Telomere fusion in Drosophila: The role of subtelomeric chromatin

Drosophila telomeres are maintained by transposition to chromosome ends of the HeT-A, TART and TAHRE retrotransposons, collectively designated as HTT. Although all Drosophila telomeres terminate with HTT arrays and are capped by the terminin complex, they differ in the type of subtelomeric chromatin. The HTT sequences of YS, YL, XR, and 4L are juxtaposed to constitutive heterochromatin, while the HTTs of the other telomeres are linked to either the TAS repeat-associated chromatin (XL, 2L, 2R, 3L, 3R) or to the specialized 4R chromatin. We found that mutations in pendolino (peo) cause (telomeric fusions) that preferentially involve the heterochromatin-associated telomeres (Ha-telomeres), a telomeric fusion pattern never observed in the other 10 telomere-capping mutants characterized so far. Peo, is homologous to the E2 variant ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes and is required for DNA replication. Our analyses lead us to hypothesize that DNA replication in Peo-depleted cells results in specific fusigenic lesions concentrated in Ha-telomeres. These data provide the first demonstration that subtelomeres can affect telomere fusion.     

The Analysis of Pendolino (peo) Mutants Reveals Differences in the Fusigenic Potential among Drosophila Telomeres

Drosophila telomeres are sequence-independent structures that are maintained by transposition to chromosome ends of three specialized retroelements (HeT-A, TART and TAHRE; collectively designated as HTT) rather than telomerase activity. Fly telomeres are protected by the terminin complex (HOAP-HipHop-Moi-Ver) that localizes and functions exclusively at telomeres and by non-terminin proteins that do not serve telomere-specific functions. Although all Drosophila telomeres terminate with HTT arrays and are capped by terminin, they differ in the type of subtelomeric chromatin; the Y, XR, and 4L HTT are juxtaposed to constitutive heterochromatin, while the XL, 2L, 2R, 3L and 3R HTT are linked to the TAS repetitive sequences; the 4R HTT is associated with a chromatin that has features common to both euchromatin and heterochromatin. Here we show that mutations in pendolino (peo) cause telomeric fusions (TFs). The analysis of several peo mutant combinations showed that these TFs preferentially involve the Y, XR and 4th chromosome telomeres, a TF pattern never observed in the other 10 telomere-capping mutants so far characterized. peo encodes a non-terminin protein homologous to the E2 variant ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes. The Peo protein directly interacts with the terminin components, but peo mutations do not affect telomeric localization of HOAP, Moi, Ver and HP1a, suggesting that the peo-dependent telomere fusion phenotype is not due to loss of terminin from chromosome ends. peo mutants are also defective in DNA replication and PCNA recruitment. However, our results suggest that general defects in DNA replication are unable to induce TFs in Drosophila cells. We thus hypothesize that DNA replication in Peo-depleted cells results in specific fusigenic lesions concentrated in heterochromatin-associated telomeres. Alternatively, it is possible that Peo plays a dual function being independently required for DNA replication and telomere capping.     

Origin-dependent initiation of DNA replication within telomeric sequences

Replication of telomeres requires the action of telomerase, the semi-conservative replication machinery and the stabilization of the replication fork during passage through telomeric DNA. Whether vertebrate telomeres support initiation of replication has not been experimentally addressed. Using Xenopus cell free extracts we established a system to study replication initiation within linear telomeric DNA substrates. We show binding of TRF2 to telomeric DNA, indicating that exogenous DNA exclusively composed of telomeric repeats is recognized by shelterin components. Interaction with telomere binding proteins is not sufficient to prevent a DNA damage response. Notably, we observe regulated assembly of the pre-replicative complex proteins ORC2, MCM6 and Cdc6 to telomeric DNA. Most importantly, we detect origin-dependent replication of telomeric substrates under conditions that inhibit checkpoint activation. These results indicate that pre-replicative complexes assemble within telomeric DNA and can be converted into functional origins.     

