Mechanism of chromosomal boundary action: roadblock, sink, or loop?

Chromosome structure in Drosophila is determined by boundary pairing not loop extrusion

Two different models have been proposed to explain how the endpoints of chromatin looped domains ('TADs') in eukaryotic chromosomes are determined. In the first, a cohesin complex extrudes a loop until it encounters a boundary element roadblock, generating a stem-loop. In this model, boundaries are functionally autonomous: they have an intrinsic ability to halt the movement of incoming cohesin complexes that is independent of the properties of neighboring boundaries. In the second, loops are generated by boundary:boundary pairing. In this model, boundaries are functionally non-autonomous, and their ability to form a loop depends upon how well they match with their neighbors. Moreover, unlike the loop-extrusion model, pairing interactions can generate both stem-loops and circle-loops. We have used a combination of MicroC to analyze how TADs are organized, and experimental manipulations of the even skipped TAD boundary, homie, to test the predictions of the 'loop-extrusion' and the 'boundary-pairing' models. Our findings are incompatible with the loop-extrusion model, and instead suggest that the endpoints of TADs in flies are determined by a mechanism in which boundary elements physically pair with their partners, either head-to-head or head-to-tail, with varying degrees of specificity. Although our experiments do not address how partners find each other, the mechanism is unlikely to require loop extrusion.

Stem-loop and circle-loop TADs generated by directional pairing of boundary elements have distinct physical and regulatory properties

The chromosomes in multicellular eukaryotes are organized into a series of topologically independent loops called TADs. In flies, TADs are formed by physical interactions between neighboring boundaries. Fly boundaries exhibit distinct partner preferences, and pairing interactions between boundaries are typically orientation-dependent. Pairing can be head-to-tail or head-to-head. The former generates a stem-loop TAD, while the latter gives a circle-loop TAD. The TAD that encompasses the Drosophila even skipped (eve) gene is formed by the head-to-tail pairing of the nhomie and homie boundaries. To explore the relationship between loop topology and the physical and regulatory landscape, we flanked the nhomie boundary region with two attP sites. The attP sites were then used to generate four boundary replacements: λ DNA, nhomie forward (WT orientation), nhomie reverse (opposite of WT orientation), and homie forward (same orientation as WT homie). The nhomie forward replacement restores the WT physical and regulatory landscape: in MicroC experiments, the eve TAD is a 'volcano' triangle topped by a plume, and the eve gene and its regulatory elements are sequestered from interactions with neighbors. The λ DNA replacement lacks boundary function: the endpoint of the 'new' eve TAD on the nhomie side is ill-defined, and eve stripe enhancers activate a nearby gene, eIF3j. While nhomie reverse and homie forward restore the eve TAD, the topology is a circle-loop, and this changes the local physical and regulatory landscape. In MicroC experiments, the eve TAD interacts with its neighbors, and the plume at the top of the eve triangle peak is converted to a pair of 'clouds' of contacts with the next-door TADs. Consistent with the loss of isolation afforded by the stem-loop topology, the eve enhancers weakly activate genes in the neighboring TADs. Conversely, eve function is partially disrupted.

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.

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.

Tau Oligomers Neurotoxicity

Although the mechanisms of toxic activity of tau are not fully recognized, it is supposed that the tau toxicity is related rather not to insoluble tau aggregates but to its intermediate forms. It seems that neurofibrillar tangles (NFTs) themselves, despite being composed of toxic tau, are probably neither necessary nor sufficient for tau-induced neuronal dysfunction and toxicity. Tau oligomers (TauOs) formed during the early stages of tau aggregation are the pathological forms that play a key role in eliciting the loss of neurons and behavioral impairments in several neurodegenerative disorders called tauopathies. They can be found in tauopathic diseases, the most common of which is Alzheimer's disease (AD). Evidence of co-occurrence of b-amyloid, α-synuclein, and tau into their most toxic forms, i.e., oligomers, suggests that these species interact and influence each other's aggregation in several tauopathies. The mechanism responsible for oligomeric tau neurotoxicity is a subject of intensive investigation. In this review, we summarize the most recent literature on the damaging effect of TauOs on the stability of the genome and the function of the nucleus, energy production and mitochondrial function, cell signaling and synaptic plasticity, the microtubule assembly, neuronal cytoskeleton and axonal transport, and the effectiveness of the protein degradation system.

