WAPL maintains a cohesin loading cycle to preserve cell-type-specific distal gene regulation.


Journal

Nature genetics
ISSN: 1546-1718
Titre abrégé: Nat Genet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9216904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2021
Historique:
received: 23 09 2019
accepted: 27 10 2020
pubmed: 16 12 2020
medline: 11 2 2021
entrez: 15 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The cohesin complex has an essential role in maintaining genome organization. However, its role in gene regulation remains largely unresolved. Here we report that the cohesin release factor WAPL creates a pool of free cohesin, in a process known as cohesin turnover, which reloads it to cell-type-specific binding sites. Paradoxically, stabilization of cohesin binding, following WAPL ablation, results in depletion of cohesin from these cell-type-specific regions, loss of gene expression and differentiation. Chromosome conformation capture experiments show that cohesin turnover is important for maintaining promoter-enhancer loops. Binding of cohesin to cell-type-specific sites is dependent on the pioneer transcription factors OCT4 (POU5F1) and SOX2, but not NANOG. We show the importance of cohesin turnover in controlling transcription and propose that a cycle of cohesin loading and off-loading, instead of static cohesin binding, mediates promoter and enhancer interactions critical for gene regulation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33318687
doi: 10.1038/s41588-020-00744-4
pii: 10.1038/s41588-020-00744-4
pmc: PMC7610352
mid: EMS118022
doi:

Substances chimiques

Cell Cycle Proteins 0
Chromatin 0
Chromosomal Proteins, Non-Histone 0
DNA-Binding Proteins 0
Proteins 0
Rad21 protein, mouse 0
Transcription Factors 0
WAPL protein, mouse 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