Structure of telomeric chromatin in <Emphasis Type="Italic">Drosophila</Emphasis>

The telomeric nucleoprotein complex protects linear chromosome ends from degradation. In contrast to most eukaryotes in which telomerase is responsible for telomere elongation by adding short DNA repeats synthesized using an RNA template, the telomere elongation in Drosophila involves transposition of specialized telomeric retroelements onto chromosome ends. Proteins that bind telomeric and subtelomeric sequences form specific telomeric chromatin, and its components are highly conserved among organisms employing different mechanisms of telomere elongation. This review is focused on the analysis of components of the Drosophila telomeric complex and its comparison with telomeric proteins in telomerase-encoded organisms. Structural and functional analysis of Drosophila telomeres suggests that there are three distinct chromatin regions: protective structure at the very end of chromosome (cap), subtelomeric region which is characterized by condensed chromatin structure, and the terminal retrotransposon array whose expression is under the control of an RNAi (RNA interference)-based mechanism. The link between RNAi and telomeric chromatin formation in germinal tissues is discussed.     

HipHop interacts with HOAP and HP1 to protect Drosophila telomeres in a sequence‐independent manner

Telomeres prevent chromosome ends from being repaired as double‐strand breaks (DSBs). Telomere identity in Drosophila is determined epigenetically with no sequence either necessary or sufficient. To better understand this sequence‐independent capping mechanism, we isolated proteins that interact with the HP1/ORC‐associated protein (HOAP) capping protein, and identified HipHop as a subunit of the complex. Loss of one protein destabilizes the other and renders telomeres susceptible to fusion. Both HipHop and HOAP are enriched at telomeres, where they also interact with the conserved HP1 protein. We developed a model telomere lacking repetitive sequences to study the distribution of HipHop, HOAP and HP1 using chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP). We discovered that they occupy a broad region >10 kb from the chromosome end and their binding is independent of the underlying DNA sequence. HipHop and HOAP are both rapidly evolving proteins yet their telomeric deposition is under the control of the conserved ATM and Mre11–Rad50–Nbs (MRN) proteins that modulate DNA structures at telomeres and at DSBs. Our characterization of HipHop and HOAP reveals functional analogies between the Drosophila proteins and subunits of the yeast and mammalian capping complexes, implicating conservation in epigenetic capping mechanisms.     

