Supp Material.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS Supplemental Figure 1 (A) Growth curves of wild type, Ring1B-/-, Eed-/- and dKO ES cells. Growth curves for two independent dKO ES cell lines were recorded. (B) Quantitative expression analysis of PcG deficient ES cells. Expression of ES cell markers is largely unchanged in all PcG mutant ES cells compared to wild type ES cells. Supplemental Figure 2 (A) Western analysis of histone H3 lysine 27 mono- and di-methylation (H3K27me1 and H3K27me2), and histone H4 lysine 20 mono-methylation (H4K20me1) in wild type and Polycomb mutant ES cells (genotypes indicated). macroH2A and H2A.Z are used to control for loading. (B) Immunofluorescence staining (red) of H3K27me1 and H3K27me2 in ES cells of indicated genotype. DNA is counterstained with DAPI (blue). Supplemental Figure 3 (A) Weights of wild type, Eed-/- and Ring1B-/- teratomas in gram. (B) Table showing the number of performed ES cell injections and the number of teratomas obtained. (C) Teratoma formed 10 weeks after injection of dKOEedGFP ES cells into the flanks of immunodeficient mice using Matrigel as a carrier. Scale bar represents one centimeter. (D) Immunohistochemistry (brown) of dKOEedGFP teratoma sections showing expression of the endodermal marker (Troma1) and the ectodermal marker (GFAP). Supplemental Figure 4 (A) Immunofluorescence analysis of Nestin positive NS cells formed by Eed-/- and Eed-/- Ring1B-/fl ES cells in defined culture conditions. (B) PCR strategy used to distinguish deleted from 1lox Ring1B allele. Supplemental Figure 5 (A) Embryoid bodies generated from wild type, dKO and dKOEedGFP ES cells on day 6 and day 14 after aggregation are shown. Scale bars represent 1mm. (B) RT-PCR expression analysis of the pluripotency marker Oct4 and differentiation markers Afp, Foxa2, and p16 in embryoid bodies generated from wild type, Eed deficient, dKO and dKOEedGFP ES cells. Results from undifferentiated ES cells and embryoid body cultures on days 11 and 15 of differentiation are shown. Actin is used to control for equal loading. Supplemental Figure 6 Brightfield (left) and fluorescence microscopy images (right) of blastocysts injected with GFP expressing wild type and dKO ES cells. Contribution of the ES cells to the inner cell mass is observed by the GFP signal (green, right). Not injected blastocysts are shown as a control. Supplemental Figure 7 (A) Venn diagram showing genes that are upregulated (> 2 fold; p<0.05) in Eed-/-, Ring1B-/- and dKO ES cells compared to wt. (B) Venn diagram showing upregulated genes in all genotypes (> 2 fold; p<0.05) that have previously been reported as PcG targets (Ku et al. 2008). (C) Volcano plots showing the global transcriptional changes in Eed-/-, Ring1B-/- and dKO vs. wild type ES cells. All genes present on the Affymetrix GeneChip 430.2 array were plotted. Each circle represents one gene. The log fold change in the indicated genotype versus wild type is represented on the x-axis. The y-axis shows the log10 of the p value. A p value of 0.05 and a fold change of 2 are indicated by grey lines. (D) Volcano plots showing changes in gene expression of bivalent PcG target genes in indicated genotypes versus wild type. Each circle represents one PcG target gene. The log fold change in the indicated geneotype versus wild type is represented on the x-axis. The y-axis shows the log10 of the p value. A p value of 0.05 and a fold change of 2 are indicated by grey lines. Bivalent genes are preferentially upregulated in PcG mutant ES cells and only few genes show downregulation. The shift to upregulation is most pronounced in dKO ES cells. However, derepression is only weak for the majority of PcG targets in all PcG mutants. (E) Recently it was reported that PcG target promoters can be classified into two subgroups (Ku et al. 2008). One group is also bound by the PRC1 component Ring1B whereas the other is marked by PRC2 only. To test if a functional difference exists between the PRC1 bound and not bound bivalent genes, we investigated if PRC1 bound bivalent genes are more likely to be derepressed (> 2 fold; p<0.05) in PcG deficient ES cells than PRC2 only bound genes. Indeed we found Ring1B positive bivalent genes to be preferentially derepressed in Eed-/-, Ring1B-/- and dKO ES cells. This indicates that silencing of Ring1B positive bivalent genes is more sensitive to loss of PcG proteins than silencing of PRC2 only bound bivalent genes. Unexpectedly, in Ring1B deficient ES cells, genes that were reported to be bound only by the PRC2 complex do also show a higher propensity to be upregulated. This can possibly be explained by Ring1B binding below the threshold used by Ku et al. in their study. (F) The presence of pluripotency associated TFs or (G) core regulators of pluripotency (Oct4, Nanog and Sox2) on PcG target genes has only a minor influence on derepression upon disruption of the PcG system (Kim et al. 2008; Ku et al. 2008). Supplemental Figure 8 Virtually