Effective blocking of the white enhancer requires cooperation between two main mechanisms suggested for the insulator function

Role of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 Protein in Interactions between Su(Hw)-Dependent Complexes and Their Recruitment to Chromatin

Su(Hw) belongs to the class of proteins that organize chromosome architecture, determine promoter activity, and participate in formation of the boundaries/insulators between the regulatory domains. This protein contains a cluster of 12 zinc fingers of the C2H2 type, some of which are responsible for binding to the consensus site. The Su(Hw) protein forms complex with the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and the CP190 proteins, where the last one binds to all known Drosophila insulators. To further study functioning of the Su(Hw)-dependent complexes, we used the previously described su(Hw)E8 mutation with inactive seventh zinc finger, which produces mutant protein that cannot bind to the consensus site. The present work shows that the Su(Hw)E8 protein continues to directly interact with the CP190 and Mod(mdg4)-67.2 proteins. Through interaction with Mod(mdg4)-67.2, the Su(Hw)E8 protein can be recruited into the Su(Hw)-dependent complexes formed on chromatin and enhance their insulator activity. Our results demonstrate that the Su(Hw) dependent complexes without bound DNA can be recruited to the Su(Hw) binding sites through the specific protein-protein interactions that are stabilized by Mod(mdg4)-67.2.

Boundary bypass activity in the abdominal-B region of the Drosophila bithorax complex is position dependent and regulated

Expression of Abdominal-B (Abd-B) in abdominal segments A5-A8 is controlled by four regulatory domains, iab-5-iab-8. Each domain has an initiator element (which sets the activity state), elements that maintain this state and tissue-specific enhancers. To ensure their functional autonomy, each domain is bracketed by boundary elements (Mcp, Fab-7, Fab-7 and Fab-8). In addition to blocking crosstalk between adjacent regulatory domains, the Fab boundaries must also have bypass activity so the relevant regulatory domains can 'jump over' intervening boundaries and activate the Abd-B promoter. In the studies reported here we have investigated the parameters governing bypass activity. We find that the bypass elements in the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries must be located in the regulatory domain that is responsible for driving Abd-B expression. We suggest that bypass activity may also be subject to regulation.

Polycomb Recruiters Inside and Outside of the Repressed Domains

The establishment and stable inheritance of individual patterns of gene expression in different cell types are required for the development of multicellular organisms. The important epigenetic regulators are the Polycomb group (PcG) and Trithorax group (TrxG) proteins, which control the silenced and active states of genes, respectively. In Drosophila, the PcG/TrxG group proteins are recruited to the DNA regulatory sequences termed the Polycomb response elements (PREs). The PREs are composed of the binding sites for different DNA-binding proteins, the so-called PcG recruiters. Currently, the role of the PcG recruiters in the targeting of the PcG proteins to PREs is well documented. However, there are examples where the PcG recruiters are also implicated in the active transcription and in the TrxG function. In addition, there is increasing evidence that the genome-wide PcG recruiters interact with the chromatin outside of the PREs and overlap with the proteins of differing regulatory classes. Recent studies of the interactomes of the PcG recruiters significantly expanded our understanding that they have numerous interactors besides the PcG proteins and that their functions extend beyond the regulation of the PRE repressive activity. Here, we summarize current data about the functions of the PcG recruiters.

Boundary Bypass Activity in the Abdominal-B Region of the Drosophila Bithorax Complex is Position Dependent and Regulated

Expression of Abdominal-B ( Abd-B ) in abdominal segments A5 - A8 is controlled by four regulatory domains, iab-5 - iab-8 . Each domain has an initiator element (which sets the activity state), elements that maintain this state and tissue-specific enhancers. To ensure their functional autonomy, each domain is bracketed by boundary elements ( Mcp , Fab-7 , Fab-7 and Fab-8 ). In addition to blocking crosstalk between adjacent regulatory domains, the Fab boundaries must also have bypass activity so the relevant regulatory domains can "jump over" intervening boundaries and activate the Abd-B promoter. In the studies reported here we have investigated the parameters governing bypass activity. We find that the bypass elements in the Fab-7 and Fab-8 boundaries must be located in the regulatory domain that is responsible for driving Abd-B expression. We suggest that bypass activity may also be subject to regulation.

Summary Statement

Boundaries separating Abd-B regulatory domains block crosstalk between domains and mediate their interactions with Abd-B . The latter function is location but not orientation dependent.