Chromatin-modifying elements for recombinant protein production in mammalian cell systems

Mammalian cells are the preferred choice system for the production of complex molecules, such as recombinant therapeutic proteins. Although the technology for increasing the yield of proteins has improved rapidly, the process of selecting, identifying as well as maintaining high-yield cell clones is still troublesome, time-consuming and usually uncertain. Optimization of expression vectors is one of the most effective methods for enhancing protein expression levels. Several commonly used chromatin-modifying elements, including the matrix attachment region, ubiquitous chromatin opening elements, insulators, stabilizing anti-repressor elements can be used to increase the expression level and stability of recombinant proteins. In this review, these chromatin-modifying elements used for the expression vector optimization in mammalian cells are summarized, and future strategies for the utilization of expression cassettes are also discussed.

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.

The same domain of Su(Hw) is required for enhancer blocking and direct promoter repression

Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] is a DNA-binding architectural protein that participates in the organization of insulators and repression of promoters in Drosophila. This protein contains acidic regions at both ends and a central cluster of 12 zinc finger domains, some of which are involved in the specific recognition of the binding site. One of the well-described in vivo function of Su(Hw) is the repression of transcription of neuronal genes in oocytes. Here, we have found that the same Su(Hw) C-terminal region (aa 720–892) is required for insulation as well as for promoter repression. The best characterized partners of Su(Hw), CP190 and Mod(mdg4)-67.2, are not involved in the repression of neuronal genes. Taken together, these results suggest that an unknown protein or protein complex binds to the C-terminal region of Su(Hw) and is responsible for the direct repression activity of Su(Hw).

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.

Multiple interactions are involved in a highly specific association of the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 isoform with the Su(Hw) sites in Drosophila

The best-studied Drosophila insulator complex consists of two BTB-containing proteins, the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 isoform and CP190, which are recruited to the chromatin through interactions with the DNA-binding Su(Hw) protein. It was shown previously that Mod(mdg4)-67.2 is critical for the enhancer-blocking activity of the Su(Hw) insulators and it differs from more than 30 other Mod(mdg4) isoforms by the C-terminal domain required for a specific interaction with Su(Hw) only. The mechanism of the highly specific association between Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and Su(Hw) is not well understood. Therefore, we have performed a detailed analysis of domains involved in the interaction of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 with Su(Hw) and CP190. We found that the N-terminal region of Su(Hw) interacts with the glutamine-rich domain common to all the Mod(mdg4) isoforms. The unique C-terminal part of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 contains the Su(Hw)-interacting domain and the FLYWCH domain that facilitates a specific association between Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and the CP190/Su(Hw) complex. Finally, interaction between the BTB domain of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and the M domain of CP190 has been demonstrated. By using transgenic lines expressing different protein variants, we have shown that all the newly identified interactions are to a greater or lesser extent redundant, which increases the reliability in the formation of the protein complexes.

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.

Boundaries of loop domains (insulators): Determinants of chromosome form and function in multicellular eukaryotes

Chromosomes in multicellular animals are subdivided into a series of looped domains. In addition to being the underlying principle for organizing the chromatin fiber, looping is critical for processes ranging from gene regulation to recombination and repair. The subdivision of chromosomes into looped domains depends upon a special class of architectural elements called boundaries or insulators. These elements are distributed throughout the genome and are ubiquitous building blocks of chromosomes. In this review, we focus on features of boundaries that are critical in determining the topology of the looped domains and their genetic properties. We highlight the properties of fly boundaries that are likely to have an important bearing on the organization of looped domains in vertebrates, and discuss the functional consequences of the observed similarities and differences.

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.

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.

