Two independent modes of chromatin organization revealed by cohesin removal

Nature

Volumn 551, Issue 7678, 2017, Pages 51-56

  Schwarzer, Wibke ^a   Abdennur, Nezar ^b   Goloborodko, Anton ^b   Pekowska, Aleksandra ^a   Fudenberg, Geoffrey ^c   Loe Mie, Yann ^d,e   Fonseca, Nuno A ^f   Huber, Wolfgang ^a   Haering, Christian H ^a   Mirny, Leonid ^b,c   Spitz, Francois ^a,d,e  

^a EUROPEAN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY LABORATORY   (Germany)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge   (United States)

^d INSTITUT PASTEUR   (France)

^e CNRS   (France)

^f WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COHESIN; COHESIN LOADING FACTOR NIPBL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; CELL CYCLE PROTEIN; NIPBL PROTEIN, MOUSE; NONHISTONE PROTEIN; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR;

CHROMOSOME; DNA; GENOME; MODEL; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; PROTEIN; RODENT;

ADULT; ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CHROMATIN; CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE; CONFORMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBRYO; EPIGENETICS; LIVER CELL; MOUSE; MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; CHROMOSOME POSITIONING; DEFICIENCY; ENHANCER REGION; GENETIC EPIGENESIS; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; GENETICS; LIVER; METABOLISM;

ANIMALS; CELL CYCLE PROTEINS; CHROMATIN; CHROMOSOMAL PROTEINS, NON-HISTONE; CHROMOSOME POSITIONING; ENHANCER ELEMENTS, GENETIC; EPIGENESIS, GENETIC; LIVER; MICE; TRANSCRIPTION FACTORS; TRANSCRIPTION, GENETIC;