Mechanisms of Interaction between Enhancers and Promoters in Three Drosophila Model Systems

In higher eukaryotes, the regulation of developmental gene expression is determined by enhancers, which are often located at a large distance from the promoters they regulate. Therefore, the architecture of chromosomes and the mechanisms that determine the functional interaction between enhancers and promoters are of decisive importance in the development of organisms. Mammals and the model animal Drosophila have homologous key architectural proteins and similar mechanisms in the organization of chromosome architecture. This review describes the current progress in understanding the mechanisms of the formation and regulation of long-range interactions between enhancers and promoters at three well-studied key regulatory loci in Drosophila.

Drosophila insulator proteins exhibit in vivo liquid-liquid phase separation properties

Drosophila insulator proteins and the cohesin subunit Rad21 coalesce in vivo to form liquid-droplet condensates, suggesting that liquid–liquid phase separation mediates their function in 3D genome organization.

Mounting evidence implicates liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS), the condensation of biomolecules into liquid-like droplets in the formation and dissolution of membraneless intracellular organelles (MLOs). Cells use MLOs or condensates for various biological processes, including emergency signaling and spatiotemporal control over steady-state biochemical reactions and heterochromatin formation. Insulator proteins are architectural elements involved in establishing independent domains of transcriptional activity within eukaryotic genomes. In Drosophila, insulator proteins form nuclear foci known as insulator bodies in response to osmotic stress. However, the mechanism through which insulator proteins assemble into bodies is yet to be investigated. Here, we identify signatures of LLPS by insulator bodies, including high disorder tendency in insulator proteins, scaffold–client–dependent assembly, extensive fusion behavior, sphericity, and sensitivity to 1,6-hexanediol. We also show that the cohesin subunit Rad21 is a component of insulator bodies, adding to the known insulator protein constituents and γH2Av. Our data suggest a concerted role of cohesin and insulator proteins in insulator body formation and under physiological conditions. We propose a mechanism whereby these architectural proteins modulate 3D genome organization through LLPS.

Mechanisms of enhancer-promoter communication and chromosomal architecture in mammals and Drosophila

The spatial organization of chromosomes is involved in regulating the majority of intranuclear processes in higher eukaryotes, including gene expression. Drosophila was used as a model to discover many transcription factors whose homologs play a key role in regulation of gene expression in mammals. According to modern views, a cohesin complex mostly determines the architecture of mammalian chromosomes by forming chromatin loops on anchors created by the CTCF DNA-binding architectural protein. The role of the cohesin complex in chromosome architecture is poorly understood in Drosophila, and CTCF is merely one of many Drosophila architectural proteins with a proven potential to organize specific long-range interactions between regulatory elements in the genome. The review compares the mechanisms responsible for long-range interactions and chromosome architecture between mammals and Drosophila.

Mod(mdg4) variants repress telomeric retrotransposon HeT-A by blocking subtelomeric enhancers

Telomeres in Drosophila are composed of sequential non-LTR retrotransposons HeT-A, TART and TAHRE. Although they are repressed by the PIWI-piRNA pathway or heterochromatin in the germline, the regulation of these retrotransposons in somatic cells is poorly understood. In this study, we demonstrated that specific splice variants of Mod(mdg4) repress HeT-A by blocking subtelomeric enhancers in ovarian somatic cells. Among the variants, we found that the Mod(mdg4)-N variant represses HeT-A expression the most efficiently. Subtelomeric sequences bound by Mod(mdg4)-N block enhancer activity within subtelomeric TAS-R repeats. This enhancer-blocking activity is increased by the tandem association of Mod(mdg4)-N to repetitive subtelomeric sequences. In addition, the association of Mod(mdg4)-N couples with the recruitment of RNA polymerase II to the subtelomeres, which reinforces its enhancer-blocking function. Our findings provide novel insights into how telomeric retrotransposons are regulated by the specific variants of insulator proteins associated with subtelomeric sequences.

Comparative interactome analysis of the PRE DNA-binding factors: purification of the Combgap-, Zeste-, Psq-, and Adf1-associated proteins

The Polycomb group (PcG) and Trithorax group (TrxG) proteins are key epigenetic regulators controlling the silenced and active states of genes in multicellular organisms, respectively. In Drosophila, PcG/TrxG proteins are recruited to the chromatin via binding to specific DNA sequences termed polycomb response elements (PREs). While precise mechanisms of the PcG/TrxG protein recruitment remain unknown, the important role is suggested to belong to sequence-specific DNA-binding factors. At the same time, it was demonstrated that the PRE DNA-binding proteins are not exclusively localized to PREs but can bind other DNA regulatory elements, including enhancers, promoters, and boundaries. To gain an insight into the PRE DNA-binding protein regulatory network, here, using ChIP-seq and immuno-affinity purification coupled to the high-throughput mass spectrometry, we searched for differences in abundance of the Combgap, Zeste, Psq, and Adf1 PRE DNA-binding proteins. While there were no conspicuous differences in co-localization of these proteins with other functional transcription factors, we show that Combgap and Zeste are more tightly associated with the Polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1), while Psq interacts strongly with the TrxG proteins, including the BAP SWI/SNF complex. The Adf1 interactome contained Mediator subunits as the top interactors. In addition, Combgap efficiently interacted with AGO2, NELF, and TFIID. Combgap, Psq, and Adf1 have architectural proteins in their networks. We further investigated the existence of direct interactions between different PRE DNA-binding proteins and demonstrated that Combgap-Adf1, Psq-Dsp1, and Pho-Spps can interact in the yeast two-hybrid assay. Overall, our data suggest that Combgap, Psq, Zeste, and Adf1 are associated with the protein complexes implicated in different regulatory activities and indicate their potential multifunctional role in the regulation of transcription.

