The biogenesis and function of nucleosome arrays.


Journal

Nature communications
ISSN: 2041-1723
Titre abrégé: Nat Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101528555

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 12 2021
Historique:
received: 08 04 2020
accepted: 09 11 2021
entrez: 2 12 2021
pubmed: 3 12 2021
medline: 29 12 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Numerous chromatin remodeling enzymes position nucleosomes in eukaryotic cells. Aside from these factors, transcription, DNA sequence, and statistical positioning of nucleosomes also shape the nucleosome landscape. The precise contributions of these processes remain unclear due to their functional redundancy in vivo. By incisive genome engineering, we radically decreased their redundancy in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The transcriptional machinery strongly disrupts evenly spaced nucleosomes. Proper nucleosome density and DNA sequence are critical for their biogenesis. The INO80 remodeling complex helps space nucleosomes in vivo and positions the first nucleosome over genes in an H2A.Z-independent fashion. INO80 requires its Arp8 subunit but unexpectedly not the Nhp10 module for spacing. Cells with irregularly spaced nucleosomes suffer from genotoxic stress including DNA damage, recombination and transpositions. We derive a model of the biogenesis of the nucleosome landscape and suggest that it evolved not only to regulate but also to protect the genome.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34853297
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-27285-6
pii: 10.1038/s41467-021-27285-6
pmc: PMC8636622
doi:

Substances chimiques

ARP8 protein, S cerevisiae 0
Chromatin 0
High Mobility Group Proteins 0
Histones 0
Microfilament Proteins 0
NHP10 protein, S cerevisiae 0
Nucleosomes 0
Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins 0
Transcription Factors 0
DNA 9007-49-2