Determinants of Chromosome Architecture: Insulator Pairing in cis and in trans

The chromosomes of multicellular animals are organized into a series of topologically independent looped domains. This domain organization is critical for the proper utilization and propagation of the genetic information encoded by the chromosome. A special set of architectural elements, called boundaries or insulators, are responsible both for subdividing the chromatin into discrete domains and for determining the topological organization of these domains. Central to the architectural functions of insulators are homologous and heterologous insulator:insulator pairing interactions. The former (pairing between copies of the same insulator) dictates the process of homolog alignment and pairing in trans, while the latter (pairing between different insulators) defines the topology of looped domains in cis. To elucidate the principles governing these architectural functions, we use two insulators, Homie and Nhomie, that flank the Drosophila even skipped locus. We show that homologous insulator interactions in trans, between Homie on one homolog and Homie on the other, or between Nhomie on one homolog and Nhomie on the other, mediate transvection. Critically, these homologous insulator:insulator interactions are orientation-dependent. Consistent with a role in the alignment and pairing of homologs, self-pairing in trans is head-to-head. Head-to-head self-interactions in cis have been reported for other fly insulators, suggesting that this is a general principle of self-pairing. Homie and Nhomie not only pair with themselves, but with each other. Heterologous Homie-Nhomie interactions occur in cis, and we show that they serve to delimit a looped chromosomal domain that contains the even skipped transcription unit and its associated enhancers. The topology of this loop is defined by the heterologous pairing properties of Homie and Nhomie. Instead of being head-to-head, which would generate a circular loop, Homie-Nhomie pairing is head-to-tail. Head-to-tail pairing in cis generates a stem-loop, a configuration much like that observed in classical lampbrush chromosomes. These pairing principles provide a mechanistic underpinning for the observed topologies within and between chromosomes.

The chromosomes of multicellular animals are organized into a series of topologically independent looped domains. This domain organization is critical for the proper utilization and propagation of the genetic information encoded by the chromosome. A special set of architectural elements, called boundaries or insulators, are responsible for both subdividing the chromatin fiber into discrete domains, and determining the topological organization of these domains. Central to the architectural functions of insulators are heterologous and homologous insulator:insulator pairing interactions. In Drosophila, the former defines the topology of individual looped domains in cis, while the latter dictates the process of homolog alignment and pairing in trans. Here we use two insulators from the even skipped locus to elucidate the principles governing these two architectural functions. These principles align with several longstanding observations, and resolve a number of conundrums regarding chromosome topology and function.

In the loop: promoter-enhancer interactions and bioinformatics

Enhancer-promoter regulation is a fundamental mechanism underlying differential transcriptional regulation. Spatial chromatin organization brings remote enhancers in contact with target promoters in cis to regulate gene expression. There is considerable evidence for promoter-enhancer interactions (PEIs). In the recent years, genome-wide analyses have identified signatures and mapped novel enhancers; however, being able to precisely identify their target gene(s) requires massive biological and bioinformatics efforts. In this review, we give a short overview of the chromatin landscape and transcriptional regulation. We discuss some key concepts and problems related to chromatin interaction detection technologies, and emerging knowledge from genome-wide chromatin interaction data sets. Then, we critically review different types of bioinformatics analysis methods and tools related to representation and visualization of PEI data, raw data processing and PEI prediction. Lastly, we provide specific examples of how PEIs have been used to elucidate a functional role of non-coding single-nucleotide polymorphisms. The topic is at the forefront of epigenetic research, and by highlighting some future bioinformatics challenges in the field, this review provides a comprehensive background for future PEI studies.

Active chromatin and transcription play a key role in chromosome partitioning into topologically associating domains

Recent advances enabled by the Hi-C technique have unraveled many principles of chromosomal folding that were subsequently linked to disease and gene regulation. In particular, Hi-C revealed that chromosomes of animals are organized into topologically associating domains (TADs), evolutionary conserved compact chromatin domains that influence gene expression. Mechanisms that underlie partitioning of the genome into TADs remain poorly understood. To explore principles of TAD folding in Drosophila melanogaster, we performed Hi-C and poly(A)⁺ RNA-seq in four cell lines of various origins (S2, Kc167, DmBG3-c2, and OSC). Contrary to previous studies, we find that regions between TADs (i.e., the inter-TADs and TAD boundaries) in Drosophila are only weakly enriched with the insulator protein dCTCF, while another insulator protein Su(Hw) is preferentially present within TADs. However, Drosophila inter-TADs harbor active chromatin and constitutively transcribed (housekeeping) genes. Accordingly, we find that binding of insulator proteins dCTCF and Su(Hw) predicts TAD boundaries much worse than active chromatin marks do. Interestingly, inter-TADs correspond to decompacted inter-bands of polytene chromosomes, whereas TADs mostly correspond to densely packed bands. Collectively, our results suggest that TADs are condensed chromatin domains depleted in active chromatin marks, separated by regions of active chromatin. We propose the mechanism of TAD self-assembly based on the ability of nucleosomes from inactive chromatin to aggregate, and lack of this ability in acetylated nucleosomal arrays. Finally, we test this hypothesis by polymer simulations and find that TAD partitioning may be explained by different modes of inter-nucleosomal interactions for active and inactive chromatin.

