3 is a strong constitutive bidirectional promoter and a valuable new addition to the genetic toolbox of at least the genus Aspergillus.

A comprehensive, mechanistically detailed, and executable model of the cell division cycle in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Understanding how cellular functions emerge from the underlying molecular mechanisms is a key challenge in biology. This will require computational models, whose predictive power is expected to increase with coverage and precision of formulation. Genome-scale models revolutionised the metabolic field and made the first whole-cell model possible. However, the lack of genome-scale models of signalling networks blocks the development of eukaryotic whole-cell models. Here, we present a comprehensive mechanistic model of the molecular network that controls the cell division cycle in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We use rxncon, the reaction-contingency language, to neutralise the scalability issues preventing formulation, visualisation and simulation of signalling networks at the genome-scale. We use parameter-free modelling to validate the network and to predict genotype-to-phenotype relationships down to residue resolution. This mechanistic genome-scale model offers a new perspective on eukaryotic cell cycle control, and opens up for similar models-and eventually whole-cell models-of human cells.

Regulation of conidiation, dimorphic transition, and microsclerotia formation by MrSwi6 transcription factor in dimorphic fungus Metarhizium rileyi

Microsclerotia (MS) produced in the liquid culture of the dimorphic insect pathogen Metarhizium rileyi can be used as a mycoinsecticide. Bioinformatics analysis demonstrated that the cell cycle signaling pathway was involved in regulating MS formation. To investigate the mechanisms by which the signaling pathway is regulated, a cell cycle box binding transcription factor MrSwi6 of M. rileyi was characterized. MrSwi6 was highly expressed during periods of yeast-hypha transition and conidia and MS formation. When compared with wild-type and complemented strains, disruption of MrSwi6 significantly reduced conidia (15-36%) and MS formation (96.2%), and exhibited decreased virulence levels. Digital expression profiling revealed that genes involved in antioxidation, pigment biosynthesis, and ion transport and storage were regulated by MrSwi6 during conidia and MS development. These results confirmed the significance of MrSwi6 in dimorphic transition, conidia and MS formation, and virulence in M. rileyi.

Lack of G1/S control destabilizes the yeast genome via replication stress-induced DSBs and illegitimate recombination

The protein Swi6 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a cofactor in two complexes that regulate the transcription of the genes controlling the G1/S transition. It also ensures proper oxidative and cell wall stress responses. Previously, we found that Swi6 was crucial for the survival of genotoxic stress. Here, we show that a lack of Swi6 causes replication stress leading to double-strand break (DSB) formation, inefficient DNA repair and DNA content alterations, resulting in high cell mortality. Comparative genome hybridization experiments revealed that there was a random genome rearrangement in swi6Δ cells, whereas in diploid swi6Δ/swi6Δ cells, chromosome V is duplicated. SWI4 and PAB1, which are located on chromosome V and are known multicopy suppressors of swi6Δ phenotypes, partially reverse swi6Δ genome instability when overexpressed. Another gene on chromosome V, RAD51, also supports swi6Δ survival, but at a high cost; Rad51-dependent illegitimate recombination in swi6Δ cells appears to connect DSBs, leading to genome rearrangement and preventing cell death.This article has an associated First Person interview with the first author of the paper.

Regulation of Yeast-to-Hyphae Transition in Yarrowia lipolytica

Many yeasts undergo a morphological transition from yeast-to-hyphal growth in response to environmental conditions. We used forward and reverse genetic techniques to identify genes regulating this transition in Yarrowia lipolytica. We confirmed that the transcription factor Ylmsn2 is required for the transition to hyphal growth and found that signaling by the histidine kinases Ylchk1 and Ylnik1 as well as the MAP kinases of the HOG pathway (Ylssk2, Ylpbs2, and Ylhog1) regulates the transition to hyphal growth. These results suggest that Y. lipolytica transitions to hyphal growth in response to stress through multiple kinase pathways. Intriguingly, we found that a repetitive portion of the genome containing telomere-like and rDNA repeats may be involved in the transition to hyphal growth, suggesting a link between this region and the general stress response.

