The Chromosomal High-Affinity Binding Sites for the Drosophila Dosage Compensation Complex

Dosage compensation in male Drosophila relies on the X chromosome–specific recruitment of a chromatin-modifying machinery, the dosage compensation complex (DCC). The principles that assure selective targeting of the DCC are unknown. According to a prevalent model, X chromosome targeting is initiated by recruitment of the DCC core components, MSL1 and MSL2, to a limited number of so-called “high-affinity sites” (HAS). Only very few such sites are known at the DNA sequence level, which has precluded the definition of DCC targeting principles. Combining RNA interference against DCC subunits, limited crosslinking, and chromatin immunoprecipitation coupled to probing high-resolution DNA microarrays, we identified a set of 131 HAS for MSL1 and MSL2 and confirmed their properties by various means. The HAS sites are distributed all over the X chromosome and are functionally important, since the extent of dosage compensation of a given gene and its proximity to a HAS are positively correlated. The sites are mainly located on non-coding parts of genes and predominantly map to regions that are devoid of nucleosomes. In contrast, the bulk of DCC binding is in coding regions and is marked by histone H3K36 methylation. Within the HAS, repetitive DNA sequences mainly based on GA and CA dinucleotides are enriched. Interestingly, DCC subcomplexes bind a small number of autosomal locations with similar features

Sex-biased transcription enhancement by a 5' tethered Gal4-MOF histone acetyltransferase fusion protein in Drosophila

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In male <it>Drosophila melanogaster</it>, the male specific lethal (MSL) complex is somehow responsible for a two-fold increase in transcription of most X-linked genes, which are enriched for histone H4 acetylated at lysine 16 (H4K16ac). This acetylation requires MOF, a histone acetyltransferase that is a component of the MSL complex. MOF also associates with the non-specific lethal or NSL complex. The MSL complex is bound within active genes on the male X chromosome with a 3' bias. In contrast, the NSL complex is enriched at promoter regions of many autosomal and X-linked genes in both sexes. In this study we have investigated the role of MOF as a transcriptional activator.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>MOF was fused to the DNA binding domain of Gal4 and targeted to the promoter region of UAS-reporter genes in <it>Drosophila</it>. We found that expression of a UAS-red fluorescent protein (DsRed) reporter gene was strongly induced by Gal4-MOF. However, DsRed RNA levels were about seven times higher in female than male larvae. Immunostaining of polytene chromosomes showed that Gal4-MOF co-localized with MSL1 to many sites on the X chromosome in male but not female nuclei. However, in female nuclei that express MSL2, Gal4-MOF co-localized with MSL1 to many sites on polytene chromosomes but DsRed expression was reduced. Mutation of conserved active site residues in MOF (Glu714 and Cys680) reduced HAT activity <it>in vitro </it>and UAS-DsRed activation in <it>Drosophila</it>. In the presence of Gal4-MOF, H4K16ac levels were enriched over UAS-<it>lacZ </it>and UAS-<it>arm-lacZ </it>reporter genes. The latter utilizes the constitutive promoter from the <it>arm </it>gene to drive <it>lacZ </it>expression. In contrast to the strong induction of UAS-DsRed expression, UAS-<it>arm-lacZ </it>expression increased by about 2-fold in both sexes.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Targeting MOF to reporter genes led to transcription enhancement and acetylation of histone H4 at lysine 16. Histone acetyltransferase activity was required for the full transcriptional response. Incorporation of Gal4-MOF into the MSL complex in males led to a lower transcription enhancement of UAS-<it>DsRed </it>but not UAS-<it>arm-lacZ </it>genes. We discuss how association of Gal4-MOF with the MSL or NSL proteins could explain our results.</p

Abnormal Dosage Compensation of Reporter Genes Driven by the Drosophila Glass Multiple Reporter (GMR) Enhancer-Promoter

In Drosophila melanogaster the male specific lethal (MSL) complex is required for upregulation of expression of most X-linked genes in males, thereby achieving X chromosome dosage compensation. The MSL complex is highly enriched across most active X-linked genes with a bias towards the 3′ end. Previous studies have shown that gene transcription facilitates MSL complex binding but the type of promoter did not appear to be important. We have made the surprising observation that genes driven by the glass multiple reporter (GMR) enhancer-promoter are not dosage compensated at X-linked sites. The GMR promoter is active in all cells in, and posterior to, the morphogenetic furrow of the developing eye disc. Using phiC31 integrase-mediated targeted integration, we measured expression of lacZ reporter genes driven by either the GMR or armadillo (arm) promoters at each of three X-linked sites. At all sites, the arm-lacZ reporter gene was dosage compensated but GMR-lacZ was not. We have investigated why GMR-driven genes are not dosage compensated. Earlier or constitutive expression of GMR-lacZ did not affect the level of compensation. Neither did proximity to a strong MSL binding site. However, replacement of the hsp70 minimal promoter with a minimal promoter from the X-linked 6-Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase gene did restore partial dosage compensation. Similarly, insertion of binding sites for the GAGA and DREF factors upstream of the GMR promoter led to significantly higher lacZ expression in males than females. GAGA and DREF have been implicated to play a role in dosage compensation. We conclude that the gene promoter can affect MSL complex-mediated upregulation and dosage compensation. Further, it appears that the nature of the basal promoter and the presence of binding sites for specific factors influence the ability of a gene promoter to respond to the MSL complex

