PcG complexes and chromatin silencing

Current Opinion in Genetics and Development

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 249-258

  Pirrotta, Vincenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA; DNA BINDING PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; CHROMATIN STRUCTURE; COMPLEX FORMATION; DROSOPHILA; GENE REPRESSION; NONHUMAN; NUCLEOSOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DNA BINDING; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; SILENCER GENE; TRANSCRIPTION REGULATION; YEAST;

EID: 0031000434     PISSN: 0959437X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-437X(97)80135-9     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Marcand S, Buck SW, Moretti P, Gilson E, Shore D: Silencing of genes at nontelomeric sites in yeast is controlled by sequestration of silencing factors at telomeres by Rap1 protein. Genes Dev 1996, 10:1297-1309. Sir proteins targeted to a GAL4-binding site can initiate silencing in the absence of a functional silencer or of Rap1. Such silencing is effective near telomeres but not at internal chromosome sites unless telomeric silencing is weakened, suggesting that telomeres sequester Sir proteins and control other potential silencers.
2. Hecht A, Strahl-Bolsinger S, Grunstein M: Spreading of transcriptional repressor SIR3 from telomeric heterochromatin. Nature 1996, 383:92-96.
3. Buck SW, Shore D: Action of a RAP1 carboxy-terminal silencing domain reveals an underlying competition between HMR and telomeres in yeast. Genes Dev 1995, 9:370-384.
4. Hecht A, Laroche T, Strahl-Bolsinger S, Gasser SM, Grunstein M: Histone H3 and H4 N-termini interact with SIR3 and SIR4 proteins: a molecular model for the formation of heterochromatin in yeast. Cell 1995, 80:583-592. The amino-terminal regions of H3 and H4 bind Sir3 and Sir4 but not Rap1 or Sir2. Mutations in these regions prevent the telomeric association of Sir proteins and the perinuclear positioning of the telomeres. These interactions suggest that, after recruitment by Rap1, the Sir complex spreads by interactions with successive nucleosomes.
5. Renauld H, Aparicio OM, Zierath PD, Billington BL, Chhablani SK, Gottschling DE: Silent domains are assembled continuously from the telomere and are defined by promoter distance and strength, and by SIR3 dosage. Genes Dev 1993, 7:1133-1145.
6. Maillet L, Boscheron C, Gotta M, Marcand S, Gilson E, Gasser SM: Evidence for silencing compartments within the yeast nucleus: a role for telomere proximity and Sir protein concentration in silencer-mediated repression. Genes Dev 1996, 10:1796-1811. Functional enhancers cannot repress when integrated at internal chromosome sites but silencing is restored when a new telomere is created in their vicinity or when Sir proteins are overexpressed. In a normal nucleus, Sir proteins are concentrated around telomeres but are diffused through nucleoplasm when overexpressed, indicating that they normally exist in limiting concentrations.
7. Triolo T, Sternglanz R: Role of interactions between the origin recognition complex and SIR1 in transcriptional silencing. Nature 1996, 381:251-253.
8. Boscheron C, Maillet L, Marcand S, Tsai-Pflugfelder M, Gasser SM, Gilson E: Cooperation at a distance between silencers and proto-silencers at the yeast HML locus. EMBO J 1996, 15:2184-2195. Elements that have no silencing activity of their own can cooperate over distances of several kilobases to establish silencing. Binding sites for Rap1, Abf1 or ORC can cooperate to initiate nucleation of a Sir complex.
9. Elgin SCR: Heterochromatin and gene regulation in Drosophila. Curr Opin Genet Dev 1996, 6:193-202.
10. Simon J: Locking in stable states of gene expression: transcriptional control during Drosophila development. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1995, 7:376-385.
11. Pirrotta V: Chromatin complexes regulating gene expression in Drosophila. Curr Opin Genet Dev 1995, 5:466-472.
12. Platero JS, Hartnett T, Eissenberg JC: Functional analysis of the chromodomain of HP1. EMBO J 1995, 14:3977-3986. The HP1 chromodomain is replaced by the Pc chromodomain in an HP1-lacz construct. In Drosophila, the hybrid protein is associated correctly with the centric heterochromatin but also with the Pc binding sites in the chromosome arms. The endogenous Pc protein is now also recruited to the heterochromatin, indicating that the chromodomain is a protein-protein interaction motif and implying that both HP1 and Pc have a second protein-protein interaction domain.
13. Müller J, Gaunt S, Lawrence PA: Function of the Polycomb protein is conserved in mice and flies. Development 1995, 121:2847-2852. M33, a mouse homologue of Pc, when expressed in Drosophila can rescue embryos that lack Pc function up to the end of embryogenesis though not to adulthood. This indicates that the mouse protein is recognized by the fly PcG proteins.