Types de publication

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

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

7011

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

Lai, W. K. M. & Pugh, B. F. Understanding nucleosome dynamics and their links to gene expression and DNA replication. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 548–562 (2017).
pubmed: 28537572 pmcid: 5831138 doi: 10.1038/nrm.2017.47
Jiang, C. & Pugh, B. F. Nucleosome positioning and gene regulation: advances through genomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 10, 161–172 (2009).
pubmed: 19204718 pmcid: 4860946 doi: 10.1038/nrg2522
Kubik, S. et al. Opposing chromatin remodelers control transcription initiation frequency and start site selection. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 26, 744–754 (2019).
pubmed: 31384063 doi: 10.1038/s41594-019-0273-3
Weber, C. M., Ramachandran, S. & Henikoff, S. Nucleosomes Are Context-Specific, H2A.Z-Modulated Barriers to RNA Polymerase. Mol. Cell 53, 819–830 (2014).
pubmed: 24606920 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.02.014
Groth, A., Rocha, W., Verreault, A. & Almouzni, G. Chromatin Challenges during DNA Replication and Repair. Cell 128, 721–733 (2007).
pubmed: 17320509 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.01.030
Yadav, T. & Whitehouse, I. Replication-Coupled Nucleosome Assembly and Positioning by ATP-Dependent Chromatin-Remodeling Enzymes. Cell Rep. 15, 715–723 (2016).
pubmed: 27149855 pmcid: 5063657 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.059
Vasseur, P. et al. Dynamics of Nucleosome Positioning Maturation following Genomic Replication. Cell Rep. 16, 2651–2665 (2016).
pubmed: 27568571 pmcid: 5014762 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.07.083
Kubik, S. et al. Sequence-Directed Action of RSC Remodeler and General Regulatory Factors Modulates +1 Nucleosome Position to Facilitate Transcription. Mol. Cell 71, 89–102.e5 (2018).
pubmed: 29979971 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.030
Ocampo, J., Chereji, R. V., Eriksson, P. R. & Clark, D. J. Contrasting roles of the RSC and ISW1/CHD1 chromatin remodelers in RNA polymerase II elongation and termination. Genome Res 29, 407–417 (2019).
pubmed: 30683752 pmcid: 6396426 doi: 10.1101/gr.242032.118
Ocampo, J., Chereji, R. V., Eriksson, P. R. & Clark, D. J. The ISW1 and CHD1 ATP-dependent chromatin remodelers compete to set nucleosome spacing in vivo. Nucleic Acids Res 44, 4625–4635 (2016).
pubmed: 26861626 pmcid: 4889916 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw068
Gkikopoulos, T. et al. A Role for Snf2-Related Nucleosome-Spacing Enzymes in Genome-Wide Nucleosome. Organ. Sci. 333, 1758–1760 (2011).
Lieleg, C. et al. Nucleosome Spacing Generated by ISWI and CHD1 Remodelers Is Constant Regardless of Nucleosome Density. Mol. Cell. Biol. 35, 1588–1605 (2015).
pubmed: 25733687 pmcid: 4387221 doi: 10.1128/MCB.01070-14
Yamada, K. et al. Structure and mechanism of the chromatin remodelling factor ISW1a. Nature 472, 448–453 (2011).
pubmed: 21525927 doi: 10.1038/nature09947
Yang, J. G., Madrid, T. S., Sevastopoulos, E. & Narlikar, G. J. The chromatin-remodeling enzyme ACF is an ATP-dependent DNA length sensor that regulates nucleosome spacing. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 13, 1078–1083 (2006).
pubmed: 17099699 doi: 10.1038/nsmb1170
Stockdale, C., Flaus, A., Ferreira, H. & Owen-Hughes, T. Analysis of Nucleosome Repositioning by Yeast ISWI and Chd1 Chromatin Remodeling Complexes. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 16279–16288 (2006).
pubmed: 16606615 doi: 10.1074/jbc.M600682200
Udugama, M., Sabri, A. & Bartholomew, B. The INO80 ATP-Dependent Chromatin Remodeling Complex Is a Nucleosome Spacing Factor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 31, 662–673 (2011).
pubmed: 21135121 doi: 10.1128/MCB.01035-10
Zhou, C. Y. et al. The Yeast INO80 Complex Operates as a Tunable DNA Length-Sensitive Switch to Regulate Nucleosome Sliding. Mol. Cell 69, 677–688.e9 (2018).
pubmed: 29452642 pmcid: 5897057 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.01.028
Brahma, S., Ngubo, M., Paul, S., Udugama, M. & Bartholomew, B. The Arp8 and Arp4 module acts as a DNA sensor controlling INO80 chromatin remodeling. Nat. Commun. 9, 3309 (2018).
pubmed: 30120252 pmcid: 6098158 doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05710-7
Knoll, K. R. et al. The nuclear actin-containing Arp8 module is a linker DNA sensor driving INO80 chromatin remodeling. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25, 823–832 (2018).
pubmed: 30177756 doi: 10.1038/s41594-018-0115-8
