Mechanism of Transcriptional Silencing in Yeast

AbstractTranscriptional silencing is a phenomenon in which the transcription of a gene by RNA polymerase II or III is repressed or not, dependent only on the gene's chromosomal location. Two prevailing models exist for silencing: (1) steric hindrance in silenced chromatin inhibits the binding of upstream activator proteins or polymerase or (2) silencing primarily blocks steps downstream of transcription preinitiation complex formation. Here, we test these models quantitatively for the case of SIR2-dependent silencing in budding yeast, using foreign and endogenous reporter proteins, at transgenic and endogenous loci. Our results contradict both models and show instead that transcriptional silencing at several URA3 transgenes, and at the naturally silenced endogenous HMRa and HMLα mating type genes, acts downstream of gene activator protein binding to strongly reduce the occupancy of TFIIB, RNA polymerase II, and TFIIE at the silenced promoters

Improved alignment of nucleosome DNA sequences using a mixture model

DNA sequences that are present in nucleosomes have a preferential ∼10 bp periodicity of certain dinucleotide signals (1,2), but the overall sequence similarity of the nucleosomal DNA is weak, and traditional multiple sequence alignment tools fail to yield meaningful alignments. We develop a mixture model that characterizes the known dinucleotide periodicity probabilistically to improve the alignment of nucleosomal DNAs. We assume that a periodic dinucleotide signal of any type emits according to a probability distribution around a series of ‘hot spots’ that are equally spaced along nucleosomal DNA with 10 bp period, but with a 1 bp phase shift across the middle of the nucleosome. We model the three statistically most significant dinucleotide signals, AA/TT, GC and TA, simultaneously, while allowing phase shifts between the signals. The alignment is obtained by maximizing the likelihood of both Watson and Crick strands simultaneously. The resulting alignment of 177 chicken nucleosomal DNA sequences revealed that all 10 distinct dinucleotides are periodic, however, with only two distinct phases and varying intensity. By Fourier analysis, we show that our new alignment has enhanced periodicity and sequence identity compared with center alignment. The significance of the nucleosomal DNA sequence alignment is evaluated by comparing it with that obtained using the same model on non-nucleosomal sequences

Biological Consequences of Tightly Bent DNA: The Other Life of a Macromolecular Celebrity

The mechanical properties of DNA play a critical role in many biological functions. For example, DNA packing in viruses involves confining the viral genome in a volume (the viral capsid) with dimensions that are comparable to the DNA persistence length. Similarly, eukaryotic DNA is packed in DNA-protein complexes (nucleosomes) in which DNA is tightly bent around protein spools. DNA is also tightly bent by many proteins that regulate transcription, resulting in a variation in gene expression that is amenable to quantitative analysis. In these cases, DNA loops are formed with lengths that are comparable to or smaller than the DNA persistence length. The aim of this review is to describe the physical forces associated with tightly bent DNA in all of these settings and to explore the biological consequences of such bending, as increasingly accessible by single-molecule techniques.Comment: 24 pages, 9 figure

Predicting nucleosome positioning using a duration Hidden Markov Model

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The nucleosome is the fundamental packing unit of DNAs in eukaryotic cells. Its detailed positioning on the genome is closely related to chromosome functions. Increasing evidence has shown that genomic DNA sequence itself is highly predictive of nucleosome positioning genome-wide. Therefore a fast software tool for predicting nucleosome positioning can help understanding how a genome's nucleosome organization may facilitate genome function.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We present a duration Hidden Markov model for nucleosome positioning prediction by explicitly modeling the linker DNA length. The nucleosome and linker models trained from yeast data are re-scaled when making predictions for other species to adjust for differences in base composition. A software tool named NuPoP is developed in three formats for free download.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Simulation studies show that modeling the linker length distribution and utilizing a base composition re-scaling method both improve the prediction of nucleosome positioning regarding sensitivity and false discovery rate. NuPoP provides a user-friendly software tool for predicting the nucleosome occupancy and the most probable nucleosome positioning map for genomic sequences of any size. When compared with two existing methods, NuPoP shows improved performance in sensitivity.</p

Controls of nucleosome positioning in the human genome

Nucleosomes are important for gene regulation because their arrangement on the genome can control which proteins bind to DNA. Currently, few human nucleosomes are thought to be consistently positioned across cells; however, this has been difficult to assess due to the limited resolution of existing data. We performed paired-end sequencing of micrococcal nuclease-digested chromatin (MNase-seq) from seven lymphoblastoid cell lines and mapped over 3.6 billion MNase-seq fragments to the human genome to create the highest-resolution map of nucleosome occupancy to date in a human cell type. In contrast to previous results, we find that most nucleosomes have more consistent positioning than expected by chance and a substantial fraction (8.7%) of nucleosomes have moderate to strong positioning. In aggregate, nucleosome sequences have 10 bp periodic patterns in dinucleotide frequency and DNase I sensitivity; and, across cells, nucleosomes frequently have translational offsets that are multiples of 10 bp. We estimate that almost half of the genome contains regularly spaced arrays of nucleosomes, which are enriched in active chromatin domains. Single nucleotide polymorphisms that reduce DNase I sensitivity can disrupt the phasing of nucleosome arrays, which indicates that they often result from positioning against a barrier formed by other proteins. However, nucleosome arrays can also be created by DNA sequence alone. The most striking example is an array of over 400 nucleosomes on chromosome 12 that is created by tandem repetition of sequences with strong positioning properties. In summary, a large fraction of nucleosomes are consistently positioned--in some regions because they adopt favored sequence positions, and in other regions because they are forced into specific arrangements by chromatin remodeling or DNA binding proteins

