Epigenetics: Judge,jury and executioner of stem cell fate

Emerging evidence is shedding light on a large and complex network of epigenetic modifications at play in human stem cells. This “epigenetic landscape” governs the fine-tuning and precision of gene expression programs that define the molecular basis of stem cell pluripotency, differentiation and reprogramming. This review will focus on recent progress in our understanding of the processes that govern this landscape in stem cells, such as histone modification, DNA methylation, alterations of chromatin structure due to chromatin remodeling and non-coding RNA activity. Further investigation into stem cell epigenetics promises to provide novel advances in the diagnosis and treatment of a wide array of human diseases.     

Crosstalk Between DNA and Histones: Tet’s New Role in Embryonic Stem Cells

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are characterized by the expression of an extensive and interconnected network of pluripotency factors which are downregulated in specialized cells. Epigenetic mechanisms, including DNA methylation and histone modifications, are also important in maintaining this pluripotency program in ES cells and in guiding correct differentiation of the developing embryo. Methylation of the cytosine base of DNA blocks gene expression in all cell types and further modifications of methylated cytosine have recently been discovered. These new modifications, putative intermediates in a pathway to erase DNA methylation marks, are catalyzed by the ten-eleven translocation (Tet) proteins, specifically by Tet1 and Tet2 in ES cells. Surprisingly, Tet1 shows repressive along with active effects on gene expression depending on its distribution throughout the genome and co-localization with Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2). PRC2 di- and tri-methylates lysine 27 of histone 3 (H3K27me2/3 activity), marking genes for repression. In ES cells, almost all gene loci containing the repressive H3K27me3 modification also bear the active H3K4me3 modification, creating “bivalent domains” which mark important developmental regulators for timely activation. Incorporation of Tet1 into the bivalent domain paradigm is a new and exciting development in the epigenetics field, and the ramifications of this novel crosstalk between DNA and histone modifications need to be further investigated. This knowledge would aid reprogramming of specialized cells back into pluripotent stem cells and advance understanding of epigenetic perturbations in cancer.     

Chromatin remodeling and bivalent histone modifications in embryonic stem cells

Pluripotent embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are characterized by distinct epigenetic features including a relative enrichment of histone modifications related to active chromatin. Among these is tri‐methylation of lysine 4 on histone H3 (H3K4me3). Several thousands of the H3K4me3‐enriched promoters in pluripotent cells also contain a repressive histone mark, namely H3K27me3, a situation referred to as “bivalency”. While bivalent promoters are not unique to pluripotent cells, they are relatively enriched in these cell types, largely marking developmental and lineage‐specific genes which are silent but poised for immediate action. The H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 modifications are catalyzed by lysine methyltransferases which are usually found within, although not entirely limited to, the Trithorax group (TrxG) and Polycomb group (PcG) protein complexes, respectively, but these do not provide selective bivalent specificity. Recent studies highlight the family of ATP‐dependent chromatin remodeling proteins as regulators of bivalent domains. Here, we discuss bivalency in general, describe the machineries that catalyze bivalent chromatin domains, and portray the emerging connection between bivalency and the action of different families of chromatin remodelers, namely INO80, esBAF, and NuRD, in pluripotent cells. We posit that chromatin remodeling proteins may enable “bivalent specificity”, often selectively acting on, or selectively depleted from, bivalent domains.     

Replication stress,a source of epigenetic aberrations in cancer?

Cancer cells accumulate widespread local and global chromatin changes and the source of this instability remains a key question. Here we hypothesize that chromatin alterations including unscheduled silencing can arise as a consequence of perturbed histone dynamics in response to replication stress. Chromatin organization is transiently disrupted during DNA replication and maintenance of epigenetic information thus relies on faithful restoration of chromatin on the new daughter strands. Acute replication stress challenges proper chromatin restoration by deregulating histone H3 lysine 9 mono‐methylation on new histones and impairing parental histone recycling. This could facilitate stochastic epigenetic silencing by laying down repressive histone marks at sites of fork stalling. Deregulation of replication in response to oncogenes and other tumor‐promoting insults is recognized as a significant source of genome instability in cancer. We propose that replication stress not only presents a threat to genome stability, but also jeopardizes chromatin integrity and increases epigenetic plasticity during tumorigenesis.     

INO80 promotes H2A.Z occupancy to regulate cell fate transition in pluripotent stem cells

The INO80 chromatin remodeler is involved in many chromatin-dependent cellular functions. However, its role in pluripotency and cell fate transition is not fully defined. We examined the impact of Ino80 deletion in the naïve and primed pluripotent stem cells. We found that Ino80 deletion had minimal effect on self-renewal and gene expression in the naïve state, but led to cellular differentiation and de-repression of developmental genes in the transition toward and maintenance of the primed state. In the naïve state, INO80 pre-marked gene promoters that would adopt bivalent histone modifications by H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 upon transition into the primed state. In the primed state, in contrast to its known role in H2A.Z exchange, INO80 promoted H2A.Z occupancy at these bivalent promoters and facilitated H3K27me3 installation and maintenance as well as downstream gene repression. Together, our results identified an unexpected function of INO80 in H2A.Z deposition and gene regulation. We showed that INO80-dependent H2A.Z occupancy is a critical licensing step for the bivalent domains, and thereby uncovered an epigenetic mechanism by which chromatin remodeling, histone variant deposition and histone modification coordinately control cell fate.     