Kornberg, R. D. & Stryer, L. Statistical distributions of nucleosomes: nonrandom locations by a stochastic mechanism. Nucleic Acids Res 16, 6677–6690 (1988).
pubmed: 3399412 pmcid: 338322 doi: 10.1093/nar/16.14.6677
Celona, B. et al. Substantial Histone Reduction Modulates Genomewide Nucleosomal Occupancy and Global Transcriptional Output. PLoS Biol. 9, e1001086 (2011).
pubmed: 21738444 pmcid: 3125158 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001086
Gossett, A. J. & Lieb, J. D. In Vivo Effects of Histone H3 Depletion on Nucleosome Occupancy and Position in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS Genet 8, e1002771 (2012).
pubmed: 22737086 pmcid: 3380831 doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002771
van Bakel, H. et al. A Compendium of Nucleosome and Transcript Profiles Reveals Determinants of Chromatin Architecture and Transcription. PLoS Genet 9, e1003479 (2013).
pubmed: 23658529 pmcid: 3642058 doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003479
Hughes, A. L., Jin, Y., Rando, O. J. & Struhl, K. A Functional Evolutionary Approach to Identify Determinants of Nucleosome Positioning: A Unifying Model for Establishing the Genome-wide Pattern. Mol. Cell 48, 5–15 (2012).
pubmed: 22885008 pmcid: 3472102 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.07.003
Struhl, K. & Segal, E. Determinants of nucleosome positioning. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 267–273 (2013).
pubmed: 23463311 pmcid: 3740156 doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2506
Krietenstein, N. et al. Genomic Nucleosome Organization Reconstituted with Pure Proteins. Cell 167, 709–721.e12 (2016).
pubmed: 27768892 pmcid: 5240917 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.045
Tsukiyama, T., Palmer, J., Landel, C. C., Shiloach, J. & Wu, C. Characterization of the Imitation Switch subfamily of ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling factors in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev. 13, 686–697 (1999).
pubmed: 10090725 pmcid: 316555 doi: 10.1101/gad.13.6.686
Mann, R. K. & Grunstein, M. Histone H3 N-terminal mutations allow hyperactivation of the yeast GAL1 gene in vivo. EMBO J. 11, 3297–3306 (1992).
pubmed: 1505519 pmcid: 556864 doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1992.tb05408.x
Kim, U. J., Han, M., Kayne, P. & Grunstein, M. Effects of histone H4 depletion on the cell cycle and transcription of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 7, 2211–2219 (1988).
pubmed: 3046933 pmcid: 454562 doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1988.tb03060.x
Haruki, H., Nishikawa, J. & Laemmli, U. K. The Anchor-Away Technique: Rapid, Conditional Establishment of Yeast Mutant Phenotypes. Mol. Cell 31, 925–932 (2008).
pubmed: 18922474 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.07.020
Shivaswamy, S. et al. Dynamic Remodeling of Individual Nucleosomes Across a Eukaryotic Genome in Response to Transcriptional Perturbation. PLoS Biol. 6, e65 (2008).
pubmed: 18351804 pmcid: 2267817 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060065
Lu, Z. & Lin, Z. Pervasive and dynamic transcription initiation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genome Res 29, 1198–1210 (2019).
pubmed: 31076411 pmcid: 6633255 doi: 10.1101/gr.245456.118
Zhang, Y. et al. Intrinsic histone-DNA interactions are not the major determinant of nucleosome positions in vivo. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 16, 847–852 (2009).
pubmed: 19620965 pmcid: 2823114 doi: 10.1038/nsmb.1636
Tramantano, M. et al. Constitutive turnover of histone H2A.Z at yeast promoters requires the preinitiation complex. eLife 5, e14243 (2016).
pubmed: 27438412 pmcid: 4995100 doi: 10.7554/eLife.14243
Kubik, S. et al. Nucleosome Stability Distinguishes Two Different Promoter Types at All Protein-Coding Genes in Yeast. Mol. Cell 60, 422–434 (2015).
pubmed: 26545077 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.10.002
Yen, K., Vinayachandran, V., Batta, K., Koerber, R. T. & Pugh, B. F. Genome-wide Nucleosome Specificity and Directionality of Chromatin Remodelers. Cell 149, 1461–1473 (2012).
pubmed: 22726434 pmcid: 3397793 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.036
Klein-Brill, A., Joseph-Strauss, D., Appleboim, A. & Friedman, N. Dynamics of Chromatin and Transcription during Transient Depletion of the RSC Chromatin Remodeling Complex. Cell Rep. 26, 279–292.e5 (2019).
pubmed: 30605682 pmcid: 6315372 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.12.020
Papamichos-Chronakis, M. & Peterson, C. L. The Ino80 chromatin-remodeling enzyme regulates replisome function and stability. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 15, 338–345 (2008).
pubmed: 18376411 doi: 10.1038/nsmb.1413
