DNA copy-number control through inhibition of replication fork progression

Finishing the egg

Gamete development is a fundamental process that is highly conserved from early eukaryotes to mammals. As germ cells develop, they must coordinate a dynamic series of cellular processes that support growth, cell specification, patterning, the loading of maternal factors (RNAs, proteins, and nutrients), differentiation of structures to enable fertilization and ensure embryonic survival, and other processes that make a functional oocyte. To achieve these goals, germ cells integrate a complex milieu of environmental and developmental signals to produce fertilizable eggs. Over the past 50 years, Drosophila oogenesis has risen to the forefront as a system to interrogate the sophisticated mechanisms that drive oocyte development. Studies in Drosophila have defined mechanisms in germ cells that control meiosis, protect genome integrity, facilitate mRNA trafficking, and support the maternal loading of nutrients. Work in this system has provided key insights into the mechanisms that establish egg chamber polarity and patterning as well as the mechanisms that drive ovulation and egg activation. Using the power of Drosophila genetics, the field has begun to define the molecular mechanisms that coordinate environmental stresses and nutrient availability with oocyte development. Importantly, the majority of these reproductive mechanisms are highly conserved throughout evolution, and many play critical roles in the development of somatic tissues as well. In this chapter, we summarize the recent progress in several key areas that impact egg chamber development and ovulation. First, we discuss the mechanisms that drive nutrient storage and trafficking during oocyte maturation and vitellogenesis. Second, we examine the processes that regulate follicle cell patterning and how that patterning impacts the construction of the egg shell and the establishment of embryonic polarity. Finally, we examine regulatory factors that control ovulation, egg activation, and successful fertilization.

Developmentally Programmed Switches in DNA Replication: Gene Amplification and Genome-Wide Endoreplication in Tetrahymena

Locus-specific gene amplification and genome-wide endoreplication generate the elevated copy number of ribosomal DNA (rDNA, 9000 C) and non-rDNA (90 C) chromosomes in the developing macronucleus of Tetrahymena thermophila. Subsequently, all macronuclear chromosomes replicate once per cell cycle during vegetative growth. Here, we describe an unanticipated, programmed switch in the regulation of replication initiation in the rDNA minichromosome. Early in development, the 21 kb rDNA minichromosome is preferentially amplified from 2 C to ~800 C from well-defined origins, concurrent with genome-wide endoreplication (2 C to 8-16 C) in starved mating Tetrahymena (endoreplication (ER) Phase 1). Upon refeeding, rDNA and non-rDNA chromosomes achieve their final copy number through resumption of just the endoreplication program (ER Phase 2). Unconventional rDNA replication intermediates are generated primarily during ER phase 2, consistent with delocalized replication initiation and possible formation of persistent RNA-DNA hybrids. Origin usage and replication fork elongation are affected in non-rDNA chromosomes as well. Despite the developmentally programmed 10-fold reduction in the ubiquitous eukaryotic initiator, the Origin Recognition Complex (ORC), active initiation sites are more closely spaced in ER phases 1 and 2 compared to vegetative growing cells. We propose that initiation site selection is relaxed in endoreplicating macronuclear chromosomes and may be less dependent on ORC.

Drosophila SUMM4 complex couples insulator function and DNA replication control

Asynchronous replication of chromosome domains during S phase is essential for eukaryotic genome function, but the mechanisms establishing which domains replicate early versus late in different cell types remain incompletely understood. Intercalary heterochromatin domains replicate very late in both diploid chromosomes of dividing cells and in endoreplicating polytene chromosomes where they are also underreplicated. Drosophila SNF2-related factor SUUR imparts locus-specific underreplication of polytene chromosomes. SUUR negatively regulates DNA replication fork progression; however, its mechanism of action remains obscure. Here, we developed a novel method termed MS-Enabled Rapid protein Complex Identification (MERCI) to isolate a stable stoichiometric native complex SUMM4 that comprises SUUR and a chromatin boundary protein Mod(Mdg4)-67.2. Mod(Mdg4) stimulates SUUR ATPase activity and is required for a normal spatiotemporal distribution of SUUR in vivo. SUUR and Mod(Mdg4)-67.2 together mediate the activities of gypsy insulator that prevent certain enhancer-promoter interactions and establish euchromatin-heterochromatin barriers in the genome. Furthermore, SuUR or mod(mdg4) mutations reverse underreplication of intercalary heterochromatin. Thus, SUMM4 can impart late replication of intercalary heterochromatin by attenuating the progression of replication forks through euchromatin/heterochromatin boundaries. Our findings implicate a SNF2 family ATP-dependent motor protein SUUR in the insulator function, reveal that DNA replication can be delayed by a chromatin barrier, and uncover a critical role for architectural proteins in replication control. They suggest a mechanism for the establishment of late replication that does not depend on an asynchronous firing of late replication origins.