100-109

Subventions

Organisme : European Research Council
ID : 637587
Pays : International

Références

Rao, S. S. P., Huntley, M. H., Durand, N. C. & Stamenova, E. K. A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. Cell 159, 1665–1680 (2014).
pubmed: 25497547 pmcid: 5635824 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.021
de Wit, E. et al. CTCF binding polarity determines chromatin looping. Mol. Cell 60, 676–684 (2015).
pubmed: 26527277 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.09.023
Sanborn, A. L. et al. Chromatin extrusion explains key features of loop and domain formation in wild-type and engineered genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 201518552 (2015).
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1508074112
Haarhuis, J. H. I. et al. The cohesin release factor WAPL restricts chromatin loop extension. Cell 169, 693–707 (2017).
pubmed: 28475897 pmcid: 5422210 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.04.013
Rao, S. S. P. et al. Cohesin loss eliminates all loop domains. Cell 171, 305–320 (2017).
pubmed: 28985562 pmcid: 5846482 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.026
Nora, E. P. et al. Targeted degradation of CTCF decouples local insulation of chromosome domains from genomic compartmentalization. Cell 169, 930–944 (2017).
pubmed: 28525758 pmcid: 5538188 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.004
Wutz, G. et al. Topologically associating domains and chromatin loops depend on cohesin and are regulated by CTCF, WAPL, and PDS5 proteins. EMBO J. 36, 3573–3599 (2017).
Schwarzer, W. et al. Two independent modes of chromatin organization revealed by cohesin removal. Nature 551, 51–56 (2017).
pubmed: 29094699 pmcid: 5687303 doi: 10.1038/nature24281
Hyle, J. et al. Acute depletion of CTCF directly affects MYC regulation through loss of enhancer–promoter looping. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, 6699–6713 (2019).
pubmed: 31127282 pmcid: 6648894 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz462
Hadjur, S. et al. Cohesins form chromosomal cis-interactions at the developmentally regulated IFNG locus. Nature 460, 410–413 (2009).
pubmed: 19458616 pmcid: 2869028 doi: 10.1038/nature08079
Paliou, C. et al. Preformed chromatin topology assists transcriptional robustness of Shh during limb development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 12390–12399 (2019).
pubmed: 31147463 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1900672116 pmcid: 6589666
Chan, K.-L. et al. Cohesin’s DNA exit gate is distinct from its entrance gate and is regulated by acetylation. Cell 150, 961–974 (2012).
pubmed: 22901742 pmcid: 3485559 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.07.028
Huis in’t Veld, P. J. et al. Characterization of a DNA exit gate in the human cohesin ring. Science 346, 968–972 (2014).
doi: 10.1126/science.1256904
Kueng, S. et al. Wapl controls the dynamic association of cohesin with chromatin. Cell 127, 955–967 (2006).
pubmed: 17113138 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.040
Nishiyama, T. et al. Sororin mediates sister chromatid cohesion by antagonizing Wapl. Cell 143, 737–749 (2010).
pubmed: 21111234 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.10.031
Misulovin, Z., Pherson, M., Gause, M. & Dorsett, D. Brca2, Pds5 and Wapl differentially control cohesin chromosome association and function. PLoS Genet. 14, e1007225 (2018).
pubmed: 29447171 pmcid: 5831647 doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007225
Kagey, M. H. et al. Mediator and cohesin connect gene expression and chromatin architecture. Nature 467, 430–435 (2010).
pubmed: 20720539 pmcid: 2953795 doi: 10.1038/nature09380
Nitzsche, A. et al. RAD21 cooperates with pluripotency transcription factors in the maintenance of embryonic stem cell identity. PLoS ONE 6, e19470 (2011).
pubmed: 21589869 pmcid: 3093395 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019470
Faure, A. J. et al. Cohesin regulates tissue-specific expression by stabilizing highly occupied cis-regulatory modules. Genome Res. 22, 2163–2175 (2012).
pubmed: 22780989 pmcid: 3483546 doi: 10.1101/gr.136507.111
Kojic, A. et al. Distinct roles of cohesin-SA1 and cohesin-SA2 in 3D chromosome organization. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25, 496–504 (2018).
pubmed: 29867216 pmcid: 6122591 doi: 10.1038/s41594-018-0070-4
Cuadrado, A. et al. Specific contributions of cohesin-SA1 and cohesin-SA2 to TADs and Polycomb domains in embryonic stem cells. Cell Rep. 27, 3500–3510 (2019).
pubmed: 31216471 pmcid: 7057268 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.05.078
Tedeschi, A. et al. Wapl is an essential regulator of chromatin structure and chromosome segregation. Nature 501, 564–568 (2013).
pubmed: 23975099 pmcid: 6080692 doi: 10.1038/nature12471
Haarhuis, J. H. I. et al. WAPL-mediated removal of cohesin protects against segregation errors and aneuploidy. Curr. Biol. 23, 2071–2077 (2013).
pubmed: 24055153 doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.09.003
Aladjem, M. I. et al. ES cells do not activate p53-dependent stress responses and undergo p53-independent apoptosis in response to DNA damage. Curr. Biol. 8, 145–155 (1998).
pubmed: 9443911 doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(98)70061-2
Natsume, T., Kiyomitsu, T., Saga, Y. & Kanemaki, M. T. Rapid protein depletion in human cells by auxin-inducible degron tagging with short homology donors. Cell Rep. 15, 210–218 (2016).