Deniz, Ö., Flores, O., Aldea, M., Soler-López, M. & Orozco, M. Nucleosome architecture throughout the cell cycle. Sci. Rep. 6, 19729 (2016).
pubmed: 26818620 pmcid: 4730144 doi: 10.1038/srep19729
Cutler, S., Lee, L. J. & Tsukiyama, T. Chromatin Remodeling Factors Isw2 and Ino80 Regulate Chromatin, Replication, and Copy Number of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Ribosomal DNA Locus. Genetics 210, 1543–1556 (2018).
pubmed: 30355728 pmcid: 6283175 doi: 10.1534/genetics.118.301579
Tosi, A. et al. Structure and Subunit Topology of the INO80 Chromatin Remodeler and Its Nucleosome Complex. Cell 154, 1207–1219 (2013).
pubmed: 24034245 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.08.016
Watanabe, S. et al. Structural analyses of the chromatin remodelling enzymes INO80-C and SWR-C. Nat. Commun. 6, 7108 (2015).
pubmed: 25964121 doi: 10.1038/ncomms8108
Chen, K. et al. DANPOS: Dynamic analysis of nucleosome position and occupancy by sequencing. Genome Res 23, 341–351 (2013).
pubmed: 23193179 pmcid: 3561875 doi: 10.1101/gr.142067.112
Eustermann, S. et al. Structural basis for ATP-dependent chromatin remodelling by the INO80 complex. Nature 556, 386–390 (2018).
pubmed: 29643509 pmcid: 6071913 doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0029-y
Brahma, S. et al. INO80 exchanges H2A.Z for H2A by translocating on DNA proximal to histone dimers. Nat. Commun. 8, 15616 (2017).
pubmed: 28604691 pmcid: 5472786 doi: 10.1038/ncomms15616
Ioshikhes, I. P., Albert, I., Zanton, S. J. & Pugh, B. F. Nucleosome positions predicted through comparative genomics. Nat. Genet. 38, 1210–1215 (2006).
pubmed: 16964265 doi: 10.1038/ng1878
Ganguli, D., Chereji, R. V., Iben, J. R., Cole, H. A. & Clark, D. J. RSC-dependent constructive and destructive interference between opposing arrays of phased nucleosomes in yeast. Genome Res 24, 1637–1649 (2014).
pubmed: 25015381 pmcid: 4199373 doi: 10.1101/gr.177014.114
Kato, H., Shimizu, M. & Urano, T. Chemical map-based prediction of nucleosome positioning using the Bioconductor package nuCpos. BMC Bioinforma. 22, 322 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s12859-021-04240-2
Alabert, C., Bianco, J. N. & Pasero, P. Differential regulation of homologous recombination at DNA breaks and replication forks by the Mrc1 branch of the S-phase checkpoint. EMBO J. 28, 1131–1141 (2009).
pubmed: 19322196 pmcid: 2683710 doi: 10.1038/emboj.2009.75
Morrison, A. J. Genome maintenance functions of the INO80 chromatin remodeller. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 372, 20160289 (2017).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0289
Mimitou, E. P. & Symington, L. S. Sae2, Exo1 and Sgs1 collaborate in DNA double-strand break processing. Nature 455, 770–774 (2008).
pubmed: 18806779 doi: 10.1038/nature07312
van Attikum, H., Fritsch, O., Hohn, B. & Gasser, S. M. Recruitment of the INO80 Complex by H2A Phosphorylation Links ATP-Dependent Chromatin Remodeling with DNA Double-Strand Break Repair. Cell 119, 777–788 (2004).
pubmed: 15607975 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2004.11.033
Hauer, M. H. et al. Histone degradation in response to DNA damage enhances chromatin dynamics and recombination rates. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 99–107 (2017).
pubmed: 28067915 doi: 10.1038/nsmb.3347
Michel, A. H. et al. Functional mapping of yeast genomes by saturated transposition. eLife 6, e23570 (2017).
pubmed: 28481201 pmcid: 5466422 doi: 10.7554/eLife.23570
Gamarra, N. & Narlikar, G. J. Collaboration through chromatin: motors of transcription and chromatin structure. J. Mol. Biol. 433, 166876 (2021).
pubmed: 33556407 doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2021.166876
Smolle, M. et al. Chromatin remodelers Isw1 and Chd1 maintain chromatin structure during transcription by preventing histone exchange. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 884–892 (2012).
pubmed: 22922743 pmcid: 3560298 doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2312
Oberbeckmann, E. et al. Ruler elements in chromatin remodelers set nucleosome array spacing and phasing. Nat. Commun. 12, 3232 (2021).
pubmed: 34050140 pmcid: 8163753 doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23015-0
Stergachis, A. B., Debo, B. M., Haugen, E., Churchman, L. S. & Stamatoyannopoulos, J. A. Single-molecule regulatory architectures captured by chromatin fiber sequencing. Science 368, 1449–1454 (2020).
pubmed: 32587015 doi: 10.1126/science.aaz1646
Abdulhay, N. J. et al. Massively multiplex single-molecule oligonucleosome footprinting. eLife 9, e59404 (2020).
pubmed: 33263279 pmcid: 7735760 doi: 10.7554/eLife.59404
