LECTURE 13: DOSAGE COMPENSATION Reading: Ch. 12, P

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

LECTURE 13: DOSAGE COMPENSATION Reading: Ch. 12, P LECTURE 13: DOSAGE COMPENSATION Reading: Ch. 12, p. 431-2 Supplementary Reading: Turner Ch. 12, p. 249-267; 271-2 (on reserve in Biosciences Library; don't worry about the details) Problems: Ch. 12, problems 12.19 – 12.21 Last time, we ended lecture with a discussion of trisomies and monosomies of the autosomes and sex chromosomes in humans. We discussed that trisomy of the X is much less severe than that of the autosomes. Most trisomies and all monosomies of the autosomes are embryonic lethals. We discussed that monosomy of the X leads to XO females that are viable, but usually sterile. So, aneuploidy for the autosomes is more severe than aneuploidy for the X. Now we’ll discuss dosage compensation, which helps explain why this is true. Brief review of sex determination in fruit flies and humans: TABLE 3.1 XXX XX XXY XO XY XYY OY Drosophila Dies Normal Normal Sterile male Normal Normal Dies female female male male Humans Nearly Normal Kleinfelter Turner Normal Normal or Dies normal female male female male nearly female (sterile); (sterile); normal tall, thin male In humans, it is the presence or absence of the Y that makes the difference; a person carrying a Y will look like a male; a person with one X and lacking a Y (XO) will look female. Drosophila also use an XX female, XY male strategy of sex determination, but it is the ratio of X chromosomes to autosomes (non sex chromosomes) that makes the difference. Flies with X:A = 1 are female, flies with X:A = 0.5 are male, and flies with X:A ratios between 0.5-1 are "intersex". What we’ll talk about today is how the difference in number of X chromosomes between males and females of both species is compensated for by the organism. That is, the activity of X-linked genes must be equalized in the two sexes. Although humans and fruit flies both use a XX female / XYmale strategy for sex determination, they use two different mechanisms for dosage compensation. In human females, one of the X-chromosomes is inactivated in each somatic cell. In fruit flies, transcription of the X chromosome is hyperactivated in males versus females. X-Chromosome Inactivation in mammals As we mentioned last time, aneuploidy for the X chromosome (either extra or missing sex chromosomes) is much less severe than aneuploidy of autosomal genes. In 1961, Mary Lyon proposed the X chromosome inactivation hypothesis to explain dosage compensation in mammals. Her observations of X-linked coat color genes in mice led her to propose that the amount of products derived from X-linked genes were equalized in the sexes by inactivating one of the X chromosomes in females. Inactive X chromosomes can be seen in interphase nuclei as darkly staining heterochromatic masses. These masses are called Barr bodies after the cytologist who discovered them. XX females have one Barr body per cell, XXX females have 2 Barr bodies per cell, and XXY Klinefelter males have one Barr body per cell (Barr bodies are not observed in XY males). This is why X chromosome aneuploidy can be tolerated; all but one of the extra X chromosomes is unactivated. Why do individuals aneuploid for the X have any phenotype at all? As we’ll discuss, not all of the genes on the X are inactivated. A possible explanation is that in Klinefelter’s Syndrome males (XXY), these genes are expressed at two times the levels normally expressed in XY males. Turner’s Syndrome (XO) may be explained by the absence of X re- activation. Normally, when female germ cells start to make oocytes and enter meiosis, the inactive X becomes active, so that developing oocytes have two functional doses of X chromosome gene and every oocyte receives an active X. Developing oocytes in Turner’s syndrome females only have one dose of X chromosome genes. At the 500-1000 cell stage (postfertilization day 16 in humans), each embryonic cell randomly decides to inactivate either the paternally-derived X or the maternally-derived X. This “decision” is inherited by all of the descendents of the original cell. Thus, all females are mosaic! There is an X-linked mutation that causes anhidrotic ectodermal displasia (absence of sweat glands). Females heterozygous for the mutation display large patches of skin lacking sweat glands; this is because the decision to inactivate the X is made randomly at early stages of development, leading to mitotic clones that eventually become patches of normal and mutant skin. If the X- linked gene you are following is a recessive lethal or a disease gene, you can imagine that the ratio of cells (and the cell type) carrying the wild-type allele and those carrying the mutant allele is what is important. Another way to detect mosaicism is by looking at electrophoretic variants of X-linked enzymes such as glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD). When a sample of tissue from a female carrying two different variants A and B is examined, we see both variants. However, if we look at which variants are expressed in a single cell (by isolating single cells and culturing them), we see that that cell will express either A or B, but not both. In 1963, these data were presented as direct evidence in favor of X chromosome inactivation. Now we know even more details. There are three basic steps: (1) X chromosome counting, (2) selection of the X to inactivate, and (3) the process of X-inactivation. X chromosome inactivation begins at a particular site called the X Inactivation Center and then spreads to adjacent regions towards the ends of the chromosome. The chromosome becomes heterochromatic. Heterochromatin is highly condensed chromosomal regions that stain darkly. Not all genes are inactivated – about a dozen genes escape inactivation. Most of these are active on the active X chromosome, but one of these genes is inactive on the active X, and instead active on the heterochromatic X. This latter gene is part of the XIC and is called XIST (for X inactive specific transcript). An X chromosome must have Xist in order to be inactivated. If Xist is missing from one X chromosome, then the other X must be inactivated. Deletion of the Xist gene abolishes a chromosome’s capacity for X inactivation. If Xist is inserted into an autosome, it can induce partial inactivation on that autosome. The Xist gene transcribes a large RNA molecule that has no open reading frames, thus makes no protein. Instead in makes a long 17 Kb RNA that decorates the inactive X chromosome, perhaps preventing transcription of most genes. What might influence what X is inactivated? The question is still being actively investigated, but there is evidence that another transcript called Tsix (also part of the XIC) may be involved. Tsix is also a non-coding RNA and part of the Tsix transcript is "antisense" to the Xist transcript. Tsix is expressed only very early during the X-inactivation process. If an X chromosome carries a deletion of the Tsix promoter (therefore does not express Tsix), then that chromosome is always chosen for inactivation. The model is this: before the choice, Xist and Tsix are expressed from both X chromosomes. The Xist transcript is unstable however, so it does not accumulate. As the choice is made, Tsix transcription is decreased from one chromosome (the pre-Xi chromosome, [Xi meaning the inactive X]). This correlates with stabilization of Xist transcripts from the pre-Xi chromosome. Then, Xist transcripts begin to coat the Xi chromosome. Soon after, Xist and Tsix are both no longer transcribed from the active X. (See Figure 12.6 in Turner). Recently, another Xic region, named Xite, which positively regulates Tsix expression has been identified. Deletion of a region that includes Xite (and the 5’ end of Tsix) causes the X chromosome containing the deletion to become silenced, even in male cells where there is only one X chromosome. Some models suggest that this region of the Xic binds a “blocking factor” produced in limiting quantities from an autosome. The hypothesis is that the amount of blocking factor produced is only enough to bind one X chromosome and binding protects that X from becoming silenced. The other X chromosome(s) is/are then selected for silencing. Dosage compensation in other animals: The purpose of dosage compensation is to equalize expression of the X chromosome in males and females, but the mechanism of how this is accomplished is different in different organisms. It is even clear that the mechanism may have differences among mammals (humans versus mice for example). Like previously mentioned, dosage compensation in fruit flies is achieved by hyper-activating transcription of the single X chromosome is in males versus females. In the worm C. elegans, where XX gives hermaphrodites and XO gives males, dosage compensation is achieved by reducing transcription on each X of hermaphrodites by half..
Recommended publications
  • Revealing the Mechanism of Xist-Mediated Silencing
    Revealing the Mechanism of Xist-mediated Silencing Thesis by Chun-Kan Chen In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Pasadena, California 2018 Defended November 1, 2017 ii 2017 Chun-Kan Chen ORCID: 0000-0002-1194-9137 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I’d like to thank my great mentor, Dr. Mitch Guttman (California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA), who led me to become an independent researcher and gave me valuable advice that guided me to accomplish this thesis. He has always been supportive of my future plans and career goals. I really enjoyed every discussion we have had. We often generated some interesting ideas for projects during our discussions. I would also like to send my thanks to my lab mates, Amy Chow, Mario Blanco, and Erik Aznauryan, who helped me with many experiments to move the project forward. I’d like to acknowledge Dr. Kathrin Plath (University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA) for the collaboration and his critical comments on this project. Also, I want to thank Jesse Engreitz and Patrick McDonel, who provided helpful comments and suggestions to the project. I want to thank my parents, brother, and parents-in-law who provided both instrumental and emotional support to assist me in completing my Ph.D. degree. I also want to thank my friends, Lily Chen, Pei-Ying Lin, Tzu-Yao Wang, and Wei Li, for giving me valuable social support during my years in graduate school. Last but not least, I would like to send my special thanks to my wife, Christine Juang, who has always been supportive.
    [Show full text]
  • Association of BRCA1 with the Inactive X Chromosome and XIST RNA
    FirstCite Published online e-publishing Association of BRCA1 with the inactive X chromosome and XIST RNA Shridar Ganesan1, Daniel P. Silver1, Ronny Drapkin1, Roger Greenberg1, Jean Feunteun2 and David M. Livingston1* 1The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, 1 Jimmy Fund Way, Boston, MA 02115, USA 2Laboratoire de Genetique et Transfert de Gene, Institut Gustav-Roussy, Villejuif 94805, France Breast cancer, early onset 1 (BRCA1) encodes a nuclear protein that participates in breast and ovarian cancer suppression. The molecular basis for the gender and tissue specificity of the BRCA1 cancer syn- drome is unknown. Recently, we observed that a fraction of BRCA1 in female cells is localized on the inactive X chromosome (Xi). Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) experiments have demonstrated that BRCA1 physically associates with Xi-specific transcript (XIST) RNA, a non-coding RNA known to coat Xi and to participate in the initiation of its inactivation during early embryogenesis. Cells lacking wild- type BRCA1 show abnormalities in Xi, including lack of proper XIST RNA localization. Reintroduction of wild-type, but not mutant, BRCA1 can correct this defect in XIST localization in these cells. Depletion of BRCA1 in female diploid cells led to a defect in proper XIST localization on Xi and in the development of normal Xi heterchromatic superstructure. Moreover, depletion of BRCA1 led to an increased likelihood of re-expression of a green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter gene embedded on Xi. Taken together, these findings are consistent with a model in which BRCA1 function contributes to the maintenance of proper Xi heterochromatin superstructure. Although the data imply a novel gender-specific consequence of BRCA1 loss, the relevance of the BRCA1/Xi function to the tumour suppressor activity of BRCA1 remains unclear and needs to be tested.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Non‑Coding Rnas XIST and MALAT1 Hijack the PD‑L1 Regulatory Signaling Pathway in Breast Cancer Subtypes
    ONCOLOGY LETTERS 22: 593, 2021 Long non‑coding RNAs XIST and MALAT1 hijack the PD‑L1 regulatory signaling pathway in breast cancer subtypes AMANY SAMIR1, REDA ABDEL TAWAB2 and HEND M. EL TAYEBI1 1Molecular Pharmacology Research Group, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, German University in Cairo, Cairo 11835; 2Department of General Surgery, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11772, Egypt Received July 18, 2020; Accepted January 14, 2021 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2021.12854 Abstract. Long non‑coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have attracted presence of lncRNAs. Therefore, the results of the present widespread attention as potential biological and patho‑ study indicated that although miR‑182‑5p exhibited an onco‑ logical regulators. lncRNAs are involved in several biological genic effect, XIST exerted a dominant effect on the regulation processes in cancer. Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is of the PD‑L1 signaling pathway via the inhibition of the onco‑ characterized by strong heterogeneity and aggressiveness. At genic function of MALAT1. present, the implication of microRNAs (miRs) and lncRNAs in immunotherapy has been poorly studied. Nevertheless, Introduction the blockade of immune checkpoints, particularly that of the programmed cell‑death protein‑1/programmed cell‑death In the context of tumor biology, the six hallmarks of cancer ligand‑1 (PD‑L1) axis, is considered as a principle approach in have been proposed to be associated with progressively breast cancer (BC) therapy. The present study aimed to inves‑ growing tumors and to be responsible for the complexity of tigate the interaction between immune‑modulatory upstream neoplastic diseases, and these are limitless replicative poten‑ signaling pathways of the PD‑L1 transcript that could enhance tial, evading apoptosis, self‑sufficiency in growth signals, personalized targeted therapy.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Coding RNA: X-Chromosome Inactivation Unravelled
    RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology | AOP, published online 8 May 2015; doi:10.1038/nrm3998 NON-CODING RNA X-chromosome inactivation unravelled The long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) specific and reproducible set of ten suggesting that SAFA acts to localize Xist (X inactive-specific transcript) is proteins that directly interact with Xist to genomic DNA. Depleting required for the transcriptional silenc- Xist. Of these proteins, knocking Xist binds to SHARP led to the retention of Pol II ing of one X chromosome in each cell, down the genes encoding scaffold SHARP to at Xist-coated X chromosomes, in a process known as X-chromosome attachment factor A (SAFA; also recruit SMRT indicating that SHARP might be inactivation (XCI) that occurs during known as HNRNPU), SMRT- and required for initiating transcriptional mammalian female development. HDAC1-associated repressor protein and activate silencing following Xist localization, Owing to technical limitations, little (SHARP; also known as SPEN or HDAC3 … possibly by recruiting the transcrip- is known about the mechanism of MSX2-interacting protein) and resulting in tional co-repressors SMRT and transcriptional silencing during XCI. lamin-B receptor (LBR) largely abol- HDAC3. Indeed, depleting SMRT McHugh et al. now describe using ished the silencing of XCI‑affected gene silencing or HDAC3 (but not other HDACs) RNA antisense purification followed genes in the male ES cells as well as in abrogated Xist-dependent gene by quantitative mass spectrometry differentiating female ES cells. These silencing. Another feature of XCI (RAP–MS) — a novel approach for three proteins are therefore required is the recruitment of the Polycomb identifying proteins that directly for Xist-mediated gene silencing.
    [Show full text]
  • Agonists Regulate the Expression of Stemness and Differentiation Genes in Brain Tumour Stem Cells
    British Journal of Cancer (2012) 106, 1702–1712 & 2012 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved 0007 – 0920/12 www.bjcancer.com PPARg agonists regulate the expression of stemness and differentiation genes in brain tumour stem cells E Pestereva1, S Kanakasabai1 and JJ Bright*,1,2 1 Neuroscience Research Laboratory, Methodist Research Institute, Indiana University Health, 1800 North Capitol Avenue, Noyes Building E504C, 2 Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA BACKGROUND: Brain tumour stem cells (BTSCs) are a small population of cancer cells that exhibit self-renewal, multi-drug resistance, and recurrence properties. We have shown earlier that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARg) agonists inhibit the expansion of BTSCs in T98G and U87MG glioma. In this study, we analysed the influence of PPARg agonists on the expression of stemness and differentiation genes in BTSCs. METHODS: The BTSCs were isolated from T98G and DB29 glioma cells, and cultured in neurobasal medium with epidermal growth factor þ basic fibroblast growth factor. Proliferation was measured by WST-1 (4-[3-(4-iodophenyl)-2-(4-nitrophenyl)-2 H-5- tetrazolio]-1,3-benzene disulphonate) and 3H thymidine uptake assays, and gene expression was analysed by quantitative reverse– transcription PCR and Taqman array. The expression of CD133, SRY box 2, and nanog homeobox (Nanog) was also evaluated by western blotting, immunostaining, and flow cytometry. 12,14 RESULTS: We found that PPARg agonists, ciglitazone and 15-deoxy-D -ProstaglandinJ2, inhibited cell viability and proliferation of þ T98G- and DB29-BTSCs. The PPARg agonists reduced the expansion of CD133 BTSCs and altered the expression of stemness and differentiation genes.
    [Show full text]
  • Reprogramming Capacity of Nanog Is Functionally Conserved in Vertebrates and Resides in a Unique Homeodomain Thorold W
    Reprogramming capacity of Nanog is functionally conserved in vertebrates and resides in a unique homeodomain Thorold W. Theunissen, Yael Costa, Aliaksandra Radzisheuskaya, A., Anouk L. van Oosten, Fabrice Lavial, Bertrand Pain, L. Filipe C. Castro Castro, José C. R. Silva, J. C. R. To cite this version: Thorold W. Theunissen, Yael Costa, Aliaksandra Radzisheuskaya, A., Anouk L. van Oosten, Fabrice Lavial, et al.. Reprogramming capacity of Nanog is functionally conserved in vertebrates and resides in a unique homeodomain. Development (Cambridge, England), Company of Biologists, 2011, 138 (22), pp.4853-4865. 10.1242/dev.068775. hal-02644461 HAL Id: hal-02644461 https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02644461 Submitted on 28 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - ShareAlike| 4.0 International License DEVELOPMENT AND STEM CELLS RESEARCH ARTICLE 4853 Development 138, 4853-4865 (2011) doi:10.1242/dev.068775 © 2011. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd Reprogramming capacity of Nanog is functionally conserved in vertebrates and resides in a unique homeodomain Thorold W. Theunissen1, Yael Costa1, Aliaksandra Radzisheuskaya1, Anouk L. van Oosten1, Fabrice Lavial2, Bertrand Pain3, L.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Functions of Natural Antisense Transcripts Andreas Werner
    Werner BMC Biology 2013, 11:31 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/11/31 COMMENTARY Open Access Biological functions of natural antisense transcripts Andreas Werner Abstract The most common meaning of the term 'antisense tran- script' refers to a protein coding sense transcript and a In theory, the human genome is large enough to fully processed (capped, polyadenylated) antisense RNA keep its roughly 20,000 genes well separated. In with complementarity in exonic regions (Figure 1). The practice, genes are clustered; even more puzzling, in key issue of whether the antisense transcripts act as ex- many cases both DNA strands of a protein coding quisitely specific gene regulators or are simply transcrip- gene are transcribed. The resulting natural antisense tional waste that a cell has learned to live with is still a transcripts can be a blessing and curse, as many matter of controversy [2]. However, a study published in appreciate, or simply transcriptional trash, as others BMC Genomics reports conservation of natural antisense believe. Widespread evolutionary conservation, as transcripts at a large scale between human, rat and mouse, recently demonstrated, is a good indicator for which strongly suggests that there is biological sense to potential biological functions of natural antisense having antisense transcripts [3]. transcripts. See research article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/ Regulatory antisense transcripts 1471-2164/14/243 The most convincing way to demonstrate the biologi- cal significance of an antisense transcript is to interfere with its expression and demonstrate phenotypic conse- By the mid-1980s antisense transcription in mammalian quences or altered expression levels of the sense tran- genomes had already been described by a few isolated script.
    [Show full text]
  • Thoughts About SLC16A2, TSIX and XIST Gene Like Sites in the Human Genome and a Potential Role in Cellular Chromosome Counting Martina Rinčić1, Ivan Y
    Rinčić et al. Molecular Cytogenetics (2016) 9:56 DOI 10.1186/s13039-016-0271-7 HYPOTHESIS Open Access Thoughts about SLC16A2, TSIX and XIST gene like sites in the human genome and a potential role in cellular chromosome counting Martina Rinčić1, Ivan Y. Iourov2,3,4 and Thomas Liehr5* Abstract Background: Chromosome counting is a process in which cells determine somehow their intrinsic chromosome number(s). The best-studied cellular mechanism that involves chromosome counting is ‘chromosome-kissing’ and X-chromosome inactivation (XCI) mechanism. It is necessary for the well-known dosage compensation between the genders in mammals to balance the number of active X-chromosomes (Xa) with regard to diploid set of autosomes. At the onset of XCI, two X-chromosomes are coming in close proximity and pair physically by a specific segment denominated X-pairing region (Xpr) that involves the SLC16A2 gene. Results: An Ensembl BLAST search for human and mouse SLC16A2/Slc16a2 homologues revealed, that highly similar sequences can be found at almost each chromosome in the corresponding genomes. Additionally, a BLAST search for SLC16A2/TSIX/XIST (genes responsible for XCI) reveled that “SLC16A2/TSIX/XIST like sequences” cover equally all chromosomes, too. With respect to this we provide following hypotheses. Hypotheses: If a single genomic region containing the SLC16A2 gene on X-chromosome is responsible for maintaining “balanced” active copy numbers, it is possible that similar sequences or gene/s have the same function on other chromosomes (autosomes). SLC16A2 like sequences on autosomes could encompass evolutionary older, but functionally active key regions for chromosome counting in early embryogenesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Dosage Compensation∗ a Mechanism to Equalize X-Linked Gene Products Between the Sexes
    GENERAL ARTICLE Dosage Compensation∗ A Mechanism to Equalize X-linked Gene Products Between the Sexes Rajiva Raman The sex chromosomes evolved from a pair of autosomes that deviated over a period of time, with one chromosome losing most of its genes. In many animal groups, females have two X-chromosomes—a large chromosome with numerous genes. Males have one X and a Y chromosome, which has lost most genes except those involved in sex determination and fertility. Thus males are effectively monosomic for the X-chromosome. Monosomy being lethal for other chromosomes, organisms Rajiva Raman had his evolved a mechanism called ‘dosage compensation’ (DC) which university education from quantitatively equalizes X-linked gene products between the Banaras Hindu University. After his retirement from the sexes, compensating for their numerical disparity (dosage). Department of Zoology at Best studied in Drosophila, Caenorhabditis elegans, and mam- BHU as Professor, he is now mals, different species adopt different mechanisms of DC. In serving in the same Drosophila, genes on the male X-chromosome are twice as ac- department as Distinguished Professor. He is also the tive as on each X-chromosome in females. In C. elegans, DC Senior Scientist of the Indian is achieved by the lowered activity of each X-chromosome in National Science Academy. XX individuals vis-a-vis the male X. In mammals, the inac- He has a teaching experience tivation of an entire X-chromosome in the female results in of nearly 40 years. the parity between the two sexes. Despite the difference in gross mechanisms, the molecular processes achieving DC are uniform due to chromatin modifications (histone acetylation, methylation, and DNA methylation) and synthesis of various noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs ).
    [Show full text]
  • Small Rnas and the Regulation of Cis-Natural Antisense Transcripts in Arabidopsis
    UC Riverside UC Riverside Previously Published Works Title Small RNAs and the regulation of cis-natural antisense transcripts in Arabidopsis Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/66p3c9bz Journal BMC Molecular Biology, 9 ISSN 1471-2199 Authors Jin, Hailing Vacic, Vladimir Girke, Thomas et al. Publication Date 2008 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California BMC Molecular Biology BioMed Central Research article Open Access Small RNAs and the regulation of cis-natural antisense transcripts in Arabidopsis Hailing Jin*1, Vladimir Vacic2, Thomas Girke3, Stefano Lonardi4 and Jian- Kang Zhu*3 Address: 1Departments of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Center for Plant Cell Biology and Institute for Integrative Genome Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA, 2Computer Science and Engineering, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA, 3Botany and Plant Sciences, Center for Plant Cell Biology and Institute for Integrative Genome Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA and 4Computer Science and Engineering, Center for Plant Cell Biology and Institute for Integrative Genome Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA Email: Hailing Jin* - [email protected]; Vladimir Vacic - [email protected]; Thomas Girke - [email protected]; Stefano Lonardi - [email protected]; Jian-Kang Zhu* - [email protected] * Corresponding authors Published: 14 January 2008 Received: 30 May 2007 Accepted: 14 January 2008 BMC Molecular Biology 2008, 9:6 doi:10.1186/1471-2199-9-6 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2199/9/6 © 2008 Jin et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
    [Show full text]
  • Antisense Transcription Licenses Nascent Transcripts to Mediate Transcriptional Gene Silencing
    Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on October 3, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Antisense transcription licenses nascent transcripts to mediate transcriptional gene silencing Yunkun Dang,1,4 Jiasen Cheng,2,4 Xianyun Sun,3 Zhipeng Zhou,1 and Yi Liu1 1Department of Physiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas 75390, USA; 2State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology, College of Plant Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China; 3State Key Laboratory of Mycology, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, ZhongGuanCun, Beijing 100080, China In eukaryotes, antisense transcription can regulate sense transcription by induction of epigenetic modifications. We showed previously that antisense transcription triggers Dicer-independent siRNA (disiRNA) production and dis- iRNA locus DNA methylation (DLDM) in Neurospora crassa. Here we show that the conserved exonuclease ERI-1 (enhanced RNAi-1) is a critical component in this process. Antisense transcription and ERI-1 binding to target RNAs are necessary and sufficient to trigger DLDM. Convergent transcription causes stalling of RNA polymerase II during transcription, which permits ERI-1 to bind nascent RNAs in the nucleus and recruit a histone methyltransferase complex that catalyzes chromatin modifications. Furthermore, we show that, in the cytoplasm, ERI-1 targets hundreds of transcripts from loci without antisense transcription to regulate RNA stability. Together, our results demonstrate a critical role for transcription kinetics in long noncoding RNA-mediated epigenetic modifications and identify ERI-1 as an important regulator of cotranscriptional gene silencing and post-transcriptional RNA metabolism. [Keywords: DNA methylation; Neurospora; antisense transcription; gene silencing; small RNA] Supplemental material is available for this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: Epigenesis and Genetic Regulation
    © 1998, Gregory Carey Chapter 4: Epigenesis - 1 Chapter 4: Epigenesis and Genetic Regulation Introduction Virtually every cell in your body contains all the genetic information about making a complete human being that would be your identical twin.1 This fact makes cloning you a theoretical possibility. A mad geneticist could try this by extracting the DNA from one of your cells, placing it into the nucleus of a human egg where the DNA has been removed, inducing the egg to start dividing, and then inserting it into the uterus of a woman. If the resulting zygote were viable, the organism would be your identical twin, albeit in a different phase of the life cycle. But if every cell has the same genetic code, then why are some cells liver cells while others are neurons? Another problem arises from the consideration of cell division. You and I begin as a single fertilized egg. This egg divides into two cells that contain the same genetic material. These two genetically identical cells each divide, giving four genetically identical cells; these four divide, giving eight and so on. Why were our parents not rewarded for nine months of pregnancy by bouncing, seven pound blobs of identical cells? Although the answers for these questions are complicated and not well understood, a major reason is that genes are differentially expressed in some tissues and are also regulated over time even within the same tissue. To oversimplify, even though a liver cell has all the genetic information to make a neuron, only those “liver cell” genes are © 1998, Gregory Carey Chapter 4: Epigenesis - 2 working in the liver.
    [Show full text]