Unscheduled DNA replication in G1 causes genome instability and damage signatures indicative of replication collisions

DNA replicates once per cell cycle. Interfering with the regulation of DNA replication initiation generates genome instability through over-replication and has been linked to early stages of cancer development. Here, we engineer genetic systems in budding yeast to induce unscheduled replication in a G1-like cell cycle state. Unscheduled G1 replication initiates at canonical S-phase origins. We quantifiy the composition of replisomes in G1- and S-phase and identified firing factors, polymerase α, and histone supply as factors that limit replication outside S-phase. G1 replication per se does not trigger cellular checkpoints. Subsequent replication during S-phase, however, results in over-replication and leads to chromosome breaks and chromosome-wide, strand-biased occurrence of RPA-bound single-stranded DNA, indicating head-to-tail replication collisions as a key mechanism generating genome instability upon G1 replication. Low-level, sporadic induction of G1 replication induces an identical response, indicating findings from synthetic systems are applicable to naturally occurring scenarios of unscheduled replication initiation.

Rif1-Dependent Control of Replication Timing

Successful duplication of the genome requires the accurate replication of billions of base pairs of DNA within a relatively short time frame. Failure to accurately replicate the genome results in genomic instability and a host of diseases. To faithfully and rapidly replicate the genome, DNA replication must be tightly regulated and coordinated with many other nuclear processes. These regulations, however, must also be flexible as replication kinetics can change through development and differentiation. Exactly how DNA replication is regulated and how this regulation changes through development is an active field of research. One aspect of genome duplication where much remains to be discovered is replication timing (RT), which dictates when each segment of the genome is replicated during S phase. All organisms display some level of RT, yet the precise mechanisms that govern RT remain are not fully understood. The study of Rif1, a protein that actively regulates RT from yeast to humans, provides a key to unlock the underlying molecular mechanisms controlling RT. The paradigm for Rif1 function is to delay helicase activation within certain regions of the genome, causing these regions to replicate late in S phase. Many questions, however, remain about the intricacies of Rif1 function. Here, we review the current models for the activity of Rif1 with the goal of trying to understand how Rif1 functions to establish the RT program.

Delayed DNA replication in haploid human embryonic stem cells

Haploid human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) provide a powerful genetic system but diploidize at high rates. We hypothesized that diploidization results from aberrant DNA replication. To test this, we profiled DNA replication timing in isogenic haploid and diploid ESCs. The greatest difference was the earlier replication of the X Chromosome in haploids, consistent with the lack of X-Chromosome inactivation. We also identified 21 autosomal regions that had delayed replication in haploids, extending beyond the normal S phase and into G2/M. Haploid-delays comprised a unique set of quiescent genomic regions that are also underreplicated in polyploid placental cells. The same delays were observed in female ESCs with two active X Chromosomes, suggesting that increased X-Chromosome dosage may cause delayed autosomal replication. We propose that incomplete replication at the onset of mitosis could prevent cell division and result in re-entry into the cell cycle and whole genome duplication.

Replication timing analysis in polyploid cells reveals Rif1 uses multiple mechanisms to promote underreplication in Drosophila

Regulation of DNA replication and copy number is necessary to promote genome stability and maintain cell and tissue function. DNA replication is regulated temporally in a process known as replication timing (RT). Rap1-interacting factor 1 (Rif1) is a key regulator of RT and has a critical function in copy number control in polyploid cells. Previously, we demonstrated that Rif1 functions with SUUR to inhibit replication fork progression and promote underreplication (UR) of specific genomic regions. How Rif1-dependent control of RT factors into its ability to promote UR is unknown. By applying a computational approach to measure RT in Drosophila polyploid cells, we show that SUUR and Rif1 have differential roles in controlling UR and RT. Our findings reveal that Rif1 acts to promote late replication, which is necessary for SUUR-dependent underreplication. Our work provides new insight into the process of UR and its links to RT.