Timeless tunes: Replicating happy endings

Comment on: Leman AR, et al. Cell Cycle 2012; 11:2337-47.DNA replication is at the heart of the inheritance of genetic material. A single replication fork can progress through hundreds of kilobases of DNA, melting parental double-stranded DNA and leaving newly synthesized strands in its wake. A beautiful illustration showing how the replication machinery accomplishes this complex task is one of the triumphs of molecular biology. However, it is known that DNA replication is not always as processive as the textbooks suggest. Specifically, the rate of fork progression varies depending on the regions being replicated, and the replication fork even stalls in some circumstances, during replication of heterochromatin or damaged DNA, for example. A stalled replication fork has two fates. It may restart DNA replication, or it may collapse after prolonged stalling. A collapsed replication fork is particularly dangerous for the genome, because the DNA intermediate left by the collapsed fork may form a double-stranded break, a highly mutagenic lesion that can undergo illegitimate recombination. To circumvent replication fork collapse, cells are equipped with specialized proteins that stabilize the stalled replication fork. Timeless and Tipin are highly conserved in eukaryotes. from yeast to humans, and form a complex to protect stalled replication forks.In a paper published in Cell Cycle, Noguchi and his group investigated how Timeless plays a role in telomere replication in human cells.¹ Telomeres consist of tandem arrays of short repetitive DNA (TTAGGG/CCCTAA in mammals) at the ends of chromosomes and numerous associated proteins. Telomeres are essential for the stable maintenance of genomic DNA, because they protect the DNA termini from undergoing accidental recombination and exonuclease attack. Dysfunctional telomeres lead to genetic instability that eventually results in senescence and cancer development. Because of the heterochromatic nature of telomeres, it has been recognized that telomere DNA is one of the genomic regions that impede replication fork progression. Indeed, in vitro DNA replication experiments using SV40 DNA, and cell extracts demonstrated that telomere DNA is replicated less efficiently and incurs more fork stalling than non-telomeric DNA.² Moreover, overexpression of telomere-DNA binding protein TRF1 in HeLa cells led to an accumulation of replicating telomeres, consistent with a slower replication rate of telomeres under those circumstance. Furthermore, experiments using TRF1-deleted murine cells showed that TRF1 is essential for efficient telomere DNA replication.³ Collectively, these results confirm that the telomere is a difficult-to-replicate region.There is an apparent contradiction between two earlier studies, however, with TRF1 described as an anti-replication protein in one report² and a pro-replication protein in the other.³ One potential explanation for the inconsistency might be that TRF1 requires other protein(s) to perform its pro-replication function, and the second factor was missing in the TRF1-overexpression experiments. Noguchi and his colleagues investigated this possibility by testing whether Timeless is required for proficient telomere DNA replication.¹ They found that Timeless-knockdown cells displayed telomere length shortening and an increased frequency of dysfunctional telomeres. In vitro replication assays of SV40 DNA revealed that Timeless-depleted extracts supported non-telomere replication proficiently, while telomere replication was inefficient. They then demonstrated that addition of recombinant TRF1 to the replication system slowed telomere replication. Importantly, Timeless depletion and TRF1 addition did not produce additive effects on telomere replication, suggesting that Timeless and TRF1 function in the same pathway. These results suggest a model as described in Figure 1. A replication fork frequently stalls at telomeres because of the molecularly crowded nature of telomeric chromatin. Timeless presumably encounters TRF1 at telomeres and protects the stalled fork from undergoing collapse. In the absence of Timeless, the stalled forks easily collapse, leading to an abrupt shortening of telomeres. Several questions remain to be answered. Given that Timeless moves along the genomic DNA as a component of the replication machinery,⁴ it will be particularly interesting to see how Timeless (or the replication machinery) interacts with telomeric chromatin. In such studies, a dynamic transaction between the regional chromatin at telomeres and the replication machinery may be revealed.Open in a separate windowFigure 1. Hard life at telomeres. (A) Mammalian telomeres consist of repetitive DNA that potentially forms higher-ordered structures [G-quartet(G4)-DNA] and numerous proteins, including telomere DNA-binding protein TRF1. (B) Replication fork is frequently stalled at telomeres. Overexpressed TRF1 slows down fork progression at the telomere, while endogenous TRF1 together with Timeless protein facilitates it. Timeless protects the stalled replication fork from collapse. (C) Telomeres are unique in that the most distal replication fork is not coupled with another fork progressing inversely. (D) Prolonged fork stalling may lead to the formation of a DNA double-strand break. Because of the lack of another fork compensating the telomere replication (C), the break immediately results in the abrupt single-step shortening of telomere DNAs.     

Telomere-bound TRF1 and TRF2 stall the replication fork at telomeric repeats

Vertebrate telomeres consist of tandem repeats of T₂AG₃ and associated proteins including the telomeric DNA-binding proteins, TRF1 and TRF2. It has been proposed that telomeres assume two interswitchable states, the open state that is accessible to various trans-acting factors and the closed state that excludes those factors. TRF1 and TRF2 are believed to promote the formation of the closed state. However, little is known about how those two states influence DNA replication. We analyzed the effects of TRF1 and TRF2 on telomeric replication both in vitro and in vivo. By exploiting the in vitro replication system of linear SV40 DNA, we found that telomeric repeats are a poor replication template. Moreover, the addition of recombinant TRF1 and TRF2 significantly stalled the replication fork progression at telomeric repeats. When TRF1 was overexpressed in HeLa cells, cells with 4N DNA content were accumulated. Furthermore, cytological analyses revealed that the replication focus overlapped with telomere signals at a significantly higher frequency in TRF1-overexpressing cells than in control cells. The results suggest that TRF1 and TRF2 exert inhibitory effects on replication fork progression.     

