The dynamic three-dimensional organization of the diploid yeast genome

  1. Seungsoo Kim
  2. Ivan Liachko
  3. Donna G Brickner
  4. Kate Cook
  5. William S Noble
  6. Jason H Brickner
  7. Jay Shendure
  8. Maitreya J Dunham  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Washington, United States
  2. Northwestern University, United States

Abstract

The budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a long-standing model for the three-dimensional organization of eukaryotic genomes. However, even in this well-studied model, it is unclear how homolog pairing in diploids or environmental conditions influence overall genome organization. Here, we performed high-throughput chromosome conformation capture on diverged Saccharomyces hybrid diploids to obtain the first global view of chromosome conformation in diploid yeasts. After controlling for the Rabl-like orientation using a polymer model, we observe significant homolog proximity that increases in saturated culture conditions. Surprisingly, we observe a localized increase in homologous interactions between the HAS1-TDA1 alleles specifically under galactose induction and saturated growth. This pairing is accompanied by relocalization to the nuclear periphery and requires Nup2, suggesting a role for nuclear pore complexes. Together, these results reveal that the diploid yeast genome has a dynamic and complex 3D organization.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Seungsoo Kim

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ivan Liachko

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Donna G Brickner

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Kate Cook

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. William S Noble

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jason H Brickner

    Department of Molecular Biosciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8019-3743
  7. Jay Shendure

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Maitreya J Dunham

    Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    maitreya@uw.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9944-2666

Funding

National Institutes of Health (GM080484 to JHB P41GM103533 to MJD U54 DK107979 to JS and WSN)

  • William S Noble
  • Jason H Brickner
  • Jay Shendure
  • Maitreya J Dunham

National Science Foundation (graduate research fellowship DGE-1256082 to SK 1516330 to MJD)

  • Seungsoo Kim

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (JS is an investigator of HHMI MJD was supported in part by a Faculty Scholar grant from HHMI)

  • Jay Shendure
  • Maitreya J Dunham

Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (MJD is a senior fellow in the Genetic Networks Program)

  • Maitreya J Dunham

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

Copyright

© 2017, Kim 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.

Download links

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23623

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Shihui Chen, Carolyn Marie Phillips
    Research Article

    RNA interference (RNAi) is a conserved pathway that utilizes Argonaute proteins and their associated small RNAs to exert gene regulatory function on complementary transcripts. While the majority of germline-expressed RNAi proteins reside in perinuclear germ granules, it is unknown whether and how RNAi pathways are spatially organized in other cell types. Here, we find that the small RNA biogenesis machinery is spatially and temporally organized during Caenorhabditis elegans embryogenesis. Specifically, the RNAi factor, SIMR-1, forms visible concentrates during mid-embryogenesis that contain an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, a poly-UG polymerase, and the unloaded nuclear Argonaute protein, NRDE-3. Curiously, coincident with the appearance of the SIMR granules, the small RNAs bound to NRDE-3 switch from predominantly CSR-class 22G-RNAs to ERGO-dependent 22G-RNAs. NRDE-3 binds ERGO-dependent 22G-RNAs in the somatic cells of larvae and adults to silence ERGO-target genes; here we further demonstrate that NRDE-3-bound, CSR-class 22G-RNAs repress transcription in oocytes. Thus, our study defines two separable roles for NRDE-3, targeting germline-expressed genes during oogenesis to promote global transcriptional repression, and switching during embryogenesis to repress recently duplicated genes and retrotransposons in somatic cells, highlighting the plasticity of Argonaute proteins and the need for more precise temporal characterization of Argonaute-small RNA interactions.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Steven Henikoff, David L Levens
    Insight

    A new method for mapping torsion provides insights into the ways that the genome responds to the torsion generated by RNA polymerase II.