14. Brunk BP, Martin EC, Adler PN: Drosophila genes Posterior Sex Combs and Suppressor two of zeste encode proteins with homology to the murine BMI-1 oncogene. Nature 1991, 353:351-353.
15. Van Lohuizen M, Frasch M, Wientjens E, Berns A: Sequence similarity between the mammalian bmi-1 proto-oncogene and the Drosophila regulatory genes Psc and Su(z)2. Nature 1991, 353:353-355.
16. Kanno M, Hasegawa M, Ishida A, Isono K, Taniguchi M: mel18, a Polycomb group-related mammalian gene, encodes a transcriptional negative regulator with tumor suppressive activity. EMBO J 1995, 14:5672-5678. PCR-amplified binding-site selection shows that Mel-18 binds to (TTAC)GA-CTNGACT - a sequence found in the regulatory region of myc, Bcl-2 and Hox genes - and can repress a reporter gene. Expression of antisense mel-18 RNA causes 3T3 cells to become tumorigenic.
17. Van der Lugt NMT, Domen J, Linders K, Van Roon M, Robanus-Maandag E, Te Riele H, Van der Valk M, Deschamps J, Sofroniew M, Van Lohuizen M, Berns A: Posterior transformation, neurological abnormalities, and severe hematopoietic defects in mice with a targeted deletion of the bmi-1 proto-oncogene. Genes Dev 1994, 8:757-769.
18. Akasaka T, Kanno M, Balling R, Mieza MA, Taniguchi M, Koseki H: A role for mel-18, a Polycomb group-related vertebrate gene, in the anteroposterior specification of the axial skeleton. Development 1996, 122:1513-1522.
19. Bornemann D, Miller E, Simon J: The Drosophila Polycomb group gene Sex comb on midleg (Scm) encodes a zinc finger protein with similarity to polyhomeotic protein. Development 1896, 122:1621-1630.
20. Tschiersch B, Hofmann A, Krauss V, Dorn R, Korge G, Reuter G: The protein encoded by the Drosophila position-effect variegation suppressor gene Su(var)3-9 combines domains of antagonistic regulators of homeotic gene complexes. EMBO J 1994, 13:3825-3831.
21. Gutjahr T, Frei E, Spicer C, Baumgartner S, White RAH, Noll M: The Polycomb-group gene, extra sex combs, encodes a nuclear member of the WD-40 repeat family. EMBO J 1995, 14:4296-4306.
22. Simon J, Bornemann D, Lunde K, Schwartz C: The extra sex combs product contains WD40 repeats and its time of action implies a role distinct from other Polycomb group products. Mech Dev 1995, 53:197-208.
23. Sathe SS, Harte PJ: The extra sex combs protein contains WD motifs essential for its function as a repressor of the homeotic genes. Mech Dev 1995, 52:77-87.
24. Neer EJ, Smith TF: G protein heterodimers: new structures propel new questions. Cell 1996, 84:175-178.
25. Komachi K, Redd MJ, Johnson AD: The WD repeats of Tup1 interact with the homeodomain protein a2. Genes Dev 1994, 8:2857-2867.
26. Schumacher A, Faust C, Magnuson T: Positional cloning of a global regulator of anterior-posterior patterning in mice. Nature 1996, 383:250-253.
27. Ekwall K, Javerzat J-P, Lorentz A, Schmidt H, Cranston G, Allshire R: The chromodomain protein Swi6: a key component at fission yeast centromeres. Science 1995, 269:1429-1431.
28. Franke A, DeCamillis M, Zink D, Cheng N, Brock HW, Paro R: Polycomb and polyhomeotic are constituents of a multimeric protein complex in chromatin of Drosophila melanogaster. EMBO J 1992, 11:2941-2950.
29. Rastelli L, Chan CS, Pirrotta V: Related chromosome binding sites for zeste, suppressors of zeste and Polycomb group proteins in Drosophila and their dependence on Enhancer of zeste function. EMBO J 1993, 12:1513-1522.
30. Martin EC, Adler PN: The Polycomb group gene Posterior Sex Combs encodes a chromosomal protein. Development 1993, 117:641-655.
31. Lonie A, D'Andrea R, Paro R, Saint R: Molecular characterisation of the Polycomblike gene of Drosophila melanogaster, a trans-acting negative regulator of homeotic gene expression. Development 1994, 120:2629-2636.
32. Pelegri F, Lehmann R: A role of polycomb group genes in the regulation of gap gene expression in Drosophila. Genetics 1994, 136:1341-1353.
33. Messmer S, Franke A, Paro R: Analysis of the functional role of the Polycomb chromo domain in Drosophila melanogaster. Genes Dev 1992, 6:1241-1254.