Genomewide analysis of PRC1 and PRC2 occupancy identifies two classes of bivalent domains

In embryonic stem (ES) cells, bivalent chromatin domains with overlapping repressive (H3 lysine 27 tri-methylation) and activating (H3 lysine 4 tri-methylation) histone modifications mark the promoters of more than 2,000 genes. To gain insight into the structure and function of bivalent domains, we mapped key histone modifications and subunits of Polycomb-repressive complexes 1 and 2 (PRC1 and PRC2) genomewide in human and mouse ES cells by chromatin immunoprecipitation, followed by ultra high-throughput sequencing. We find that bivalent domains can be segregated into two classes -- the first occupied by both PRC2 and PRC1 (PRC1-positive) and the second specifically bound by PRC2 (PRC2-only). PRC1-positive bivalent domains appear functionally distinct as they more efficiently retain lysine 27 tri-methylation upon differentiation, show stringent conservation of chromatin state, and associate with an overwhelming number of developmental regulator gene promoters. We also used computational genomics to search for sequence determinants of Polycomb binding. This analysis revealed that the genomewide locations of PRC2 and PRC1 can be largely predicted from the locations, sizes, and underlying motif contents of CpG islands. We propose that large CpG islands depleted of activating motifs confer epigenetic memory by recruiting the full repertoire of Polycomb complexes in pluripotent cells.     

Chromatin proteomics and epigenetic regulatory circuits

Many phenotypic changes of eukaryotic cells due to changes in gene expression depend on alterations in chromatin structure. Processes involved in the alteration of chromatin are diverse and include post-translational modifications of histone proteins, incorporation of specific histone variants, methylation of DNA and ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling. Interconnected with these processes are the localization of chromatin domains within the nuclear architecture and the appearance of various classes of noncoding regulatory RNAs. Recent experiments underscore the role of these processes in influencing diverse biological functions. However, the evidence to date implies the importance of an interplay of all these chromatin-changing functions, generating an epigenetic regulatory circuit that is still not well understood.     

Differences among brain tumor stem cell types and fetal neural stem cells in focal regions of histone modifications and DNA methylation,broad regions of modifications,and bivalent promoters

Background

Aberrational epigenetic marks are believed to play a major role in establishing the abnormal features of cancer cells. Rational use and development of drugs aimed at epigenetic processes requires an understanding of the range, extent, and roles of epigenetic reprogramming in cancer cells. Using ChIP-chip and MeDIP-chip approaches, we localized well-established and prevalent epigenetic marks (H3K27me3, H3K4me3, H3K9me3, DNA methylation) on a genome scale in several lines of putative glioma stem cells (brain tumor stem cells, BTSCs) and, for comparison, normal human fetal neural stem cells (fNSCs).

Results

We determined a substantial “core” set of promoters possessing each mark in every surveyed BTSC cell type, which largely overlapped the corresponding fNSC sets. However, there was substantial diversity among cell types in mark localization. We observed large differences among cell types in total number of H3K9me3+ positive promoters and peaks and in broad modifications (defined as >50 kb peak length) for H3K27me3 and, to a lesser extent, H3K9me3. We verified that a change in a broad modification affected gene expression of CACNG7. We detected large numbers of bivalent promoters, but most bivalent promoters did not display direct overlap of contrasting epigenetic marks, but rather occupied nearby regions of the proximal promoter. There were significant differences in the sets of promoters bearing bivalent marks in the different cell types and few consistent differences between fNSCs and BTSCs.

Conclusions

Overall, our “core set” data establishes sets of potential therapeutic targets, but the diversity in sets of sites and broad modifications among cell types underscores the need to carefully consider BTSC subtype variation in epigenetic therapy. Our results point toward substantial differences among cell types in the activity of the production/maintenance systems for H3K9me3 and for broad regions of modification (H3K27me3 or H3K9me3). Finally, the unexpected diversity in bivalent promoter sets among these multipotent cells indicates that bivalent promoters may play complex roles in the overall biology of these cells. These results provide key information for forming the basis for future rational drug therapy aimed at epigenetic processes in these cells.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2164-15-724) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Chromatin proteomics and epigenetic regulatory circuits

Many phenotypic changes of eukaryotic cells due to changes in gene expression depend on alterations in chromatin structure. Processes involved in the alteration of chromatin are diverse and include post-translational modifications of histone proteins, incorporation of specific histone variants, methylation of DNA and ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling. Interconnected with these processes are the localization of chromatin domains within the nuclear architecture and the appearance of various classes of noncoding regulatory RNAs. Recent experiments underscore the role of these processes in influencing diverse biological functions. However, the evidence to date implies the importance of an interplay of all these chromatin-changing functions, generating an epigenetic regulatory circuit that is still not well understood.     

Genome-Wide Studies Reveal that H3K4me3 Modification in Bivalent Genes Is Dynamically Regulated during the Pluripotent Cell Cycle and Stabilized upon Differentiation

Stem cell phenotypes are reflected by posttranslational histone modifications, and this chromatin-related memory must be mitotically inherited to maintain cell identity through proliferative expansion. In human embryonic stem cells (hESCs), bivalent genes with both activating (H3K4me3) and repressive (H3K27me3) histone modifications are essential to sustain pluripotency. Yet, the molecular mechanisms by which this epigenetic landscape is transferred to progeny cells remain to be established. By mapping genomic enrichment of H3K4me3/H3K27me3 in pure populations of hESCs in G₂, mitotic, and G₁ phases of the cell cycle, we found striking variations in the levels of H3K4me3 through the G₂-M-G₁ transition. Analysis of a representative set of bivalent genes revealed that chromatin modifiers involved in H3K4 methylation/demethylation are recruited to bivalent gene promoters in a cell cycle-dependent fashion. Interestingly, bivalent genes enriched with H3K4me3 exclusively during mitosis undergo the strongest upregulation after induction of differentiation. Furthermore, the histone modification signature of genes that remain bivalent in differentiated cells resolves into a cell cycle-independent pattern after lineage commitment. These results establish a new dimension of chromatin regulation important in the maintenance of pluripotency.