Faculty Bibliography

Mammalian genomes are folded into topologically associating domains (TADs), consisting of chromatin loops anchored by CTCF and cohesin. Some loops are cell-type specific. Here we asked whether CTCF loops are established by a universal or locus-specific mechanism. Investigating the molecular determinants of CTCF clustering, we found that CTCF self-association in vitro is RNase sensitive and that an internal RNA-binding region (RBR_i) mediates CTCF clustering and RNA interaction in vivo. Strikingly, deleting the RBR_i impairs about half of all chromatin loops in mESCs and causes deregulation of gene expression. Disrupted loop formation correlates with diminished clustering and chromatin binding of RBR_i mutant CTCF, which in turn results in a failure to halt cohesin-mediated extrusion. Thus, CTCF loops fall into at least two classes: RBR_i-independent and RBR_i-dependent loops. We speculate that evidence for RBR_i-dependent loops may provide a molecular mechanism for establishing cell-specific CTCF loops, potentially regulated by RNA(s) or other RBR_i-interacting partners.

Chromatin domains and their associated structures must be faithfully inherited through cellular division to maintain cellular identity. However, accessing the localized strategies preserving chromatin domain inheritance, specifically the transfer of parental, pre-existing nucleosomes with their associated post-translational modifications (PTMs) during DNA replication, is challenging in living cells. We devised an inducible, proximity-dependent labeling system to irreversibly mark replication-dependent H3.1 and H3.2 histone-containing nucleosomes at desired loci in mouse embryonic stem cells so that their fate after DNA replication could be followed. Strikingly, repressed chromatin domains are preserved through local re-deposition of parental nucleosomes. In contrast, nucleosomes decorating active chromatin domains do not exhibit such preservation. Notably, altering cell fate leads to an adjustment of the positional inheritance of parental nucleosomes that reflects the corresponding changes in chromatin structure. These findings point to important mechanisms that contribute to parental nucleosome segregation to preserve cellular identity.

The histone methyltransferase activity of PRC2 is central to the formation of H3K27me3-decorated facultative heterochromatin and gene silencing. In addition, PRC2 has been shown to automethylate its core subunits, EZH1/EZH2 and SUZ12. Here, we identify the lysine residues at which EZH1/EZH2 are automethylated with EZH2-K510 and EZH2-K514 being the major such sites in vivo. Automethylated EZH2/PRC2 exhibits a higher level of histone methyltransferase activity and is required for attaining proper cellular levels of H3K27me3. While occurring independently of PRC2 recruitment to chromatin, automethylation promotes PRC2 accessibility to the histone H3 tail. Intriguingly, EZH2 automethylation is significantly reduced in diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) cells that carry a lysine-to-methionine substitution in histone H3 (H3K27M), but not in cells that carry either EZH2 or EED mutants that abrogate PRC2 allosteric activation, indicating that H3K27M impairs the intrinsic activity of PRC2. Our study demonstrates a PRC2 self-regulatory mechanism through its EZH1/2-mediated automethylation activity.

FACT (facilitates chromatin transcription) is a protein complex that allows RNA polymerase II (RNAPII) to overcome the nucleosome-induced barrier to transcription. While abundant in undifferentiated cells and many cancers, FACT is not abundant or is absent in most tissues. Therefore, we screened for additional proteins that might replace FACT upon differentiation. We identified two proteins, lens epithelium-derived growth factor (LEDGF) and hepatoma-derived growth factor 2 (HDGF2), each containing two high mobility group A (HMGA)-like AT-hooks and a methyl-lysine reading Pro-Trp-Trp-Pro (PWWP) domain that binds to H3K36me2 and H3K36me3.LEDGF and HDGF2 colocalize with H3K36me2/3 at genomic regions containing active genes. In myoblasts, LEDGF and HDGF2 are enriched on most active genes. Upon differentiation to myotubes, LEDGF levels decrease, while HDGF2 levels are maintained. Moreover, HDGF2 is required for their proper expression. HDGF2 knockout myoblasts exhibit an accumulation of paused RNAPII within the transcribed region of many HDGF2 target genes, indicating a defect in early elongation.