The yeast Yarrowia lipolytica undergoes a morphological transition from yeast-to-hyphal growth in response to environmental conditions. A forward genetic screen was used to identify mutants that reliably remain in the yeast phase, which were then assessed by whole-genome sequencing. All the smooth mutants identified, so named because of their colony morphology, exhibit independent loss of DNA at a repetitive locus made up of interspersed ribosomal DNA and short 10- to 40-mer telomere-like repeats. The loss of repetitive DNA is associated with downregulation of genes with stress response elements (5′-CCCCT-3′) and upregulation of genes with cell cycle box (5′-ACGCG-3′) motifs in their promoter region. The stress response element is bound by the transcription factor Msn2p in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We confirmed that the Y. lipolyticamsn2 (Ylmsn2) ortholog is required for hyphal growth and found that overexpression of Ylmsn2 enables hyphal growth in smooth strains. The cell cycle box is bound by the Mbp1p/Swi6p complex in S. cerevisiae to regulate G₁-to-S phase progression. We found that overexpression of either the Ylmbp1 or Ylswi6 homologs decreased hyphal growth and that deletion of either Ylmbp1 or Ylswi6 promotes hyphal growth in smooth strains. A second forward genetic screen for reversion to hyphal growth was performed with the smooth-33 mutant to identify additional genetic factors regulating hyphal growth in Y. lipolytica. Thirteen of the mutants sequenced from this screen had coding mutations in five kinases, including the histidine kinases Ylchk1 and Ylnik1 and kinases of the high-osmolarity glycerol response (HOG) mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase cascade Ylssk2, Ylpbs2, and Ylhog1. Together, these results demonstrate that Y. lipolytica transitions to hyphal growth in response to stress through multiple signaling pathways.

IMPORTANCE Many yeasts undergo a morphological transition from yeast-to-hyphal growth in response to environmental conditions. We used forward and reverse genetic techniques to identify genes regulating this transition in Yarrowia lipolytica. We confirmed that the transcription factor Ylmsn2 is required for the transition to hyphal growth and found that signaling by the histidine kinases Ylchk1 and Ylnik1 as well as the MAP kinases of the HOG pathway (Ylssk2, Ylpbs2, and Ylhog1) regulates the transition to hyphal growth. These results suggest that Y. lipolytica transitions to hyphal growth in response to stress through multiple kinase pathways. Intriguingly, we found that a repetitive portion of the genome containing telomere-like and rDNA repeats may be involved in the transition to hyphal growth, suggesting a link between this region and the general stress response.

The evolution of a G1/S transcriptional network in yeasts

The G1-to-S cell cycle transition is promoted by the periodic expression of a large set of genes. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae G1/S gene expression is regulated by two transcription factor (TF) complexes, the MBF and SBF, which bind to specific DNA sequences, the MCB and SCB, respectively. Despite extensive research little is known regarding the evolution of the G1/S transcription regulation including the co-evolution of the DNA binding domains with their respective DNA binding sequences. We have recently examined the co-evolution of the G1/S TF specificity through the systematic generation and examination of chimeric Mbp1/Swi4 TFs containing different orthologue DNA binding domains in S. cerevisiae (Hendler et al. in PLoS Genet 13:e1006778. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006778 , 2017). Here, we review the co-evolution of G1/S transcriptional network and discuss the evolutionary dynamics and specificity of the MBF-MCB and SBF-SCB interactions in different fungal species.

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

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

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

Gene duplication and co-evolution of G1/S transcription factor specificity in fungi are essential for optimizing cell fitness

Transcriptional regulatory networks play a central role in optimizing cell survival. How DNA binding domains and cis-regulatory DNA binding sequences have co-evolved to allow the expansion of transcriptional networks and how this contributes to cellular fitness remains unclear. Here we experimentally explore how the complex G1/S transcriptional network evolved in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae by examining different chimeric transcription factor (TF) complexes. Over 200 G1/S genes are regulated by either one of the two TF complexes, SBF and MBF, which bind to specific DNA binding sequences, SCB and MCB, respectively. The difference in size and complexity of the G1/S transcriptional network across yeast species makes it well suited to investigate how TF paralogs (SBF and MBF) and DNA binding sequences (SCB and MCB) co-evolved after gene duplication to rewire and expand the network of G1/S target genes. Our data suggests that whilst SBF is the likely ancestral regulatory complex, the ancestral DNA binding element is more MCB-like. G1/S network expansion took place by both cis- and trans- co-evolutionary changes in closely related but distinct regulatory sequences. Replacement of the endogenous SBF DNA-binding domain (DBD) with that from more distantly related fungi leads to a contraction of the SBF-regulated G1/S network in budding yeast, which also correlates with increased defects in cell growth, cell size, and proliferation.