Multi-Scale Organization of the Drosophila melanogaster Genome

Interphase chromatin, despite its appearance, is a highly organized framework of loops and bends. Chromosomes are folded into topologically associating domains, or TADs, and each chromosome and its homolog occupy a distinct territory within the nucleus. In Drosophila, genome organization is exceptional because homologous chromosome pairing is in both germline and somatic tissues, which promote interhomolog interactions such as transvection that can affect gene expression in trans. In this review, we focus on what is known about genome organization in Drosophila and discuss it from TADs to territory. We start by examining intrachromosomal organization at the sub-chromosome level into TADs, followed by a comprehensive analysis of the known proteins that play a key role in TAD formation and boundary establishment. We then zoom out to examine interhomolog interactions such as pairing and transvection that are abundant in Drosophila but rare in other model systems. Finally, we discuss chromosome territories that form within the nucleus, resulting in a complete picture of the multi-scale organization of the Drosophila genome.

CTCF As an Example of DNA-Binding Transcription Factors Containing Clusters of C2H2-Type Zinc Fingers

In mammals, most of the boundaries of topologically associating domains and all well-studied insulators are rich in binding sites for the CTCF protein. According to existing experimental data, CTCF is a key factor in the organization of the architecture of mammalian chromosomes. A characteristic feature of the CTCF is that the central part of the protein contains a cluster consisting of eleven domains of C2H2-type zinc fingers, five of which specifically bind to a long DNA sequence conserved in most animals. The class of transcription factors that carry a cluster of C2H2-type zinc fingers consisting of five or more domains (C2H2 proteins) is widely represented in all groups of animals. The functions of most C2H2 proteins still remain unknown. This review presents data on the structure and possible functions of these proteins, using the example of the vertebrate CTCF protein and several well- characterized C2H2 proteins in Drosophila and mammals.

The Functions and Mechanisms of Action of Insulators in the Genomes of Higher Eukaryotes

The mechanisms underlying long-range interactions between chromatin regions and the principles of chromosomal architecture formation are currently under extensive scrutiny. A special class of regulatory elements known as insulators is believed to be involved in the regulation of specific long-range interactions between enhancers and promoters. This review focuses on the insulators of Drosophila and mammals, and it also briefly characterizes the proteins responsible for their functional activity. It was initially believed that the main properties of insulators are blocking of enhancers and the formation of independent transcription domains. We present experimental data proving that the chromatin loops formed by insulators play only an auxiliary role in enhancer blocking. The review also discusses the mechanisms involved in the formation of topologically associating domains and their role in the formation of the chromosomal architecture and regulation of gene transcription.

HIPP1 stabilizes the interaction between CP190 and Su(Hw) in the Drosophila insulator complex

Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] is one of the best characterized architectural proteins in Drosophila and recruits the CP190 and Mod(mdg4)-67.2 proteins to chromatin, where they form a well-known insulator complex. Recently, HP1 and insulator partner protein 1 (HIPP1), a homolog of the human co-repressor Chromodomain Y-Like (CDYL), was identified as a new partner for Su(Hw). Here, we performed a detailed analysis of the domains involved in the HIPP1 interactions with Su(Hw)-dependent complexes. HIPP1 was found to directly interact with the Su(Hw) C-terminal region (aa 720–892) and with CP190, but not with Mod(mdg4)-67.2. We have generated Hipp1 null mutants (Hipp^Δ1) and found that the loss of Hipp1 does not affect the enhancer-blocking or repression activities of the Su(Hw)-dependent complex. However, the simultaneous inactivation of both HIPP1 and Mod(mdg4)-67.2 proteins resulted in reduced CP190 binding with Su(Hw) sites and significantly altered gypsy insulator activity. Taken together, these results suggested that the HIPP1 protein stabilized the interaction between CP190 and the Su(Hw)-dependent complex.