An Organizational Hub of Developmentally Regulated Chromatin Loops in the Drosophila Antennapedia Complex

Chromatin boundary elements (CBEs) are widely distributed in the genome and mediate formation of chromatin loops, but their roles in gene regulation remain poorly understood. The complex expression pattern of the Drosophila homeotic gene Sex combs reduced (Scr) is directed by an unusually long regulatory sequence harboring diverse cis elements and an intervening neighbor gene fushi tarazu (ftz). Here we report the presence of a multitude of CBEs in the Scr regulatory region. Selective and dynamic pairing among these CBEs mediates developmentally regulated chromatin loops. In particular, the SF1 boundary plays a central role in organizing two subsets of chromatin loops: one subset encloses ftz, limiting its access by the surrounding Scr enhancers and compartmentalizing distinct histone modifications, and the other subset subdivides the Scr regulatory sequences into independent enhancer access domains. We show that these CBEs exhibit diverse enhancer-blocking activities that vary in strength and tissue distribution. Tandem pairing of SF1 and SF2, two strong CBEs that flank the ftz domain, allows the distal enhancers to bypass their block in transgenic Drosophila, providing a mechanism for the endogenous Scr enhancer to circumvent the ftz domain. Our study demonstrates how an endogenous CBE network, centrally orchestrated by SF1, could remodel the genomic environment to facilitate gene regulation during development.

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.

Chromatin loops as allosteric modulators of enhancer-promoter interactions

The classic model of eukaryotic gene expression requires direct spatial contact between a distal enhancer and a proximal promoter. Recent Chromosome Conformation Capture (3C) studies show that enhancers and promoters are embedded in a complex network of looping interactions. Here we use a polymer model of chromatin fiber to investigate whether, and to what extent, looping interactions between elements in the vicinity of an enhancer-promoter pair can influence their contact frequency. Our equilibrium polymer simulations show that a chromatin loop, formed by elements flanking either an enhancer or a promoter, suppresses enhancer-promoter interactions, working as an insulator. A loop formed by elements located in the region between an enhancer and a promoter, on the contrary, facilitates their interactions. We find that different mechanisms underlie insulation and facilitation; insulation occurs due to steric exclusion by the loop, and is a global effect, while facilitation occurs due to an effective shortening of the enhancer-promoter genomic distance, and is a local effect. Consistently, we find that these effects manifest quite differently for in silico 3C and microscopy. Our results show that looping interactions that do not directly involve an enhancer-promoter pair can nevertheless significantly modulate their interactions. This phenomenon is analogous to allosteric regulation in proteins, where a conformational change triggered by binding of a regulatory molecule to one site affects the state of another site.

In eukaryotes, enhancers directly contact promoters over large genomic distances to regulate gene expression. Characterizing the principles underlying these long-range enhancer-promoter contacts is crucial for a full understanding of gene expression. Recent experimental mapping of chromosomal interactions by the Hi-C method shows an intricate network of local looping interactions surrounding enhancers and promoters. We model a region of chromatin fiber as a long polymer and study how the formation of loops between certain regulatory elements can insulate or facilitate enhancer-promoter interactions. We find 2–5 fold insulation or facilitation, depending on the location of looping elements relative to an enhancer-promoter pair. These effects originate from the polymer nature of chromatin, without requiring additional mechanisms beyond the formation of a chromatin loop. Our findings suggest that loop-mediated gene regulation by elements in the vicinity of an enhancer-promoter pair can be understood as an allosteric effect. This highlights the complex effects that local chromatin organization can have on gene regulation.

Quantitation of interactions between two DNA loops demonstrates loop domain insulation in E. coli cells

Eukaryotic gene regulation involves complex patterns of long-range DNA-looping interactions between enhancers and promoters, but how these specific interactions are achieved is poorly understood. Models that posit other DNA loops--that aid or inhibit enhancer-promoter contact--are difficult to test or quantitate rigorously in eukaryotic cells. Here, we use the well-characterized DNA-looping proteins Lac repressor and phage λ CI to measure interactions between pairs of long DNA loops in E. coli cells in the three possible topological arrangements. We find that side-by-side loops do not affect each other. Nested loops assist each other's formation consistent with their distance-shortening effect. In contrast, alternating loops, where one looping element is placed within the other DNA loop, inhibit each other's formation, thus providing clear support for the loop domain model for insulation. Modeling shows that combining loop assistance and loop interference can provide strong specificity in long-range interactions.