Morrison, A. J. et al. INO80 and gamma-H2AX Interaction Links ATP-Dependent Chromatin Remodeling to DNA Damage Repair. Cell 119, 775–767 (2004).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2004.11.037
Baldi, S., Krebs, S., Blum, H. & Becker, P. B. Genome-wide measurement of local nucleosome array regularity and spacing by nanopore sequencing. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25, 894–901 (2018).
pubmed: 30127356 doi: 10.1038/s41594-018-0110-0
Cole, H. A., Ocampo, J., Iben, J. R., Chereji, R. V. & Clark, D. J. Heavy transcription of yeast genes correlates with differential loss of histone H2B relative to H4 and queued RNA polymerases. Nucleic Acids Res 42, 12512–12522 (2014).
pubmed: 25348398 pmcid: 4227747 doi: 10.1093/nar/gku1013
Schwabish, M. A. & Struhl, K. Evidence for Eviction and Rapid Deposition of Histones upon Transcriptional Elongation by RNA Polymerase II. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 10111–10117 (2004).
pubmed: 15542822 pmcid: 529037 doi: 10.1128/MCB.24.23.10111-10117.2004
Shen, C.-H., Leblanc, B. P., Alfieri, J. A. & Clark, D. J. Remodeling of Yeast CUP1 Chromatin Involves Activator-Dependent Repositioning of Nucleosomes over the Entire Gene and Flanking Sequences. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21, 534–547 (2001).
pubmed: 11134341 pmcid: 86616 doi: 10.1128/MCB.21.2.534-547.2001
Petesch, S. J. & Lis, J. T. Rapid, Transcription-Independent Loss of Nucleosomes over a Large Chromatin Domain at Hsp70 Loci. Cell 134, 74–84 (2008).
pubmed: 18614012 pmcid: 2527511 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.05.029
Oberbeckmann, E. et al. Absolute nucleosome occupancy map for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Genome Res 29, 1996–2009 (2019).
pubmed: 31694866 pmcid: 6886505 doi: 10.1101/gr.253419.119
Weiner, A., Hughes, A., Yassour, M., Rando, O. J. & Friedman, N. High-resolution nucleosome mapping reveals transcription-dependent promoter packaging. Genome Res 20, 90–100 (2010).
pubmed: 19846608 pmcid: 2798834 doi: 10.1101/gr.098509.109
Singh, A. K. & Mueller-Planitz, F. Nucleosome Positioning and Spacing: From Mechanism to Function. J. Mol. Biol. 433, 166847 (2021).
pubmed: 33539878 doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2021.166847
Hartley, P. D. & Madhani, H. D. Mechanisms that Specify Promoter Nucleosome Location and Identity. Cell 137, 445–458 (2009).
pubmed: 19410542 pmcid: 2677553 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2009.02.043
Wittschieben, B. O. Overlapping roles for the histone acetyltransferase activities of SAGA and Elongator in vivo. EMBO J. 19, 3060–3068 (2000).
pubmed: 10856249 pmcid: 203375 doi: 10.1093/emboj/19.12.3060
Almer, A. & Horz, W. Nuclease hypersensitive regions with adjacent positioned nucleosomes mark the gene boundaries of the PH05/PH03 locus. EMBO J. 5, 2681–2687 (1986).
pubmed: 3023055 pmcid: 1167169 doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1986.tb04551.x
Schep, A. N. et al. Structured nucleosome fingerprints enable high-resolution mapping of chromatin architecture within regulatory regions. Genome Res 25, 1757–1770 (2015).
pubmed: 26314830 pmcid: 4617971 doi: 10.1101/gr.192294.115
Chereji, R. V., Ramachandran, S., Bryson, T. D. & Henikoff, S. Precise genome-wide mapping of single nucleosomes and linkers in vivo. Genome Biol. 19, 19 (2018).
pubmed: 29426353 pmcid: 5807854 doi: 10.1186/s13059-018-1398-0
Gittens, W. H. et al. A nucleotide resolution map of Top2-linked DNA breaks in the yeast and human genome. Nat. Commun. 10, 4846 (2019).
pubmed: 31649282 pmcid: 6813358 doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-12802-5

Auteurs

Ashish Kumar Singh (AK)

Molecular Biology, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, München, Germany.

Tamás Schauer (T)

Bioinformatics Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, München, Germany.

Lena Pfaller (L)

Molecular Biology, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, München, Germany.
Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.

Tobias Straub (T)

Bioinformatics Unit, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, München, Germany.

Felix Mueller-Planitz (F)

Molecular Biology, Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, München, Germany. felix.mueller-planitz@tu-dresden.de.
Institute of Physiological Chemistry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany. felix.mueller-planitz@tu-dresden.de.

Articles similaires

Adenosine Triphosphate Adenosine Diphosphate Mitochondrial ADP, ATP Translocases Binding Sites Mitochondria
Triticum Transcription Factors Gene Expression Regulation, Plant Plant Proteins Salt Stress
Animals Humans Mice Neoplasms Tumor Microenvironment
Saccharomyces cerevisiae Aldehydes Biotransformation Flavoring Agents Lipoxygenase

Classifications MeSH