Small Drosophila zinc finger C2H2 protein with an N-terminal zinc finger-associated domain demonstrates the architecture functions

Recently, the concept has arisen that a special class of architectural proteins exists, which are responsible not only for global chromosome architecture but also for the local regulation of enhancer-promoter interactions. Here, we describe a new architectural protein, with a total size of only 375 aa, which contains an N-terminal zinc finger-associated domain (ZAD) and a cluster of five zinc finger C2H2 domains at the C-terminus. This new protein, named ZAD and Architectural Function 1 protein (ZAF1 protein), is weakly and ubiquitously expressed, with the highest expression levels observed in oocytes and embryos. The cluster of C2H2 domains recognizes a specific 15-bp consensus site, located predominantly in promoters, near transcription start sites. The expression of ZAF1 by a tissue-specific promoter led to the complete blocking of the eye enhancer when clusters of ZAF1 binding sites flanked the eye enhancer in transgenic lines, suggesting that the loop formed by the ZAF1 protein leads to insulation. The ZAF1 protein also supported long-range interactions between the yeast GAL4 activator and the white promoter in transgenic Drosophila lines. A mutant protein lacking the ZAD failed to block the eye enhancer or to support distance interactions in transgenic lines. Taken together, these results suggest that ZAF1 is a minimal architectural protein that can be used to create a convenient model for studying the mechanisms of distance interactions.

Study of dCTCF Insulator Activity in Drosophilamelanogaster Model Systems

Using transgenic Drosophila model systems, we showed that four binding sites for the architectural protein dCTCF per se cannot form an effective insulator that blocks enhancers and protects against the Polycomb-dependent repression. These results suggest that, in the known Drosophila insulators, the dCTCF protein functions in cooperation with other architectural proteins.

The Role of Insulators in Transgene Transvection in Drosophila

Transvection is the phenomenon where a transcriptional enhancer activates a promoter located on the homologous chromosome. It has been amply documented in Drosophila where homologs are closely paired in most, if not all, somatic nuclei, but it has been known to rarely occur in mammals as well. We have taken advantage of site-directed transgenesis to insert reporter constructs into the same genetic locus in Drosophila and have evaluated their ability to engage in transvection by testing many heterozygous combinations. We find that transvection requires the presence of an insulator element on both homologs. Homotypic trans-interactions between four different insulators can support transvection: the gypsy insulator (GI), Wari, Fab-8 and 1A2; GI and Fab-8 are more effective than Wari or 1A2 We show that, in the presence of insulators, transvection displays the characteristics that have been previously described: it requires homolog pairing, but can happen at any of several loci in the genome; a solitary enhancer confronted with an enhancerless reporter is sufficient to drive transcription; it is weaker than the action of the same enhancer-promoter pair in cis, and it is further suppressed by cis-promoter competition. Though necessary, the presence of homotypic insulators is not sufficient for transvection; their position, number and orientation matters. A single GI adjacent to both enhancer and promoter is the optimal configuration. The identity of enhancers and promoters in the vicinity of a trans-interacting insulator pair is also important, indicative of complex insulator-enhancer-promoter interactions.

The same domain of Su(Hw) is required for enhancer blocking and direct promoter repression

Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] is a DNA-binding architectural protein that participates in the organization of insulators and repression of promoters in Drosophila. This protein contains acidic regions at both ends and a central cluster of 12 zinc finger domains, some of which are involved in the specific recognition of the binding site. One of the well-described in vivo function of Su(Hw) is the repression of transcription of neuronal genes in oocytes. Here, we have found that the same Su(Hw) C-terminal region (aa 720–892) is required for insulation as well as for promoter repression. The best characterized partners of Su(Hw), CP190 and Mod(mdg4)-67.2, are not involved in the repression of neuronal genes. Taken together, these results suggest that an unknown protein or protein complex binds to the C-terminal region of Su(Hw) and is responsible for the direct repression activity of Su(Hw).

Functional dissection of the developmentally restricted BEN domain chromatin boundary factor Insensitive

Background

Boundaries in the Drosophila bithorax complex delimit autonomous regulatory domains that activate the parasegment (PS)-specific expression of homeotic genes. The Fab-7 boundary separates the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains that control Abd-B expression in PS11 and PS12. This boundary is composed of multiple functionally redundant elements and has two key activities: it blocks crosstalk between iab-6 and iab-7 and facilitates boundary bypass.