EID: 85032943081     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: 14764687     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nature24281     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Bickmore, W. A. & van Steensel, B. Genome architecture: domain organization of interphase chromosomes. Cell 152, 1270-1284 (2013).
2. Dixon, J. R., Gorkin, D. U. & Ren, B. Chromatin domains: the unit of chromosome organization. Mol. Cell 62, 668-680 (2016).
3. Dekker, J. & Mirny, L. The 3D genome as moderator of chromosomal communication. Cell 164, 1110-1121 (2016).
4. Dekker, J., Marti-Renom, M. A. & Mirny, L. A. Exploring the three-dimensional organization of genomes: interpreting chromatin interaction data. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 390-403 (2013).
5. Nora, E. P., Dekker, J. & Heard, E. Segmental folding of chromosomes: a basis for structural and regulatory chromosomal neighborhoods? BioEssays 35, 818-828 (2013).
6. Lieberman-Aiden, E. et al. Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science 326, 289-293 (2009).
7. Dixon, J. R. et al. Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions. Nature 485, 376-380 (2012).
8. Nora, E. P. et al. Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre. Nature 485, 381-385 (2012).
9. Lupiáñez, D. G. et al. Disruptions of topological chromatin domains cause pathogenic rewiring of gene-enhancer interactions. Cell 161, 1012-1025 (2015).
10. Dowen, J. M. et al. Control of cell identity genes occurs in insulated neighborhoods in mammalian chromosomes. Cell 159, 374-387 (2014).
11. Symmons, O. et al. The Shh topological domain facilitates the action of remote enhancers by reducing the effects of genomic distances. Dev. Cell 39, 529-543 (2016).
12. Rao, S. S. P. et al. A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. Cell 159, 1665-1680 (2014).
13. Merkenschlager, M. & Nora, E. P. CTCF and cohesin in genome folding and transcriptional gene regulation. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 17, 17-43 (2016).
14. Fudenberg, G. et al. Formation of chromosomal domains by loop extrusion. Cell Reports 15, 2038-2049 (2016).
15. Sanborn, A. L. et al. Chromatin extrusion explains key features of loop and domain formation in wild-type and engineered genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E6456-E6465 (2015).
16. Guo, Y. et al. CRISPR inversion of CTCF sites alters genome topology and enhancer/promoter function. Cell 162, 900-910 (2015).
17. de Wit, E. et al. CTCF binding polarity determines chromatin looping. Mol. Cell 60, 676-684 (2015).
18. Nora, E. P. et al. Targeted degradation of CTCF decouples local insulation of chromosome domains from genomic compartmentalization. Cell 169, 930-944 (2017).
19. Zuin, J. et al. Cohesin and CTCF differentially affect chromatin architecture and gene expression in human cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 996-1001 (2014).
20. Seitan, V. C. et al. Cohesin-based chromatin interactions enable regulated gene expression within preexisting architectural compartments. Genome Res. 23, 2066-2077 (2013).
21. Sofueva, S. et al. Cohesin-mediated interactions organize chromosomal domain architecture. EMBO J. 32, 3119-3129 (2013).
22. Nasmyth, K. & Haering, C. H. Cohesin: its roles and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Genet. 43, 525-558 (2009).
23. Tedeschi, A. et al. Wapl is an essential regulator of chromatin structure and chromosome segregation. Nature 501, 564-568 (2013).
24. Gerlich, D., Koch, B., Dupeux, F., Peters, J.-M. & Ellenberg, J. Live-cell imaging reveals a stable cohesin-chromatin interaction after but not before DNA replication. Curr. Biol. 16, 1571-1578 (2006).
25. Hu, B. et al. Biological chromodynamics: a general method for measuring protein occupancy across the genome by calibrating ChIP-seq. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, e132 (2015).
26. Kalhor, R., Tjong, H., Jayathilaka, N., Alber, F. & Chen, L. Genome architectures revealed by tethered chromosome conformation capture and populationbased modeling. Nat. Biotechnol. 30, 90-98 (2011).
27. Schmitt, A. D. et al. A compendium of chromatin contact maps reveals spatially active regions in the human genome. Cell Reports 17, 2042-2059 (2016).
28. Lajoie, B. R., Dekker, J. & Kaplan, N. The Hitchhiker's guide to Hi-C analysis: practical guidelines. Methods 72, 65-75 (2015).
29. Naumova, N. et al. Organization of the mitotic chromosome. Science 342, 948-953 (2013).
30. Nolen, L. D., Boyle, S., Ansari, M., Pritchard, E. & Bickmore, W. A. Regional chromatin decompaction in Cornelia de Lange syndrome associated with NIPBL disruption can be uncoupled from cohesin and CTCF. Hum. Mol. Genet. 22, 4180-4193 (2013).
31. Ernst, J. et al. Mapping and analysis of chromatin state dynamics in nine human cell types. Nature 473, 43-49 (2011).
32. Meuleman, W. et al. Constitutive nuclear lamina-genome interactions are highly conserved and associated with A/T-rich sequence. Genome Res. 23, 270-280 (2013).
33. Rhodes, J., Mazza, D., Nasmyth, K. & Uphoff, S. Scc2/Nipbl hops between chromosomal cohesin rings after loading. eLife 6, e30000 (2017).
