Homolog Pairing at the Push of a Button

Homologous chromosomes pair in somatic cells in Drosophila, but how this occurs is poorly understood. In this issue of Developmental Cell, Viets et al. (2019) show that proteins and chromatin structure mediate pairing and argue against a DNA sequence-based mechanism

A simple polymerase chain reaction-based method for the construction of recombinase-mediated cassette exchange donor vectors

Here we describe a simple method for generating donor vectors suitable for targeted transgenesis via recombinase-mediated cassette exchange (RMCE) using the ΦC31 integrase. This PCR-based strategy employs small attB tails on the primers used to amplify a sequence of interest, permitting the rapid creation of transgenes for in vivo analysis. Copyright © 2008 by the Genetics Society of America

Position effects influence transvection in drosophila melanogaster

Transvection is an epigenetic phenomenon wherein regulatory elements communicate between different chromosomes in trans, and is thereby dependent upon the three-dimensional organization of the genome. Transvection is best understood in Drosophila, where homologous chromosomes are closely paired in most somatic nuclei, although similar phenomena have been observed in other species. Previous data have supported that the Drosophila genome is generally permissive to enhancer action in trans, a form of transvection where an enhancer on one homolog activates gene expression from a promoter on a paired homolog. However, the capacity of different genomic positions to influence the quantitative output of transvection has yet to be addressed. To investigate this question, we employed a transgenic system that assesses and compares enhancer action in cis and in trans at defined chromosomal locations. Using the strong synthetic eye-specific enhancer GMR, we show that loci supporting strong cis-expression tend to support robust enhancer action in trans, whereas locations with weaker cis-expression show reduced transvection in a fluorescent reporter assay. Our subsequent analysis is consistent with a model wherein the chromatin state of the transgenic insertion site is a primary determinant of the degree to which enhancer action in trans will be supported, whereas other factors such as locus-specific variation in somatic homolog pairing are of less importance in influencing position effects on transvection

Comparing enhancer action in cis and in trans

Studies from diverse systems have shown that distinct interchromosomal interactions are a central component of nuclear organization. In some cases, these interactions allow an enhancer to act in trans, modulating the expression of a gene encoded on a separate chromosome held in close proximity. Despite recent advances in uncovering such phenomena, our understanding of how a regulatory element acts on another chromosome remains incomplete. Here, we describe a transgenic approach to better understand enhancer action in trans in Drosophila melanogaster. Using phiC31-based recombinase-mediated cassette exchange (RMCE), we placed transgenes carrying combinations of the simple enhancer GMR, a minimal promoter, and different fluorescent reporters at equivalent positions on homologous chromosomes so that they would pair via the endogenous somatic pairing machinery of Drosophila. Our data demonstrate that the enhancer GMR is capable of activating a promoter in trans and does so in a variegated pattern, suggesting stochastic interactions between the enhancer and the promoter when they are carried on separate chromosomes. Furthermore, we quantitatively assessed the impact of two concurrent promoter targets in cis and in trans to GMR, demonstrating that each promoter is capable of competing for the enhancer\u27s activity, with the presence of one negatively affecting expression from the other. Finally, the single-cell resolution afforded by our approach allowed us to show that promoters in cis and in trans to GMR can both be activated in the same nucleus, implying that a single enhancer can share its activity between multiple promoter targets carried on separate chromosomes. © 2012 by the Genetics Society of America

The receptor tyrosine phosphatase Dlar and integrins organize actin filaments in the Drosophila follicular epithelium

Background: Regulation of actin structures is instrumental in maintaining proper cytoarchitecture in many tissues. In the follicular epithelium of Drosophila ovaries, a system of actin filaments is coordinated across the basal surface of cells encircling the oocyte. These filaments have been postulated to regulate oocyte elongation; however, the molecular components that control this cytoskeletal array are not yet understood. Results: We find that the receptor tyrosine phosphatase (RPTP) Dlar and integrins are involved in organizing basal actin filaments in follicle cells. Mutations in Dlar and the common β-integrin subunit mys cause a failure in oocyte elongation, which is correlated with a loss of proper actin filament organization. Immunolocalization shows that early in oogenesis Dlar is polarized to membranes where filaments terminate but becomes generally distributed late in development, at which time β-integrin and Enabled specifically associate with actin filament terminals. Rescue experiments point to the early period of polar Dlar localization as critical for its function. Furthermore, clonal analysis shows that loss of Dlar or mys influences actin filament polarity in wild-type cells that surround mutant tissues, suggesting that communication between neighboring cells regulates cytoskeletal organization. Finally, we find that two integrin α subunits encoded by mew and if are required for proper oocyte elongation, implying that multiple components of the ECM are instructive in coordinating actin fiber polarity. Conclusions: Dlar cooperates with integrins to coordinate actin filaments at the basal surface of the follicular epithelium. To our knowledge, this is the first direct demonstration of an RPTP\u27s influence on the actin cytoskeleton