Results

Here, we have used a structure–function approach to elucidate the biochemical properties and the in vivo activities of a conserved BEN domain protein, Insensitive, that is associated with Fab-7. Our biochemical studies indicate that in addition to the C-terminal BEN DNA-binding domain, Insv has two domains that mediate multimerization: one is a coiled-coil domain in the N-terminus, and the other is next to the BEN domain. These multimerization domains enable Insv to bind simultaneously to two canonical 8-bp recognition motifs, as well as to a ~ 100-bp non-canonical recognition sequence. They also mediate the assembly of higher-order multimers in the presence of DNA. Transgenic proteins lacking the N-terminal coiled-coil domain are compromised for boundary function in vivo. We also show that Insv interacts directly with CP190, a protein previously implicated in the boundary functions of several DNA-binding proteins, including Su(Hw) and dCTCF. While CP190 interaction is required for Insv binding to a subset of sites on polytene chromosomes, it has only a minor role in the boundary activity of Insv in the context of Fab-7.

Conclusions

The subdivision of eukaryotic chromosomes into discrete topological domains depends upon the pairing of boundary elements. In flies, pairing interactions are specific and typically orientation dependent. They occur in cis between neighboring heterologous boundaries, and in trans between homologous boundaries. One potential mechanism for ensuring pairing-interaction specificity is the use of sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins that can bind simultaneously with two or more recognition sequences. Our studies indicate that Insv can assemble into a multivalent DNA-binding complex and that the N-terminal Insv multimerization domain is critical for boundary function.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13072-018-0249-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The BEN Domain Protein Insensitive Binds to the Fab-7 Chromatin Boundary To Establish Proper Segmental Identity in Drosophila

Boundaries (insulators) in the Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) delimit autonomous regulatory domains that orchestrate the parasegment (PS)-specific expression of the BX-C homeotic genes. The Fab-7 boundary separates the iab-6 and iab-7 regulatory domains, which control Abd-B expression in PS11 and PS12, respectively. This boundary is composed of multiple functionally redundant elements and has two key functions: it blocks cross talk between iab-6 and iab-7 and facilitates boundary bypass. Here, we show that two BEN domain protein complexes, Insensitive and Elba, bind to multiple sequences located in the Fab-7 nuclease hypersensitive regions. Two of these sequences are recognized by both Insv and Elba and correspond to a CCAATTGG palindrome. Elba also binds to a related CCAATAAG sequence, while Insv does not. However, the third Insv recognition sequences is ∼100 bp in length and contains the CCAATAAG sequence at one end. Both Insv and Elba are assembled into large complexes (∼420 and ∼265-290 kDa, respectively) in nuclear extracts. Using a sensitized genetic background, we show that the Insv protein is required for Fab-7 boundary function and that PS11 identity is not properly established in insv mutants. This is the first demonstration that a BEN domain protein is important for the functioning of an endogenous fly boundary.

Study of the Ability of the gypsy Insulator to Stabilize Amplification of the chorion Replication Origin of Drosophila melanogaster

The role of the gypsy insulator in the replication origin (RO) activity in the presence and absence of one and two copies of this insulator in several genomic sites was studied. Due to the fact that the prepared model system makes it possible to study the activity of this element in a given genomic site, it was shown that the RO stabilization, indeed, is determined by the activity of the insulator rather than by the construct integration site into the genome. The role of the Su(Hw) protein in this process was also studied in detail.

Multiple interactions are involved in a highly specific association of the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 isoform with the Su(Hw) sites in Drosophila

The best-studied Drosophila insulator complex consists of two BTB-containing proteins, the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 isoform and CP190, which are recruited to the chromatin through interactions with the DNA-binding Su(Hw) protein. It was shown previously that Mod(mdg4)-67.2 is critical for the enhancer-blocking activity of the Su(Hw) insulators and it differs from more than 30 other Mod(mdg4) isoforms by the C-terminal domain required for a specific interaction with Su(Hw) only. The mechanism of the highly specific association between Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and Su(Hw) is not well understood. Therefore, we have performed a detailed analysis of domains involved in the interaction of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 with Su(Hw) and CP190. We found that the N-terminal region of Su(Hw) interacts with the glutamine-rich domain common to all the Mod(mdg4) isoforms. The unique C-terminal part of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 contains the Su(Hw)-interacting domain and the FLYWCH domain that facilitates a specific association between Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and the CP190/Su(Hw) complex. Finally, interaction between the BTB domain of Mod(mdg4)-67.2 and the M domain of CP190 has been demonstrated. By using transgenic lines expressing different protein variants, we have shown that all the newly identified interactions are to a greater or lesser extent redundant, which increases the reliability in the formation of the protein complexes.

