1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression

Conversion of random X-inactivation to imprinted X-inactivation by maternal PRC2

  1. Clair Harris
  2. Marissa Cloutier
  3. Megan Trotter
  4. Michael Hinten
  5. Srimonta Gayen
  6. Zhenhai Du
  7. Wei Xie
  8. Sundeep Kalantry  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Michigan, United States
  2. Tsinghua University, China
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44258
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Clair Harris
  2. Marissa Cloutier
  3. Megan Trotter
  4. Michael Hinten
  5. Srimonta Gayen
  6. Zhenhai Du
  7. Wei Xie
  8. Sundeep Kalantry
(2019)
Conversion of random X-inactivation to imprinted X-inactivation by maternal PRC2
eLife 8:e44258.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44258
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS

Abstract

Imprinted X-inactivation silences genes exclusively on the paternally-inherited X-chromosome and is a paradigm of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in mammals. Here, we test the role of maternal vs. zygotic Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) protein EED in orchestrating imprinted X-inactivation in mouse embryos. In maternal-null (Eedm-/-) but not zygotic-null (Eed-/-) early embryos, the maternal X-chromosome ectopically induced Xist and underwent inactivation. Eedm-/- females subsequently stochastically silenced Xist from one of the two X-chromosomes and displayed random X-inactivation. This effect was exacerbated in embryos lacking both maternal and zygotic EED (Eedmz-/-), suggesting that zygotic EED can also contribute to the onset of imprinted X-inactivation. Xist expression dynamics in Eedm-/- embryos resemble that of early human embryos, which lack oocyte-derived maternal PRC2 and only undergo random X-inactivation. Thus, expression of PRC2 in the oocyte and transmission of the gene products to the embryo may dictate the occurrence of imprinted X-inactivation in mammals.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession number GSE123173. The analyzed sequencing data are also included as Supplementary File 3.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Clair Harris

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  2. Marissa Cloutier

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  3. Megan Trotter

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Michael Hinten

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Srimonta Gayen

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  6. Zhenhai Du

    Center for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, THU-PKU Center for Life Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  7. Wei Xie

    Center for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, MOE Key Laboratory of Bioinformatics, THU-PKU Center for Life Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Sundeep Kalantry

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    For correspondence
    kalantry@umich.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0763-8050

Funding

NIH Office of the Director (DP2-OD-008646)

  • Sundeep Kalantry

National Institutes of Health (R01GM124571)

  • Sundeep Kalantry

National Institutes of Health (R01HD095463)

  • Sundeep Kalantry

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM07544)

  • Marissa Cloutier
  • Megan Trotter

March of Dimes Foundation (5-FY12-119)

  • Sundeep Kalantry

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Kavitha Sarma, Wistar Institute, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All animals were handled according to protocols approved by the University Committee on Use and Care of Animals (UCUCA) at the University of Michigan (protocol #s PRO6455 and PRO8425).

Version history

  1. Received: December 10, 2018
  2. Accepted: April 1, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 2, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: May 29, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Harris 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

  • 4,542
    views
  • 557
    downloads
  • 39
    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. Clair Harris
  2. Marissa Cloutier
  3. Megan Trotter
  4. Michael Hinten
  5. Srimonta Gayen
  6. Zhenhai Du
  7. Wei Xie
  8. Sundeep Kalantry
(2019)
Conversion of random X-inactivation to imprinted X-inactivation by maternal PRC2
eLife 8:e44258.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44258

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44258

Categories and tags

Research organism

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics

    Evolutionary adaptation of an HP1-protein chromodomain integrates chromatin and DNA sequence signals

    Lisa Baumgartner, Jonathan J Ipsaro ... Julius Brennecke
    Research Advance

    Members of the diverse heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1) family play crucial roles in heterochromatin formation and maintenance. Despite the similar affinities of their chromodomains for di- and tri-methylated histone H3 lysine 9 (H3K9me2/3), different HP1 proteins exhibit distinct chromatin-binding patterns, likely due to interactions with various specificity factors. Previously, we showed that the chromatin-binding pattern of the HP1 protein Rhino, a crucial factor of the Drosophila PIWI-interacting RNA (piRNA) pathway, is largely defined by a DNA sequence-specific C2H2 zinc finger protein named Kipferl (Baumgartner et al., 2022). Here, we elucidate the molecular basis of the interaction between Rhino and its guidance factor Kipferl. Through phylogenetic analyses, structure prediction, and in vivo genetics, we identify a single amino acid change within Rhino’s chromodomain, G31D, that does not affect H3K9me2/3 binding but disrupts the interaction between Rhino and Kipferl. Flies carrying the rhinoG31D mutation phenocopy kipferl mutant flies, with Rhino redistributing from piRNA clusters to satellite repeats, causing pronounced changes in the ovarian piRNA profile of rhinoG31D flies. Thus, Rhino’s chromodomain functions as a dual-specificity module, facilitating interactions with both a histone mark and a DNA-binding protein.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression

    Human DDX6 regulates translation and decay of inefficiently translated mRNAs

    Ramona Weber, Chung-Te Chang
    Research Article

    Recent findings indicate that the translation elongation rate influences mRNA stability. One of the factors that has been implicated in this link between mRNA decay and translation speed is the yeast DEAD-box helicase Dhh1p. Here, we demonstrated that the human ortholog of Dhh1p, DDX6, triggers the deadenylation-dependent decay of inefficiently translated mRNAs in human cells. DDX6 interacts with the ribosome through the Phe-Asp-Phe (FDF) motif in its RecA2 domain. Furthermore, RecA2-mediated interactions and ATPase activity are both required for DDX6 to destabilize inefficiently translated mRNAs. Using ribosome profiling and RNA sequencing, we identified two classes of endogenous mRNAs that are regulated in a DDX6-dependent manner. The identified targets are either translationally regulated or regulated at the steady-state-level and either exhibit signatures of poor overall translation or of locally reduced ribosome translocation rates. Transferring the identified sequence stretches into a reporter mRNA caused translation- and DDX6-dependent degradation of the reporter mRNA. In summary, these results identify DDX6 as a crucial regulator of mRNA translation and decay triggered by slow ribosome movement and provide insights into the mechanism by which DDX6 destabilizes inefficiently translated mRNAs.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression

    Comparative transcriptomics reveal a novel tardigrade-specific DNA-binding protein induced in response to ionizing radiation

    Marwan Anoud, Emmanuelle Delagoutte ... Jean-Paul Concordet
    Research Article

    Tardigrades are microscopic animals renowned for their ability to withstand extreme conditions, including high doses of ionizing radiation (IR). To better understand their radio-resistance, we first characterized induction and repair of DNA double- and single-strand breaks after exposure to IR in the model species Hypsibius exemplaris. Importantly, we found that the rate of single-strand breaks induced was roughly equivalent to that in human cells, suggesting that DNA repair plays a predominant role in tardigrades’ radio-resistance. To identify novel tardigrade-specific genes involved, we next conducted a comparative transcriptomics analysis across three different species. In all three species, many DNA repair genes were among the most strongly overexpressed genes alongside a novel tardigrade-specific gene, which we named Tardigrade DNA damage Response 1 (TDR1). We found that TDR1 protein interacts with DNA and forms aggregates at high concentration suggesting it may condensate DNA and preserve chromosome organization until DNA repair is accomplished. Remarkably, when expressed in human cells, TDR1 improved resistance to Bleomycin, a radiomimetic drug. Based on these findings, we propose that TDR1 is a novel tardigrade-specific gene conferring resistance to IR. Our study sheds light on mechanisms of DNA repair helping cope with high levels of DNA damage inflicted by IR.