pubmed: 27052166 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.001
McLean, C. Y. et al. GREAT improves functional interpretation of cis-regulatory regions. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 495–501 (2010).
pubmed: 20436461 pmcid: 4840234 doi: 10.1038/nbt.1630
Bult, C. J. et al. The Mouse Genome Database: enhancements and updates. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, D586–D592 (2010).
pubmed: 19864252 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp880
Busslinger, G. A. et al. Cohesin is positioned in mammalian genomes by transcription, CTCF and Wapl. Nature 544, 503–507 (2017).
pubmed: 28424523 pmcid: 6080695 doi: 10.1038/nature22063
de Jonge, H. J. M. et al. Evidence based selection of housekeeping genes. PLoS ONE 2, e898 (2007).
pubmed: 17878933 pmcid: 1976390 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000898
Schwalb, B. et al. TT-seq maps the human transient transcriptome. Science 352, 1225–1228 (2016).
pubmed: 27257258 doi: 10.1126/science.aad9841
Gregersen, L. H., Mitter, R. & Svejstrup, J. Q. Using TTchem-seq for profiling nascent transcription and measuring transcript elongation. Nat. Protoc. 15, 604–627 (2020).
pubmed: 31915390 doi: 10.1038/s41596-019-0262-3
van de Werken, H. J. G. et al. Robust 4C-seq data analysis to screen for regulatory DNA interactions. Nat. Methods 9, 969–972 (2012).
pubmed: 22961246 doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2173
Rhodes, J. D. P. et al. Cohesin disrupts Polycomb-dependent chromosome interactions in embryonic stem cells. Cell Rep. 30, 820–835 (2020).
pubmed: 31968256 pmcid: 6988126 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.12.057
Boija, A. et al. Transcription factors activate genes through the phase-separation capacity of their activation domains. Cell 175, 1842–1855 (2018).
pubmed: 30449618 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.042
Nabet, B. et al. The dTAG system for immediate and target-specific protein degradation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 431–441 (2018).
pubmed: 29581585 pmcid: 6295913 doi: 10.1038/s41589-018-0021-8
Beagan, J. A. et al. YY1 and CTCF orchestrate a 3D chromatin looping switch during early neural lineage commitment. Genome Res. 27, 1139–1152 (2017).
pubmed: 28536180 pmcid: 5495066 doi: 10.1101/gr.215160.116
Peric-Hupkes, D. et al. Molecular maps of the reorganization of genome–nuclear lamina interactions during differentiation. Mol. Cell 38, 603–613 (2010).
pubmed: 20513434 pmcid: 5975946 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.03.016
Bonev, B. et al. Multiscale 3D genome rewiring during mouse neural development. Cell 171, 557–572 (2017).
pubmed: 29053968 pmcid: 5651218 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.043
Garel, S., Marín, F., Grosschedl, R. & Charnay, P. Ebf1 controls early cell differentiation in the embryonic striatum. Development 126, 5285–5294 (1999).
pubmed: 10556054
Driller, K. et al. Nuclear factor I X deficiency causes brain malformation and severe skeletal defects. Mol. Cell. Biol. 27, 3855–3867 (2007).
pubmed: 17353270 pmcid: 1899988 doi: 10.1128/MCB.02293-06
Cuartero, S. et al. Control of inducible gene expression links cohesin to hematopoietic progenitor self-renewal and differentiation. Nat. Immunol. 19, 932–941 (2018).
pubmed: 30127433 pmcid: 6195188 doi: 10.1038/s41590-018-0184-1
Lavagnolli, T. et al. Initiation and maintenance of pluripotency gene expression in the absence of cohesin. Genes Dev. 29, 23–38 (2015).
pubmed: 25561493 pmcid: 4281562 doi: 10.1101/gad.251835.114
Fudenberg, G. et al. Formation of chromosomal domains by loop extrusion. Cell Rep. 15, 2038–2049 (2016).
pubmed: 27210764 pmcid: 4889513 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.04.085
Bulger, M. & Groudine, M. Functional and mechanistic diversity of distal transcription enhancers. Cell 144, 327–339 (2011).
pubmed: 21295696 pmcid: 3742076 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.01.024
Gurumurthy, A., Shen, Y., Gunn, E. M. & Bungert, J. Phase separation and transcription regulation: are super-enhancers and locus control regions primary sites of transcription complex assembly? BioEssays 41, 1800164 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/bies.201800164
Davidson, I. F. et al. DNA loop extrusion by human cohesin. Science 366, 1338–1345 (2019).
pubmed: 31753851 doi: 10.1126/science.aaz3418
Kim, Y., Shi, Z., Zhang, H., Finkelstein, I. J. & Yu, H. Human cohesin compacts DNA by loop extrusion. Science 366, 1345–1349 (2019).
pubmed: 31780627 pmcid: 7387118 doi: 10.1126/science.aaz4475
van den Berg, D. L. C. et al. An Oct4-centered protein interaction network in embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 6, 369–381 (2010).
pubmed: 20362541 pmcid: 2860243 doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2010.02.014
King, H. W. & Klose, R. J. The pioneer factor OCT4 requires the chromatin remodeller BRG1 to support gene regulatory element function in mouse embryonic stem cells. eLife 6, e22631 (2017).
pubmed: 28287392 pmcid: 5400504 doi: 10.7554/eLife.22631
Lopez-Serra, L., Kelly, G., Patel, H., Stewart, A. & Uhlmann, F. The Scc2–Scc4 complex acts in sister chromatid cohesion and transcriptional regulation by maintaining nucleosome-free regions. Nat. Genet. 46, 1147–1151 (2014).