Effects of Mutations in the Drosophila melanogaster Rif1 Gene on the Replication and Underreplication of Pericentromeric Heterochromatin in Salivary Gland Polytene Chromosomes

In Drosophila salivary gland polytene chromosomes, a substantial portion of heterochromatin is underreplicated. The combination of mutations SuUR^ES and Su(var)3-9⁰⁶ results in the polytenization of a substantial fraction of unique and moderately repeated sequences but has almost no effect on satellite DNA replication. The Rap1 interacting factor 1 (Rif) protein is a conserved regulator of replication timing, and in Drosophila, it affects underreplication in polytene chromosomes. We compared the morphology of pericentromeric regions and labeling patterns of in situ hybridization of heterochromatin-specific DNA probes between wild-type salivary gland polytene chromosomes and the chromosomes of Rif1 mutants and SuUR Su(var)3-9⁰⁶ double mutants. We show that, despite general similarities, heterochromatin zones exist that are polytenized only in the Rif1 mutants, and that there are zones that are under specific control of Su(var)3-9. In the Rif1 mutants, we found additional polytenization of the largest blocks of satellite DNA (in particular, satellite 1.688 of chromosome X and simple satellites in chromosomes X and 4) as well as partial polytenization of chromosome Y. Data on pulsed incorporation of 5-ethynyl-2′-deoxyuridine (EdU) into polytene chromosomes indicated that in the Rif1 mutants, just as in the wild type, most of the heterochromatin becomes replicated during the late S phase. Nevertheless, a significantly increased number of heterochromatin replicons was noted. These results suggest that Rif1 regulates the activation probability of heterochromatic origins in the satellite DNA region.

Asymmetric Histone Inheritance in Asymmetrically Dividing Stem Cells

Epigenetic mechanisms play essential roles in determining distinct cell fates during the development of multicellular organisms. Histone proteins represent crucial epigenetic components that help specify cell identities. Previous work has demonstrated that during the asymmetric cell division of Drosophila male germline stem cells (GSCs), histones H3 and H4 are asymmetrically inherited, such that pre-existing (old) histones are segregated towards the self-renewing GSC whereas newly synthesized (new) histones are enriched towards the differentiating daughter cell. In order to further understand the molecular mechanisms underlying this striking phenomenon, two key questions must be answered: when and how old and new histones are differentially incorporated by sister chromatids, and how epigenetically distinct sister chromatids are specifically recognized and segregated. Here, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the molecular mechanisms and cellular bases underlying these fundamental and important biological processes responsible for generating two distinct cells through one cell division.

Replication timing in Drosophila and its peculiarities in polytene chromosomes

Drosophila melanogaster is one of the popular model organisms in DNA replication studies. Since the 1960s, DNA replication of polytene chromosomes has been extensively studied by cytological methods. In the recent two decades, the progress in our understanding of DNA replication was associated with new techniques. Use of fluorescent dyes increased the resolution of cytological methods significantly. High-throughput methods allowed analysis of DNA replication on a genome scale, as well as its correlation with chromatin structure and gene activi ty. Precise mapping of the cytological structures of polytene chromosomes to the genome assembly allowed comparison of replication between polytene chromosomes and chromosomes of diploid cells. New features of replication characteristic for D. melanogaster were described for both diploid and polytene chromosomes. Comparison of genomic replication profiles revealed a significant similarity between Drosophila and other well-studi ed eukaryotic species, such as human. Early replication is often confined to intensely transcribed gene-dense regions characterized by multiple replication initiation sites. Features of DNA replication in Drosophila might be explained by a compact genome. The organization of replication in polytene chromosomes has much in common with the organization of replication in chromosomes in diploid cells. The most important feature of replication in polytene chromosomes is its low rate and the dependence of S-phase duration on many factors: external and internal, local and global. The speed of replication forks in D. melanogaster polytene chromosomes is affected by SUUR and Rif1 proteins. It is not known yet how universal the mechanisms associated with these factors are, but their study is very promising.