Opbp is a new architectural/insulator protein required for ribosomal gene expression

A special class of poorly characterized architectural proteins is required for chromatin topology and enhancer–promoter interactions. Here, we identify Opbp as a new Drosophila architectural protein, interacting with CP190 both in vivo and in vitro. Opbp binds to a very restrictive set of genomic regions, through a rare sequence specific motif. These sites are co-bound by CP190 in vivo, and generally located at bidirectional promoters of ribosomal protein genes. We show that Opbp is essential for viability, and loss of opbp function, or destruction of its motif, leads to reduced ribosomal protein gene expression, indicating a functional role in promoter activation. As characteristic of architectural/insulator proteins, the Opbp motif is sufficient for distance-dependent reporter gene activation and enhancer-blocking activity, suggesting an Opbp-mediated enhancer–promoter interaction. Rather than having a constitutive role, Opbp represents a new type of architectural protein with a very restricted, yet essential, function in regulation of housekeeping gene expression.

Interactions between BTB domain of CP190 and two adjacent regions in Su(Hw) are required for the insulator complex formation

The best-studied Drosophila insulator complex consists of two BTB-containing proteins, the Mod(mdg4)-67.2 isoform and CP190, which are recruited cooperatively to chromatin through interactions with the DNA-binding architectural protein Su(Hw). While Mod(mdg4)-67.2 interacts only with Su(Hw), CP190 interacts with many other architectural proteins. In spite of the fact that CP190 is critical for the activity of Su(Hw) insulators, interaction between these proteins has not been studied yet. Therefore, we have performed a detailed analysis of domains involved in the interaction between the Su(Hw) and CP190. The results show that the BTB domain of CP190 interacts with two adjacent regions at the N-terminus of Su(Hw). Deletion of either region in Su(Hw) only weakly affected recruiting of CP190 to the Su(Hw) sites in the presence of Mod(mdg4)-67.2. Deletion of both regions in Su(Hw) prevents its interaction with CP190. Using mutations in vivo, we found that interactions with Su(Hw) and Mod(mdg4)-67.2 are essential for recruiting of CP190 to the Su(Hw) genomic sites.

Architectural proteins Pita, Zw5,and ZIPIC contain homodimerization domain and support specific long-range interactions in Drosophila

According to recent models, as yet poorly studied architectural proteins appear to be required for local regulation of enhancer-promoter interactions, as well as for global chromosome organization. Transcription factors ZIPIC, Pita and Zw5 belong to the class of chromatin insulator proteins and preferentially bind to promoters near the TSS and extensively colocalize with cohesin and condensin complexes. ZIPIC, Pita and Zw5 are structurally similar in containing the N-terminal zinc finger-associated domain (ZAD) and different numbers of C2H2-type zinc fingers at the C-terminus. Here we have shown that the ZAD domains of ZIPIC, Pita and Zw5 form homodimers. In Drosophila transgenic lines, these proteins are able to support long-distance interaction between GAL4 activator and the reporter gene promoter. However, no functional interaction between binding sites for different proteins has been revealed, suggesting that such interactions are highly specific. ZIPIC facilitates long-distance stimulation of the reporter gene by GAL4 activator in yeast model system. Many of the genomic binding sites of ZIPIC, Pita and Zw5 are located at the boundaries of topologically associated domains (TADs). Thus, ZAD-containing zinc-finger proteins can be attributed to the class of architectural proteins.

Determinants of Chromosome Architecture: Insulator Pairing in cis and in trans

The chromosomes of multicellular animals are organized into a series of topologically independent looped domains. This domain organization is critical for the proper utilization and propagation of the genetic information encoded by the chromosome. A special set of architectural elements, called boundaries or insulators, are responsible both for subdividing the chromatin into discrete domains and for determining the topological organization of these domains. Central to the architectural functions of insulators are homologous and heterologous insulator:insulator pairing interactions. The former (pairing between copies of the same insulator) dictates the process of homolog alignment and pairing in trans, while the latter (pairing between different insulators) defines the topology of looped domains in cis. To elucidate the principles governing these architectural functions, we use two insulators, Homie and Nhomie, that flank the Drosophila even skipped locus. We show that homologous insulator interactions in trans, between Homie on one homolog and Homie on the other, or between Nhomie on one homolog and Nhomie on the other, mediate transvection. Critically, these homologous insulator:insulator interactions are orientation-dependent. Consistent with a role in the alignment and pairing of homologs, self-pairing in trans is head-to-head. Head-to-head self-interactions in cis have been reported for other fly insulators, suggesting that this is a general principle of self-pairing. Homie and Nhomie not only pair with themselves, but with each other. Heterologous Homie-Nhomie interactions occur in cis, and we show that they serve to delimit a looped chromosomal domain that contains the even skipped transcription unit and its associated enhancers. The topology of this loop is defined by the heterologous pairing properties of Homie and Nhomie. Instead of being head-to-head, which would generate a circular loop, Homie-Nhomie pairing is head-to-tail. Head-to-tail pairing in cis generates a stem-loop, a configuration much like that observed in classical lampbrush chromosomes. These pairing principles provide a mechanistic underpinning for the observed topologies within and between chromosomes.