Replication timing of large <Emphasis Type="Italic">Sorex granarius</Emphasis> (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Soricidae</Emphasis>, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Eulipotyphla</Emphasis>) telomeres

Previously, we described the unique feature of telomeric regions in Iberian shrew Sorex granarius: its telomeres have two ranges of size, very small (3.8 kb of telomeric repeats on average) and very large discontinuous telomeres (213 kb) interrupted with 18S rDNA. In this study, we have demonstrated extraordinary replication pattern of S. granarius large telomeres that have not been shown before in other studied mammal. Using the ReD-FISH procedure, we observed prolonged, through S period, large telomere replication. Furthermore, revealed ReD-FISH asymmetric signals were probably caused by partial replication of telomeres within an hour of 5-bromodeoxyuridine treatment due to the large size and special organization. We also found that in contrast to the telomeric halo from primary fibroblasts of bovine, mink, and common shrew, telomere halo of S. granarius consists of multiple loops bundled together, some of which contain rDNA. Here, we suggested several replicons firing possibly stochastic in each large telomere. Finally, we performed the TIF assay to reveal DNA damage responses at the telomeres, and along with TIF in nuclei, we found large bodies of telomeric DNA and ?-H2AX in the cytoplasm and on the surface of fibroblasts. We discuss the possibility of additional origin activation together with recombination-dependent replication pathways, mainly homologous recombination including BIR for replication fork stagnation overcoming and further S. granarius large telomere replication.     

Telomeric protein distributions and remodeling through the cell cycle in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, telomeric DNA is protected by a nonnucleosomal protein complex, tethered by the protein Rap1. Rif and Sir proteins, which interact with Rap1p, are thought to have further interactions with conventional nucleosomic chromatin to create a repressive structure that protects the chromosome end. We showed by microarray analysis that Rif1p association with the chromosome ends extends to subtelomeric regions many kilobases internal to the terminal telomeric repeats and correlates strongly with the previously determined genomic footprints of Rap1p and the Sir2-4 proteins in these regions. Although the end-protection function of telomeres is essential for genomic stability, telomeric DNA must also be copied by the conventional DNA replication machinery and replenished by telomerase, suggesting that transient remodeling of the telomeric chromatin might result in distinct protein complexes at different stages of the cell cycle. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation, we monitored the association of Rap1p, Rif1p, Rif2p, and the protein component of telomerase, Est2p, with telomeric DNA through the cell cycle. We provide evidence for dynamic remodeling of these components at telomeres.     

Telomeric chromatin: replicating and wrapping up chromosome ends

Recent advances in our understanding of the specialized chromatin structure at telomeres, the ends of eukaryotic chromosomes, have focused on three separate areas: replication of telomeres through the coordinated action of conventional DNA polymerases and the telomerase enzyme, protection of the chromosome end from DNA damage checkpoint sensors and DNA-repair processes, and the discovery of a novel deacetylase enzyme (Sir2p) required for the establishment and maintenance of telomeric heterochromatin. Although the number of proteins and the complexity of their interactions at telomeres continues to grow, a picture of at least some of the major players and mechanisms underlying telomere replication, end 'capping' and chromatin assembly is beginning to emerge.     