H3K9 Promotes Under-Replication of Pericentromeric Heterochromatin in Drosophila Salivary Gland Polytene Chromosomes

Chromatin structure and its organization contributes to the proper regulation and timing of DNA replication. Yet, the precise mechanism by which chromatin contributes to DNA replication remains incompletely understood. This is particularly true for cell types that rely on polyploidization as a developmental strategy for growth and high biosynthetic capacity. During Drosophila larval development, cells of the salivary gland undergo endoreplication, repetitive rounds of DNA synthesis without intervening cell division, resulting in ploidy values of ~1350C. S phase of these endocycles displays a reproducible pattern of early and late replicating regions of the genome resulting from the activity of the same replication initiation factors that are used in diploid cells. However, unlike diploid cells, the latest replicating regions of polyploid salivary gland genomes, composed primarily of pericentric heterochromatic enriched in H3K9 methylation, are not replicated each endocycle, resulting in under-replicated domains with reduced ploidy. Here, we employ a histone gene replacement strategy in Drosophila to demonstrate that mutation of a histone residue important for heterochromatin organization and function (H3K9) but not mutation of a histone residue important for euchromatin function (H4K16), disrupts proper endoreplication in Drosophila salivary gland polyploid genomes thereby leading to DNA copy gain in pericentric heterochromatin. These findings reveal that H3K9 is necessary for normal levels of under-replication of pericentric heterochromatin and suggest that under-replication at pericentric heterochromatin is mediated through H3K9 methylation.

Solving the Polyploid Mystery in Health and Disease

Polyploidy (the more than doubling of a cell's genome) frequently arises during organogenesis, tissue repair, and age-associated diseases. Despite its prevalence, major gaps exist in how polyploid cells emerge and affect tissue function. Studies have begun to elucidate the signals required for polyploid cell growth as well as the advantages and disadvantages of polyploidy in health and disease. This review highlights the recent advances on the role and regulation of polyploidy in Drosophila and vertebrate models. The newly discovered versatility of polyploid cells has the potential to provide alternative strategies to promote tissue growth and repair, while limiting disease and dysfunction.

Efficient Replication of the Plastid Genome Requires an Organellar Thymidine Kinase

Thymidine kinase (TK) is a key enzyme of the salvage pathway that recycles thymidine nucleosides to produce deoxythymidine triphosphate. Here, we identified the single TK of maize (Zea mays), denoted CPTK1, as necessary in the replication of the plastidial genome (cpDNA), demonstrating the essential function of the salvage pathway during chloroplast biogenesis. CPTK1 localized to both plastids and mitochondria, and its absence resulted in an albino phenotype, reduced cpDNA copy number and a severe deficiency in plastidial ribosomes. Mitochondria were not affected, indicating they are less reliant on the salvage pathway. Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) TKs, TK1A and TK1B, apparently resulted from a gene duplication after the divergence of monocots and dicots. Similar but less-severe effects were observed for Arabidopsis tk1a tk1b double mutants in comparison to those in maize cptk1 TK1B was important for cpDNA replication and repair in conditions of replicative stress but had little impact on the mitochondrial phenotype. In the maize cptk1 mutant, the DNA from the small single-copy region of the plastidial genome was reduced to a greater extent than other regions, suggesting preferential abortion of replication in this region. This was accompanied by the accumulation of truncated genomes that resulted, at least in part, from unfaithful microhomology-mediated repair. These and other results suggest that the loss of normal cpDNA replication elicits the mobilization of new replication origins around the rpoB (beta subunit of plastid-encoded RNA polymerase) transcription unit and imply that increased transcription at rpoB is associated with the initiation of cpDNA replication.