Transvection-based gene regulation in Drosophila is a complex and plastic trait

Transvection, a chromosome pairing-dependent form of trans-based gene regulation, is potentially widespread in the Drosophila melanogaster genome and varies across cell types and within tissues in D. melanogaster, characteristics of a complex trait. Here, we demonstrate that the trans-interactions at the Malic enzyme (Men) locus are, in fact, transvection as classically defined and are plastic with respect to both genetic background and environment. Using chromosomal inversions, we show that trans-interactions at the Men locus are eliminated by changes in chromosomal architecture that presumably disrupt somatic pairing. We further show that the magnitude of transvection at the Men locus is modified by both genetic background and environment (temperature), demonstrating that transvection is a plastic phenotype. Our results suggest that transvection effects in D. melanogaster are shaped by a dynamic interplay between environment and genetic background. Interestingly, we find that cis-based regulation of the Men gene is more robust to genetic background and environment than trans-based. Finally, we begin to uncover the nonlocal factors that may contribute to variation in transvection overall, implicating Abd-B in the regulation of Men in cis and in trans in an allele-specific and tissue-specific manner, driven by differences in expression of the two genes across genetic backgrounds and environmental conditions

The capacity to act in trans varies among drosophila enhancers

The interphase nucleus is organized such that genomic segments interact in cis, on the same chromosome, and in trans, between different chromosomes. In Drosophila and other Dipterans, extensive interactions are observed between homologous chromosomes, which can permit enhancers and promoters to communicate in trans. Enhancer action in trans has been observed for a handful of genes in Drosophila, but it is as yet unclear whether this is a general property of all enhancers or specific to a few. Here, we test a collection of well-characterized enhancers for the capacity to act in trans. Specifically, we tested 18 enhancers that are active in either the eye or wing disc of third instar Drosophila larvae and, using two different assays, found evidence that each enhancer can act in trans. However, the degree to which trans-action was supported varied greatly between enhancers. Quantitative analysis of enhancer activity supports a model wherein an enhancer’s strength of transcriptional activation is a major determinant of its ability to act in trans, but that additional factors may also contribute to an enhancer’s trans-activity. In sum, our data suggest that a capacity to activate a promoter on a paired chromosome is common among Drosophila enhancers

A Genome-Wide Screen Identifies Genes That Affect Somatic Homolog Pairing in Drosophila

In Drosophila and other Dipterans, homologous chromosomes are in close contact in virtually all nuclei, a phenomenon known as somatic homolog pairing. Although homolog pairing has been recognized for over a century, relatively little is known about its regulation. We performed a genome-wide RNAi-based screen that monitored the X-specific localization of the male-specific lethal (MSL) complex, and we identified 59 candidate genes whose knockdown via RNAi causes a change in the pattern of MSL staining that is consistent with a disruption of X-chromosomal homolog pairing. Using DNA fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), we confirmed that knockdown of 17 of these genes has a dramatic effect on pairing of the 359 bp repeat at the base of the X. Furthermore, dsRNAs targeting Pr-set7, which encodes an H4K20 methyltransferase, cause a modest disruption in somatic homolog pairing. Consistent with our results in cultured cells, a classical mutation in one of the strongest candidate genes, pebble (pbl), causes a decrease in somatic homolog pairing in developing embryos. Interestingly, many of the genes identified by our screen have known roles in diverse cell-cycle events, suggesting an important link between somatic homolog pairing and the choreography of chromosomes during the cell cycle

Ic‐P‐204: The Relationship Between Tau Pet And Other Ad Biomarkers In Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer Disease

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/152660/1/alzjjalz2018062271.pd

Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.

IntroductionQuantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B-based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design.MethodsPittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally.ResultsGlobal amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers.DiscussionAlthough the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers