How two become one: HJURP dimerization drives CENP-A assembly

CENP‐A containing nucleosomes epigenetically specify centromere position on chromosomes. Deposition of CENP‐A into chromatin is mediated by HJURP, a specific CENP‐A chaperone. Paradoxically, HJURP binding sterically prevents dimerization of CENP‐A, which is critical to form functional centromeric nucleosomes. A recent publication in The EMBO Journal (Zasadzińska et al, 2013) demonstrates that HJURP itself dimerizes through a C‐terminal repeat region, which is essential for centromeric assembly of nascent CENP‐A.FCT fellowship: (SFRH/BD/74284/2010); FCT grants: (BIA-BCM/100557/2008, BIAPRO/100537/2008); EMBO Installation Grant

Temporal control of epigenetic centromere specification

All living organisms require accurate mechanisms to faithfully inherit their genetic material during cell division. The centromere is a unique locus on each chromosome that supports a multiprotein structure called the kinetochore. During mitosis, the kinetochore is responsible for connecting chromosomes to spindle microtubules, allowing faithful segregation of the duplicated genome. In most organisms, centromere position and function is not defined by the local DNA sequence context but rather by an epigenetic chromatin-based mechanism. Centromere protein A (CENP-A) is central to this process, as chromatin assembled from this histone H3 variant is essential for assembly of the centromere complex, as well as for its epigenetic maintenance. As a major determinant of centromere function, CENP-A assembly requires tight control, both in its specificity for the centromere and in timing of assembly. In the last few years, there have been several new insights into the molecular mechanism that allow this process to occur. We will review these here and discuss the general implications of the mechanism of cell cycle coupling of centromere inheritance.FCT fellowships: (SFRH/BPD/69115/2010, SFRH/BD/33219/2007); FCT grants: (BIA-BCM/100557/2008, BIA-PRO/100537/2008);Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian; European Commission FP7 programme; EMBO installation grant

Transcription factor 4 (TCF4) expression predicts clinical outcome in RUNX1 mutated and translocated acute myeloid leukemia

Contains fulltext : 229528.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Epigenetic engineering shows H3K4me2 is required for HJURP targeting and CENP-A assembly on a synthetic human kinetochore

Here, centromeric histone marks on a human artificial chromosome are found to resemble the chromatin landscape in transcribed genes, and selective manipulation shows them to govern the incorporation of the centromere-specifying CENP-A histone variant

SUMO control of centromere homeostasis

Centromeres are unique chromosomal loci that form the anchorage point for the mitotic spindle during mitosis and meiosis. Their position and function are specified by a unique chromatin domain featuring the histone H3 variant CENP-A. While typically formed on centromeric satellite arrays, CENP-A nucleosomes are maintained and assembled by a strong self-templated feedback mechanism that can propagate centromeres even at non-canonical sites. Central to the epigenetic chromatin-based transmission of centromeres is the stable inheritance of CENP-A nucleosomes. While long-lived at centromeres, CENP-A can turn over rapidly at non-centromeric sites and even erode from centromeres in non-dividing cells. Recently, SUMO modification of the centromere complex has come to the forefront as a mediator of centromere complex stability, including CENP-A chromatin. We review evidence from different models and discuss the emerging view that limited SUMOylation appears to play a constructive role in centromere complex formation, while polySUMOylation drives complex turnover. The deSUMOylase SENP6/Ulp2 and the proteins segregase p97/Cdc48 constitute the dominant opposing forces that balance CENP-A chromatin stability. This balance may be key to ensuring proper kinetochore strength at the centromere while preventing ectopic centromere formation

