HP1 reshapes nucleosome core to promote phase separation of heterochromatin

Heterochromatin affects genome function at many levels. It enables heritable gene repression, maintains chromosome integrity and provides mechanical rigidity to the nucleus1,2. These diverse functions are proposed to arise in part from compaction of the underlying chromatin2. A major type of heterochromatin contains at its core the complex formed between HP1 proteins and chromatin that is methylated on histone H3, lysine 9 (H3K9me). HP1 is proposed to use oligomerization to compact chromatin into phase-separated condensates3-6. Yet, how HP1-mediated phase separation relates to chromatin compaction remains unclear. Here we show that chromatin compaction by the Schizosaccharomyces pombe HP1 protein Swi6 results in phase-separated liquid condensates. Unexpectedly, we find that Swi6 substantially increases the accessibility and dynamics of buried histone residues within a nucleosome. Restraining these dynamics impairs compaction of chromatin into liquid droplets by Swi6. Our results indicate that Swi6 couples its oligomerization to the phase separation of chromatin by a counterintuitive mechanism, namely the dynamic exposure of buried nucleosomal regions. We propose that such reshaping of the octamer core by Swi6 increases opportunities for multivalent interactions between nucleosomes, thereby promoting phase separation. This mechanism may more generally drive chromatin organization beyond heterochromatin

Amplification and adaptation of centromeric repeats in polyploid switchgrass species.

Centromeres in most higher eukaryotes are composed of long arrays of satellite repeats from a single satellite repeat family. Why centromeres are dominated by a single satellite repeat and how the satellite repeats originate and evolve are among the most intriguing and long-standing questions in centromere biology. We identified eight satellite repeats in the centromeres of tetraploid switchgrass (Panicum virgatum). Seven repeats showed characteristics associated with classical centromeric repeats with monomeric lengths ranging from 166 to 187 bp. Interestingly, these repeats share an 80-bp DNA motif. We demonstrate that this 80-bp motif may dictate translational and rotational phasing of the centromeric repeats with the cenH3 nucleosomes. The sequence of the last centromeric repeat, Pv156, is identical to the 5S ribosomal RNA genes. We demonstrate that a 5S ribosomal RNA gene array was recruited to be the functional centromere for one of the switchgrass chromosomes. Our findings reveal that certain types of satellite repeats, which are associated with unique sequence features and are composed of monomers in mono-nucleosomal length, are favorable for centromeres. Centromeric repeats may undergo dynamic amplification and adaptation before the centromeres in the same species become dominated by the best adapted satellite repeat

Insights into distinct regulatory modes of nucleosome positioning

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The nucleosome is the fundamental unit of eukaryotic genomes. Experimental evidence suggests that the genomic DNA sequence and a variety of protein factors contribute to nucleosome positioning <it>in vivo</it>. However, how nucleosome positioning is determined locally is still largely unknown.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) with particular nucleosomal contexts show a preference to reside on specific chromosomes. We identified four typical gene classes associated with distinct regulatory modes of nucleosome positioning, and further showed that they are distinguished by transcriptional regulation patterns. The first mode involves the cooperativity between chromatin remodeling and stable transcription factor (TF)-DNA binding that is linked to high intrinsic DNA binding affinities, evicting nucleosomes from favorable DNA sequences. The second is the DNA-encoded low nucleosome occupancy that is associated with high gene activity. The third is through chromatin remodeling and histone acetylation, sliding nucleosomes along DNA. This mode is linked to more cryptic sites for TF binding. The last consists of the nucleosome-enriched organization driven by other factors that overrides nucleosome sequence preferences. In addition, we showed that high polymerase II (Pol II) occupancy is associated with high nucleosome occupancy around the transcription start site (TSS).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We identified four different regulatory modes of nucleosome positioning and gave insights into mechanisms that specify promoter nucleosome location. We suggest two distinct modes of recruitment of Pol II, which are selectively employed by different genes.</p