A comparative study of the degradation of yeast cyclins Cln1 and Cln2

The yeast cyclins Cln1 and Cln2 are very similar in both sequence and function, but some differences in their functionality and localization have been recently described. The control of Cln1 and Cln2 cellular levels is crucial for proper cell cycle initiation. In this work, we analyzed the degradation patterns of Cln1 and Cln2 in order to further investigate the possible differences between them. Both cyclins show the same half-life but, while Cln2 degradation depends on ubiquitin ligases SCF^Grr1 and SCF^Cdc4, Cln1 is affected only by SCF^Grr1. Degradation analysis of chimeric cyclins, constructed by combining fragments from Cln1 and Cln2, identifies the N-terminal sequence of the proteins as responsible of the cyclin degradation pattern. In particular, the N-terminal region of Cln2 is required to mediate degradation by SCF^Cdc4. This region is involved in nuclear import of Cln1 and Cln2, which suggests that differences in degradation may be due to differences in localization. Moreover, a comparison of the cyclins that differ only in the presence of the Cln2 nuclear export signal indicates a greater instability of exported cyclins, thus reinforcing the idea that cyclin stability is influenced by their localization.

Coordination of Cell Cycle Progression and Mitotic Spindle Assembly Involves Histone H3 Lysine 4 Methylation by Set1/COMPASS

Methylation of histone H3 lysine 4 (H3K4) by Set1 complex/COMPASS is a hallmark of eukaryotic chromatin, but it remains poorly understood how this post-translational modification contributes to the regulation of biological processes like the cell cycle. Here, we report a H3K4 methylation-dependent pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae that governs toxicity toward benomyl, a microtubule destabilizing drug. Benomyl-sensitive growth of wild-type cells required mono- and dimethylation of H3K4 and Pho23, a PHD-containing subunit of the Rpd3L complex. Δset1 and Δpho23 deletions suppressed defects associated with ipl1-2 aurora kinase mutant, an integral component of the spindle assembly checkpoint during mitosis. Benomyl resistance of Δset1 strains was accompanied by deregulation of all four tubulin genes and the phenotype was suppressed by tub2-423 and Δtub3 mutations, establishing a genetic link between H3K4 methylation and microtubule function. Most interestingly, sine wave fitting and clustering of transcript abundance time series in synchronized cells revealed a requirement for Set1 for proper cell-cycle-dependent gene expression and Δset1 cells displayed delayed entry into S phase. Disruption of G1/S regulation in Δmbp1 and Δswi4 transcription factor mutants duplicated both benomyl resistance and suppression of ipl1-2 as was observed with Δset1 Taken together our results support a role for H3K4 methylation in the coordination of cell-cycle progression and proper assembly of the mitotic spindle during mitosis.

Inference of gene regulation functions from dynamic transcriptome data

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The anaphase-promoting complex works together with the SCF complex for proteolysis of the S-phase cyclin Clb6 during the transition from G1 to S phase

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the S-phase cyclin Clb6 is expressed shortly before the G1/S transition. It has been shown that in S phase the SCF(Cdc4) ubiquitin ligase controls Clb6 proteolysis, which requires cyclin-dependent kinases activity. A Clb6-3A mutant, bearing non-phosphorylatable mutations at S6A, T39A, and S147A, was observed to be hyperstabilized in S-phase but was unstable in mitosis. In this study, we found that the APC(Cdh1) form of the Anaphase-Promoting Complex (APC) was required for Clb6 proteolysis in both early and late G1. An in vitro ubiquitination assay confirmed that Clb6 is a substrate for APC(Cdh1). A KEN box and a destruction box in the Clb6N-terminus were identified. Mutations in the KEN box (mkb) and/or the destruction box (mdb) enhanced Clb6 stability in G1. Expression of Clb6mkd, bearing both mutations in the mkb and mdb, allowed cells to bypass the late G1 arrest caused by cdc4-1. This bypass phenotype was observed to depend upon CDK phosphorylation at residues S6, T39 and S147. Compared to Clb6, overexpression of Clb6ST, bearing all five mutations of S6A, T39A, S147A, mkb and mdb in combination, had a greater effect on promoting expression of Clb2 and S-phase entry, caused a greater G2 delay and a greater defect in cell division. Swe1 was also required for bud emergence when Clb6ST was overexpressed. Our observations suggest that both APC(Cdh1) and SCF(Cdc4)-dependent proteolysis of Clb6 at the G1/S border are crucial for multiple cell cycle regulated events including proper expression of Clb2, the G1/S and G2/M cell cycle transitions and for proper completion of cell division at mitotic exit.