A Rapid FACS-Based Strategy to Isolate Human Gene Knockin and Knockout Clones

Gene targeting protocols for mammalian cells remain inefficient and labor intensive. Here we describe FASTarget, a rapid, fluorescent cell sorting based strategy to isolate rare gene targeting events in human somatic cells. A fluorescent protein is used as a means for direct selection of targeted clones obviating the need for selection and outgrowth of drug resistant clones. Importantly, the use of a promoter-less, ATG-less construct greatly facilitates the recovery of correctly targeted cells. Using this method we report successful gene targeting in up to 94% of recovered human somatic cell clones. We create functional EYFP-tagged knockin clones in both transformed and non-transformed human somatic cell lines providing a valuable tool for mammalian cell biology. We further demonstrate the use of this technology to create gene knockouts. Using this generally applicable strategy we can recover gene targeted clones within approximately one month from DNA construct delivery to obtaining targeted monoclonal cell lines

A two-step mechanism for epigenetic specification of centromere identity and function

The basic determinant of chromosome inheritance, the centromere, is specified in many eukaryotes by an epigenetic mark. Using gene targeting in human cells and fission yeast, chromatin containing the centromere-specific histone H3 variant CENP-A is demonstrated to be the epigenetic mark that acts through a two-step mechanism to identify, maintain and propagate centromere function indefinitely. Initially, centromere position is replicated and maintained by chromatin assembled with the centromere-targeting domain (CATD) of CENP-A substituted into H3. Subsequently, nucleation of kinetochore assembly onto CATD-containing chromatin is shown to require either the amino- or carboxy-terminal tail of CENP-A for recruitment of inner kinetochore proteins, including stabilizing CENP-B binding to human centromeres or direct recruitment of CENP-C, respectively.National Institutes of Health grant: (GM 074150); Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research; European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) long-term fellowship

Molecular Interactions between Prions as Seeds and Recombinant Prion Proteins as Substrates Resemble the Biological Interspecies Barrier In Vitro

Prion diseases like Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans, Scrapie in sheep or bovine spongiform encephalopathy are fatal neurodegenerative diseases, which can be of sporadic, genetic, or infectious origin. Prion diseases are transmissible between different species, however, with a variable species barrier. The key event of prion amplification is the conversion of the cellular isoform of the prion protein (PrPC) into the pathogenic isoform (PrPSc). We developed a sodiumdodecylsulfate-based PrP conversion system that induces amyloid fibril formation from soluble α-helical structured recombinant PrP (recPrP). This approach was extended applying pre-purified PrPSc as seeds which accelerate fibrillization of recPrP. In the present study we investigated the interspecies coherence of prion disease. Therefore we used PrPSc from different species like Syrian hamster, cattle, mouse and sheep and seeded fibrillization of recPrP from the same or other species to mimic in vitro the natural species barrier. We could show that the in vitro system of seeded fibrillization is in accordance with what is known from the naturally occurring species barriers

Beyond the Global Brain Differences:Intraindividual Variability Differences in 1q21.1 Distal and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 Deletion Carriers

BACKGROUND: Carriers of the 1q21.1 distal and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants exhibit regional and globalbrain differences compared with noncarriers. However, interpreting regional differences is challenging if a globaldifference drives the regional brain differences. Intraindividual variability measures can be used to test for regionaldifferences beyond global differences in brain structure.METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging data were used to obtain regional brain values for 1q21.1 distal deletion (n =30) and duplication (n = 27) and 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 deletion (n = 170) and duplication (n = 243) carriers and matchednoncarriers (n = 2350). Regional intra-deviation scores, i.e., the standardized difference between an individual’sregional difference and global difference, were used to test for regional differences that diverge from the globaldifference.RESULTS: For the 1q21.1 distal deletion carriers, cortical surface area for regions in the medial visual cortex, posterior cingulate, and temporal pole differed less and regions in the prefrontal and superior temporal cortex differedmore than the global difference in cortical surface area. For the 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 deletion carriers, cortical thicknessin regions in the medial visual cortex, auditory cortex, and temporal pole differed less and the prefrontal andsomatosensory cortex differed more than the global difference in cortical thickness.CONCLUSIONS: We find evidence for regional effects beyond differences in global brain measures in 1q21.1 distaland 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants. The results provide new insight into brain profiling of the 1q21.1 distaland 15q11.2 BP1-BP2 copy number variants, with the potential to increase understanding of the mechanismsinvolved in altered neurodevelopment