The organization and structure of chromatin domains are unique to individual cell lineages. Their misregulation might lead to a loss in cellular identity and/or disease. Despite tremendous efforts, our understanding of the formation and propagation of chromatin domains is still limited. Chromatin domains have been studied under steady-state conditions, which are not conducive to following the initial events during their establishment. Here, we present a method to inducibly reconstruct chromatin domains and follow their re-formation as a function of time. Although, first applied to the case of PRC2-mediated repressive chromatin domain formation, it could be easily adapted to other chromatin domains. The modification of and/or the combination of this method with genomics and imaging technologies will provide invaluable tools to study the establishment of chromatin domains in great detail. We believe that this method will revolutionize our understanding of how chromatin domains form and interact with each other.

As the process that silences gene expression ensues during development, the stage is set for the activity of Polycomb-repressive complex 2 (PRC2) to maintain these repressed gene profiles. PRC2 catalyzes a specific histone posttranslational modification (hPTM) that fosters chromatin compaction. PRC2 also facilitates the inheritance of this hPTM through its self-contained "write and read" activities, key to preserving cellular identity during cell division. As these changes in gene expression occur without changes in DNA sequence and are inherited, the process is epigenetic in scope. Mutants of mammalian PRC2 or of its histone substrate contribute to the cancer process and other diseases, and research into these aberrant pathways is yielding viable candidates for therapeutic targeting. The effectiveness of PRC2 hinges on its being recruited to the proper chromatin sites; however, resolving the determinants to this process in the mammalian case was not straightforward and thus piqued the interest of many in the field. Here, we chronicle the latest advances toward exposing mammalian PRC2 and its high maintenance.

Background and Purpose: An emerging role is beginning to be appreciated for the abnormal regulation of transcriptional programs in regulating alcohol use disorders (AUD) associated behaviors. We speculate that one such transcriptional regulator, AUTS2 plays a role in AUD-associated behaviors given links between Auts2/AUTS2 brain expression and SNPs with ethanol (EtOH) consumption in mice and human, respectively. Therefore, these studies sought to understand whether Auts2 contributes to AUD-associated behaviors and if so, what brain regions and chromatin dynamics are important in mitigating these behaviors Methods: Our studies relied on mice with a floxed Auts2 locus crossed to Cre-driver lines producing whole brain (Nestin-Cre), forebrain (EMX1-cre) or purkinje cell (PCP2-Cre) specific knockout of AUTS2 (AUTS2 cKO), respectively. All comparisons weremade between wild-type (WT) and heterozygous Auts2 cKO littermates (HET) on EtOH consumption behaviors (two-bottle choice, lickometer) and accelerating rotarod following EtOH challenge. Neural tissue was also harvested from select subgroups of cKO and subject to RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) to determine the brain-region specific consequences of AUTS2 deletion on the transcriptome.
Result(s): A critical finding of these studies was that AUTS2 affects EtOH preference in a brain region specific manner. Specifically, whole brain and forebrain AUTS2 cKO led to elevated EtOH preference relative to WTlittermates, while purkinje AUTS2 cKO had negligible effect on EtOH preference. In contrast, only the purkinje-AUTS2 cKO impacted performance on an accelerating rotarod following EtOH challenge whereas forebrain specific AUTS2 cKO did not. RNA-seq on the developing cortex and cerebellum further suggest unique transcriptional programs associated with AUTS2 cKO in those brain regions.
Conclusion(s): This work suggests that AUTS2 may play a key role in the propensity to consume EtOH as well as sensitivity to the locomotor properties of EtOH. Furthermore, the effects of AUTS2 on locomotor behavior appear to be rooted in the cerebellum while the consummatory behaviors may rely more on cortical circuits. The precise behavioral substrates, neural networks as well as the mechanisms by which AUTS2 drives transcriptional networks in discrete brain regions are continued areas of study. Together, the present studies suggest that AUTS2 may be key in regulating transcriptional programs that give rise to select AUD phenotypes

Eusocial insects live in societies in which distinct family members serve specific roles in maintaining the colony and advancing the reproductive ability of a few select individuals. Given the genetic similarity of all colony members, the diversity of morphologies and behaviors is surprising. Social communication relies on pheromones and olfaction, as shown by mutants of orco, the universal odorant receptor coreceptor, and through electrophysiological analysis of neuronal responses to pheromones. Additionally, neurohormonal factors and epigenetic regulators play a key role in caste-specific behavior, such as foraging and caste switching. These studies start to allow an understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying social behavior and provide a technological foundation for future studies of eusocial insects. In this review, we highlight recent findings in eusocial insects that advance our understanding of genetic and epigenetic regulations of social behavior and provide perspectives on future studies using cutting-edge technologies. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Genetics Volume 52 is November 23, 2018. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.