Search

Polycomb group proteins form two main complexes, PRC2 and PRC1, which generally coregulate their target genes. Here we show that PRC1 components act as neoplastic tumor suppressors independently of PRC2 function. By mapping the distribution of PRC1 components and trimethylation of histone H3 at Lys27 (H3K27me3) across the genome, we identify a large set of genes that acquire PRC1 in the absence of H3K27me3 in Drosophila larval tissues. These genes massively outnumber canonical targets and are mainly involved in the regulation of cell proliferation, signaling and polarity. Alterations in PRC1 components specifically deregulate this set of genes, whereas canonical targets are derepressed in both PRC1 and PRC2 mutants. In human embryonic stem cells, PRC1 components colocalize with H3K27me3 as in Drosophila embryos, whereas in differentiated cell types they are selectively recruited to a large set of proliferation and signaling-associated genes that lack H3K27me3, suggesting that the redeployment of PRC1 components during development is evolutionarily conserved.

Summary: Metazoan genomes are partitioned into modular chromosomal domains containing active or repressive chromatin. In flies, Polycomb group (PcG) response elements (PREs) recruit PHO and other DNA-binding factors and act as nucleation sites for the formation of Polycomb repressive domains. The sequence specificity of PREs is not well understood. Here, we use comparative epigenomics and transgenic assays to show that Drosophila domain organization and PRE specification are evolutionarily conserved despite significant cis-element divergence within Polycomb domains, whereas cis-element evolution is strongly correlated with transcription factor binding divergence outside of Polycomb domains. Cooperative interactions of PcG complexes and their recruiting factor PHO stabilize PHO recruitment to low-specificity sequences. Consistently, PHO recruitment to sites within Polycomb domains is stabilized by PRC1. These data suggest that cooperative rather than hierarchical interactions among low-affinity sequences, DNA-binding factors, and the Polycomb machinery are giving rise to specific and strongly conserved 3D structures in Drosophila. : Schuettengruber et al. present an extensive comparative epigenomics data set, providing new insights into cis-driven versus buffered evolution of Polycomb recruitment and Polycomb domain specificity. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing and transgenic assays, they demonstrate an extremely high conservation of Polycomb repressive domains in five Drosophila species. Using Hi-C and knockout experiments, they challenge the standard hierarchical Polycomb recruitment model and demonstrate that cooperative rather than hierarchical interactions among DNA motifs, transcription factors, and Polycomb group complexes define Polycomb domains.

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins dynamically define cellular identities through epigenetic repression of key developmental genes. PcG target gene repression can be stabilized through the interaction in the nucleus at PcG foci. Here, we report the results of a high-resolution microscopy genome-wide RNAi screen that identifies 129 genes that regulate the nuclear organization of Pc foci. Candidate genes include PcG components and chromatin factors, as well as many protein-modifying enzymes, including components of the SUMOylation pathway. In the absence of SUMO, Pc foci coagulate into larger aggregates. Conversely, loss of function of the SUMO peptidase Velo disperses Pc foci. Moreover, SUMO and Velo colocalize with PcG proteins at PREs, and Pc SUMOylation affects its chromatin targeting, suggesting that the dynamic regulation of Pc SUMOylation regulates PcG-mediated silencing by modulating the kinetics of Pc binding to chromatin as well as its ability to form Polycomb foci.

Topoisomerase I (Top1) is a key enzyme in functioning at the interface between DNA replication, transcription and mRNA maturation. Here, we show that Top1 suppresses genomic instability in mammalian cells by preventing a conflict between transcription and DNA replication. Using DNA combing and ChIP (chromatin immunoprecipitation)-on-chip, we found that Top1-deficient cells accumulate stalled replication forks and chromosome breaks in S phase, and that breaks occur preferentially at gene-rich regions of the genome. Notably, these phenotypes were suppressed by preventing the formation of RNA-DNA hybrids (R-loops) during transcription. Moreover, these defects could be mimicked by depletion of the splicing factor ASF/SF2 (alternative splicing factor/splicing factor 2), which interacts functionally with Top1. Taken together, these data indicate that Top1 prevents replication fork collapse by suppressing the formation of R-loops in an ASF/SF2-dependent manner. We propose that interference between replication and transcription represents a major source of spontaneous replication stress, which could drive genomic instability during the early stages of tumorigenesis.

Maintenance of genome integrity relies on surveillance mechanisms that detect and signal arrested replication forks. Although evidence from budding yeast indicates that the DNA replication checkpoint (DRC) is primarily activated by single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), studies in higher eukaryotes have implicated primer ends in this process. To identify factors that signal primed ssDNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we have screened a collection of checkpoint mutants for their ability to activate the DRC, using the repression of late origins as readout for checkpoint activity. This quantitative analysis reveals that neither RFC(Rad24) and the 9-1-1 clamp nor the alternative clamp loader RFC(Elg1) is required to signal paused forks. In contrast, we found that RFC(Ctf18) is essential for the Mrc1-dependent activation of Rad53 and for the maintenance of paused forks. These data identify RFC(Ctf18) as a key DRC mediator, potentially bridging Mrc1 and primed ssDNA to signal paused forks.