Experimental testing of a new integrated model of the budding yeast Start transition

Mathematical modeling of the cell cycle has unveiled recurrent features and emergent behaviors of cellular networks. Constructing new mutants and performing experimental tests during development of a new model of the budding yeast cell cycle yields a more efficient modeling process and results in several testable hypotheses.

The cell cycle is composed of bistable molecular switches that govern the transitions between gap phases (G1 and G2) and the phases in which DNA is replicated (S) and partitioned between daughter cells (M). Many molecular details of the budding yeast G1–S transition (Start) have been elucidated in recent years, especially with regard to its switch-like behavior due to positive feedback mechanisms. These results led us to reevaluate and expand a previous mathematical model of the yeast cell cycle. The new model incorporates Whi3 inhibition of Cln3 activity, Whi5 inhibition of SBF and MBF transcription factors, and feedback inhibition of Whi5 by G1–S cyclins. We tested the accuracy of the model by simulating various mutants not described in the literature. We then constructed these novel mutant strains and compared their observed phenotypes to the model’s simulations. The experimental results reported here led to further changes of the model, which will be fully described in a later article. Our study demonstrates the advantages of combining model design, simulation, and testing in a coordinated effort to better understand a complex biological network.

Functional Analysis and Characterization of Differential Coexpression Networks

Differential coexpression analysis is emerging as a complement to conventional differential gene expression analysis. The identified differential coexpression links can be assembled into a differential coexpression network (DCEN) in response to environmental stresses or genetic changes. Differential coexpression analyses have been successfully used to identify condition-specific modules; however, the structural properties and biological significance of general DCENs have not been well investigated. Here, we analyzed two independent Saccharomyces cerevisiae DCENs constructed from large-scale time-course gene expression profiles in response to different situations. Topological analyses show that DCENs are tree-like networks possessing scale-free characteristics, but not small-world. Functional analyses indicate that differentially coexpressed gene pairs in DCEN tend to link different biological processes, achieving complementary or synergistic effects. Furthermore, the gene pairs lacking common transcription factors are sensitive to perturbation and hence lead to differential coexpression. Based on these observations, we integrated transcriptional regulatory information into DCEN and identified transcription factors that might cause differential coexpression by gain or loss of activation in response to different situations. Collectively, our results not only uncover the unique structural characteristics of DCEN but also provide new insights into interpretation of DCEN to reveal its biological significance and infer the underlying gene regulatory dynamics.

Structural basis of DNA recognition by PCG2 reveals a novel DNA binding mode for winged helix-turn-helix domains

The MBP1 family proteins are the DNA binding subunits of MBF cell-cycle transcription factor complexes and contain an N terminal winged helix-turn-helix (wHTH) DNA binding domain (DBD). Although the DNA binding mechanism of MBP1 from Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been extensively studied, the structural framework and the DNA binding mode of other MBP1 family proteins remains to be disclosed. Here, we determined the crystal structure of the DBD of PCG2, the Magnaporthe oryzae orthologue of MBP1, bound to MCB-DNA. The structure revealed that the wing, the 20-loop, helix A and helix B in PCG2-DBD are important elements for DNA binding. Unlike previously characterized wHTH proteins, PCG2-DBD utilizes the wing and helix-B to bind the minor groove and the major groove of the MCB-DNA whilst the 20-loop and helix A interact non-specifically with DNA. Notably, two glutamines Q89 and Q82 within the wing were found to recognize the MCB core CGCG sequence through making hydrogen bond interactions. Further in vitro assays confirmed essential roles of Q89 and Q82 in the DNA binding. These data together indicate that the MBP1 homologue PCG2 employs an unusual mode of binding to target DNA and demonstrate the versatility of wHTH domains.