pubmed: 25173104 pmcid: 4177232 doi: 10.1038/ng.3080
Yan, J. et al. Transcription factor binding in human cells occurs in dense clusters formed around cohesin anchor sites. Cell 154, 801–813 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.07.034 pubmed: 23953112
Krantz, I. D. et al. Cornelia de Lange syndrome is caused by mutations in NIPBL, the human homolog of Drosophila melanogaster Nipped-B. Nat. Genet. 36, 631–635 (2004).
pubmed: 15146186 pmcid: 4902017 doi: 10.1038/ng1364
van Heeringen, S. J. & Veenstra, G. J. C. GimmeMotifs: a de novo motif prediction pipeline for ChIP-sequencing experiments. Bioinformatics 27, 270–271 (2011).
pubmed: 21081511 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq636
Fedr, R. et al. Automatic cell cloning assay for determining the clonogenic capacity of cancer and cancer stem-like cells. Cytometry A 83, 472–482 (2013).
pubmed: 23450810 doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.22273
Liu, N. Q. et al. The non-coding variant rs1800734 enhances DCLK3 expression through long-range interaction and promotes colorectal cancer progression. Nat. Commun. 8, 14418 (2017).
pubmed: 28195176 pmcid: 5316867 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14418
Geeven, G., Teunissen, H., de Laat, W. & de Wit, E. peakC: a flexible, non-parametric peak calling package for 4C and Capture-C data. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, e91 (2018).
pubmed: 29800273 pmcid: 6125690 doi: 10.1093/nar/gky443
Orlando, D. A. et al. Quantitative ChIP–Seq normalization reveals global modulation of the epigenome. Cell Rep. 9, 1163–1170 (2014).
pubmed: 25437568 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.10.018
Langmead, B., Trapnell, C., Pop, M. & Salzberg, S. L. Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome. Genome Biol. 10, R25 (2009).
pubmed: 19261174 pmcid: 2690996 doi: 10.1186/gb-2009-10-3-r25
Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).
pubmed: 19505943 pmcid: 2723002 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352
Ramírez, F., Dündar, F., Diehl, S., Grüning, B. A. & Manke, T. deepTools: a flexible platform for exploring deep-sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, W187–W191 (2014).
pubmed: 24799436 pmcid: 4086134 doi: 10.1093/nar/gku365
Liu, T. Use model-based analysis of ChIP–Seq (MACS) to analyze short reads generated by sequencing protein–DNA interactions in embryonic stem cells. Methods Mol. Biol. 1150, 81–95 (2014).
pubmed: 24743991 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0512-6_4
Ramírez, F. et al. deepTools2: a next generation web server for deep-sequencing data analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W160–W165 (2016).
pubmed: 27079975 pmcid: 4987876 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw257
Anders, S. & Huber, W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 11, R106 (2010).
pubmed: 20979621 pmcid: 3218662 doi: 10.1186/gb-2010-11-10-r106
Kim, D. et al. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 14, R36 (2013).
pubmed: 23618408 pmcid: 4053844 doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-4-r36
Subramanian, A. et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 15545–15550 (2005).
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506580102 pubmed: 16199517 pmcid: 1239896
Liberzon, A. et al. The molecular signatures database hallmark gene set collection. Cell Syst. 1, 417–425 (2015).
pubmed: 26771021 pmcid: 4707969 doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2015.12.004
Li, H. & Wren, J. Toward better understanding of artifacts in variant calling from high-coverage samples. Bioinformatics 30, 2843–2851 (2014).
pubmed: 24974202 pmcid: 4271055 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu356
Servant, N. et al. HiC-Pro: an optimized and flexible pipeline for Hi-C data processing. Genome Biol. 16, 259 (2015).
pubmed: 26619908 pmcid: 4665391 doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0831-x
Imakaev, M. et al. Iterative correction of Hi-C data reveals hallmarks of chromosome organization. Nat. Methods 9, 999–1003 (2012).
pubmed: 22941365 pmcid: 3816492 doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2148
Bolstad, B. M., Irizarry, R., Astrand, M. & Speed, T. P. A comparison of normalization methods for high density oligonucleotide array data based on variance and bias. Bioinformatics 19, 185–193 (2003).
pubmed: 12538238 doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/19.2.185
Gel, B. et al. regioneR: an R/Bioconductor package for the association analysis of genomic regions based on permutation tests. Bioinformatics 32, 289–291 (2016).
pubmed: 26424858

Auteurs

Ning Qing Liu (NQ)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Michela Maresca (M)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Teun van den Brand (T)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Luca Braccioli (L)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Marijne M G A Schijns (MMGA)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Hans Teunissen (H)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Benoit G Bruneau (BG)

Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Elphѐge P Nora (EP)

Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Elzo de Wit (E)

Division of Gene Regulation, Oncode Institute, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. e.d.wit@nki.nl.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH