Telomere dysfunction cooperates with epigenetic alterations to impair murine embryonic stem cell fate commitment

  1. Mélanie Criqui
  2. Aditi Qamra
  3. Tsz Wai Chu
  4. Monika Sharma
  5. Julissa Tsao
  6. Danielle A Henry
  7. Dalia Barsyte-Lovejoy
  8. Cheryl H Arrowsmith
  9. Neil Winegarden
  10. Mathieu Lupien
  11. Lea Harrington  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Montreal, Canada
  2. University Health Network, Canada
  3. McGill University Health Centre, Canada
  4. University of Toronto, Canada
  5. University Heath Network, Canada

Abstract

The precise relationship between epigenetic perturbations and telomere dysfunction is an extant question. Previously, we showed that telomere dysfunction leads to differentiation instability in murine embryonic stem cells (mESCs) via perturbations in DNA methylation at pluripotency-factor promoters. Here, we uncovered that telomerase reverse transcriptase null (Tert-/-) mESCs exhibit genome-wide perturbations in chromatin accessibility and gene expression during differentiation. These changes were accompanied by an increase of H3K27me3 globally, an altered chromatin landscape at the Pou5f1/Oct4 pluripotency gene promoter, and impaired Tert-/- mESC differentiation. Inhibition of the Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), an H3K27 tri-methyltransferase, exacerbated the impairment in differentiation and pluripotency gene repression in Tert-/- mESCs but not wild-type mESCs, whereas inhibition of H3K27me3 demethylation led to a partial rescue of the Tert-/- phenotype. This data reveals a new interdependent relationship between H3K27me3 and telomere integrity in stem cell lineage commitment that may have implications in aging and cancer.

Data availability

ATAC-seq and ChIP-seq data has been deposited in GEO under accession number GSE130780 and GSE146322. The Metadata sheet accompanying this deposition is provided in Figure 4 - source data files 2 and 4.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Mélanie Criqui

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Aditi Qamra

    Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Tsz Wai Chu

    Clinical Research Unit, McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Monika Sharma

    Princess Margaret Genomics Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Julissa Tsao

    Princess Margaret Genomics Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Danielle A Henry

    Department of Molecular Biology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Dalia Barsyte-Lovejoy

    Structural Genomics Consortium, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Cheryl H Arrowsmith

    Structural Genomics Consortium, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Neil Winegarden

    Princess Margaret Genomics Centre, University Heath Network, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Mathieu Lupien

    Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0929-9478
  11. Lea Harrington

    Department of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada
    For correspondence
    lea.harrington@umontreal.ca
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4977-2744

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (367427)

  • Lea Harrington

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (133573)

  • Lea Harrington

Wellcome (084637)

  • Lea Harrington

Ontario Genomics Institute (OGI-055)

  • Cheryl H Arrowsmith

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

Copyright

© 2020, Criqui 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

  • 2,705
    views
  • 350
    downloads
  • 14
    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. Mélanie Criqui
  2. Aditi Qamra
  3. Tsz Wai Chu
  4. Monika Sharma
  5. Julissa Tsao
  6. Danielle A Henry
  7. Dalia Barsyte-Lovejoy
  8. Cheryl H Arrowsmith
  9. Neil Winegarden
  10. Mathieu Lupien
  11. Lea Harrington
(2020)
Telomere dysfunction cooperates with epigenetic alterations to impair murine embryonic stem cell fate commitment
eLife 9:e47333.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47333

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47333

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bethany M Bartlett, Yatendra Kumar ... Wendy A Bickmore
    Research Article Updated

    During oncogene-induced senescence there are striking changes in the organisation of heterochromatin in the nucleus. This is accompanied by activation of a pro-inflammatory gene expression programme – the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) – driven by transcription factors such as NF-κB. The relationship between heterochromatin re-organisation and the SASP has been unclear. Here, we show that TPR, a protein of the nuclear pore complex basket required for heterochromatin re-organisation during senescence, is also required for the very early activation of NF-κB signalling during the stress-response phase of oncogene-induced senescence. This is prior to activation of the SASP and occurs without affecting NF-κB nuclear import. We show that TPR is required for the activation of innate immune signalling at these early stages of senescence and we link this to the formation of heterochromatin-enriched cytoplasmic chromatin fragments thought to bleb off from the nuclear periphery. We show that HMGA1 is also required for cytoplasmic chromatin fragment formation. Together these data suggest that re-organisation of heterochromatin is involved in altered structural integrity of the nuclear periphery during senescence, and that this can lead to activation of cytoplasmic nucleic acid sensing, NF-κB signalling, and activation of the SASP.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Timothy Fuqua, Yiqiao Sun, Andreas Wagner
    Research Article

    Gene regulation is essential for life and controlled by regulatory DNA. Mutations can modify the activity of regulatory DNA, and also create new regulatory DNA, a process called regulatory emergence. Non-regulatory and regulatory DNA contain motifs to which transcription factors may bind. In prokaryotes, gene expression requires a stretch of DNA called a promoter, which contains two motifs called –10 and –35 boxes. However, these motifs may occur in both promoters and non-promoter DNA in multiple copies. They have been implicated in some studies to improve promoter activity, and in others to repress it. Here, we ask whether the presence of such motifs in different genetic sequences influences promoter evolution and emergence. To understand whether and how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution, we start from 50 ‘promoter islands’, DNA sequences enriched with –10 and –35 boxes. We mutagenize these starting ‘parent’ sequences, and measure gene expression driven by 240,000 of the resulting mutants. We find that the probability that mutations create an active promoter varies more than 200-fold, and is not correlated with the number of promoter motifs. For parent sequences without promoter activity, mutations created over 1500 new –10 and –35 boxes at unique positions in the library, but only ~0.3% of these resulted in de-novo promoter activity. Only ~13% of all –10 and –35 boxes contribute to de-novo promoter activity. For parent sequences with promoter activity, mutations created new –10 and –35 boxes in 11 specific positions that partially overlap with preexisting ones to modulate expression. We also find that –10 and –35 boxes do not repress promoter activity. Overall, our work demonstrates how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution. It has implications for predicting and understanding regulatory evolution, de novo genes, and phenotypic evolution.