Insulators recruit histone methyltransferase dMes4 to regulate chromatin of flanking genes

Chromosomal domains in Drosophila are marked by the insulator-binding proteins (IBPs) dCTCF/Beaf32 and cofactors that participate in regulating long-range interactions. Chromosomal borders are further enriched in specific histone modifications, yet the role of histone modifiers and nucleosome dynamics in this context remains largely unknown. Here, we show that IBP depletion impairs nucleosome dynamics specifically at the promoters and coding sequence of genes flanked by IBP binding sites. Biochemical purification identifies the H3K36 histone methyltransferase NSD/dMes-4 as a novel IBP cofactor, which specifically co-regulates the chromatin accessibility of hundreds of genes flanked by dCTCF/Beaf32. NSD/dMes-4 presets chromatin before the recruitment of transcriptional activators including DREF that triggers Set2/Hypb-dependent H3K36 trimethylation, nucleosome positioning, and RNA splicing. Our results unveil a model for how IBPs regulate nucleosome dynamics and gene expression through NSD/dMes-4, which may regulate H3K27me3 spreading. Our data uncover how IBPs dynamically regulate chromatin organization depending on distinct cofactors.

Homeotic gene regulation: a paradigm for epigenetic mechanisms underlying organismal development

The organization of eukaryotic genome into chromatin within the nucleus eventually dictates the cell type specific expression pattern of genes. This higher order of chromatin organization is established during development and dynamically maintained throughout the life span. Developmental mechanisms are conserved in bilaterians and hence they have body plan in common, which is achieved by regulatory networks controlling cell type specific gene expression. Homeotic genes are conserved in metazoans and are crucial for animal development as they specify cell type identity along the anterior-posterior body axis. Hox genes are the best studied in the context of epigenetic regulation that has led to significant understanding of the organismal development. Epigenome specific regulation is brought about by conserved chromatin modulating factors like PcG/trxG proteins during development and differentiation. Here we discuss the conserved epigenetic mechanisms relevant to homeotic gene regulation in metazoans.

Chromatin immunoprecipitation indirect peaks highlight long-range interactions of insulator proteins and Pol II pausing

Eukaryotic chromosomes are partitioned into topologically associating domains (TADs) that are demarcated by distinct insulator-binding proteins (IBPs) in Drosophila. Whether IBPs regulate specific long-range contacts and how this may impact gene expression remains unclear. Here we identify "indirect peaks" of multiple IBPs that represent their distant sites of interactions through long-range contacts. Indirect peaks depend on protein-protein interactions among multiple IBPs and their common cofactors, including CP190, as confirmed by high-resolution analyses of long-range contacts. Mutant IBPs unable to interact with CP190 impair long-range contacts as well as the expression of hundreds of distant genes that are specifically flanked by indirect peaks. Regulation of distant genes strongly correlates with RNAPII pausing, highlighting how this key transcriptional stage may trap insulator-based long-range interactions. Our data illustrate how indirect peaks may decipher gene regulatory networks through specific long-range interactions.

Making connections: insulators organize eukaryotic chromosomes into independent cis-regulatory networks

Insulators play a central role in subdividing the chromosome into a series of discrete topologically independent domains and in ensuring that enhancers and silencers contact their appropriate target genes. In this review we first discuss the general characteristics of insulator elements and their associated protein factors. A growing collection of insulator proteins have been identified including a family of proteins whose expression is developmentally regulated. We next consider several unexpected discoveries that require us to completely rethink how insulators function (and how they can best be assayed). These discoveries also require a reevaluation of how insulators might restrict or orchestrate (by preventing or promoting) interactions between regulatory elements and their target genes. We conclude by connecting these new insights into the mechanisms of insulator action to dynamic changes in the three-dimensional topology of the chromatin fiber and the generation of specific patterns of gene activity during development and differentiation.

Chromatin insulators and long-distance interactions in Drosophila

Data on long-distance enhancer-mediated activation of gene promoters and complex regulation of gene expression by multiple enhancers have prompted the hypothesis that the action of enhancers is restricted by insulators. Studies with transgenic lines have shown that insulators are responsible for establishing proper local interactions between regulatory elements, but not for defining independent transcriptional domains that restrict the activity of enhancers. It has also become apparent that enhancer blocking is only one of several functional activities of known insulator proteins, which also contribute to the organization of chromosome architecture and the integrity of regulatory elements.

