Dynamic interplay between non-coding enhancer transcription and gene activity in development

Mouse promoters are characterised by low occupancy and high turnover of RNA polymerase II

The general transcription machinery and its occupancy at promoters are highly conserved across metazoans. This contrasts with the kinetics of mRNA production that considerably differ between model species such as Drosophila and mouse. The molecular basis for these kinetic differences is currently unknown. Here, we used Single-Molecule Footprinting to measure RNA Polymerase II (Pol II) occupancy, the fraction of DNA molecules bound, at promoters in mouse and Drosophila cell lines. Single-molecule data reveals that Pol II occupancy is on average 3-5 times more frequent at transcriptionally active Drosophila promoters than active mouse promoters. Kinetic modelling of the occupancy states suggests that these differences in Pol II occupancy are determined by the ratio between the transcription initiation and Pol II turnover rates. We used chemical perturbation of transcription initiation to determine Pol II turnover rate in both species. Integration of these data into the model shows that infrequent Pol II occupancy in mouse is explained by the combination of high Pol II turnover and low transcription initiation rates.

A transcription coupling model for how enhancers communicate with their target genes

How enhancers communicate with their target genes to influence transcription is an unresolved question of fundamental importance. Current models of the mechanism of enhancer-target gene or enhancer-promoter (E-P) communication are transcription-factor-centric and underappreciate major findings, including that enhancers are themselves transcribed by RNA polymerase II, which correlates with enhancer activity. In this Perspective, we posit that enhancer transcription and its products, enhancer RNAs, are elementary components of enhancer-gene communication. Specifically, we discuss the possibility that transcription at enhancers and at their cognate genes are linked and that this coupling is at the basis of how enhancers communicate with their targets. This model of transcriptional coupling between enhancers and their target genes is supported by growing experimental evidence and represents a synthesis of recent key discoveries.

A single high-zinc activation enhancer can control two genes orientated head-to-head in C. elegans

Enhancers play critical roles in gene expression, but a full understanding of their complex functions has yet to be defined. The cellular response to excess zinc levels in C. elegans requires the HIZR-1 transcription factor, which binds the high-zinc activation (HZA) enhancer in the promoters of multiple target genes. Cadmium hijacks the excess zinc response by binding and activating HIZR-1. By analyzing the genome-wide transcriptional response to excess zinc and cadmium, we identified two positions in the genome where head-to-head oriented genes are both induced by metals. In both examples, a single predicted HZA enhancer is positioned between the two translational start sites. We hypothesized that a single enhancer can control both head-to-head genes, an arrangement that has not been extensively characterized. To test this hypothesis, we used CRISPR genome editing to precisely delete the HZAmT enhancer positioned between mtl-2 and T08G5.1; in this mutant, both head-to-head genes display severely reduced zinc-activated transcription, whereas zinc-activated transcription of more distant genes was not strongly affected. Deleting the HZAcF enhancer positioned between cdr-1 and F35E8.10 caused both head-to-head genes to display reduced cadmium-activated transcription, whereas cadmium-activated transcription of more distant genes was not strongly affected. These studies rigorously document that a single HZA enhancer can control two head-to-head genes, advancing our understanding of the diverse functions of enhancers.

Uncovering the functions and mechanisms of regulatory elements-associated non-coding RNAs

Over the past decade, regulatory non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) produced by RNA Pol II have been revealed as meaningful players in various essential cellular functions. In particular, thousands of ncRNAs are produced at transcriptional regulatory elements such as enhancers and promoters, where they may exert multiple functions to regulate proper development, cellular programming, transcription or genomic stability. Here, we review the mechanisms involving these regulatory element-associated ncRNAs, and particularly enhancer RNAs (eRNAs) and PROMoter uPstream Transcripts (PROMPTs). We contextualize the mechanisms described to the processing and degradation of these short lived RNAs. We summarize recent findings explaining how ncRNAs operate locally at promoters and enhancers, or further away, either shortly after their production by RNA Pol II, or through post-transcriptional stabilization. Such discoveries lead to a converging model accounting for how ncRNAs influence cellular fate, by acting on transcription and chromatin structure, which may further involve factors participating to 3D nuclear organization.

Regulatory landscape of enhancer-mediated transcriptional activation

Enhancers are noncoding regulatory elements that instruct spatial and temporal specificity of gene transcription in response to a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic signals during development. Although it has long been postulated that enhancers physically interact with target promoters through the formation of stable loops, recent studies have changed this static view: sequence-specific transcription factors (TFs) and coactivators are dynamically recruited to enhancers and assemble so-called transcription hubs. Dynamic assembly of transcription hubs appears to serve as a key scaffold to integrate regulatory information encoded by surrounding genome and biophysical properties of transcription machineries. In this review, we outline emerging new models of transcriptional regulation by enhancers and discuss future perspectives.

Mechanisms for controlling Dorsal nuclear levels

Formation of the Dorsal nuclear-cytoplasmic gradient is important for the proper establishment of gene expression patterns along the dorsal-ventral (DV) axis during embryogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster. Correct patterning of the DV axis leads to formation of the presumptive mesoderm, neurogenic ectoderm, dorsal ectoderm, and amnioserosa, which are tissues necessary for embryo viability. While Toll signaling is necessary for Dorsal gradient formation, a gradient still forms in the absence of Toll, suggesting there are additional mechanisms required to achieve correct nuclear Dorsal levels. Potential mechanisms include post-translational modification, shuttling, and nuclear spacing. Post-translational modification could affect import and export rates either directly through modification of a nuclear localization sequence or nuclear export sequence, or indirectly by affecting interactions with binding partners that alter import and export rates. Shuttling, which refers to the facilitated diffusion of Dorsal through its interaction with its cytoplasmic inhibitor Cactus, could regulate nuclear levels by delivering more Dorsal ventrally. Finally, nuclear spacing could result in higher nuclear levels by leaving fewer nuclei in the ventral domain to uptake Dorsal. This review details how each of these mechanisms may help establish Dorsal nuclear levels in the early fly embryo, which serves as a paradigm for understanding how the dynamics of graded inputs can influence patterning and target gene expression. Furthermore, careful analysis of nuclear Dorsal levels is likely to provide general insights as recent studies have suggested that the regulation of nuclear import affects the timing of gene expression at the maternal-to-zygotic transition.

Time will tell: comparing timescales to gain insight into transcriptional bursting

Recent imaging studies have captured the dynamics of regulatory events of transcription inside living cells. These events include transcription factor (TF) DNA binding, chromatin remodeling and modification, enhancer-promoter (E-P) proximity, cluster formation, and preinitiation complex (PIC) assembly. Together, these molecular events culminate in stochastic bursts of RNA synthesis, but their kinetic relationship remains largely unclear. In this review, we compare the timescales of upstream regulatory steps (input) with the kinetics of transcriptional bursting (output) to generate mechanistic models of transcription dynamics in single cells. We highlight open questions and potential technical advances to guide future endeavors toward a quantitative and kinetic understanding of transcription regulation.