Rif1 inhibits replication fork progression and controls DNA copy number in Drosophila

Control of DNA copy number is essential to maintain genome stability and ensure proper cell and tissue function. In Drosophila polyploid cells, the SNF2-domain-containing SUUR protein inhibits replication fork progression within specific regions of the genome to promote DNA underreplication. While dissecting the function of SUUR's SNF2 domain, we identified an interaction between SUUR and Rif1. Rif1 has many roles in DNA metabolism and regulates the replication timing program. We demonstrate that repression of DNA replication is dependent on Rif1. Rif1 localizes to active replication forks in a partially SUUR-dependent manner and directly regulates replication fork progression. Importantly, SUUR associates with replication forks in the absence of Rif1, indicating that Rif1 acts downstream of SUUR to inhibit fork progression. Our findings uncover an unrecognized function of the Rif1 protein as a regulator of replication fork progression.

Dynamic changes in ORC localization and replication fork progression during tissue differentiation

Background

Genomic regions repressed for DNA replication, resulting in either delayed replication in S phase or underreplication in polyploid cells, are thought to be controlled by inhibition of replication origin activation. Studies in Drosophila polytene cells, however, raised the possibility that impeding replication fork progression also plays a major role.

Results

We exploited genomic regions underreplicated (URs) with tissue specificity in Drosophila polytene cells to analyze mechanisms of replication repression. By localizing the Origin Recognition Complex (ORC) in the genome of the larval fat body and comparing this to ORC binding in the salivary gland, we found that sites of ORC binding show extensive tissue specificity. In contrast, there are common domains nearly devoid of ORC in the salivary gland and fat body that also have reduced density of ORC binding sites in diploid cells. Strikingly, domains lacking ORC can still be replicated in some polytene tissues, showing absence of ORC and origins is insufficient to repress replication. Analysis of the width and location of the URs with respect to ORC position indicates that whether or not a genomic region lacking ORC is replicated is controlled by whether replication forks formed outside the region are inhibited.

Conclusions

These studies demonstrate that inhibition of replication fork progression can block replication across genomic regions that constitutively lack ORC. Replication fork progression can be inhibited in both tissue-specific and genome region-specific ways. Consequently, when evaluating sources of genome instability it is important to consider altered control of replication forks in response to differentiation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-018-4992-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Similarity in replication timing between polytene and diploid cells is associated with the organization of the Drosophila genome

Morphologically, polytene chromosomes of Drosophila melanogaster consist of compact “black” bands alternating with less compact “grey” bands and interbands. We developed a comprehensive approach that combines cytological mapping data of FlyBase-annotated genes and novel tools for predicting cytogenetic features of chromosomes on the basis of their protein composition and determined the genomic coordinates for all black bands of polytene chromosome 2R. By a PCNA immunostaining assay, we obtained the replication timetable for all the bands mapped. The results allowed us to compare replication timing between polytene chromosomes in salivary glands and chromosomes from cultured diploid cell lines and to observe a substantial similarity in the global replication patterns at the band resolution level. In both kinds of chromosomes, the intervals between black bands correspond to early replication initiation zones. Black bands are depleted of replication initiation events and are characterized by a gradient of replication timing; therefore, the time of replication completion correlates with the band length. The bands are characterized by low gene density, contain predominantly tissue-specific genes, and are represented by silent chromatin types in various tissues. The borders of black bands correspond well to the borders of topological domains as well as to the borders of the zones showing H3K27me3, SUUR, and LAMIN enrichment. In conclusion, the characteristic pattern of polytene chromosomes reflects partitioning of the Drosophila genome into two global types of domains with contrasting properties. This partitioning is conserved in different tissues and determines replication timing in Drosophila.

DNA Replication Control During Drosophila Development: Insights into the Onset of S Phase, Replication Initiation, and Fork Progression

Proper control of DNA replication is critical to ensure genomic integrity during cell proliferation. In addition, differential regulation of the DNA replication program during development can change gene copy number to influence cell size and gene expression. Drosophila melanogaster serves as a powerful organism to study the developmental control of DNA replication in various cell cycle contexts in a variety of differentiated cell and tissue types. Additionally, Drosophila has provided several developmentally regulated replication models to dissect the molecular mechanisms that underlie replication-based copy number changes in the genome, which include differential underreplication and gene amplification. Here, we review key findings and our current understanding of the developmental control of DNA replication in the contexts of the archetypal replication program as well as of underreplication and differential gene amplification. We focus on the use of these latter two replication systems to delineate many of the molecular mechanisms that underlie the developmental control of replication initiation and fork elongation.