Controls of Nucleosome Positioning in the Human Genome

Nucleosomes are important for gene regulation because their arrangement on the genome can control which proteins bind to DNA. Currently, few human nucleosomes are thought to be consistently positioned across cells; however, this has been difficult to assess due to the limited resolution of existing data. We performed paired-end sequencing of micrococcal nuclease-digested chromatin (MNase–seq) from seven lymphoblastoid cell lines and mapped over 3.6 billion MNase–seq fragments to the human genome to create the highest-resolution map of nucleosome occupancy to date in a human cell type. In contrast to previous results, we find that most nucleosomes have more consistent positioning than expected by chance and a substantial fraction (8.7%) of nucleosomes have moderate to strong positioning. In aggregate, nucleosome sequences have 10 bp periodic patterns in dinucleotide frequency and DNase I sensitivity; and, across cells, nucleosomes frequently have translational offsets that are multiples of 10 bp. We estimate that almost half of the genome contains regularly spaced arrays of nucleosomes, which are enriched in active chromatin domains. Single nucleotide polymorphisms that reduce DNase I sensitivity can disrupt the phasing of nucleosome arrays, which indicates that they often result from positioning against a barrier formed by other proteins. However, nucleosome arrays can also be created by DNA sequence alone. The most striking example is an array of over 400 nucleosomes on chromosome 12 that is created by tandem repetition of sequences with strong positioning properties. In summary, a large fraction of nucleosomes are consistently positioned—in some regions because they adopt favored sequence positions, and in other regions because they are forced into specific arrangements by chromatin remodeling or DNA binding proteins.</p

Distinct Modes of Regulation by Chromatin Encoded through Nucleosome Positioning Signals

The detailed positions of nucleosomes profoundly impact gene regulation and are partly encoded by the genomic DNA sequence. However, less is known about the functional consequences of this encoding. Here, we address this question using a genome-wide map of ∼380,000 yeast nucleosomes that we sequenced in their entirety. Utilizing the high resolution of our map, we refine our understanding of how nucleosome organizations are encoded by the DNA sequence and demonstrate that the genomic sequence is highly predictive of the in vivo nucleosome organization, even across new nucleosome-bound sequences that we isolated from fly and human. We find that Poly(dA:dT) tracts are an important component of these nucleosome positioning signals and that their nucleosome-disfavoring action results in large nucleosome depletion over them and over their flanking regions and enhances the accessibility of transcription factors to their cognate sites. Our results suggest that the yeast genome may utilize these nucleosome positioning signals to regulate gene expression with different transcriptional noise and activation kinetics and DNA replication with different origin efficiency. These distinct functions may be achieved by encoding both relatively closed (nucleosome-covered) chromatin organizations over some factor binding sites, where factors must compete with nucleosomes for DNA access, and relatively open (nucleosome-depleted) organizations over other factor sites, where factors bind without competition

High flexibility of DNA on short length scales probed by atomic force microscopy

The mechanics of DNA bending on intermediate length scales (5–100 nm) plays a key role in many cellular processes, and is also important in the fabrication of artificial DNA structures, but previous experimental studies of DNA mechanics have focused on longer length scales than these. We use high-resolution atomic force microscopy on individual DNA molecules to obtain a direct measurement of the bending energy function appropriate for scales down to 5 nm. Our measurements imply that the elastic energy of highly bent DNA conformations is lower than predicted by classical elasticity models such as the worm-like chain (WLC) model. For example, we found that on short length scales, spontaneous large-angle bends are many times more prevalent than predicted by the WLC model. We test our data and model with an interlocking set of consistency checks. Our analysis also shows how our model is compatible with previous experiments, which have sometimes been viewed as confirming the WLC

Archaeal Nucleosome Positioning In Vivo and In Vitro is Directed by Primary Sequence Motifs

Background: Histone wrapping of DNA into nucleosomes almost certainly evolved in the Archaea, and predates Eukaryotes. In Eukaryotes, nucleosome positioning plays a central role in regulating gene expression and is directed by primary sequence motifs that together form a nucleosome positioning code. The experiments reported were undertaken to determine if archaeal histone assembly conforms to the nucleosome positioning code. Results: Eukaryotic nucleosome positioning is favored and directed by phased helical repeats of AA/TT/AT/TA and CC/GG/CG/GC dinucleotides, and disfavored by longer AT-rich oligonucleotides. Deep sequencing of genomic DNA protected from micrococcal nuclease digestion by assembly into archaeal nucleosomes has established that archaeal nucleosome assembly is also directed and positioned by these sequence motifs, both in vivo in Methanothermobacter thermautotrophicus and Thermococcus kodakarensis and in vitro in reaction mixtures containing only one purified archaeal histone and genomic DNA. Archaeal nucleosomes assembled at the same locations in vivo and in vitro, with much reduced assembly immediately upstream of open reading frames and throughout the ribosomal rDNA operons. Providing further support for a common positioning code, archaeal histones assembled into nucleosomes on eukaryotic DNA and eukaryotic histones into nucleosomes on archaeal DNA at the same locations. T. kodakarensis has two histones, designated HTkA and HTkB, and strains with either but not both histones deleted grow normally but do exhibit transcriptome differences. Comparisons of the archaeal nucleosome profiles in the intergenic regions immediately upstream of genes that exhibited increased or decreased transcription in the absence of HTkA or HTkB revealed substantial differences but no consistent pattern of changes that would correlate directly with archaeal nucleosome positioning inhibiting or stimulating transcription. Conclusions: The results obtained establish that an archaeal histone and a genome sequence together are sufficient to determine where archaeal nucleosomes preferentially assemble and where they avoid assembly. We confirm that the same nucleosome positioning code operates in Archaea as in Eukaryotes and presumably therefore evolved with the histone-fold mechanism of DNA binding and compaction early in the archaeal lineage, before the divergence of Eukaryotes