Activation of individual L1 retrotransposon instances is restricted to cell-type dependent permissive loci

  1. Claude Philippe
  2. Dulce B Vargas-Landin
  3. Aurelien J Doucet
  4. Dominic van Essen
  5. Jorge Vera-Otarola
  6. Monika Kuciak
  7. Antoine Corbin
  8. Pilvi Nigumann
  9. Gaël Cristofari  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, France
  2. Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, University of Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, France
  3. 1Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, France
  4. Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France

Abstract

LINE-1 (L1) retrotransposons represent approximately one sixth of the human genome, but only the human-specific L1HS-Ta subfamily acts as an endogenous mutagen in modern humans, reshaping both somatic and germline genomes. Due to their high levels of sequence identity and the existence of many polymorphic insertions absent from the reference genome, the transcriptional activation of individual genomic L1HS-Ta copies remains poorly understood. Here we comprehensively mapped fixed and polymorphic L1HS-Ta copies in 12 commonly-used somatic cell lines, and identified transcriptional and epigenetic signatures allowing the unambiguous identification of active L1HS-Ta copies in their genomic context. Strikingly, only a very restricted subset of L1HS-Ta loci - some being polymorphic among individuals - significantly contributes to the bulk of L1 expression, and these loci are differentially regulated among distinct cell lines. Thus, our data support a local model of L1 transcriptional activation in somatic cells, governed by individual-, locus-, and cell-type-specific determinants.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Claude Philippe

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Dulce B Vargas-Landin

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Aurelien J Doucet

    Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, University of Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dominic van Essen

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jorge Vera-Otarola

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, 1Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Monika Kuciak

    Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, University of Nice-Sophia-Antipolis, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Antoine Corbin

    Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Lyon, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Pilvi Nigumann

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Gaël Cristofari

    INSERM U1081, CNRS UMR 7284, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice, Nice, France
    For correspondence
    Gael.Cristofari@unice.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2016, Philippe 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

  • 7,782
    views
  • 1,260
    downloads
  • 131
    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. Claude Philippe
  2. Dulce B Vargas-Landin
  3. Aurelien J Doucet
  4. Dominic van Essen
  5. Jorge Vera-Otarola
  6. Monika Kuciak
  7. Antoine Corbin
  8. Pilvi Nigumann
  9. Gaël Cristofari
(2016)
Activation of individual L1 retrotransposon instances is restricted to cell-type dependent permissive loci
eLife 5:e13926.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13926

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13926

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bethany M Bartlett, Yatendra Kumar ... Wendy A Bickmore
    Research Article Updated

    During oncogene-induced senescence there are striking changes in the organisation of heterochromatin in the nucleus. This is accompanied by activation of a pro-inflammatory gene expression programme – the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) – driven by transcription factors such as NF-κB. The relationship between heterochromatin re-organisation and the SASP has been unclear. Here, we show that TPR, a protein of the nuclear pore complex basket required for heterochromatin re-organisation during senescence, is also required for the very early activation of NF-κB signalling during the stress-response phase of oncogene-induced senescence. This is prior to activation of the SASP and occurs without affecting NF-κB nuclear import. We show that TPR is required for the activation of innate immune signalling at these early stages of senescence and we link this to the formation of heterochromatin-enriched cytoplasmic chromatin fragments thought to bleb off from the nuclear periphery. We show that HMGA1 is also required for cytoplasmic chromatin fragment formation. Together these data suggest that re-organisation of heterochromatin is involved in altered structural integrity of the nuclear periphery during senescence, and that this can lead to activation of cytoplasmic nucleic acid sensing, NF-κB signalling, and activation of the SASP.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Timothy Fuqua, Yiqiao Sun, Andreas Wagner
    Research Article

    Gene regulation is essential for life and controlled by regulatory DNA. Mutations can modify the activity of regulatory DNA, and also create new regulatory DNA, a process called regulatory emergence. Non-regulatory and regulatory DNA contain motifs to which transcription factors may bind. In prokaryotes, gene expression requires a stretch of DNA called a promoter, which contains two motifs called –10 and –35 boxes. However, these motifs may occur in both promoters and non-promoter DNA in multiple copies. They have been implicated in some studies to improve promoter activity, and in others to repress it. Here, we ask whether the presence of such motifs in different genetic sequences influences promoter evolution and emergence. To understand whether and how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution, we start from 50 ‘promoter islands’, DNA sequences enriched with –10 and –35 boxes. We mutagenize these starting ‘parent’ sequences, and measure gene expression driven by 240,000 of the resulting mutants. We find that the probability that mutations create an active promoter varies more than 200-fold, and is not correlated with the number of promoter motifs. For parent sequences without promoter activity, mutations created over 1500 new –10 and –35 boxes at unique positions in the library, but only ~0.3% of these resulted in de-novo promoter activity. Only ~13% of all –10 and –35 boxes contribute to de-novo promoter activity. For parent sequences with promoter activity, mutations created new –10 and –35 boxes in 11 specific positions that partially overlap with preexisting ones to modulate expression. We also find that –10 and –35 boxes do not repress promoter activity. Overall, our work demonstrates how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution. It has implications for predicting and understanding regulatory evolution, de novo genes, and phenotypic evolution.