Functional dissection of Drosophila melanogaster SUUR protein influence on H3K27me3 profile

BACKGROUND

In eukaryotes, heterochromatin replicates late in S phase of the cell cycle and contains specific covalent modifications of histones. SuUR mutation found in Drosophila makes heterochromatin replicate earlier than in wild type and reduces the level of repressive histone modifications. SUUR protein was shown to be associated with moving replication forks, apparently through the interaction with PCNA. The biological process underlying the effects of SUUR on replication and composition of heterochromatin remains unknown.

RESULTS

Here we performed a functional dissection of SUUR protein effects on H3K27me3 level. Using hidden Markow model-based algorithm we revealed SuUR-sensitive chromosomal regions that demonstrated unusual characteristics: They do not contain Polycomb and require SUUR function to sustain H3K27me3 level. We tested the role of SUUR protein in the mechanisms that could affect H3K27me3 histone levels in these regions. We found that SUUR does not affect the initial H3K27me3 pattern formation in embryogenesis or Polycomb distribution in the chromosomes. We also ruled out the possible effect of SUUR on histone genes expression and its involvement in DSB repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Obtained results support the idea that SUUR protein contributes to the heterochromatin maintenance during the chromosome replication. A model that explains major SUUR-associated phenotypes is proposed.

Polytene Chromosome Structure and Somatic Genome Instability

Polytene chromosomes have for 80 years provided the highest resolution view of interphase genome structure in an animal cell nucleus. These chromosomes represent the normal genomic state of nearly all Drosophila larval and many adult cells, and a better understanding of their striking banded structure has been sought for decades. A more recently appreciated characteristic of Drosophila polytene cells is somatic genome instability caused by unfinished replication (UR). Repair of stalled forks generates enough deletions in polytene salivary gland cells to alter 10%-90% of the DNA strands within more than 100 UR regions comprising 20% of the euchromatic genome. We accurately map UR regions and show that most approximate large polytene bands, indicating that replication forks frequently stall near band boundaries in late S phase. Chromosome conformation capture has recently identified dense topologically associated domains (TADs) in many genomes and most UR bands are similar or slightly smaller than a cognate Drosophila TAD. We argue that bands serve the evolutionarily ancient function of coordinating genome replication with local gene activity. We also discuss the relatively recent evolution of polyteny and somatic instability in Diptera and propose that these processes helped propel the amazing success of two-winged flies in becoming the most ecologically diverse insect group, with 200 times the number of species as mammals.

Emerging roles of linker histones in regulating chromatin structure and function

Together with core histones, which make up the nucleosome, the linker histone (H1) is one of the five main histone protein families present in chromatin in eukaryotic cells. H1 binds to the nucleosome to form the next structural unit of metazoan chromatin, the chromatosome, which may help chromatin to fold into higher-order structures. Despite their important roles in regulating the structure and function of chromatin, linker histones have not been studied as extensively as core histones. Nevertheless, substantial progress has been made recently. The first near-atomic resolution crystal structure of a chromatosome core particle and an 11 Å resolution cryo-electron microscopy-derived structure of the 30 nm nucleosome array have been determined, revealing unprecedented details about how linker histones interact with the nucleosome and organize higher-order chromatin structures. Moreover, several new functions of linker histones have been discovered, including their roles in epigenetic regulation and the regulation of DNA replication, DNA repair and genome stability. Studies of the molecular mechanisms of H1 action in these processes suggest a new paradigm for linker histone function beyond its architectural roles in chromatin.

Replication fork instability and the consequences of fork collisions from rereplication

Replication forks encounter obstacles that must be repaired or bypassed to complete chromosome duplication before cell division. Proteomic analysis of replication forks suggests that the checkpoint and repair machinery travels with unperturbed forks, implying that they are poised to respond to stalling and collapse. However, impaired fork progression still generates aberrations, including repeat copy number instability and chromosome rearrangements. Deregulated origin firing also causes fork instability if a newer fork collides with an older one, generating double-strand breaks (DSBs) and partially rereplicated DNA. Current evidence suggests that multiple mechanisms are used to repair rereplication damage, yet these can have deleterious consequences for genome integrity.