Effective blocking of the white enhancer requires cooperation between two main mechanisms suggested for the insulator function

Chromatin insulators block the action of transcriptional enhancers when interposed between an enhancer and a promoter. In this study, we examined the role of chromatin loops formed by two unrelated insulators, gypsy and Fab-7, in their enhancer-blocking activity. To test for this activity, we selected the white reporter gene that is activated by the eye-specific enhancer. The results showed that one copy of the gypsy or Fab-7 insulator failed to block the eye enhancer in most of genomic sites, whereas a chromatin loop formed by two gypsy insulators flanking either the eye enhancer or the reporter completely blocked white stimulation by the enhancer. However, strong enhancer blocking was achieved due not only to chromatin loop formation but also to the direct interaction of the gypsy insulator with the eye enhancer, which was confirmed by the 3C assay. In particular, it was observed that Mod(mdg4)-67.2, a component of the gypsy insulator, interacted with the Zeste protein, which is critical for the eye enhancer–white promoter communication. These results suggest that efficient enhancer blocking depends on the combination of two factors: chromatin loop formation by paired insulators, which generates physical constraints for enhancer–promoter communication, and the direct interaction of proteins recruited to an insulator and to the enhancer–promoter pair.

The mechanism underlying enhancer blocking by insulators is unclear. Current models suggest that insulator proteins block enhancers either by formation of chromatin loops or by direct interaction with protein complexes bound to the enhancers and promoters. Here, we tested the role of a chromatin loop in blocking the activity of two Drosophila insulators, gypsy and Fab-7. Both insulators failed to effectively block the interaction between the eye enhancer and the white promoter at most of genomic sites. Insertion of an additional gypsy copy either upstream of the eye enhancer or downstream from the white gene led to complete blocking of the enhancer–promoter communication. In contrast, flanking of the eye enhancer by Fab-7 insulators only weakly improved enhancer blocking. Such a difference in enhancer blocking may be explained by finding that Mod(mdg4)-67.2, a component of gypsy insulator, directly interacts with the Zeste protein, which is critical for enhancer–promoter communication in the white gene.

New properties of Drosophila scs and scs' insulators

Insulators are defined as a class of regulatory elements that delimit independent transcriptional domains within eukaryotic genomes. The first insulators to be identified were scs and scs', which flank the domain including two heat shock 70 genes. Zw5 and BEAF bind to scs and scs', respectively, and are responsible for the interaction between these insulators. Using the regulatory regions of yellow and white reporter genes, we have found that the interaction between scs and scs' improves the enhancer-blocking activity of the weak scs' insulator. The sequences of scs and scs' insulators include the promoters of genes that are strongly active in S2 cells but not in the eyes, in which the enhancer-blocking activity of these insulators has been extensively examined. Only the promoter of the Cad87A gene located at the end of the scs insulator drives white expression in the eyes, and the white enhancer can slightly stimulate this promoter. The scs insulator contains polyadenylation signals that may be important for preventing transcription through the insulator. As shown previously, scs and scs' can insulate transcription of the white transgene from the enhancing effects of the surrounding genome, a phenomenon known as the chromosomal position effect (CPE). After analyzing many independent transgenic lines, we have concluded that transgenes carrying the scs insulator are rarely inserted into genomic regions that stimulate the white reporter expression in the eyes.

Elba, a novel developmentally regulated chromatin boundary factor is a hetero-tripartite DNA binding complex

Chromatin boundaries subdivide eukaryotic chromosomes into functionally autonomous domains of genetic activity. This subdivision insulates genes and/or regulatory elements within a domain from promiscuous interactions with nearby domains. While it was previously assumed that the chromosomal domain landscape is fixed, there is now growing evidence that the landscape may be subject to tissue and stage specific regulation. Here we report the isolation and characterization of a novel developmentally restricted boundary factor, Elba. We show that Elba is an unusual hetero-tripartite protein complex that requires all three proteins for DNA binding and insulator activity.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00171.001

If all of the DNA in a human cell was stretched out, it would be about 2 m long. The nucleus of a human cell, on the other hand, has a diameter of just 6 μm, so the DNA molecules that carry all the genetic information in the cell need to be carefully folded to fit inside the nucleus. Cells meet this challenge by combining their DNA molecules with proteins to form a compact and highly organized structure called chromatin. Packaging DNA into chromatin also reduces damage to it.

