Insights into the molecular architecture and histone H3-H4 deposition mechanism of yeast Chromatin assembly factor 1

  1. Paul Victor Sauer
  2. Jennifer Timm
  3. Danni Liu
  4. David Sitbon
  5. Elisabetta Boeri-Erba
  6. Christophe Velours
  7. Norbert Mücke
  8. Jörg Langowski
  9. Françoise Ochsenbein
  10. Geneviève Almouzni
  11. Daniel Panne  Is a corresponding author
  1. European Molecular Biology Laboratory, France
  2. CEA, DRF, SB2SM, Laboratoire de Biologie Structurale et Radiobiologie, France
  3. Institut Curie, France
  4. Université Grenoble Alpes, France
  5. CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Sud, France
  6. Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Germany

Abstract

How the very first step in nucleosome assembly, deposition of histone H3-H4 as tetramers or dimers on DNA, is accomplished remains largely unclear. Here we report that yeast chromatin assembly factor 1 (CAF1), a conserved histone chaperone complex that deposits H3-H4 during DNA replication, binds a single H3-H4 heterodimer in solution. We identify a new DNA binding domain in the large Cac1 subunit of CAF1, which is required for high-affinity DNA binding by the CAF1 three-subunit complex, and which is distinct from the previously described C-terminal winged-helix domain. CAF1 binds preferentially to DNA molecules longer than 40 bp, and two CAF1-H3-H4 complexes concertedly associate with DNA molecules of this size, resulting in deposition of H3-H4 tetramers. While DNA binding is not essential for H3-H4 tetrasome deposition in vitro, it is required for efficient DNA synthesis-coupled nucleosome assembly. Mutant histones with impaired H3-H4 tetramerization interactions fail to release from CAF1, indicating that DNA deposition of H3-H4 tetramers by CAF1 requires a hierarchical cooperation between DNA binding, H3-H4 deposition and histone tetramerization.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Paul Victor Sauer

    European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Grenoble, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7204-5863
  2. Jennifer Timm

    European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Grenoble, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Danni Liu

    CEA, DRF, SB2SM, Laboratoire de Biologie Structurale et Radiobiologie, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. David Sitbon

    Institut Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Elisabetta Boeri-Erba

    Institut de Biologie Structurale, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Christophe Velours

    Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Sud, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Norbert Mücke

    Abteilung Biophysik der Makromoleküle, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jörg Langowski

    Abteilung Biophysik der Makromoleküle, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Françoise Ochsenbein

    CEA, DRF, SB2SM, Laboratoire de Biologie Structurale et Radiobiologie, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Geneviève Almouzni

    Institut Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Daniel Panne

    European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Grenoble, France
    For correspondence
    panne@embl.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9158-5507

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-16-CE11-0028-02)

  • Paul Victor Sauer
  • Jennifer Timm
  • Danni Liu
  • David Sitbon

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Paul D. Kaufman, U. Massachusetts Medical School, United States

Version history

  1. Received: November 21, 2016
  2. Accepted: March 9, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 18, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 25, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Sauer 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

  • 4,009
    views
  • 864
    downloads
  • 51
    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. Paul Victor Sauer
  2. Jennifer Timm
  3. Danni Liu
  4. David Sitbon
  5. Elisabetta Boeri-Erba
  6. Christophe Velours
  7. Norbert Mücke
  8. Jörg Langowski
  9. Françoise Ochsenbein
  10. Geneviève Almouzni
  11. Daniel Panne
(2017)
Insights into the molecular architecture and histone H3-H4 deposition mechanism of yeast Chromatin assembly factor 1
eLife 6:e23474.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23474

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23474

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Plant Biology
    Henning Mühlenbeck, Yuko Tsutsui ... Cyril Zipfel
    Research Article

    Transmembrane signaling by plant receptor kinases (RKs) has long been thought to involve reciprocal trans-phosphorylation of their intracellular kinase domains. The fact that many of these are pseudokinase domains, however, suggests that additional mechanisms must govern RK signaling activation. Non-catalytic signaling mechanisms of protein kinase domains have been described in metazoans, but information is scarce for plants. Recently, a non-catalytic function was reported for the leucine-rich repeat (LRR)-RK subfamily XIIa member EFR (elongation factor Tu receptor) and phosphorylation-dependent conformational changes were proposed to regulate signaling of RKs with non-RD kinase domains. Here, using EFR as a model, we describe a non-catalytic activation mechanism for LRR-RKs with non-RD kinase domains. EFR is an active kinase, but a kinase-dead variant retains the ability to enhance catalytic activity of its co-receptor kinase BAK1/SERK3 (brassinosteroid insensitive 1-associated kinase 1/somatic embryogenesis receptor kinase 3). Applying hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) analysis and designing homology-based intragenic suppressor mutations, we provide evidence that the EFR kinase domain must adopt its active conformation in order to activate BAK1 allosterically, likely by supporting αC-helix positioning in BAK1. Our results suggest a conformational toggle model for signaling, in which BAK1 first phosphorylates EFR in the activation loop to stabilize its active conformation, allowing EFR in turn to allosterically activate BAK1.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Katarzyna Marta Zoltowska, Utpal Das ... Lucía Chávez-Gutiérrez
    Research Article

    Amyloid β (Aβ) peptides accumulating in the brain are proposed to trigger Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, molecular cascades underlying their toxicity are poorly defined. Here, we explored a novel hypothesis for Aβ42 toxicity that arises from its proven affinity for γ-secretases. We hypothesized that the reported increases in Aβ42, particularly in the endolysosomal compartment, promote the establishment of a product feedback inhibitory mechanism on γ-secretases, and thereby impair downstream signaling events. We conducted kinetic analyses of γ-secretase activity in cell-free systems in the presence of Aβ, as well as cell-based and ex vivo assays in neuronal cell lines, neurons, and brain synaptosomes to assess the impact of Aβ on γ-secretases. We show that human Aβ42 peptides, but neither murine Aβ42 nor human Aβ17–42 (p3), inhibit γ-secretases and trigger accumulation of unprocessed substrates in neurons, including C-terminal fragments (CTFs) of APP, p75, and pan-cadherin. Moreover, Aβ42 treatment dysregulated cellular homeostasis, as shown by the induction of p75-dependent neuronal death in two distinct cellular systems. Our findings raise the possibility that pathological elevations in Aβ42 contribute to cellular toxicity via the γ-secretase inhibition, and provide a novel conceptual framework to address Aβ toxicity in the context of γ-secretase-dependent homeostatic signaling.