PHF13 is a molecular reader and transcriptional co-regulator of H3K4me2/3

  1. Ho-Ryun Chung
  2. Chao Xu
  3. Alisa Fuchs
  4. Andreas Mund
  5. Martin Lange
  6. Hannah Staege
  7. Tobias Schubert
  8. Chuanbing Bian
  9. Ilona Dunkel
  10. Anton Eberharter
  11. Catherine Regnard
  12. Henrike Klinker
  13. David Meierhofer
  14. Luca Cozzuto
  15. Andreas Winterpacht
  16. Luciano DiCroce
  17. Jinrong Min
  18. Hans Will
  19. Sarah Kinkley  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Germany
  2. Structural Genomics Consortium, Canada
  3. Heinrich-Pette-Institute - Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Germany
  4. Bayer Pharma AG, Germany
  5. Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Germany
  6. Centre for Genomic Regulation, Spain
  7. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

Abstract

PHF13 is a chromatin affiliated protein with a functional role in differentiation, cell division, DNA damage response and higher chromatin order. To gain insight into PHF13's ability to modulate these processes, we elucidate the mechanisms targeting PHF13 to chromatin, its genome wide localization and its molecular chromatin context. Size exclusion chromatography, mass spectrometry, X-ray crystallography and ChIP sequencing demonstrate that PHF13 binds chromatin in a multivalent fashion via direct interactions with H3K4me2/3 and DNA, and indirectly via interactions with PRC2 and RNA PolII. Furthermore, PHF13 depletion disrupted the interactions between PRC2, RNA PolII S5P, H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 and resulted in the up and down regulation of genes functionally enriched in transcriptional regulation, DNA binding, cell cycle, differentiation and chromatin organization. Together our findings argue that PHF13 is an H3K4me2/3 molecular reader and transcriptional co-regulator, affording it the ability to impact different chromatin processes.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ho-Ryun Chung

    Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Chao Xu

    Structural Genomics Consortium, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Alisa Fuchs

    Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Andreas Mund

    Heinrich-Pette-Institute - Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Martin Lange

    TRG-ONCI, Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Hannah Staege

    Heinrich-Pette-Institute - Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Tobias Schubert

    Heinrich-Pette-Institute - Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Chuanbing Bian

    Structural Genomics Consortium, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Ilona Dunkel

    Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Anton Eberharter

    Adolf-Butenandt-Institute and Center for Integrated Protein Science, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Catherine Regnard

    Adolf-Butenandt-Institute and Center for Integrated Protein Science, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Henrike Klinker

    Adolf-Butenandt-Institute and Center for Integrated Protein Science, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. David Meierhofer

    Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Luca Cozzuto

    Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Andreas Winterpacht

    Human Genetics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Luciano DiCroce

    Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Jinrong Min

    Structural Genomics Consortium, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Hans Will

    Heinrich-Pette-Institute - Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Sarah Kinkley

    Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany
    For correspondence
    kinkley@molgen.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2016, Ho-Ryun et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,582
    views
  • 681
    downloads
  • 23
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ho-Ryun Chung
  2. Chao Xu
  3. Alisa Fuchs
  4. Andreas Mund
  5. Martin Lange
  6. Hannah Staege
  7. Tobias Schubert
  8. Chuanbing Bian
  9. Ilona Dunkel
  10. Anton Eberharter
  11. Catherine Regnard
  12. Henrike Klinker
  13. David Meierhofer
  14. Luca Cozzuto
  15. Andreas Winterpacht
  16. Luciano DiCroce
  17. Jinrong Min
  18. Hans Will
  19. Sarah Kinkley
(2016)
PHF13 is a molecular reader and transcriptional co-regulator of H3K4me2/3
eLife 5:e10607.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10607

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10607

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Jinsai Shang, Douglas J Kojetin
    Research Advance

    Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) is a nuclear receptor transcription factor that regulates gene expression programs in response to ligand binding. Endogenous and synthetic ligands, including covalent antagonist inhibitors GW9662 and T0070907, are thought to compete for the orthosteric pocket in the ligand-binding domain (LBD). However, we previously showed that synthetic PPARγ ligands can cooperatively cobind with and reposition a bound endogenous orthosteric ligand to an alternate site, synergistically regulating PPARγ structure and function (Shang et al., 2018). Here, we reveal the structural mechanism of cobinding between a synthetic covalent antagonist inhibitor with other synthetic ligands. Biochemical and NMR data show that covalent inhibitors weaken—but do not prevent—the binding of other ligands via an allosteric mechanism, rather than direct ligand clashing, by shifting the LBD ensemble toward a transcriptionally repressive conformation, which structurally clashes with orthosteric ligand binding. Crystal structures reveal different cobinding mechanisms including alternate site binding to unexpectedly adopting an orthosteric binding mode by altering the covalent inhibitor binding pose. Our findings highlight the significant flexibility of the PPARγ orthosteric pocket, its ability to accommodate multiple ligands, and demonstrate that GW9662 and T0070907 should not be used as chemical tools to inhibit ligand binding to PPARγ.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yuanyuan Wang, Fan Xu ... Yongning He
    Research Article

    SCARF1 (scavenger receptor class F member 1, SREC-1 or SR-F1) is a type I transmembrane protein that recognizes multiple endogenous and exogenous ligands such as modified low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) and is important for maintaining homeostasis and immunity. But the structural information and the mechanisms of ligand recognition of SCARF1 are largely unavailable. Here, we solve the crystal structures of the N-terminal fragments of human SCARF1, which show that SCARF1 forms homodimers and its epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like domains adopt a long-curved conformation. Then, we examine the interactions of SCARF1 with lipoproteins and are able to identify a region on SCARF1 for recognizing modified LDLs. The mutagenesis data show that the positively charged residues in the region are crucial for the interaction of SCARF1 with modified LDLs, which is confirmed by making chimeric molecules of SCARF1 and SCARF2. In addition, teichoic acids, a cell wall polymer expressed on the surface of gram-positive bacteria, are able to inhibit the interactions of modified LDLs with SCARF1, suggesting the ligand binding sites of SCARF1 might be shared for some of its scavenging targets. Overall, these results provide mechanistic insights into SCARF1 and its interactions with the ligands, which are important for understanding its physiological roles in homeostasis and the related diseases.