Aneuploidy as a cause of impaired chromatin silencing and mating-type specification in budding yeast

  1. Wahid A Mulla
  2. Chris W Seidel
  3. Jin Zhu
  4. Hung-Ji Tsai
  5. Sarah E Smith
  6. Pushpendra Singh
  7. William D Bradford
  8. Scott McCroskey
  9. Anjali R Nelliat
  10. Juliana Conkright
  11. Allison Peak
  12. Kathryn E Malanowski
  13. Anoja G Perera
  14. Rong Li  Is a corresponding author
  1. Johns Hopkins University, United States
  2. Stowers Institute for Medical Research, United States
  3. Johns Hopkins, United States

Abstract

Aneuploidy and epigenetic alterations have long been associated with carcinogenesis, but it was unknown whether aneuploidy could disrupt the epigenetic states required for cellular differentiation. In this study, we found that ~3% of random aneuploid karyotypes in yeast disrupt the stable inheritance of silenced chromatin during cell proliferation. Karyotype analysis revealed that this phenotype was significantly correlated with gains of chromosomes III and X. Chromosome X disomy alone was sufficient to disrupt chromatin silencing and yeast mating-type identity as indicated by a lack of growth response to pheromone. The silencing defect was not limited to cryptic mating type loci and was associated with broad changes in histone modifications and chromatin localization of Sir2 histone deacetylase. The chromatin-silencing defect of disome X can be partially recapitulated by an extra copy of several genes on chromosome X. These results suggest that aneuploidy can directly cause epigenetic instability and disrupt cellular differentiation.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Wahid A Mulla

    Department of Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3356-3902
  2. Chris W Seidel

    Genomics, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jin Zhu

    Department of Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Hung-Ji Tsai

    Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sarah E Smith

    Imaging Facility, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Pushpendra Singh

    Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. William D Bradford

    Molecular Biology, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Scott McCroskey

    Molecular Biology, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Anjali R Nelliat

    Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Juliana Conkright

    Screening core, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Allison Peak

    Molecular Biology Core, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Kathryn E Malanowski

    Molecular Biology Core, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Anoja G Perera

    Molecular Biology, Stowers Institute for Medical Research, Kansas City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Rong Li

    Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, United States
    For correspondence
    rong@jhu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0540-6566

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35-GM118172)

  • Rong Li

American Heart Association (15PRE25090204)

  • Wahid A Mulla

Prostate Cancer Foundation (16YOUN21)

  • Hung-Ji Tsai

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

Copyright

© 2017, Mulla 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

  • 2,959
    views
  • 481
    downloads
  • 20
    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. Wahid A Mulla
  2. Chris W Seidel
  3. Jin Zhu
  4. Hung-Ji Tsai
  5. Sarah E Smith
  6. Pushpendra Singh
  7. William D Bradford
  8. Scott McCroskey
  9. Anjali R Nelliat
  10. Juliana Conkright
  11. Allison Peak
  12. Kathryn E Malanowski
  13. Anoja G Perera
  14. Rong Li
(2017)
Aneuploidy as a cause of impaired chromatin silencing and mating-type specification in budding yeast
eLife 6:e27991.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27991

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27991

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Tomoharu Kanie, Roy Ng ... Peter K Jackson
    Research Article Updated

    The primary cilium is a microtubule-based organelle that cycles through assembly and disassembly. In many cell types, formation of the cilium is initiated by recruitment of preciliary vesicles to the distal appendage of the mother centriole. However, the distal appendage mechanism that directly captures preciliary vesicles is yet to be identified. In an accompanying paper, we show that the distal appendage protein, CEP89, is important for the preciliary vesicle recruitment, but not for other steps of cilium formation (Kanie et al., 2025). The lack of a membrane-binding motif in CEP89 suggests that it may indirectly recruit preciliary vesicles via another binding partner. Here, we identify Neuronal Calcium Sensor-1 (NCS1) as a stoichiometric interactor of CEP89. NCS1 localizes to the position between CEP89 and the centriole-associated vesicle marker, RAB34, at the distal appendage. This localization was completely abolished in CEP89 knockouts, suggesting that CEP89 recruits NCS1 to the distal appendage. Similar to CEP89 knockouts, preciliary vesicle recruitment as well as subsequent cilium formation was perturbed in NCS1 knockout cells. The ability of NCS1 to recruit the preciliary vesicle is dependent on its myristoylation motif and NCS1 knockout cells expressing a myristoylation defective mutant failed to rescue the vesicle recruitment defect despite localizing properly to the centriole. In sum, our analysis reveals the first known mechanism for how the distal appendage recruits the preciliary vesicles.

    1. Cell Biology
    Tomoharu Kanie, Beibei Liu ... Peter K Jackson
    Research Article Updated

    Distal appendages are ninefold symmetric blade-like structures attached to the distal end of the mother centriole. These structures are critical for the formation of the primary cilium, by regulating at least four critical steps: preciliary vesicle recruitment, recruitment and initiation of intraflagellar transport (IFT), and removal of CP110. While specific proteins that localize to the distal appendages have been identified, how exactly each protein functions to achieve the multiple roles of the distal appendages is poorly understood. Here, we comprehensively analyze known and newly discovered distal appendage proteins (CEP83, SCLT1, CEP164, TTBK2, FBF1, CEP89, KIZ, ANKRD26, PIDD1, LRRC45, NCS1, CEP15) for their precise localization, order of recruitment, and their roles in each step of cilia formation. Using CRISPR-Cas9 knockouts, we show that the order of the recruitment of the distal appendage proteins is highly interconnected and a more complex hierarchy. Our analysis highlights two protein modules, CEP83-SCLT1 and CEP164-TTBK2, as critical for structural assembly of distal appendages. Functional assays revealed that CEP89 selectively functions in the RAB34+ vesicle recruitment, while deletion of the integral components, CEP83-SCLT1-CEP164-TTBK2, severely compromised all four steps of cilium formation. Collectively, our analyses provide a more comprehensive view of the organization and the function of the distal appendage, paving the way for molecular understanding of ciliary assembly.