Umeå University's logo

Even when split into several chromosomes, DNA molecules that make up our genome are too long to fit into the cell nuclei unless massively folded. Such folding must accommodate the need for timely access to selected parts of the genome by transcription factors, RNA polymerases, and DNA replication machinery. Here, we review our current understanding of the genome folding inside the interphase nuclei. We consider the resulting genome architecture at three scales with a particular focus on the intermediate (meso) scale and summarize the insights gained from recent experimental observations and diverse computational models.

Development of multicellular animals requires epigenetic repression by Polycomb group proteins. The latter assemble in multi-subunit complexes, of which two kinds, Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1) and Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), act together to repress key developmental genes. How PRC1 and PRC2 recognize specific genes remains an open question. Here we report the identification of several hundreds of DNA elements that tether canonical PRC1 to human developmental genes. We use the term tether to describe a process leading to a prominent presence of canonical PRC1 at certain genomic sites, although the complex is unlikely to interact with DNA directly. Detailed analysis indicates that sequence features associated with PRC1 tethering differ from those that favour PRC2 binding. Throughout the genome, the two kinds of sequence features mix in different proportions to yield a gamut of DNA elements that range from those tethering predominantly PRC1 or PRC2 to ones capable of tethering both complexes. The emerging picture is similar to the paradigmatic targeting of Polycomb complexes by Polycomb Response Elements (PREs) of Drosophila but providing for greater plasticity. [GRAPHICS]

Animals use the Polycomb system to epigenetically repress developmental genes. The repression requires trimethylation of lysine 27 of histone H3 (H3K27me3) by Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), but the dynamics of this process is poorly understood. To bridge the gap, we developed a computational model that forecasts H3K27 methylation in Drosophila with high temporal resolution and spatial accuracy of contemporary experimental techniques. Using this model, we show that pools of methylated H3K27 in dividing cells are defined by the effective concentration of PRC2 and the replication frequency. We find that the allosteric stimulation by preexisting H3K27me3 makes PRC2 better in methylating developmental genes as opposed to indiscriminate methylation throughout the genome. Applied to Drosophila development, our model argues that, in this organism, the intergenerationally inherited H3K27me3 does not “survive” rapid cycles of embryonic chromatin replication and is unlikely to transmit the memory of epigenetic repression to the offspring. Our model is adaptable to other organisms, including mice and humans.

Transposable elements constitute a substantial portion of most eukaryotic genomes and their activity can lead to developmental and neuronal defects. In the germline, transposon activity is antagonized by the PIWI-interacting RNA pathway tasked with repression of transposon transcription and degrading transcripts that have already been produced. However, most of the genes required for transposon control are not expressed outside the germline, prompting the question: what causes deleterious transposons activity in the soma and how is it managed? Here, we show that disruptions of the Histone 3 lysine 36 methylation machinery led to increased transposon transcription in Drosophila melanogaster brains and that there is division of labour for the repression of transposable elements between the different methyltransferases Set2, NSD, and Ash1. Furthermore, we show that disruption of methylation leads to somatic activation of key genes in the PIWI-interacting RNA pathway and the preferential production of RNA from dual-strand piRNA clusters.

Epigenetic repression often involves covalent histone modifications. Yet, how the presence of a histone mark translates into changes in chromatin structure that ultimately benefits the repression is largely unclear. Polycomb group proteins comprise a family of evolutionarily conserved epigenetic repressors. They act as multi-subunit complexes one of which tri-methylates histone H3 at Lysine 27 (H3K27). Here we describe a novel Monte Carlo–Molecular Dynamics simulation framework, which we employed to discover that stochastic interaction of Polycomb Repressive Complex 1 (PRC1) with tri-methylated H3K27 is sufficient to fold the methylated chromatin. Unexpectedly, such chromatin folding leads to spatial clustering of the DNA elements bound by PRC1. Our results provide further insight into mechanisms of epigenetic repression and the process of chromatin folding in response to histone methylation.