all PcG targets and most H3K4me3 bound genes have CpG rich (hiCpG) promoters (Mikkelsen et al. 2007; Ku et al. 2008). Promoters showing an intermediate (inCpG) or low (loCpG) CpG level are depleted for both H3K27me3 and H3K4me3. Overall, genes derepressed in Ring1B-/-, Eed-/- or dKO ES cells are randomly distributed in all three CpG classes. As expected, derepressed Polycomb target genes do almost exclusively have high CpG class promoters. Derepressed non PcG target genes are depleted for high CpG class promoters and show a stronger enrichment of intermediate and low CpG promoters in all three PcG knockout ES cell lines. Supplemental Figure 9 (A) Endogenous retroelements were derepressed in dKO ES cells and the fold changes compared to wild type ES cells from Affymetrix analysis are plotted. (B) Northern analysis showing that repression of IAPs can be re-established by expression of an EedGFP fusion protein in dKO ES cells. (C) Chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis showing H3K27me3 enrichment on MLV elements in wild type, Eed deficient and Ring1B deficient ES cells. SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURES A 8 wild type Eed-/- Ring1B-/- 6 dKO 1 dKO 2 4 million cells 2 0 0123days B 200 regulation of pluripotency factors Eed-/- Ring1B-/- dKO 1 150 dKO2 100 50 % expression of wild type 0 Rex1 Klf4 Nanog Oct4 Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 1 A -/- EedGFP -/- wt Eed Ring1B dKO dKO H3K27me1 H3K27me2 H4K20me1 macroH2A H2A.Z B Dapi H3K27me1 Dapi H3K27me2 wt * Eed-/- dKO * dKOEedGFP Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 2 AB Teratoma weights 4 3 2 1 0 wt Eed-/- Ring1B-/- C D dKOEedGFP dKOEedGFP Troma1 GFAP Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 3 A Eed-/- Eed-/- Ring1B-/fl Nestin / DAPI B wild type allele (3kb) SA pA minus allele (500bp) ATG pCMV-HYTK floxed allele (6kb) conditional to minus allele (300bp) Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 4 A wt dKOdKO EedGFP d6 d14 B wt Eed-/- dKOdKO EedGFP ES EB d11 EB d15 ES EB d11 EB d15 ES EB d11 EB d15 ES EB d11 EB d15 Oct Afp Foxa2 p16 Actin Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 5 injected cell type brightfield GFP wt dKO not injected Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 6 A Eed-/- (1151) B Eed-/- (476) Ring1B-/- (814) 261 76 48 220 15 Ring1B-/- (279) 192 376 466 28 170 193 43 1005 329 dKO (2017) dKO (757) C all genes on array D log fold change Ring1B-/- vs wt log fold change Eed-/- vs wt log fold change dKO vs wt bivalent genes log fold change Ring1B-/- vs wt log fold change Eed-/- vs wt log fold change dKO vs wt E 40 all genes on array PRC2 only 30 PRC1&PRC2 bound all bivalent 20 10 0 % of genes derepressed in group in derepressed genes of % Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO F G bivalent bivalent 30 pluri TF bound 30 core pluri TF bound and bivalent 25 and bivalent 25 pluri TF core pluri TF 20 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 0 0 Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO % derepressed genes in group % derepressed genes in group Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 7 Derepression in different CpG classes 100 100 100 loCpG inCpG 80 80 80 hiCpG 60 60 60 40 40 40 20 20 20 % of all derepressed genes 0 0 0 % of derepressed PcG target genes % of derepressed PcG target expected Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO expected Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO genes % of derepressed non-target expected Ring1B-/- Eed-/- dKO Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 8 A B Derepression of endogenous retroelements 30 Ring1B-/- Eed-/- Eed-/- Eed-/- Ring1B-/fl dKO dKO EedGFP wild type 20 dKO Ring1B-/- IAP 10 fold change Gapd 0 IAP RLTR33 ORR1A1 RLTR4 MMVL30 C Lef1 120 Bmp2 MLV gag Gapdh 120 120 120 100 100 100 100 mock 80 80 80 80 H3K27me3 60 60 60 60 40 40 40 % H3 40 20 20 20 20 0 0 0 0 -/- -/- -/- -/- wt Eed-/- Ring1B-/- wt Eed Ring1B wt Eed Ring1B wt Eed-/- Ring1B-/- Leeb et al., Supplemental Figure 9 SUPPLEMENTAL TABLES Supplemental Table 1 The 100 most upregulated genes and PcG target genes with a p-value smaller than 0.05 in PcG mutant ES cells are listed with fold change (fc) compared to wild type ES cells. Leeb et al. Supplemental Table 1 all genes PcG target genes Ring1B-/- vs wt Eed-/- vs wt dKO vs wt Ring1B-/- vs wt Eed-/- vs wt dKO vs wt Entrez GeneID Annotation fc Entrez GeneID Annotation fc Entrez GeneID Annotation fc Entrez GeneID Annotation fc Entrez GeneID Annotation fc Entrez GeneID Annotation fc 21426 Tcfec; transcription factor EC 129.33 12309 S100g; S100 calcium bind 150.58 22139 Ttr; transthyretin 330.83 22771 Zic1; zinc finger protein of the c 79.57 83555 Tex13; testis expressed gen 50.52 83555 Tex13; testis expressed gen 72.93 12309 S100g; S100 calcium binding p 80.04 21426 Tcfec; transcription factor 81.71 12309 S100g; S100 calcium binding 259.16 15423 Hoxc4; homeo box C4 41.81 15423 Hoxc4; homeo box C4 39.17 20671