Genome-wide analysis of mobile genetic element insertion sites

Mobile genetic elements (MGEs) account for a significant fraction of eukaryotic genomes and are implicated in altered gene expression and disease. We present an efficient computational protocol for MGE insertion site analysis. ELAN, the suite of tools described here uses standard techniques to identify different MGEs and their distribution on the genome. One component, DNASCANNER analyses known insertion sites of MGEs for the presence of signals that are based on a combination of local physical and chemical properties. ISF (insertion site finder) is a machine-learning tool that incorporates information derived from DNASCANNER. ISF permits classification of a given DNA sequence as a potential insertion site or not, using a support vector machine. We have studied the genomes of Homo sapiens, Mus musculus, Drosophila melanogaster and Entamoeba histolytica via a protocol whereby DNASCANNER is used to identify a common set of statistically important signals flanking the insertion sites in the various genomes. These are used in ISF for insertion site prediction, and the current accuracy of the tool is over 65%. We find similar signals at gene boundaries and splice sites. Together, these data are suggestive of a common insertion mechanism that operates in a variety of eukaryotes

NPRD: Nucleosome Positioning Region Database

Nucleosome Positioning Region Database (NPRD), which is compiling the available experimental data on locations and characteristics of nucleosome formation sites (NFSs), is the first curated NFS-oriented database. The object of the database is a single NFS described in an individual entry. When annotating results of NFS experimental mapping, we pay special attention to several important functional characteristics, such as the relationship between type of gene activity and nucleosome positioning, the influence of non-histone proteins on nucleosome formation, type of the variant of nucleosome positioning (translational or rotational), indication of tissue types and states of cell activity, description of experimental methods used and accuracy of nucleosome position determination, and the results of applying theoretical and computer methods to the analysis of contextual and conformational DNA properties. At present, the NPRD database contains 438 entries and integrates the data described in 124 original papers. The database URL: http://srs6.bionet.nsc.ru/srs6/. Then click the button ‘Databank’ and open the link NUCLEOSOME

Nucleosomal Context of Binding Sites Influences Transcription Factor Binding Affinity and Gene Regulation

Transcription factor (TF) binding to its DNA target site plays an essential role in gene regulation. The location, orientation and spacing of transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) also affect regulatory function of the TF. However, how nucleosomal context of TFBSs influences TF binding and subsequent gene regulation remains to be elucidated. Using genome-wide nucleosome positioning and TF binding data in budding yeast, we found that binding affinities of TFs to DNA tend to decrease with increasing nucleosome occupancy of the associated binding sites. We further demonstrated that nucleosomal context of binding sites is correlated with gene regulation of the corresponding TF. Nucleosome-depleted TFBSs are linked to high gene activity and low expression noise, whereas nucleosome-covered TFBSs are associated with low gene activity and high expression noise. Moreover, nucleosome-covered TFBSs tend to disrupt coexpression of the corresponding TF target genes. We conclude that nucleosomal context of binding sites influences TF binding affinity, subsequently affecting the regulation of TFs on their target genes. This emphasizes the need to include nucleosomal context of TFBSs in modeling gene regulation

Toward a molecular understanding of yeast silent chromatin : roles for H4K16 acetylation and the Sir3 C-terminus