Drosophila insulators were the first DNA elements found to regulate gene expression by delimiting chromatin contacts. We still do not know how many of them exist and what impact they have on the Drosophila genome folding. Contrary to vertebrates, there is no evidence that fly insulators block cohesin-mediated chromatin loop extrusion. Therefore, their mechanism of action remains uncertain. To bridge these gaps, we mapped chromatin contacts in Drosophila cells lacking the key insulator proteins CTCF and Cp190. With this approach, we found hundreds of insulator elements. Their study indicates that Drosophila insulators play a minor role in the overall genome folding but affect chromatin contacts locally at many loci. Our observations argue that Cp190 promotes cobinding of other insulator proteins and that the model, where Drosophila insulators block chromatin contacts by forming loops, needs revision. Our insulator catalog provides an important resource to study mechanisms of genome folding.

Polycomb group (PcG) mutants were first identified in Drosophila on the basis of their failure to maintain proper Hox gene repression during development. The proteins encoded by the corresponding fly genes mainly assemble into one of two discrete Polycomb repressive complexes: PRC1 or PRC2. However, biochemical analyses in mammals have revealed alternative forms of PRC2 and multiple distinct types of noncanonical or variant PRC1. Through a series of proteomic analyses, we identify analogous PRC2 and variant PRC1 complexes in Drosophila, as well as a broader repertoire of interactions implicated in early development. Our data provide strong support for the ancient diversity of PcG complexes and a framework for future analysis in a longstanding and versatile genetic system.

In Drosophila, two chromosomes require special mechanisms to balance their transcriptional output to the rest of the genome. These are the male-specific lethal complex targeting the male X chromosome and Painting of fourth targeting chromosome 4. Here, we explore the role of histone H3 methylated at lysine-36 (H3K36) and the associated methyltransferases—Set2, NSD, and Ash1—in these two chromosome-specific systems. We show that the loss of Set2 impairs the MSL complex–mediated dosage compensation; however, the effect is not recapitulated by H3K36 replacement and indicates an alternative target of Set2. Unexpectedly, balanced transcriptional output from the fourth chromosome requires intact H3K36 and depends on the additive functions of NSD and Ash1. We conclude that H3K36 methylation and the associated methyltransferases are important factors to balance transcriptional output of the male X chromosome and the fourth chromosome. Furthermore, our study highlights the pleiotropic effects of these enzymes.

CRISPR-Cas9-mediated homology-directed DNA repair is the method of choice for precise gene editing in a wide range of model organisms, including mouse and human. Broad use by the biomedical community refined the method, making it more efficient and sequence specific. Nevertheless, the rapidly evolving technique still contains pitfalls. During the generation of six different conditional knockout mouse models, we discovered that frequently (sometimes solely) homology-directed repair and/or nonhomologous end joining mechanisms caused multiple unwanted head-to-tail insertions of donor DNA templates. Disturbingly, conventionally applied PCR analysis, in most cases, failed to identify these multiple integration events, which led to a high rate of falsely claimed precisely edited alleles. We caution that comprehensive analysis of modified alleles is essential and offer practical solutions to correctly identify precisely edited chromosomes.

Polycomb repression is critical for metazoan development. Equally important but less studied is the Trithorax system, which safeguards Polycomb target genes from the repression in cells where they have to remain active. It was proposed that the Trithorax system acts via methylation of histone H3 at lysine 4 and lysine 36 (H3K36), thereby inhibiting histone methyltransferase activity of the Polycomb complexes. Here we test this hypothesis by asking whether the Trithorax group protein Ash1 requires H3K36 methylation to counteract Polycomb repression. We show that Ash1 is the only Drosophila H3K36-specific methyltransferase necessary to prevent excessive Polycomb repression of homeotic genes. Unexpectedly, our experiments reveal no correlation between the extent of H3K36 methylation and the resistance to Polycomb repression. Furthermore, we find that complete substitution of the zygotic histone H3 with a variant in which lysine 36 is replaced by arginine does not cause excessive repression of homeotic genes. Our results suggest that the model, where the Trithorax group proteins methylate histone H3 to inhibit the histone methyltransferase activity of the Polycomb complexes, needs revision.