34. Haarhuis, J. H. I. et al. The cohesin release factor WAPL restricts chromatin loop extension. Cell 169, 693-707 (2017).
35. Gassler, J. et al. A mechanism of cohesin-dependent loop extrusion organizes zygotic genome architecture. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/08/17/177766 (2017)
36. Wutz, G. et al. CTCF, WAPL and PDS5 proteins control the formation of TADs and loops by cohesin. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/08/18/177444 (2017).
37. Rao, S. et al. Cohesin loss eliminates all loop domains, leading to links among superenhancers and downregulation of nearby genes. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/18/139782 (2017).
38. Kerpedjiev, P. et al. HiGlass: web-based visual comparison and exploration of genome interaction maps. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/03/31/121889 (2017).
39. Flyamer, I. M. et al. Single-nucleus Hi-C reveals unique chromatin reorganization at oocyte-to-zygote transition. Nature 544, 110-114 (2017).
40. Terakawa, T. et al. The condensin complex is a mechanochemical motor that translocates along DNA. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aan6516 (2017).
41. Nuebler, J. et al. Chromatin organization by an interplay of loop extrusion and compartmental segregation. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/10/03/196261 (2017).
42. Phillips-Cremins, J. E. et al. Architectural protein subclasses shape 3D organization of genomes during lineage commitment. Cell 153, 1281-1295 (2013).
43. Fraser, J. et al. Hierarchical folding and reorganization of chromosomes are linked to transcriptional changes in cellular differentiation. Mol. Syst. Biol. 11, 852 (2015).
44. Sexton, T. et al. Three-dimensional folding and functional organization principles of the Drosophila genome. Cell 148, 458-472 (2012).
45. Tang, S.-H. E., Silva, F. J., Tsark, W. M. K. & Mann, J. R. A. A cre/loxP-deleter transgenic line in mouse strain 129S1/SvImJ. Genesis 32, 199-202 (2002).
46. Logan, M. et al. Expression of Cre Recombinase in the developing mouse limb bud driven by a Prxl enhancer. Genesis 33, 77-80 (2002).
47. Tannour-Louet, M., Porteu, A., Vaulont, S., Kahn, A. & Vasseur-Cognet, M. A tamoxifen-inducible chimeric Cre recombinase specifically effective in the fetal and adult mouse liver. Hepatology 35, 1072-1081 (2002).
48. Li, W.-C., Ralphs, K. L. & Tosh, D. Isolation and culture of adult mouse hepatocytes. Methods Mol. Biol. 633, 185-196 (2010).
49. Gonçalves, L. A., Vigário, A. M. & Penha-Gonçalves, C. Improved isolation of murine hepatocytes for in vitro malaria liver stage studies. Malar. J. 6, 169 (2007).
50. Arrigoni, L. et al. Standardizing chromatin research: a simple and universal method for ChIP-seq. Nuclei Acids. Res. 44, e67 (2016).
51. Imakaev, M. et al. Iterative correction of Hi-C data reveals hallmarks of chromosome organization. Nat. Methods 9, 999-1003 (2012).
52. Filippova, D., Patro, R., Duggal, G. & Kingsford, C. Identification of alternative topological domains in chromatin. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 9, 14 (2014).
53. Girvan, M. & Newman, M. E. J. Community structure in social and biological networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 7821-7826 (2002).
54. Bishop, C. M. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Springer, 2006).
55. Bogu, G. K. et al. Chromatin and RNA maps reveal regulatory long noncoding RNAs in mouse. Mol. Cell. Biol. 36, 809-819 (2015).
56. Schmidt, D. et al. Waves of retrotransposon expansion remodel genome organization and CTCF binding in multiple mammalian lineages. Cell 148, 335-348 (2012).
57. Yue, F. et al. A comparative encyclopedia of DNA elements in the mouse genome. Nature 515, 355-364 (2014).
58. Peric-Hupkes, D. et al. Molecular maps of the reorganization of genomenuclear lamina interactions during differentiation. Mol. Cell 38, 603-613 (2010).
59. Harrow, J. et al. GENCODE: the reference human genome annotation for The ENCODE Project. Genome Res. 22, 1760-1774 (2012).
60. Dobin, A. et al. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics 29, 15-21 (2013).
61. Anders, S., Pyl, P. T. & Huber, W. HTSeq-a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166-169 (2015).
62. Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
63. Kim, D., Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods 12, 357-360 (2015).
64. Goloborodko, A., Imakaev, M. V., Marko, J. F. & Mirny, L. Compaction and segregation of sister chromatids via active loop extrusion. eLife 5, e14864 (2016).
65. Eastman, P. et al. OpenMM 4: A reusable, extensible, hardware independent library for high performance molecular simulation. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9, 461-469 (2013).
66. Eastman, P. & Pande, V. S. Efficient nonbonded interactions for molecular dynamics on a graphics processing unit. J. Comput. Chem. 31, 1268-1272 (2010).
67. Imakaev, M. V., Tchourine, K. M., Nechaev, S. K. & Mirny, L. A. Effects of topological constraints on globular polymers. Soft Matter 11, 665-671 (2015).
68. +/- mouse, a model of Cornelia de Lange Syndrome. PLoS Genet. 5, e1000650 (2009).
69. Shen, Y. et al. A map of the cis-regulatory sequences in the mouse genome. Nature 488, 116-120 (2012).