Discrete regions of the eukaryotic genome assume a heritable chromatin structure that is refractory to gene expression. In budding yeast, silent chromatin is characterized by the loading of the Silent Information Regulatory (Sir) proteins (Sir2, Sir3 and Sir4) onto unmodified nucleosomes. This requires the deacetylase activity of Sir2, extensive contacts between Sir3 and the nucleosome, as well as interactions between Sir proteins forming the Sir2-3-4 complex. During my PhD thesis I sought to advance our understanding of these phenomena from a molecular perspective. Previous studies of Sir-chromatin interactions made use of histone peptides and recombinant Sir protein fragments. This gave us an idea of possible interactions, but could not elucidate the role of histone modifications in the assembly of silent chromatin. This required that we examine nucleosomal arrays exposed to full length Sir proteins or the holo Sir complex. In Chapter 2, I made use of an in vitro reconstitution system, that allows the loading of Sir proteins (Sir3, Sir2-4 or Sir2-3-4) onto arrays of regularly spaced nucleosomes, to examine the impact of specific histone modifications (methylation of H3K79, acetylation of H3K56 and H4K16) on Sir protein binding and linker DNA accessibility. The “active” H4K16ac mark is thought to limit the loading of the Sir proteins to silent domain thus favoring the formation of silent regions indirectly by increasing Sir concentration locally. Strikingly, I found that the Sir2-4 subcomplex, unlike Sir3, has a slight higher affinity for H4K16ac-containing chromatin in vitro, consistent with H4K16ac being a substrate for Sir2. In addition the NAD-dependent deacetylation of H4K16ac promotes the binding of the holo Sir complex to chromatin beyond generating hypoacetylated histone tails. We conclude that the Sir2-dependent turnover of the “active” H4K16ac mark directly helps to seed repression. The tight association of the holo Sir complex within silent domains relies on the ability of Sir3 to bind unmodified nucleosomes. In addition, Sir3 dimerization is thought to reinforce and propagate silent domains. However, no Sir3 mutants that fail to dimerize were characterized to date. It was unclear which domain of Sir3 mediates dimerization in vivo. In Chapter 3, we present the X-ray crystal structure of the Sir3 extreme C-terminus (aa 840-978), which folds into a variant winged helix-turn-helix (Sir3 wH) and forms a stable homodimer through a large hydrophobic interface. Loss of wH homodimerization impairs holo Sir3 dimerization in vitro showing that the Sir3 wH module is key to Sir3-Sir3 interaction. Homodimerization mediated by the wH domain can be fully recapitulated by an unrelated bacterial homodimerization domain and is essential for stable association of the Sir2-3-4 complex with chromatin and the formation of silent chromatin in vivo

A comparison of in vitro nucleosome positioning mapped with chicken, frog and a variety of yeast core histones

AbstractUsing high-throughput sequencing, we have mapped sequence-directed nucleosome positioning in vitro on four plasmid DNAs containing DNA fragments derived from the genomes of sheep, drosophila, human and yeast. Chromatins were prepared by reconstitution using chicken, frog and yeast core histones. We also assembled yeast chromatin in which histone H3 was replaced by the centromere-specific histone variant, Cse4. The positions occupied by recombinant frog and native chicken histones were found to be very similar. In contrast, nucleosomes containing the canonical yeast octamer or, in particular, the Cse4 octamer were assembled at distinct populations of locations, a property that was more apparent on particular genomic DNA fragments. The factors that may contribute to this variation in nucleosome positioning and the implications of the behavior are discussed

G+C content dominates intrinsic nucleosome occupancy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The relative preference of nucleosomes to form on individual DNA sequences plays a major role in genome packaging. A wide variety of DNA sequence features are believed to influence nucleosome formation, including periodic dinucleotide signals, poly-A stretches and other short motifs, and sequence properties that influence DNA structure, including base content. It was recently shown by Kaplan et al. that a probabilistic model using composition of all 5-mers within a nucleosome-sized tiling window accurately predicts intrinsic nucleosome occupancy across an entire genome <it>in vitro</it>. However, the model is complicated, and it is not clear which specific DNA sequence properties are most important for intrinsic nucleosome-forming preferences.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We find that a simple linear combination of only 14 simple DNA sequence attributes (G+C content, two transformations of dinucleotide composition, and the frequency of eleven 4-bp sequences) explains nucleosome occupancy <it>in vitro </it>and <it>in vivo </it>in a manner comparable to the Kaplan model. G+C content and frequency of AAAA are the most important features. G+C content is dominant, alone explaining ~50% of the variation in nucleosome occupancy <it>in vitro</it>.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our findings provide a dramatically simplified means to predict and understand intrinsic nucleosome occupancy. G+C content may dominate because it both reduces frequency of poly-A-like stretches and correlates with many other DNA structural characteristics. Since G+C content is enriched or depleted at many types of features in diverse eukaryotic genomes, our results suggest that variation in nucleotide composition may have a widespread and direct influence on chromatin structure.</p