X chromosomal regulation in flies: when less is more

In Drosophila, dosage compensation of the single male X chromosome involves upregulation of expression of X linked genes. Dosage compensation complex or the male specific lethal (MSL) complex is intimately involved in this regulation. The MSL complex members decorate the male X chromosome by binding on hundreds of sites along the X chromosome. Recent genome wide analysis has brought new light into X chromosomal regulation. It is becoming increasingly clear that although the X chromosome achieves male specific regulation via the MSL complex members, a number of general factors also impinge on this regulation. Future studies integrating these aspects promise to shed more light into this epigenetic phenomenon

Role of Histone Acetylation in the Stimulatory Effect of Valproic Acid on Vascular Endothelial Tissue-Type Plasminogen Activator Expression

No grant i

Global Analysis of the Relationship between JIL-1 Kinase and Transcription

The ubiquitous tandem kinase JIL-1 is essential for Drosophila development. Its role in defining decondensed domains of larval polytene chromosomes is well established, but its involvement in transcription regulation has remained controversial. For a first comprehensive molecular characterisation of JIL-1, we generated a high-resolution, chromosome-wide interaction profile of the kinase in Drosophila cells and determined its role in transcription. JIL-1 binds active genes along their entire length. The presence of the kinase is not proportional to average transcription levels or polymerase density. Comparison of JIL-1 association with elongating RNA polymerase and a variety of histone modifications suggests two distinct targeting principles. A basal level of JIL-1 binding can be defined that correlates best with the methylation of histone H3 at lysine 36, a mark that is placed co-transcriptionally. The additional acetylation of H4K16 defines a second state characterised by approximately twofold elevated JIL-1 levels, which is particularly prominent on the dosage-compensated male X chromosome. Phosphorylation of the histone H3 N-terminus by JIL-1 in vitro is compatible with other tail modifications. In vivo, phosphorylation of H3 at serine 10, together with acetylation at lysine 14, creates a composite histone mark that is enriched at JIL-1 binding regions. Its depletion by RNA interference leads to a modest, but significant, decrease of transcription from the male X chromosome. Collectively, the results suggest that JIL-1 participates in a complex histone modification network that characterises active, decondensed chromatin. We hypothesise that one specific role of JIL-1 may be to reinforce, rather than to establish, the status of active chromatin through the phosphorylation of histone H3 at serine 10

An ecological future for weed science to sustain crop production and the environment. A review

Sustainable strategies for managing weeds are critical to meeting agriculture's potential to feed the world's population while conserving the ecosystems and biodiversity on which we depend. The dominant paradigm of weed management in developed countries is currently founded on the two principal tools of herbicides and tillage to remove weeds. However, evidence of negative environmental impacts from both tools is growing, and herbicide resistance is increasingly prevalent. These challenges emerge from a lack of attention to how weeds interact with and are regulated by the agroecosystem as a whole. Novel technological tools proposed for weed control, such as new herbicides, gene editing, and seed destructors, do not address these systemic challenges and thus are unlikely to provide truly sustainable solutions. Combining multiple tools and techniques in an Integrated Weed Management strategy is a step forward, but many integrated strategies still remain overly reliant on too few tools. In contrast, advances in weed ecology are revealing a wealth of options to manage weedsat the agroecosystem levelthat, rather than aiming to eradicate weeds, act to regulate populations to limit their negative impacts while conserving diversity. Here, we review the current state of knowledge in weed ecology and identify how this can be translated into practical weed management. The major points are the following: (1) the diversity and type of crops, management actions and limiting resources can be manipulated to limit weed competitiveness while promoting weed diversity; (2) in contrast to technological tools, ecological approaches to weed management tend to be synergistic with other agroecosystem functions; and (3) there are many existing practices compatible with this approach that could be integrated into current systems, alongside new options to explore. Overall, this review demonstrates that integrating systems-level ecological thinking into agronomic decision-making offers the best route to achieving sustainable weed management