The chromosomes of multicellular animals are organized into a series of topologically independent looped domains. This domain organization is critical for the proper utilization and propagation of the genetic information encoded by the chromosome. A special set of architectural elements, called boundaries or insulators, are responsible for both subdividing the chromatin fiber into discrete domains, and determining the topological organization of these domains. Central to the architectural functions of insulators are heterologous and homologous insulator:insulator pairing interactions. In Drosophila, the former defines the topology of individual looped domains in cis, while the latter dictates the process of homolog alignment and pairing in trans. Here we use two insulators from the even skipped locus to elucidate the principles governing these two architectural functions. These principles align with several longstanding observations, and resolve a number of conundrums regarding chromosome topology and function.

Discovery of Nuclear DNA-like RNA (dRNA, hnRNA) and Ribonucleoproteins Particles Containing hnRNA

On August 9-11, 2014, Cold Spring Harbor (USA) hosted a special symposium dedicated to the discovery of messenger or informational RNA and the main events in the subsequent studies of its synthesis, regulation of synthesis, maturation, and transport. The existence of mRNA in bacteria was first suggested in 1961 by Jacob and Monod, based on genetic studies [1]. The same year, Brenner et al. confirmed the hypothesis [2]. Our laboratory played a key role in the discovery of messenger RNA in eukaryotes, as well as in the discovery of the nuclear ribonucleoproteins that contain it and in the elucidation of their structural organization. Therefore, I was invited to represent Russia at the Symposium and deliver a speech on these topics. However, my visa had only been issued after the end of the Symposium, and, therefore, the presentation was delivered by my former colleague G.N. Yenikolopov, who works at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. The transcript of the lecture is presented below.

A Model System in S2 Cells to Test the Functional Activities of Drosophila Insulators

Insulators are a special class of regulatory elements that can regulate interactions between enhancers and promoters in the genome of high eukaryotes. To date, the mechanisms of insulator action remain unknown, which is primarily related to the lack of convenient model systems. We suggested studying a model system which is based on transient expression of a plasmid with an enhancer of the copia transposable element, in Drosophila embryonic cell lines. We demonstrated that during transient transfection of circle plasmids with a well-known Drosophila insulator from the gypsy retrotransposon, the insulator exhibits in an enhancer-blocking assay the same properties as in Drosophila stable transgenic lines. Therefore, the Drosophila cell line is suitable for studying the main activities of insulators, which provides additional opportunities for investigating the functional role of certain insulator proteins.

Functional role of dimerization and CP190 interacting domains of CTCF protein in Drosophila melanogaster

Background

Insulators play a central role in gene regulation, chromosomal architecture and genome function in higher eukaryotes. To learn more about how insulators carry out their diverse functions, we have begun an analysis of the Drosophila CTCF (dCTCF). CTCF is one of the few insulator proteins known to be conserved from flies to man.

Results

In the studies reported here we have focused on the identification and characterization of two dCTCF protein interaction modules. The first mediates dCTCF multimerization, while the second mediates dCTCF–CP190 interactions. The multimerization domain maps in the N-terminus of the dCTCF protein and likely mediates the formation of tetrameric complexes. The CP190 interaction module encompasses a sequence ~200 amino acids long that spans the C-terminal and mediates interactions with the N-terminal BTB domain of the CP190 protein. Transgene rescue experiments showed that a dCTCF protein lacking sequences critical for CP190 interactions was almost as effective as wild type in rescuing the phenotypic effects of a dCTCF null allele. The mutation did, however, affect CP190 recruitment to specific Drosophila insulator elements and had a modest effect on dCTCF chromatin association. A protein lacking the N-terminal dCTCF multimerization domain incompletely rescued the zygotic and maternal effect lethality of the null and did not rescue the defects in Abd-B regulation evident in surviving adult dCTCF mutant flies. Finally, we show that elimination of maternally contributed dCTCF at the onset of embryogenesis has quite different effects on development and Abd-B regulation than is observed when the homozygous mutant animals develop in the presence of maternally derived dCTCF activity.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that dCTCF–CP190 interactions are less critical for the in vivo functions of the dCTCF protein than the N-terminal dCTCF–dCTCF interaction domain. We also show that the phenotypic consequences of dCTCF mutations differ depending upon when and how dCTCF activity is lost.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12915-015-0168-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Regulatory Elements in Vectors for Efficient Generation of Cell Lines Producing Target Proteins

To date, there has been an increasing number of drugs produced in mammalian cell cultures. In order to enhance the expression level and stability of target recombinant proteins in cell cultures, various regulatory elements with poorly studied mechanisms of action are used. In this review, we summarize and discuss the potential mechanisms of action of such regulatory elements.

