Interdependence of PRC1 and PRC2 for recruitment to Polycomb Response Elements

Polycomb Group (PcG) proteins are epigenetic repressors essential for control of development and cell differentiation. They form multiple complexes of which PRC1 and PRC2 are evolutionary conserved and obligatory for repression. The targeting of PRC1 and PRC2 is poorly understood and was proposed to be hierarchical and involve tri-methylation of histone H3 (H3K27me3) and/or monoubiquitylation of histone H2A (H2AK118ub). Here, we present a strict test of this hypothesis using the Drosophila model. We discover that neither H3K27me3 nor H2AK118ub is required for targeting PRC complexes to Polycomb Response Elements (PREs). We find that PRC1 can bind PREs in the absence of PRC2 but at many PREs PRC2 requires PRC1 to be targeted. We show that one role of H3K27me3 is to allow PcG complexes anchored at PREs to interact with surrounding chromatin. In contrast, the bulk of H2AK118ub is unrelated to PcG repression. These findings radically change our view of how PcG repression is targeted and suggest that PRC1 and PRC2 can communicate independently of histone modifications.     

Independent domains for recruitment of PRC1 and PRC2 by human XIST

XIST establishes inactivation across its chromosome of origin, even when expressed from autosomal transgenes. To identify the regions of human XIST essential for recruiting heterochromatic marks we generated a series of overlapping deletions in an autosomal inducible XIST transgene present in 8p of the HT1080 male fibrosarcoma cell line. We examined the ability of each construct to enrich its unified XIST territory with the histone marks established by PRC1 and PRC2 as well as the heterochromatin factors MacroH2A and SMCHD1. Chromatin enrichment of ubH2A by PRC1 required four distinct regions of XIST, and these were completely distinct from the two domains crucial for enrichment of H3K27me3 by PRC2. Both the domains required, as well as the impact of PRC1 and PRC2 inhibitors, suggest that PRC1 is required for SMCHD1 while PRC2 function is necessary for MacroH2A recruitment, although incomplete overlap of regions implicates roles for additional factors. This cooperativity between factors contributes to the requirement for multiple separate domains being required for each feature examined. The independence of the PRC1/PRC2 pathways was observed when XIST was expressed both autosomally or from the X chromosome suggesting that these observations are not purely a result of the context in which XIST operates. Although independent domains were required for the PRC1 and PRC2 pathways overall all regions tested were important for some aspect of XIST functionality, demonstrating both modularity and cooperativity across the XIST lncRNA.     

Cooperative DNA looping by PRC2 complexes

Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) is an essential protein complex that silences gene expression via post-translational modifications of chromatin. This paper combined homology modeling, atomistic and coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations, and single-molecule force spectroscopy experiments to characterize both its full-length structure and PRC2-DNA interactions. Using free energy calculations with a newly parameterized protein-DNA force field, we studied a total of three potential PRC2 conformations and their impact on DNA binding and bending. Consistent with cryo-EM studies, we found that EZH2, a core subunit of PRC2, provides the primary interface for DNA binding, and its curved surface can induce DNA bending. Our simulations also predicted the C2 domain of the SUZ12 subunit to contact DNA. Multiple PRC2 complexes bind with DNA cooperatively via allosteric communication through the DNA, leading to a hairpin-like looped configuration. Single-molecule experiments support PRC2-mediated DNA looping and the role of AEBP2 in regulating such loop formation. The impact of AEBP2 can be partly understood from its association with the C2 domain, blocking C2 from DNA binding. Our study suggests that accessory proteins may regulate the genomic location of PRC2 by interfering with its DNA interactions.     

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.     

Competition between PRC2.1 and 2.2 subcomplexes regulates PRC2 chromatin occupancy in human stem cells

1. Download : Download high-res image (122KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Recruitment of PRC1 function at the initiation of X inactivation independent of PRC2 and silencing

In mammals X inactivation is initiated by expression of Xist RNA and involves the recruitment of Polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1) and 2 (PRC2), which mediate chromosome-wide ubiquitination of histone H2A and methylation of histone H3, respectively. Here, we show that PRC1 recruitment by Xist RNA is independent of gene silencing. We find that Eed is required for the recruitment of the canonical PRC1 proteins Mph1 and Mph2 by Xist. However, functional Ring1b is recruited by Xist and mediates ubiquitination of histone H2A in Eed deficient embryonic stem (ES) cells, which lack histone H3 lysine 27 tri-methylation. Xist expression early in ES cell differentiation establishes a chromosomal memory, which allows efficient H2A ubiquitination in differentiated cells and is independent of silencing and PRC2. Our data show that Xist recruits PRC1 components by both PRC2 dependent and independent modes and in the absence of PRC2 function is sufficient for the establishment of Polycomb-based memory systems in X inactivation.     

