The Integrity of piRNA Clusters is Abolished by Insulators in the Drosophila Germline

Modeling early germline immunization after horizontal transfer of transposable elements reveals internal piRNA cluster heterogeneity

BACKGROUND

A fraction of all genomes is composed of transposable elements (TEs) whose mobility needs to be carefully controlled. In gonads, TE activity is repressed by PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs), a class of small RNAs synthesized by heterochromatic loci enriched in TE fragments, called piRNA clusters. Maintenance of active piRNA clusters across generations is secured by maternal piRNA inheritance providing the memory for TE repression. On rare occasions, genomes encounter horizontal transfer (HT) of new TEs with no piRNA targeting them, threatening the host genome integrity. Naïve genomes can eventually start to produce new piRNAs against these genomic invaders, but the timing of their emergence remains elusive.

RESULTS

Using a set of TE-derived transgenes inserted in different germline piRNA clusters and functional assays, we have modeled a TE HT in Drosophila melanogaster. We have found that the complete co-option of these transgenes by a germline piRNA cluster can occur within four generations associated with the production of new piRNAs all along the transgenes and the germline silencing of piRNA sensors. Synthesis of new transgenic TE piRNAs is linked to piRNA cluster transcription dependent on Moonshiner and heterochromatin mark deposition that propagates more efficiently on short sequences. Moreover, we found that sequences located within piRNA clusters can have different piRNA profiles and can influence transcript accumulation of nearby sequences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that genetic and epigenetic properties, such as transcription, piRNA profiles, heterochromatin, and conversion efficiency along piRNA clusters, could be heterogeneous depending on the sequences that compose them. These findings suggest that the capacity of transcriptional signal erasure induced by the chromatin complex specific of the piRNA cluster can be incomplete through the piRNA cluster loci. Finally, these results have revealed an unexpected level of complexity that highlights a new magnitude of piRNA cluster plasticity fundamental for the maintenance of genome integrity.

The histone demethylase Kdm3 prevents auto-immune piRNAs production in Drosophila

Genome integrity of the animal germline is protected from transposable element activity by PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs). While piRNA biogenesis is intensively explored, little is known about the genetical determination of piRNA clusters, the genomic sources of piRNAs. Using a bimodal epigenetic state piRNA cluster (BX2), we identified the histone demethylase Kdm3 as being able to prevent a cryptic piRNA production. In the absence of Kdm3, dozens of coding gene-containing regions become genuine germline dual-strand piRNA clusters. Eggs laid by Kdm3 mutant females show developmental defects phenocopying loss of function of genes embedded into the additional piRNA clusters, suggesting an inheritance of functional ovarian "auto-immune" piRNAs. Antagonizing piRNA cluster determination through chromatin modifications appears crucial to prevent auto-immune genic piRNAs production.

The Drosophila ZAD zinc finger protein Kipferl guides Rhino to piRNA clusters

RNA interference systems depend on the synthesis of small RNA precursors whose sequences define the target spectrum of these silencing pathways. The Drosophila Heterochromatin Protein 1 (HP1) variant Rhino permits transcription of PIWI-interacting RNA (piRNA) precursors within transposon-rich heterochromatic loci in germline cells. Current models propose that Rhino’s specific chromatin occupancy at piRNA source loci is determined by histone marks and maternally inherited piRNAs, but also imply the existence of other, undiscovered specificity cues. Here, we identify a member of the diverse family of zinc finger associated domain (ZAD)-C₂H₂ zinc finger proteins, Kipferl, as critical Rhino cofactor in ovaries. By binding to guanosine-rich DNA motifs and interacting with the Rhino chromodomain, Kipferl recruits Rhino to specific loci and stabilizes it on chromatin. In kipferl mutant flies, Rhino is lost from most of its target chromatin loci and instead accumulates on pericentromeric Satellite arrays, resulting in decreased levels of transposon targeting piRNAs and impaired fertility. Our findings reveal that DNA sequence, in addition to the H3K9me3 mark, determines the identity of piRNA source loci and provide insight into how Rhino might be caught in the crossfire of genetic conflicts.

The genes within our DNA encode the essentials of our body plan and how each task in the body is achieved. However, our genome also contains many repetitive regions of DNA that do not encode functional genes. Some of these regions are genetic parasites known as transposons that try to multiply and spread around the DNA of their host. To prevent transposon DNA from interfering with the way the body operates, humans and other animals have evolved elaborate defense mechanisms to identify transposons and prevent them from multiplying.

In one such mechanism, known as the piRNA pathway, the host makes small molecules known as piRNAs that have sequences complementary to those of transposons, and act as guides to silence the transposons. The instructions to make these piRNAs are stored in the form of transposon fragments in dedicated regions of host DNA called piRNA clusters. These clusters thereby act as genetic memory, allowing the host to recognize and silence specific transposons in other locations within the host’s genome. In fruit flies, a protein called Rhino binds to piRNA clusters that are densely packed to allow piRNAs to be made. However, it remained unclear how Rhino is able to identify and bind to piRNA clusters, but not to other similarly densely packed regions of DNA.

Baumgartner et al. used a combination of genetic, genomic, and imaging approaches to study how Rhino finds its way in the fruit fly genome. They found that another protein called Kipferl interacts with Rhino and is required for Rhino to bind to nearly all piRNA clusters. Since Kipferl can by itself bind to the sequences that Rhino needs to find, the results suggest that Kipferl acts to recruit and initiate Rhino binding within densely packed piRNA clusters. Further experiments found that, in flies lacking Kipferl, Rhino binds to regions of DNA called Satellite repeats, hinting that these selfish sequences may compete for Rhino for their own benefit.

The finding that Kipferl and Rhino work together to define the memory system of the piRNA pathway strongly advances our understanding of how a sequence-specific defense system based on small RNAs can be established.

Special Issue: Repetitive DNA Sequences

Repetitive DNAs are ubiquitous in eukaryotic genomes and, in many species, comprise the bulk of the genome. Repeats include transposable elements that can self-mobilize and disperse around the genome and tandemly-repeated satellite DNAs that increase in copy number due to replication slippage and unequal crossing over. Despite their abundance, repetitive DNAs are often ignored in genomic studies due to technical challenges in identifying, assembling, and quantifying them. New technologies and methods are now allowing unprecedented power to analyze repetitive DNAs across diverse taxa. Repetitive DNAs are of particular interest because they can represent distinct modes of genome evolution. Some repetitive DNAs form essential genome structures, such as telomeres and centromeres, that are required for proper chromosome maintenance and segregation, while others form piRNA clusters that regulate transposable elements; thus, these elements are expected to evolve under purifying selection. In contrast, other repeats evolve selfishly and cause genetic conflicts with their host species that drive adaptive evolution of host defense systems. However, the majority of repeats likely accumulate in eukaryotes in the absence of selection due to mechanisms of transposition and unequal crossing over. However, even these “neutral” repeats may indirectly influence genome evolution as they reach high abundance. In this Special Issue, the contributing authors explore these questions from a range of perspectives.