MOF-associated complexes ensure stem cell identity and Xist repression

  1. Tomasz Chelmicki
  2. Friederike Dündar
  3. Matthew Turley
  4. Tasneem Khanam
  5. Tugce Aktas
  6. Fidel Ramírez
  7. Anne-Valerie Gendrel
  8. Patrick R Wright
  9. Pavankumar Videm
  10. Rolf Backofen
  11. Edith Heard
  12. Thomas Manke
  13. Asifa Akhtar  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Germany
  2. Institute Curie, France
  3. University of Freiburg, Germany
  4. Institut Curie, France

Abstract

Histone acetyl transferases (HATs) play distinct roles in many cellular processes and are frequently misregulated in cancers. Here, we study the regulatory potential of MYST1-(MOF)-containing MSL and NSL complexes in mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and neuronal progenitors. We find that both complexes influence transcription by targeting promoters as well as TSS-distal enhancers. In contrast to flies, the MSL complex is not exclusively enriched on the X chromosome yet it is crucial for mammalian X chromosome regulation as it specifically regulates Tsix, the major repressor of Xist lncRNA. MSL depletion leads to decreased Tsix expression, reduced REX1 recruitment, and consequently, enhanced accumulation of Xist and variable numbers of inactivated X chromosomes during early differentiation. The NSL complex provides additional, Tsix-independent repression of Xist by maintaining pluripotency. MSL and NSL complexes therefore act synergistically by using distinct pathways to ensure a fail-safe mechanism for the repression of X inactivation in ESCs.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tomasz Chelmicki

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Friederike Dündar

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Matthew Turley

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Tasneem Khanam

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Tugce Aktas

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Fidel Ramírez

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Anne-Valerie Gendrel

    Institute Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Patrick R Wright

    University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Pavankumar Videm

    University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Rolf Backofen

    University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Edith Heard

    Institut Curie, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Thomas Manke

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Asifa Akhtar

    Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Freiburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    akhtar@immunbio.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    Asifa Akhtar, Reviewing editor, eLife.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Danny Reinberg, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, New York University School of Medicine, United States

Version history

  1. Received: December 6, 2013
  2. Accepted: May 11, 2014
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 19, 2014 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 17, 2014 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2014, Chelmicki 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

  • 5,554
    Page views
  • 658
    Downloads
  • 69
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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. Tomasz Chelmicki
  2. Friederike Dündar
  3. Matthew Turley
  4. Tasneem Khanam
  5. Tugce Aktas
  6. Fidel Ramírez
  7. Anne-Valerie Gendrel
  8. Patrick R Wright
  9. Pavankumar Videm
  10. Rolf Backofen
  11. Edith Heard
  12. Thomas Manke
  13. Asifa Akhtar
(2014)
MOF-associated complexes ensure stem cell identity and Xist repression
eLife 3:e02024.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02024

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02024

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Erandi Velazquez-Miranda, Ming He
    Insight

    Endothelial cell subpopulations are characterized by unique gene expression profiles, epigenetic landscapes and functional properties.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Monica Salinas-Pena, Elena Rebollo, Albert Jordan
    Research Article

    Histone H1 participates in chromatin condensation and regulates nuclear processes. Human somatic cells may contain up to seven histone H1 variants, although their functional heterogeneity is not fully understood. Here, we have profiled the differential nuclear distribution of the somatic H1 repertoire in human cells through imaging techniques including super-resolution microscopy. H1 variants exhibit characteristic distribution patterns in both interphase and mitosis. H1.2, H1.3, and H1.5 are universally enriched at the nuclear periphery in all cell lines analyzed and co-localize with compacted DNA. H1.0 shows a less pronounced peripheral localization, with apparent variability among different cell lines. On the other hand, H1.4 and H1X are distributed throughout the nucleus, being H1X universally enriched in high-GC regions and abundant in the nucleoli. Interestingly, H1.4 and H1.0 show a more peripheral distribution in cell lines lacking H1.3 and H1.5. The differential distribution patterns of H1 suggest specific functionalities in organizing lamina-associated domains or nucleolar activity, which is further supported by a distinct response of H1X or phosphorylated H1.4 to the inhibition of ribosomal DNA transcription. Moreover, H1 variants depletion affects chromatin structure in a variant-specific manner. Concretely, H1.2 knock-down, either alone or combined, triggers a global chromatin decompaction. Overall, imaging has allowed us to distinguish H1 variants distribution beyond the segregation in two groups denoted by previous ChIP-Seq determinations. Our results support H1 variants heterogeneity and suggest that variant-specific functionality can be shared between different cell types.