Checkpoints couple transcription network oscillator dynamics to cell-cycle progression

BACKGROUND

The coupling of cyclin dependent kinases (CDKs) to an intrinsically oscillating network of transcription factors has been proposed to control progression through the cell cycle in budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The transcription network regulates the temporal expression of many genes, including cyclins, and drives cell-cycle progression, in part, by generating successive waves of distinct CDK activities that trigger the ordered program of cell-cycle events. Network oscillations continue autonomously in mutant cells arrested by depletion of CDK activities, suggesting the oscillator can be uncoupled from cell-cycle progression. It is not clear what mechanisms, if any, ensure that the network oscillator is restrained when progression in normal cells is delayed or arrested. A recent proposal suggests CDK acts as a master regulator of cell-cycle processes that have the potential for autonomous oscillatory behavior.

RESULTS

Here we find that mitotic CDK is not sufficient for fully inhibiting transcript oscillations in arrested cells. We do find that activation of the DNA replication and spindle assembly checkpoints can fully arrest the network oscillator via overlapping but distinct mechanisms. Further, we demonstrate that the DNA replication checkpoint effector protein, Rad53, acts to arrest a portion of transcript oscillations in addition to its role in halting cell-cycle progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that checkpoint mechanisms, likely via phosphorylation of network transcription factors, maintain coupling of the network oscillator to progression during cell-cycle arrest.

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

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

A putative APSES transcription factor is necessary for normal growth and development of Aspergillus nidulans

The nsdD gene encoding a GATA type transcription factor positively controls sexual development in Aspergillus nidulans. According to microarray data, 20 genes that were upregulated by deleting nsdD during various life cycle stages were randomly selected and deleted for functional analysis. None of the mutants showed apparent changes in growth or development compared with those of the wild-type except the AN3154 gene that encodes a putative APSES transcription factor and is an ortholog of Saccharomyces cerevisiae swi4. Deleting AN3154 resulted in retarded growth and development, and the gene was named rgdA (retared growth and development). The rgdA deletion mutant developed a reduced number of conidia even under favorable conditions for asexual development. The retarded growth and development was partially suppressed by the veA1 mutation. The conidial heads of the mutant aborted, showing reduced and irregular shaped phialides. Fruiting body development was delayed compared with that in the wild-type. The mutant did not respond to various nutritional or environmental factors that affected the development patterns. The rgdA gene was expressed at low levels throughout the life cycle and was not significantly affected by several regulators of sexual and asexual development such as nsdD, veA, stuA, or brlA. However, the rgdA gene affected brlA and abaA expression, which function as key regulators of asexual sporulation, suggesting that rgdA functions upstream of those genes.

Control of cell cycle transcription during G1 and S phases

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

Chimeric protein complexes in hybrid species generate novel phenotypes

Hybridization between species is an important mechanism for the origin of novel lineages and adaptation to new environments. Increased allelic variation and modification of the transcriptional network are the two recognized forces currently deemed to be responsible for the phenotypic properties seen in hybrids. However, since the majority of the biological functions in a cell are carried out by protein complexes, inter-specific protein assemblies therefore represent another important source of natural variation upon which evolutionary forces can act. Here we studied the composition of six protein complexes in two different Saccharomyces “sensu stricto” hybrids, to understand whether chimeric interactions can be freely formed in the cell in spite of species-specific co-evolutionary forces, and whether the different types of complexes cause a change in hybrid fitness. The protein assemblies were isolated from the hybrids via affinity chromatography and identified via mass spectrometry. We found evidence of spontaneous chimericity for four of the six protein assemblies tested and we showed that different types of complexes can cause a variety of phenotypes in selected environments. In the case of TRP2/TRP3 complex, the effect of such chimeric formation resulted in the fitness advantage of the hybrid in an environment lacking tryptophan, while only one type of parental combination of the MBF complex allowed the hybrid to grow under respiratory conditions. These phenotypes were dependent on both genetic and environmental backgrounds. This study provides empirical evidence that chimeric protein complexes can freely assemble in cells and reveals a new mechanism to generate phenotypic novelty and plasticity in hybrids to complement the genomic innovation resulting from gene duplication. The ability to exchange orthologous members has also important implications for the adaptation and subsequent genome evolution of the hybrids in terms of pattern of gene loss.

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae “sensu stricto” group represent an excellent example of closely related species which can readily hybridise to occupy new ecological niches. Hybrids harbour the DNA of both parents and can display diverse pattern of gene expression. Less is known about the protein interactions that occur in hybrids, where two diverged proteome co-exist and are responsible for the correct execution of the biological function. In fact, hybrids could potentially form different chimeric variants of the same protein complex by using all the different combinations of parental alleles available. Chimeric interactions are expected to be sub-optimal and therefore discouraged since the members forming the protein complex are from different parents and have a different evolutionary history. Interestingly, here, we show experimentally that chimeric protein assemblies are spontaneously established in different yeast hybrids, and that such chimericity produces different phenotypic variants displaying loss or gain of fitness according to their genetic background and to the environment that they are exposed. These findings imply that the formation of chimeric complexes offers a new source of natural variation, widens the adaptation potential of the hybrids towards new nutritional contexts, and may influence genome evolution through selective retention of optimal alleles.