34. Reijnen MJ, Hamer KM, Den Blaauwen JL, Lambrechts C, Schoneveld I, Van Driel R, Otte AP: Polycomb and bmi-1 homologs are expressed in overlapping patterns in Xenopus embryos and are able to interact with each other. Mech Dev 1995, 53:35-46. Xenopus Pc and bmi-1 homologues are expressed in the embryo in partially overlapping patterns. Pull-down experiments show that Pc interacts with its own amino-terminal and carboxy-terminal halves. The Pc amino-terminal region also interacts with the RING finger region of bmi-1.
35. Aasland R, Stewart AF: The chromo shadow domain, a second chromo domain in heterochromatin-binding protein HP1. Nucleic Acids Res 1995, 23:3168-3173.
36. ••]; the same HP1-Pc hybrid protein can also recruit Psc protein and the amino-terminal peptide of Su(z)2 to the centric heterochromatin. Inactivation of a temperature-sensitive E(z) causes the loss of PcG complexes but does not affect binding of HP1-Pc to heterochromatin. The hybrid protein can no longer recruit Psc or Pc, however, showing that E(z) is required for secondary recruitment.
37. Fauvarque M-O, Dura J-M: polyhomeotic regulatory sequences induce developmental regulator-dependent variegation and targeted P-element insertions in Drosophila. Genes Dev 1993, 7:1508-1520.
38. Kassis JA: Unusual properties of regulatory DNA from the Drosophila engrailed gene: three "pairing-sensitive" sites within a 1.6 kb region. Genetics 1994, 136:1025-1038.
39. Chan CS, Rastelli L, Pirrotta V: A Polycomb response element in the Ubx gene that determines an epigenetically inherited state of repression. EMBO J 1994, 13:2553-2564.
40. Vazquez J, Farkas G, Gaszner M, Udvardy A, Muller M, Hagstrom K, Gyurkovics H, Sipos L, Gausz J, Galloni M et al.: Genetic and molecular analysis of chromatin domains. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1993, 58:45-54.
41. Farkas G, Gausz J, Galloni M, Reuter G, Gyurkovics H, Karch F: The Trithorax-like gene encodes the Drosophila GAGA factor. Nature 1994, 371:806-808.
42. Müller J: Transcriptional silencing by the Polycomb protein in Drosophila embryos. EMBO J 1995, 14:1209-1220. Pc fused to the GAL4 DNA-binding domain can silence a reporter gene containing GAL4-binding sites. The silencing requires other PcG genes, including esc, indicating that the targeted Pc recruits other PcG proteins, mimicking the behavior of a normal PRE. Repression caused by a pulse of GAL4-Pc is transient but, if a weak PRE is present, it can persist even after GAL4-Pc is no longer there.
43. Zhang C-C, Bienz M: Segmental determination in Drosophila conferred by hunchback, a direct repressor of the homeotic gene Ultrabithorax. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992, 89:7511-7515.
44. Poux S, Kostic C, Pirrotta V: Hunchback-independent silencing of late Ubx enhancers by a Polycomb Group Response Element. EMBO J 1996, 15:4713-4722. The effect of the PRE in silencing different Ubx enhancers depends on when they are activated. Enhancers activated in the early embryo are maintained in repression by the PRE in parts of the embryo where they were not initially activated. Enhancers activated after the PcG complex is formed are silenced in all parts of the embryo, even where hunchback is not expressed. However, when early and late enhancers are combined, the activity of the early enhancer protects the late enhancer from silencing.
45. Pirrotta V, Rastelli L: white gene expression, repressive chromatin domains and homeotic gene regulation. Bioessays 1994, 16:549-556.
46. Orlando V, Paro R: Mapping Polycomb-repressed domains in the bithorax complex using in vivo formaldehyde cross-linked chromatin. Cell 1993, 75:1187-1198.
47. Müller J, Bienz M: Long range repression conferring boundaries of Ultrabithorax expression in the Drosophila embryo. EMBO J 1991, 10:3147-3155.
48. D gene causes it to associate with centric heterochromatin. Su(var) mutations that decrease PEV also decrease this association. The authors suggest that heterochromatin complexes play an important role in nuclear organization and the positioning of chromosome regions.
49. D is enhanced by specific contacts with the centric heterochromatin.
50. Aparicio OM, Gottschling DE: Overcoming telomeric silencing: a trans-activator competes to establish gene expression in a cell cycle-dependent way. Genes Dev 1994, 8:1133-1146.
51. Zink D, Paro R: Drosophila Polycomb-group regulated chromatin inhibits the accessibility of a trans-activator to its target DNA. EMBO J 1995, 14:5660-5671. The insertion of a transposon construct containing a PRE and a GAL4-activated reporter gene produces a new Pc-binding site on polytene chromosomes. The binding of Pc to this site is in competition with the binding of GAL4. When GAL4 is strongly induced, GAL4 binding at that site appears and Pc binding disappears without DNA replication or cell cycle progress.
