Live imaging and biophysical modeling support a button-based mechanism of somatic homolog pairing in Drosophila

  1. Myron Barber Child VI
  2. Jack R Bateman  Is a corresponding author
  3. Amir Jahangiri
  4. Armando Reimer
  5. Nicholas C Lammers
  6. Nica Sabouni
  7. Diego Villamarin
  8. Grace C McKenzie-Smith
  9. Justine E Johnson
  10. Daniel Jost  Is a corresponding author
  11. Hernan G Garcia  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California at Berkeley, United States
  2. Bowdoin College, United States
  3. Grenoble Alpes University, France
  4. University of California, Berkeley, United States
  5. ENS de Lyon, France

Abstract

3D eukaryotic genome organization provides the structural basis for gene regulation. In Drosophila melanogaster, genome folding is characterized by somatic homolog pairing, where homologous chromosomes are intimately paired from end to end; however, how homologs identify one another and pair has remained mysterious. Recently, this process has been proposed to be driven by specifically interacting 'buttons' encoded along chromosomes. Here, we turned this hypothesis into a quantitative biophysical model to demonstrate that a button-based mechanism can lead to chromosome-wide pairing. We tested our model using live-imaging measurements of chromosomal loci tagged with the MS2 and PP7 nascent RNA labeling systems. We show solid agreement between model predictions and experiments in the pairing dynamics of individual homologous loci. Our results strongly support a button-based mechanism of somatic homolog pairing in Drosophila and provide a theoretical framework for revealing the molecular identity and regulation of buttons.

Data availability

Modeling code is available at: https://github.com/physical-biology-of-chromatin/Homologous_pairingCustom Matlab 2019b image analysis scripts can be found at https://github.com/GarciaLab/mRNADynamics/.Raw figure files of relevant plots are available at: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cwe1t3u5q4v3yos/AACTXXBF6WiOuLuozX0MZRkba?dl=0Samples of generated data used in this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Myron Barber Child VI

    Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8563-0842
  2. Jack R Bateman

    Biology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, United States
    For correspondence
    jbateman@bowdoin.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Amir Jahangiri

    TIMC-IMAG, Grenoble Alpes University, La Tronche, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Armando Reimer

    Biophysics Graduate Group, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Nicholas C Lammers

    Biophysics Graduate Group, University of California, Berkeley, Oakland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6832-6152
  6. Nica Sabouni

    Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Diego Villamarin

    Biology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3265-1740
  8. Grace C McKenzie-Smith

    Biology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Justine E Johnson

    Biology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Daniel Jost

    Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, ENS de Lyon, Lyon, France
    For correspondence
    daniel.jost@ens-lyon.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Hernan G Garcia

    Molecular and Cell Biology, Physics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    hggarcia@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5212-3649

Funding

Burroughs Wellcome Fund (Career Award at the Scientific Interface)

  • Hernan G Garcia

ITMO Cancer (BIO2015-08)

  • Daniel Jost

National Institutes of Health (P20 GM0103423,R15 GM132896-01)

  • Jack R Bateman

National Science Foundation (CAREER Award 1349779)

  • Jack R Bateman

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Sloan Research Fellowship)

  • Hernan G Garcia

Human Frontier Science Program

  • Hernan G Garcia

Searle Scholars Program

  • Hernan G Garcia

Shurl and Kay Curci Foundation

  • Hernan G Garcia

Hellman Foundation

  • Hernan G Garcia

National Institutes of Health (Director's New Innovator Award,DP2 OD024541-01)

  • Hernan G Garcia

National Science Foundation (CAREER Award,1652236)

  • Hernan G Garcia

Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR-18-CE12-0006-03,ANR-18-CE45-0022-01)

  • Daniel Jost

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

Copyright

© 2021, Child 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

  • 1,620
    views
  • 204
    downloads
  • 23
    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. Myron Barber Child VI
  2. Jack R Bateman
  3. Amir Jahangiri
  4. Armando Reimer
  5. Nicholas C Lammers
  6. Nica Sabouni
  7. Diego Villamarin
  8. Grace C McKenzie-Smith
  9. Justine E Johnson
  10. Daniel Jost
  11. Hernan G Garcia
(2021)
Live imaging and biophysical modeling support a button-based mechanism of somatic homolog pairing in Drosophila
eLife 10:e64412.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64412

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64412

Further reading

    1. Physics of Living Systems
    Ning Liu, Wenan Qiang ... Huanyu Qiao
    Research Article

    Chromosome structure is complex, and many aspects of chromosome organization are still not understood. Measuring the stiffness of chromosomes offers valuable insight into their structural properties. In this study, we analyzed the stiffness of chromosomes from metaphase I (MI) and metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Our results revealed a tenfold increase in stiffness (Young’s modulus) of MI chromosomes compared to somatic chromosomes. Furthermore, the stiffness of MII chromosomes was found to be lower than that of MI chromosomes. We examined the role of meiosis-specific cohesin complexes in regulating chromosome stiffness. Surprisingly, the stiffness of chromosomes from three meiosis-specific cohesin mutants did not significantly differ from that of wild-type chromosomes, indicating that these cohesins may not be primary determinants of chromosome stiffness. Additionally, our findings revealed an age-related increase of chromosome stiffness for MI oocytes. Since aging is associated with elevated levels of DNA damage, we investigated the impact of etoposide-induced DNA damage on chromosome stiffness and found that it led to a reduction in stiffness in MI oocytes. Overall, our study underscores the dynamic and cyclical nature of chromosome stiffness, modulated by both the cell cycle and age-related factors.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Joseph Ackermann, Chiara Bernard ... Martine D Ben Amar
    Research Article

    The tumor stroma consists mainly of extracellular matrix, fibroblasts, immune cells, and vasculature. Its structure and functions are altered during malignancy: tumor cells transform fibroblasts into cancer-associated fibroblasts, which exhibit immunosuppressive activities on which growth and metastasis depend. These include exclusion of immune cells from the tumor nest, cancer progression, and inhibition of T-cell-based immunotherapy. To understand these complex interactions, we measure the density of different cell types in the stroma using immunohistochemistry techniques on tumor samples from lung cancer patients. We incorporate these data into a minimal dynamical system, explore the variety of outcomes, and finally establish a spatio-temporal model that explains the cell distribution. We reproduce that cancer-associated fibroblasts act as a barrier to tumor expansion, but also reduce the efficiency of the immune response. Our conclusion is that the final outcome depends on the parameter values for each patient and leads to either tumor invasion, persistence, or eradication as a result of the interplay between cancer cell growth, T-cell cytotoxicity, and fibroblast activity. However, despite the existence of a wide range of scenarios, distinct trajectories, and patterns allow quantitative predictions that may help in the selection of new therapies and personalized protocols.