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

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

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

Replication checkpoint: tuning and coordination of replication forks in s phase

Checkpoints monitor critical cell cycle events such as chromosome duplication and segregation. They are highly conserved mechanisms that prevent progression into the next phase of the cell cycle when cells are unable to accomplish the previous event properly. During S phase, cells also provide a surveillance mechanism called the DNA replication checkpoint, which consists of a conserved kinase cascade that is provoked by insults that block or slow down replication forks. The DNA replication checkpoint is crucial for maintaining genome stability, because replication forks become vulnerable to collapse when they encounter obstacles such as nucleotide adducts, nicks, RNA-DNA hybrids, or stable protein-DNA complexes. These can be exogenously induced or can arise from endogenous cellular activity. Here, we summarize the initiation and transduction of the replication checkpoint as well as its targets, which coordinate cell cycle events and DNA replication fork stability.

The effective application of a discrete transition model to explore cell-cycle regulation in yeast

Background

Bench biologists often do not take part in the development of computational models for their systems, and therefore, they frequently employ them as “black-boxes”. Our aim was to construct and test a model that does not depend on the availability of quantitative data, and can be directly used without a need for intensive computational background.

Results

We present a discrete transition model. We used cell-cycle in budding yeast as a paradigm for a complex network, demonstrating phenomena such as sequential protein expression and activity, and cell-cycle oscillation. The structure of the network was validated by its response to computational perturbations such as mutations, and its response to mating-pheromone or nitrogen depletion. The model has a strong predicative capability, demonstrating how the activity of a specific transcription factor, Hcm1, is regulated, and what determines commitment of cells to enter and complete the cell-cycle.

Conclusion

The model presented herein is intuitive, yet is expressive enough to elucidate the intrinsic structure and qualitative behavior of large and complex regulatory networks. Moreover our model allowed us to examine multiple hypotheses in a simple and intuitive manner, giving rise to testable predictions. This methodology can be easily integrated as a useful approach for the study of networks, enriching experimental biology with computational insights.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

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

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

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

Repression of G1/S transcription is mediated via interaction of the GTB motifs of Nrm1 and Whi5 with Swi6

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, G1/S transcription factors MBF and SBF regulate a large family of genes important for entry to the cell cycle and DNA replication and repair. Their regulation is crucial for cell viability, and it is conserved throughout evolution. MBF and SBF consist of a common component, Swi6, and a DNA-specific binding protein, Mbp1 and Swi4, respectively. Transcriptional repressors bind to and regulate the activity of both transcription factors. Whi5 binds to SBF and represses its activity at the beginning of the G1 phase to prevent early activation. Nrm1 binds to MBF to repress transcription as cells progress through S phase. Here, we describe a protein motif, the GTB motif (for G1/S transcription factor binding), in Nrm1 and Whi5 that is required to bind to the transcription factors. We also identify a region of the carboxy terminus of Swi6 that is required for Nrm1 and Whi5 binding to their target transcription factors and show that mutation of this region overrides the repression of MBF- and SBF-regulated genes by Nrm1 and Whi5. Finally, we show that the GTB motif is the core of a functional module that is necessary and sufficient for targeting of the transcription factors by their cognate repressors.

Cell-cycle and DNA damage regulation of the DNA mismatch repair protein Msh2 occurs at the transcriptional and post-transcriptional level