PRC1 and PRC2 are not required for targeting of H2A.Z to developmental genes in embryonic stem cells

The essential histone variant H2A.Z localises to both active and silent chromatin sites. In embryonic stem cells (ESCs), H2A.Z is also reported to co-localise with polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) at developmentally silenced genes. The mechanism of H2A.Z targeting is not clear, but a role for the PRC2 component Suz12 has been suggested. Given this association, we wished to determine if polycomb functionally directs H2A.Z incorporation in ESCs. We demonstrate that the PRC1 component Ring1B interacts with multiple complexes in ESCs. Moreover, we show that although the genomic distribution of H2A.Z co-localises with PRC2, Ring1B and with the presence of CpG islands, H2A.Z still blankets polycomb target loci in the absence of Suz12, Eed (PRC2) or Ring1B (PRC1). Therefore we conclude that H2A.Z accumulates at developmentally silenced genes in ESCs in a polycomb independent manner.     

Cancer Cells Hijack PRC2 to Modify Multiple Cytokine Pathways

Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2) is an epigenetic regulator induced in many cancers. It is thought to drive tumorigenesis by repressing division, stemness, and/or developmental regulators. Cancers evade immune detection, and diverse immune regulators are perturbed in different tumors. It is unclear how such cell-specific effects are coordinated. Here, we show a profound and cancer-selective role for PRC2 in repressing multiple cytokine pathways. We find that PRC2 represses hundreds of IFNγ stimulated genes (ISGs), cytokines and cytokine receptors. This target repertoire is significantly broadened in cancer vs non-cancer cells, and is distinct in different cancer types. PRC2 is therefore a higher order regulator of the immune program in cancer cells. Inhibiting PRC2 with either RNAi or EZH2 inhibitors activates cytokine/cytokine receptor promoters marked with bivalent H3K27me3/H3K4me3 chromatin, and augments responsiveness to diverse immune signals. PRC2 inhibition rescues immune gene induction even in the absence of SWI/SNF, a tumor suppressor defective in ~20% of human cancers. This novel PRC2 function in tumor cells could profoundly impact the mechanism of action and efficacy of EZH2 inhibitors in cancer treatment.     

Arabidopsis MSI1 connects LHP1 to PRC2 complexes

Polycomb group (PcG) proteins form essential epigenetic memory systems for controlling gene expression during development in plants and animals. However, the mechanism of plant PcG protein functions remains poorly understood. Here, we probed the composition and function of plant Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2). This work established the fact that all known plant PRC2 complexes contain MSI1, a homologue of Drosophila p55. While p55 is not essential for the in vitro enzymatic activity of PRC2, plant MSI1 was required for the functions of the EMBRYONIC FLOWER and the VERNALIZATION PRC2 complexes including trimethylation of histone H3 Lys27 (H3K27) at the target chromatin, as well as gene repression and establishment of competence to flower. We found that MSI1 serves to link PRC2 to LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN 1 (LHP1), a protein that binds H3K27me3 in vitro and in vivo and is required for a functional plant PcG system. The LHP1–MSI1 interaction forms a positive feedback loop to recruit PRC2 to chromatin that carries H3K27me3. Consequently, this can provide a mechanism for the faithful inheritance of local epigenetic information through replication.     

PRC2 during vertebrate organogenesis: a complex in transition

During organogenesis, tissues expand in size and eventually acquire consistent ratios of cells with dazzling diversity in morphology and function. During this process progenitor cells exit the cell cycle and execute differentiation programs through extensive genetic reprogramming that involves the silencing of proliferation genes and the activation of differentiation genes in a step-wise temporal manner. Recent years have witnessed expansion in our understanding of the epigenetic mechanisms that contribute to cellular differentiation and maturation during organ development, as this is a crucial step toward advancing regenerative therapy research for many intractable disorders. Among such epigenetic programs, the developmental roles of the polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2), a chromatin remodeling complex that mediates silencing of gene expression, have been under intensive examination. This review summarizes recent findings of how PRC2 functions to regulate the transition from proliferation to differentiation during organogenesis and discusses some aspects of the remaining questions associated with its regulation and mechanisms of action.     

PRC Bisection Tests

This communication presents a new method for evaluating phase response curves (PRCs). A PRC describes the phase shifts produced in an oscillator by stimuli applied at different initial phase‐states of that oscillator. In the PRC bisection tests, we repeatedly cut in half the circular distribution of the initial phase‐states of the oscillator when stimuli are given. Empirically, we locate that optimal diameter which best bisects the circular distribution of phase responses into arcs of relative phase advance and phase delay. We compute a D score reflecting the success of the best bisection. The null hypothesis of a random distribution of phase responses by initial phase is tested with a Monte Carlo procedure, which computes D_r scores from random combinations of phase shifts with initial phases, thus determining the probability, given the null hypothesis, that the observed D score was from a random distribution. The bisection procedure can be extended to examine whether stronger phase shifts are produced in one phase response curve than in contrasting curves. Also, the bisection procedure yields an estimate of the inflection point of the phase response curve. A method is given to estimate the power of the PRC bisection test.