Chromatin loops as allosteric modulators of enhancer-promoter interactions

The classic model of eukaryotic gene expression requires direct spatial contact between a distal enhancer and a proximal promoter. Recent Chromosome Conformation Capture (3C) studies show that enhancers and promoters are embedded in a complex network of looping interactions. Here we use a polymer model of chromatin fiber to investigate whether, and to what extent, looping interactions between elements in the vicinity of an enhancer-promoter pair can influence their contact frequency. Our equilibrium polymer simulations show that a chromatin loop, formed by elements flanking either an enhancer or a promoter, suppresses enhancer-promoter interactions, working as an insulator. A loop formed by elements located in the region between an enhancer and a promoter, on the contrary, facilitates their interactions. We find that different mechanisms underlie insulation and facilitation; insulation occurs due to steric exclusion by the loop, and is a global effect, while facilitation occurs due to an effective shortening of the enhancer-promoter genomic distance, and is a local effect. Consistently, we find that these effects manifest quite differently for in silico 3C and microscopy. Our results show that looping interactions that do not directly involve an enhancer-promoter pair can nevertheless significantly modulate their interactions. This phenomenon is analogous to allosteric regulation in proteins, where a conformational change triggered by binding of a regulatory molecule to one site affects the state of another site.

In eukaryotes, enhancers directly contact promoters over large genomic distances to regulate gene expression. Characterizing the principles underlying these long-range enhancer-promoter contacts is crucial for a full understanding of gene expression. Recent experimental mapping of chromosomal interactions by the Hi-C method shows an intricate network of local looping interactions surrounding enhancers and promoters. We model a region of chromatin fiber as a long polymer and study how the formation of loops between certain regulatory elements can insulate or facilitate enhancer-promoter interactions. We find 2–5 fold insulation or facilitation, depending on the location of looping elements relative to an enhancer-promoter pair. These effects originate from the polymer nature of chromatin, without requiring additional mechanisms beyond the formation of a chromatin loop. Our findings suggest that loop-mediated gene regulation by elements in the vicinity of an enhancer-promoter pair can be understood as an allosteric effect. This highlights the complex effects that local chromatin organization can have on gene regulation.

In search of the determinants of enhancer-promoter interaction specificity

Although it was originally believed that enhancers activate only the nearest promoter, recent global analyses enabled by high-throughput technology suggest that the network of enhancer-promoter interactions is far more complex. The mechanisms that determine the specificity of enhancer-promoter interactions are still poorly understood, but they are thought to include biochemical compatibility, constraints imposed by the three-dimensional architecture of chromosomes, insulator elements, and possibly the effects of local chromatin composition. In this review, we assess the current insights into these determinants, and highlight the functional genomic approaches that will lead the way towards better mechanistic understanding.

In search of the determinants of enhancer-promoter interaction specificity

Although it was originally believed that enhancers activate only the nearest promoter, recent global analyses enabled by high-throughput technology suggest that the network of enhancer-promoter interactions is far more complex. The mechanisms that determine the specificity of enhancer-promoter interactions are still poorly understood, but they are thought to include biochemical compatibility, constraints imposed by the three-dimensional architecture of chromosomes, insulator elements, and possibly the effects of local chromatin composition. In this review, we assess the current insights into these determinants, and highlight the functional genomic approaches that will lead the way towards better mechanistic understanding.

Mechanisms and proteins involved in long-distance interactions

Due to advances in genome-wide technologies, consistent distant interactions within chromosomes of higher eukaryotes have been revealed. In particular, it has been shown that enhancers can specifically and directly interact with promoters by looping out intervening sequences, which can be up to several hundred kilobases long. This review is focused on transcription factors that are supposed to be involved in long-range interactions. Available data are in agreement with the model that several known transcription factors and insulator proteins belong to an abundant but poorly studied class of proteins that are responsible for chromosomal architecture.

Chromatin insulators and long-distance interactions in Drosophila

Data on long-distance enhancer-mediated activation of gene promoters and complex regulation of gene expression by multiple enhancers have prompted the hypothesis that the action of enhancers is restricted by insulators. Studies with transgenic lines have shown that insulators are responsible for establishing proper local interactions between regulatory elements, but not for defining independent transcriptional domains that restrict the activity of enhancers. It has also become apparent that enhancer blocking is only one of several functional activities of known insulator proteins, which also contribute to the organization of chromosome architecture and the integrity of regulatory elements.