52. Gottschling DE: Telomere-proximal DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is refractory to methyltransferase activity in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992, 89:4062-4065.
53. Loo S, Rine J: Silencers and domains of generalized repression. Science 1994, 264:1768-1771.
54. Wallrath LL, Elgin SCR: Position effect variegation in Drosophila is associated with an altered chromatin structure. Genes Dev 1995, 9:1263-1277.
55. Schlossherr J, Eggert H, Paro R, Cremer S, Hack RS: Gene inactivation in Drosophila mediated by the Polycomb gene product or by position-effect variegation does not involve major changes in the accessibility of the chromatin fibre. Mol Gen Gener 1994, 243:453-465.
56. McCall K, Bender W: Probes for chromatin accessibility in the Drosophila bithorax complex respond differently to Polycomb-mediated repression. EMBO J 1996, 15:559-590. A comparison of the activity of a GAL4-activated promoter or of a phage T7 promoter introduced within the Ubx gene. Although GAL4 activation occurs in the early embryo, it is later blocked by PcG silencing. T7 polymerase is inhibited by nucleosomes but is not specifically repressed by PcG silencing. These findings contradict the simple block to accessibility by PcG proteins coating the chromatin.
57. Herschbach BM, Arnaud MB, Johnson AD: Transcriptional repression directed by the yeast α2 protein in vitro. Nature 1994, 370:309-311.
58. Edmondson DG, Smith MM, Roth SY: Repression domain of the yeast global repressor Tup1 interacts directly with histones H3 and H4. Genes Dev 1996, 10:1247-1259. Tup1 interacts in vitro with histonss H3 and H4. The interaction requires underacetylated histone amino-terminal tails and the Tup1 repression domain. This may provide a basis for the positioning of an array of nucleosomes that would prevent the access of the transcriptional machinery.
59. Cooper JP, Roth SY, Simpson RT: The global transcriptional regulators, SSN6 and TUP1, play distinct roles in the establishment of a repressive chromatin structure. Genes Dev 1994, 8:1400-1410.
60. Arents G, Moudrianakis EN: Topography of the histone octamer surface: repeating structural motifs utilized in the docking of nucleosomal DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993, 90:10469-10493.
61. Turner BM, Birley AJ, Lavender J: Histone H4 isoforms acetylated at specific lysine residues define individual chromosomes and chromatin domains in Drosophila polytene nuclei. Cell 1992, 69:375-384.
62. Braunstein M, Sobel RE, Allis CD, Turner BM, Broach JR. Efficient transcriptional silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae requires heterochromatin histone acetylation pattern. Mol Cell Biol 1996, 16:4349-4356.
63. Rundlett SE, Carmen AA, Kobayashi R, Bavykin S, Turner BM, Grunstein M: HDA1 and RPD3 are members of distinct yeast histone deacetylase complexes that regulate silencing and transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996, 93:14503-14508.
64. De Rubertis F, Kadosh D, Henchoz S, Pauli D, Reuter G, Spierer P: The histone deacetylase RPD3 counteracts genomic silencing in Drosophila and yeast. Nature 1996, 384:589-591.
65. Sobel RE, Cook RG, Perry CA, Annunziato AT, Allis CD: Conservation of deposition-related acetylation sites in newly synthesized histones H3 and H4. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1995, 92:1237-1241.
66. Moazed D, Johnson AD: A deubiquinating enzyme interacts with SIR4 and regulates silencing in S. cerevisiae. Cell 1996, 86:667-677. The authors of this paper identify one of the components of the Sir complex as UBP3, a deubiquitination enzyme. Loss of UBP3 function improves silencing. Histones H2A and H2B are major ubiquitinated proteins in the nucleus. Together with [64], this paper suggests that ubiquitination, probably of these histones, normally contributes to assembly of the silencing complex.
67. Henchoz S, De Rubertis F, Pauli D, Spierer P: The dose of a putative ubiquitin-specific protease affects position-effect variegation in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol Cell Biol 1996, 16:5717-5725.
68. Lawrence C: The RADS repair pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: what does it do, and how does it do it? Bioessays 1994, 16:253-258.
69. Roest HP, Van Klaveren J, De Wit J, Van Gurp CG, Koken MHM, Vermey M, Van Roijen JH, Hoogerbrugge JW, Vreeburg JTM, Baarends VM et al.: Inactivation of the HR6B ubiquitin-conjugating DNA repair enzyme in mice causes male sterility associated with chromatin modification. Cell 1986, 86:799-810.