But what happens when the cell needs to express the genes carried by the DNA as proteins or other gene products? The answer is that the compact structure of chromatin relaxes and opens up, which allows the DNA to be transcribed into messenger RNA. Indeed, packing DNA into chromatin makes this process more reliable, thus ensuring that the cell only produces proteins and other gene products when it needs them. However, because cross-talk between neighboring genes could potentially disrupt or change gene expression patterns, cells evolved special elements called boundaries or insulators to stop this from happening. These elements subdivide eukaryotic chromosomes into functionally autonomous chromatin domains.

Since the protein factors implicated in boundary function seemed to be active in all tissues and cell types, it was assumed for many years that these boundaries and the resulting chromatin domains were fixed. However, a number of recent studies have shown that boundary activity can be subject to regulation, and thus chromatin domains are dynamic structures that can be defined and redefined during development to alter patterns of gene expression.

Aoki et al. report the isolation and characterization of a new fruit fly boundary factor that, unlike previously characterized factors, is active only during a specific stage of development. The Elba factor is also unusual in that it is made of three different proteins, known as Elba1, Elba2, and Elba3, and all three must be present for it to bind to DNA. While Elba2 is present during most stages of development, the other two Elba proteins are only present during early embryonic development, so the boundary factor is only active in early embryos. In addition to revealing a new mechanism for controlling boundary activity as an organism develops, the studies of Aoki et al. provide further evidence that chromatin domains can be dynamic.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00171.002

Transcription factories, chromatin loops, and the dysregulation of gene expression in malignancy

Pathologists recognize and classify cancers according to nuclear morphology, but there remains little scientific explanation of why malignant nuclei possess their characteristic features, or how those features are related to dysregulated function. This essay will discuss a basic structure-function axis that connects one central architectural motif in the nucleus-the chromatin loop-to the vital nuclear function of transcription. The loop is attached to a "transcription factory" through components of the transcription machinery (either polymerases or transcriptional activators/repressors), and the position of a gene within a loop determines how often that gene is transcribed. Then, dysregulated transcription is tightly coupled to alterations in structure, and vice versa. We also speculate on how the experimental approaches being used to analyze loops and factories might be applied to study the problems of tumour initiation and progression.

Enhancers and silencers: an integrated and simple model for their function

Regulatory DNA elements such as enhancers, silencers and insulators are embedded in metazoan genomes, and they control gene expression during development. Although they fulfil different roles, they share specific properties. Herein we discuss some examples and a parsimonious model for their function is proposed. All are transcription units that tether their target promoters close to, or distant from, transcriptional hot spots (or 'factories').

Theoretical analysis of the role of chromatin interactions in long-range action of enhancers and insulators

Long-distance regulatory interactions between enhancers and their target genes are commonplace in higher eukaryotes. Interposed boundaries or insulators are able to block these long-distance regulatory interactions. The mechanistic basis for insulator activity and how it relates to enhancer action-at-a-distance remains unclear. Here we explore the idea that topological loops could simultaneously account for regulatory interactions of distal enhancers and the insulating activity of boundary elements. We show that while loop formation is not in itself sufficient to explain action at a distance, incorporating transient nonspecific and moderate attractive interactions between the chromatin fibers strongly enhances long-distance regulatory interactions and is sufficient to generate a euchromatin-like state. Under these same conditions, the subdivision of the loop into two topologically independent loops by insulators inhibits interdomain interactions. The underlying cause of this effect is a suppression of crossings in the contact map at intermediate distances. Thus our model simultaneously accounts for regulatory interactions at a distance and the insulator activity of boundary elements. This unified model of the regulatory roles of chromatin loops makes several testable predictions that could be confronted with in vitro experiments, as well as genomic chromatin conformation capture and fluorescent microscopic approaches.

Roles of chromatin insulator proteins in higher-order chromatin organization and transcription regulation

Eukaryotic chromosomes are condensed into several hierarchical levels of complexity: DNA is wrapped around core histones to form nucleosomes, nucleosomes form a higher-order structure called chromatin, and chromatin is subsequently compartmentalized in part by the combination of multiple specific or unspecific long-range contacts. The conformation of chromatin at these three levels greatly influences DNA metabolism and transcription. One class of chromatin regulatory proteins called insulator factors may organize chromatin both locally, by setting up barriers between heterochromatin and euchromatin, and globally by establishing platforms for long-range interactions. Here, we review recent data revealing a global role of insulator proteins in the regulation of transcription through the formation of clusters of long-range interactions that impact different levels of chromatin organization.