DNA mismatch repair during replication is a conserved process essential for maintaining genomic stability. Mismatch repair is also implicated in cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis after DNA damage. Because yeast and human mismatch repair systems are well conserved, we have employed the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae to understand the regulation and function of the mismatch repair gene MSH2. Using a luciferase-based transcriptional reporter, we defined a 218-bp region upstream of MSH2 that contains cell-cycle and DNA damage responsive elements. The 5' end of the MSH2 transcript was mapped by primer extension and was found to encode a small upstream open reading frame (uORF). Mutagenesis of the uORF start codon or of the uORF stop codon, which creates a continuous reading frame with MSH2, increased Msh2 steady-state protein levels ∼2-fold. Furthermore, we found that the cell-cycle transcription factors Swi6, Swi4, and Mbp1-along with SCB/MCB cell-cycle binding sites upstream of MSH2-are all required for full basal expression of MSH2. Mutagenesis of the cell-cycle boxes resulted in a minor reduction in basal Msh2 levels and a 3-fold defect in mismatch repair. Disruption of the cell-cycle boxes also affected growth in a DNA polymerase-defective strain background where mismatch repair is essential, particularly in the presence of the DNA damaging agent methyl methane sulfonate (MMS). Promoter replacements conferring constitutive expression of MSH2 revealed that the transcriptional induction in response to MMS is required to maintain induced levels of Msh2. Turnover experiments confirmed an elevated rate of degradation in the presence of MMS. Taken together, the data show that the DNA damage regulation of Msh2 occurs at the transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels. The transcriptional and translational control elements identified are conserved in mammalian cells, underscoring the use of yeast as a model system to examine the regulation of MSH2.

Differences in local genomic context of bound and unbound motifs

Understanding gene regulation is a major objective in molecular biology research. Frequently, transcription is driven by transcription factors (TFs) that bind to specific DNA sequences. These motifs are usually short and degenerate, rendering the likelihood of multiple copies occurring throughout the genome due to random chance as high. Despite this, TFs only bind to a small subset of sites, thus prompting our investigation into the differences between motifs that are bound by TFs and those that remain unbound. Here we constructed vectors representing various chromatin- and sequence-based features for a published set of bound and unbound motifs representing nine TFs in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Using a machine learning approach, we identified a set of features that can be used to discriminate between bound and unbound motifs. We also discovered that some TFs bind most or all of their strong motifs in intergenic regions. Our data demonstrate that local sequence context can be strikingly different around motifs that are bound compared to motifs that are unbound. We concluded that there are multiple combinations of genomic features that characterize bound or unbound motifs.

The checkpoint transcriptional response: make sure to turn it off once you are satisfied

The replication checkpoint signaling network monitors the presence of replication-induced lesions to DNA and coordinates an elaborate cellular response that includes ample transcriptional reprogramming. Recent work has established two major groups of replication stress-induced genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the DNA damage response (DDR) genes and G 1/S cell cycle (CC) genes. In both cases, transcriptional activation is mediated via checkpoint-dependent inhibition of a transcriptional repressor (Crt1 for DDR and Nrm1 for CC) that participates in negative feedback regulation. This repressor-mediated regulation enables transcription to be rapidly repressed once cells have dealt with the replication stress. The recent finding of a new class of CC genes, named "switch genes," further uncovers a mode of transcription regulation that prevents overexpression of replication stress induced genes during G 1. Collectively, these findings highlight the need for mechanisms that tightly control replication stress-induced transcription, allowing rapid transcriptional activation during replication stress but also avoiding long-term hyperaccumulation of the induced protein product that may be detrimental to cell proliferation.

Molecular basis of the functional distinction between Cln1 and Cln2 cyclins

Cln1 and Cln2 are very similar but not identical cyclins. In this work, we tried to describe the molecular basis of the functional distinction between Cln1 and Cln2. We constructed chimeric cyclins containing different fragments of Cln1 and Cln2 and performed several functional analysis that make it possible to distinguish between Cln1 or Cln2. We identified that region between amino acids 225 and 299 of Cln2 is not only necessary but also sufficient to confer Cln2 specific functionality compared with Cln1. We also studied Cln1 and Cln2 subcellular localization identifying additional differences between them. Both cyclins are distributed between the nucleus and the cytoplasm, but Cln1 shows stronger nuclear accumulation. Nuclear import of both cyclins is mediated by the classical nuclear import pathway and by sequences in the N-terminal end of the proteins. For Cln2, but not for Cln1, a nuclear export mechanism mediated by karyopherin Msn5 has been identified. Strikingly, Cln2 export depends on a Msn5-dependent NES between amino acids 225 and 299. In fact, the introduction of this region confers to Cln1 an export mechanism dependent on Msn5; importantly, this causes the gain of Cln2-specific cytosolic functions and the impairment of nuclear function. In short, a region from Cln2 controlling an Msn5-dependent nuclear export mechanism confers a specific functionality to Cln2 compared with Cln1.