Comprehensive analysis of the chromatin landscape in Drosophila melanogaster.

Chromatin is composed of DNA and a variety of modified histones and non-histone proteins, which have an impact on cell differentiation, gene regulation and other key cellular processes. Here we present a genome-wide chromatin landscape for Drosophila melanogaster based on eighteen histone modifications, summarized by nine prevalent combinatorial patterns. Integrative analysis with other data (non-histone chromatin proteins, DNase I hypersensitivity, GRO-Seq reads produced by engaged polymerase, short/long RNA products) reveals discrete characteristics of chromosomes, genes, regulatory elements and other functional domains. We find that active genes display distinct chromatin signatures that are correlated with disparate gene lengths, exon patterns, regulatory functions and genomic contexts. We also demonstrate a diversity of signatures among Polycomb targets that include a subset with paused polymerase. This systematic profiling and integrative analysis of chromatin signatures provides insights into how genomic elements are regulated, and will serve as a resource for future experimental investigations of genome structure and function

Rapid Analysis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genome Rearrangements by Multiplex Ligation–Dependent Probe Amplification

Aneuploidy and gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs) can lead to genetic diseases and the development of cancer. We previously demonstrated that introduction of the repetitive retrotransposon Ty912 onto a nonessential chromosome arm of Saccharomyces cerevisiae led to increased genome instability predominantly due to increased rates of formation of monocentric nonreciprocal translocations. In this study, we adapted Multiplex Ligation–dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) to analyze a large numbers of these GCRs. Using MLPA, we found that the distribution of translocations induced by the presence of Ty912 in a wild-type strain was nonrandom and that the majority of these translocations were mediated by only six translocation targets on four different chromosomes, even though there were 254 potential Ty-related translocation targets in the S. cerevisiae genome. While the majority of Ty912-mediated translocations resulted from RAD52-dependent recombination, we observed a number of nonreciprocal translocations mediated by RAD52-independent recombination between Ty1 elements. The formation of these RAD52-independent translocations did not require the Rad51 or Rad59 homologous pairing proteins or the Rad1–Rad10 endonuclease complex that processes branched DNAs during recombination. Finally, we found that defects in ASF1-RTT109–dependent acetylation of histone H3 lysine residue 56 (H3K56) resulted in increased accumulation of both GCRs and whole-chromosome duplications, and resulted in aneuploidy that tended to occur simultaneously with GCRs. Overall, we found that MLPA is a versatile technique for the rapid analysis of GCRs and can facilitate the genetic analysis of the pathways that prevent and promote GCRs and aneuploidy

Mutator Suppression and Escape from Replication Error–Induced Extinction in Yeast

Cells rely on a network of conserved pathways to govern DNA replication fidelity. Loss of polymerase proofreading or mismatch repair elevates spontaneous mutation and facilitates cellular adaptation. However, double mutants are inviable, suggesting that extreme mutation rates exceed an error threshold. Here we combine alleles that affect DNA polymerase δ (Pol δ) proofreading and mismatch repair to define the maximal error rate in haploid yeast and to characterize genetic suppressors of mutator phenotypes. We show that populations tolerate mutation rates 1,000-fold above wild-type levels but collapse when the rate exceeds 10−3 inactivating mutations per gene per cell division. Variants that escape this error-induced extinction (eex) rapidly emerge from mutator clones. One-third of the escape mutants result from second-site changes in Pol δ that suppress the proofreading-deficient phenotype, while two-thirds are extragenic. The structural locations of the Pol δ changes suggest multiple antimutator mechanisms. Our studies reveal the transient nature of eukaryotic mutators and show that mutator phenotypes are readily suppressed by genetic adaptation. This has implications for the role of mutator phenotypes in cancer

Characterization of the grappa Gene, the Drosophila Histone H3 Lysine 79 Methyltransferase

We have identified a novel gene named grappa (gpp) that is the Drosophila ortholog of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene Dot1, a histone methyltransferase that modifies the lysine (K)79 residue of histone H3. gpp is an essential gene identified in a genetic screen for dominant suppressors of pairing-dependent silencing, a Polycomb-group (Pc-G)-mediated silencing mechanism necessary for the maintenance phase of Bithorax complex (BX-C) expression. Surprisingly, gpp mutants not only exhibit Pc-G phenotypes, but also display phenotypes characteristic of trithorax-group mutants. Mutations in gpp also disrupt telomeric silencing but do not affect centric heterochromatin. These apparent contradictory phenotypes may result from loss of gpp activity in mutants at sites of both active and inactive chromatin domains. Unlike the early histone H3 K4 and K9 methylation patterns, the appearance of methylated K79 during embryogenesis coincides with the maintenance phase of BX-C expression, suggesting that there is a unique role for this chromatin modification in development

Plasticity in patterns of histone modifications and chromosomal proteins in Drosophila heterochromatin

Eukaryotic genomes are packaged in two basic forms, euchromatin and heterochromatin. We have examined the composition and organization of Drosophila melanogaster heterochromatin in different cell types using ChIP-array analysis of histone modifications and chromosomal proteins. As anticipated, the pericentric heterochromatin and chromosome 4 are on average enriched for the “silencing” marks H3K9me2, H3K9me3, HP1a, and SU(VAR)3-9, and are generally depleted for marks associated with active transcription. The locations of the euchromatin–heterochromatin borders identified by these marks are similar in animal tissues and most cell lines, although the amount of heterochromatin is variable in some cell lines. Combinatorial analysis of chromatin patterns reveals distinct profiles for euchromatin, pericentric heterochromatin, and the 4th chromosome. Both silent and active protein-coding genes in heterochromatin display complex patterns of chromosomal proteins and histone modifications; a majority of the active genes exhibit both “activation” marks (e.g., H3K4me3 and H3K36me3) and “silencing” marks (e.g., H3K9me2 and HP1a). The hallmark of active genes in heterochromatic domains appears to be a loss of H3K9 methylation at the transcription start site. We also observe complex epigenomic profiles of intergenic regions, repeated transposable element (TE) sequences, and genes in the heterochromatic extensions. An unexpectedly large fraction of sequences in the euchromatic chromosome arms exhibits a heterochromatic chromatin signature, which differs in size, position, and impact on gene expression among cell types. We conclude that patterns of heterochromatin/euchromatin packaging show greater complexity and plasticity than anticipated. This comprehensive analysis provides a foundation for future studies of gene activity and chromosomal functions that are influenced by or dependent upon heterochromatin

An assessment of histone-modification antibody quality.

We have tested the specificity and utility of more than 200 antibodies raised against 57 different histone modifications in Drosophila melanogaster, Caenorhabditis elegans and human cells. Although most antibodies performed well, more than 25% failed specificity tests by dot blot or western blot. Among specific antibodies, more than 20% failed in chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments. We advise rigorous testing of histone-modification antibodies before use, and we provide a website for posting new test results (http://compbio.med.harvard.edu/antibodies/)