Regulatory functions and chromatin loading dynamics of linker histone H1 during endoreplication in Drosophila

Eukaryotic DNA replicates asynchronously, with discrete genomic loci replicating during different stages of S phase. Drosophila larval tissues undergo endoreplication without cell division, and the latest replicating regions occasionally fail to complete endoreplication, resulting in underreplicated domains of polytene chromosomes. Here we show that linker histone H1 is required for the underreplication (UR) phenomenon in Drosophila salivary glands. H1 directly interacts with the Suppressor of UR (SUUR) protein and is required for SUUR binding to chromatin in vivo. These observations implicate H1 as a critical factor in the formation of underreplicated regions and an upstream effector of SUUR. We also demonstrate that the localization of H1 in chromatin changes profoundly during the endocycle. At the onset of endocycle S (endo-S) phase, H1 is heavily and specifically loaded into late replicating genomic regions and is then redistributed during the course of endoreplication. Our data suggest that cell cycle-dependent chromosome occupancy of H1 is governed by several independent processes. In addition to the ubiquitous replication-related disassembly and reassembly of chromatin, H1 is deposited into chromatin through a novel pathway that is replication-independent, rapid, and locus-specific. This cell cycle-directed dynamic localization of H1 in chromatin may play an important role in the regulation of DNA replication timing.

The composition and organization of Drosophila heterochromatin are heterogeneous and dynamic

Heterochromatin is enriched for specific epigenetic factors including Heterochromatin Protein 1a (HP1a), and is essential for many organismal functions. To elucidate heterochromatin organization and regulation, we purified Drosophila melanogaster HP1a interactors, and performed a genome-wide RNAi screen to identify genes that impact HP1a levels or localization. The majority of the over four hundred putative HP1a interactors and regulators identified were previously unknown. We found that 13 of 16 tested candidates (83%) are required for gene silencing, providing a substantial increase in the number of identified components that impact heterochromatin properties. Surprisingly, image analysis revealed that although some HP1a interactors and regulators are broadly distributed within the heterochromatin domain, most localize to discrete subdomains that display dynamic localization patterns during the cell cycle. We conclude that heterochromatin composition and architecture is more spatially complex and dynamic than previously suggested, and propose that a network of subdomains regulates diverse heterochromatin functions.

The effects of SUUR protein suggest its role in repressive chromatin renewal during replication in Drosophila

Replication of chromosomes is central to heredity. To become available for replication machinery, DNA invariably needs to dissociate from chromatin proteins. Yet, chromatin landscape must be promptly re-established during or soon after replication. Although this process underlies the epigenetic inheritance, little is known about its molecular mechanisms. This mini-review is focused on Drosophila melanogaster SUppressor of UnderReplication (SUUR) protein, which is involved both in replication and chromatin maintenance in polytene tissues. Existing data suggest that it is involved in the regulation of chromatin renewal during replication. According to this model, SUUR protein moves along the chromosomes together with the replication complex. When the replication fork enters the repressed, H3K27me3- or H3K9me3-enriched, chromatin, SUUR-containing complex slows down the replisome until these histone modifications are properly placed on the newly-synthesized DNA strands. Suggested model provides an insight into the mechanism of epigenetic information inheritance. This hypothesis could be tested by further analysis of the interplay between local enrichment of repressive histone modifications and the replication fork progression rate.

The Histone Variant H3.3 Is Enriched at Drosophila Amplicon Origins but Does Not Mark Them for Activation

