1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
Download icon

Enhancer regions show high histone H3.3 turnover that changes during differentiation

  1. Aimee M Deaton
  2. Mariluz Gómez-Rodríguez
  3. Jakub Mieczkowski
  4. Michael Y Tolstorukov
  5. Sharmistha Kundu
  6. Ruslan I Sadreyev
  7. Lars ET Jansen
  8. Robert E Kingston  Is a corresponding author
  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  2. Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciencia, Portugal
  3. Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Portugal
Research Article
  • Cited 42
  • Views 3,891
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e15316 doi: 10.7554/eLife.15316
Voice your concerns about research culture and research communication: Have your say in our 7th annual survey.

Abstract

The organization of DNA into chromatin is dynamic; nucleosomes are frequently displaced to facilitate the ability of regulatory proteins to access specific DNA elements. To gain insight into nucleosome dynamics, and to follow how dynamics change during differentiation, we used a technique called time-ChIP to quantitatively assess histone H3.3 turnover genome-wide during differentiation of mouse ESCs. We found that, without prior assumptions, high turnover could be used to identify regions involved in gene regulation. High turnover was seen at enhancers, as observed previously, with particularly high turnover at super-enhancers. In contrast, regions associated with the repressive Polycomb-Group showed low turnover in ESCs. Turnover correlated with DNA accessibility. Upon differentiation, numerous changes in H3.3 turnover rates were observed, the majority of which occurred at enhancers. Thus, time-ChIP measurement of histone turnover shows that active enhancers are unusually dynamic in ESCs and changes in highly dynamic nucleosomes predominate at enhancers during differentiation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Aimee M Deaton

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mariluz Gómez-Rodríguez

    Laboratory for Epigenetic Mechanisms, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciencia, Oeiras, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jakub Mieczkowski

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Michael Y Tolstorukov

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sharmistha Kundu

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ruslan I Sadreyev

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Lars ET Jansen

    Laboratory for Epigenetic Mechanisms, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Oeiras, Portugal
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Robert E Kingston

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    kingston@molbio.mgh.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Jerry L Workman, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: February 17, 2016
  2. Accepted: June 14, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 15, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 28, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Deaton 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

  • 3,891
    Page views
  • 1,115
    Downloads
  • 42
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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)

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

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

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Asha Mary Joseph et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Translesion synthesis (TLS) is a highly conserved mutagenic DNA lesion tolerance pathway, which employs specialized, low-fidelity DNA polymerases to synthesize across lesions. Current models suggest that activity of these polymerases is predominantly associated with ongoing replication, functioning either at or behind the replication fork. Here we provide evidence for DNA damage-dependent function of a specialized polymerase, DnaE2, in replication-independent conditions. We develop an assay to follow lesion repair in non-replicating Caulobacter and observe that components of the replication machinery localize on DNA in response to damage. These localizations persist in the absence of DnaE2 or if catalytic activity of this polymerase is mutated. Single-stranded DNA gaps for SSB binding and low-fidelity polymerase-mediated synthesis are generated by nucleotide excision repair (NER), as replisome components fail to localize in the absence of NER. This mechanism of gap-filling facilitates cell cycle restoration when cells are released into replication-permissive conditions. Thus, such cross-talk (between activity of NER and specialized polymerases in subsequent gap-filling) helps preserve genome integrity and enhances survival in a replication-independent manner.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Anna M Scarborough et al.
    Research Article

    S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) is the methyl donor for nearly all cellular methylation events. Cells regulate intracellular SAM levels through intron detention of MAT2A, the only SAM synthetase expressed in most cells. The N6-adenosine methyltransferase METTL16 promotes splicing of the MAT2A detained intron by an unknown mechanism. Using an unbiased CRISPR knock-out screen, we identified CFIm25 (NUDT21) as a regulator of MAT2A intron detention and intracellular SAM levels. CFIm25 is a component of the cleavage factor Im (CFIm) complex that regulates poly(A) site selection, but we show it promotes MAT2A splicing independent of poly(A) site selection. CFIm25-mediated MAT2A splicing induction requires the RS domains of its binding partners, CFIm68 and CFIm59 as well as binding sites in the detained intron and 3´ UTR. These studies uncover mechanisms that regulate MAT2A intron detention and reveal a previously undescribed role for CFIm in splicing and SAM metabolism.