Eukaryotic DNA replication begins from multiple origins. The origin recognition complex (ORC) binds origin DNA and scaffolds assembly of a prereplicative complex (pre-RC), which is subsequently activated to initiate DNA replication. In multicellular eukaryotes, origins do not share a strict DNA consensus sequence, and their activity changes in concert with chromatin status during development, but mechanisms are ill-defined. Previous genome-wide analyses in Drosophila and other organisms have revealed a correlation between ORC binding sites and the histone variant H3.3. This correlation suggests that H3.3 may designate origin sites, but this idea has remained untested. To address this question, we examined the enrichment and function of H3.3 at the origins responsible for developmental gene amplification in the somatic follicle cells of the Drosophila ovary. We found that H3.3 is abundant at these amplicon origins. H3.3 levels remained high when replication initiation was blocked, indicating that H3.3 is abundant at the origins before activation of the pre-RC. H3.3 was also enriched at the origins during early oogenesis, raising the possibility that H3.3 bookmarks sites for later amplification. However, flies null mutant for both of the H3.3 genes in Drosophila did not have overt defects in developmental gene amplification or genomic replication, suggesting that H3.3 is not essential for the assembly or activation of the pre-RC at origins. Instead, our results imply that the correlation between H3.3 and ORC sites reflects other chromatin attributes that are important for origin function.

Guanine quadruplex structures localize to heterochromatin

Increasing amounts of data support a role for guanine quadruplex (G4) DNA and RNA structures in various cellular processes. We stained different organisms with monoclonal antibody 1H6 specific for G4 DNA. Strikingly, immuno-electron microscopy showed exquisite specificity for heterochromatin. Polytene chromosomes from Drosophila salivary glands showed bands that co-localized with heterochromatin proteins HP1 and the SNF2 domain-containing protein SUUR. Staining was retained in SUUR knock-out mutants but lost upon overexpression of SUUR. Somatic cells in Macrostomum lignano were strongly labeled, but pluripotent stem cells labeled weakly. Similarly, germline stem cells in Drosophila ovaries were weakly labeled compared to most other cells. The unexpected presence of G4 structures in heterochromatin and the difference in G4 staining between somatic cells and stem cells with germline DNA in ciliates, flatworms, flies and mammals point to a conserved role for G4 structures in nuclear organization and cellular differentiation.

Polyploidy

Polyploidy is defined as an increase in genome DNA content. Throughout the plant and animal kingdoms specific cell types become polyploid as part of their differentiation programs. When this occurs in subsets of tissues within an organism it is termed somatic polyploidy, because it is distinct from the increase in ploidy that is inherited through the germline and present in every cell type of the organism. Germline polyploidy is common in plants and occurs in some animals, such as amphibians, but will not be discussed further here. Somatic polyploid cells can be mononucleate or multinucleate, and the replicated sister chromatids can remain attached and aligned, producing polytene chromosomes, or they can be dispersed (Figure 1). In this Primer, we focus on why somatic polyploidy occurs and how cells become polyploid — the first of these issues being more speculative, given the status of the field.

Chromatin dynamics of plant telomeres and ribosomal genes

Telomeres and genes encoding 45S ribosomal RNA (rDNA) are frequently located adjacent to each other on eukaryotic chromosomes. Although their primary roles are different, they show striking similarities with respect to their features and additional functions. Both genome domains have remarkably dynamic chromatin structures. Both are hypersensitive to dysfunctional histone chaperones, responding at the genomic and epigenomic levels. Both generate non-coding transcripts that, in addition to their epigenetic roles, may induce gross chromosomal rearrangements. Both give rise to chromosomal fragile sites, as their replication is intrinsically problematic. However, at the same time, both are essential for maintenance of genomic stability and integrity. Here we discuss the structural and functional inter-connectivity of telomeres and rDNA, with a focus on recent results obtained in plants.

Understanding replication fork progression, stability, and chromosome fragility by exploiting the Suppressor of Underreplication protein

There are many layers of regulation governing DNA replication to ensure that genetic information is accurately transmitted from mother cell to daughter cell. While much of the control occurs at the level of origin selection and firing, less is known about how replication fork progression is controlled throughout the genome. In Drosophila polytene cells, specific regions of the genome become repressed for DNA replication, resulting in underreplication and decreased copy number. Importantly, underreplicated domains share properties with common fragile sites. The Suppressor of Underreplication protein SUUR is essential for this repression. Recent work established that SUUR functions by directly inhibiting replication fork progression, raising several interesting questions as to how replication fork progression and stability can be modulated within targeted regions of the genome. Here we discuss potential mechanisms by which replication fork inhibition can be achieved and the consequences this has on genome stability and copy number control.