Mammalian DNA2 helicase/nuclease cleaves G‐quadruplex DNA and is required for telomere integrity

Efficient and faithful replication of telomeric DNA is critical for maintaining genome integrity. The G‐quadruplex (G4) structure arising in the repetitive TTAGGG sequence is thought to stall replication forks, impairing efficient telomere replication and leading to telomere instabilities. However, pathways modulating telomeric G4 are poorly understood, and it is unclear whether defects in these pathways contribute to genome instabilities in vivo. Here, we report that mammalian DNA2 helicase/nuclease recognizes and cleaves telomeric G4 in vitro. Consistent with DNA2's role in removing G4, DNA2 deficiency in mouse cells leads to telomere replication defects, elevating the levels of fragile telomeres (FTs) and sister telomere associations (STAs). Such telomere defects are enhanced by stabilizers of G4. Moreover, DNA2 deficiency induces telomere DNA damage and chromosome segregation errors, resulting in tetraploidy and aneuploidy. Consequently, DNA2‐deficient mice develop aneuploidy‐associated cancers containing dysfunctional telomeres. Collectively, our genetic, cytological, and biochemical results suggest that mammalian DNA2 reduces replication stress at telomeres, thereby preserving genome stability and suppressing cancer development, and that this may involve, at least in part, nucleolytic processing of telomeric G4.     

A complex network of interactions governs DNA methylation at telomeric regions

DNA methylation modulates telomere function. In Arabidopsis thaliana, telomeric regions have a bimodal chromatin organization with unmethylated telomeres and methylated subtelomeres. To gain insight into this organization we have generated TAIR10-Tel, a modified version of the Arabidopsis reference genome with additional sequences at most chromosome ends. TAIR10-Tel has allowed us to analyse DNA methylation at nucleotide resolution level in telomeric regions. We have analysed the wild-type strain and mutants that encode inactive versions of all currently known relevant methyltransferases involved in cytosine methylation. These analyses have revealed that subtelomeric DNA methylation extends 1 to 2 kbp from Interstitial Telomeric Sequences (ITSs) that abut or are very near to telomeres. However, DNA methylation drops at the telomeric side of the telomere-subtelomere boundaries and disappears at the inner part of telomeres. We present a comprehensive and integrative model for subtelomeric DNA methylation that should help to decipher the mechanisms that govern the epigenetic regulation of telomeres. This model involves a complex network of interactions between methyltransferases and subtelomeric DNA sequences.     

Euchromatic and heterochromatic domains at Drosophila telomeres.

Noncoding repetitive sequences make up a large portion of eukaryotic genomes, but their function is not well understood. Large blocks of repetitive DNA-forming heterochromatin around the centromeres are required for this region to function properly, but are difficult to analyze. The smaller regions of heterochromatin at the telomeres provide an opportunity to study their DNA and protein composition. Drosophila telomere length is maintained through the targeted transposition of specific non-long terminal repeat retrotransposons to chromosome ends, where they form long tandem arrays. A subterminal telomere-associated sequence (TAS) lies immediately proximal to the terminal-retrotransposon array. Here, we review the experimental support for the heterochromatic features of Drosophila telomeres, and provide evidence that telomeric regions contain 2 distinct chromatin subdomains: TAS, which exhibits features that resemble beta heterochromatin; and the terminal array of retrotransposons, which appears euchromatic. This organization is significantly different from the telomeric organization of other eukaryotes, where the terminal telomerase-generated repeats are often folded in a t-loop structure and become part of the heterochromatin protein complex.     

Budding yeast with human telomeres: a puzzling structure

Telomeres share some common features among eukaryotes, with few exceptions such as the fruit fly Drosophila that uses transposons as telomeres, they consist of G-rich repetitive DNA that is elongated by telomerase and/or alternative pathways depending on recombination. Telomere structure comprises both cis-acting satellite DNA (telomeric DNA) and proteins that interact directly and/or indirectly with the underlying DNA. Telomeric DNAs are surprisingly conserved among the vertebrates and very similar in most eukaryotes, but present some differences in yeast such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The telomeric proteins are more variable although the basic mechanisms which control telomere lengthening and capping are very similar, in fact orthologues of the yeast telomeric proteins, which have been studied first, have been identified in other organisms. Here we describe the structure of human telomeres in budding yeast as compared to canonical yeast and mammalian telomeres taking into consideration the more recent findings highlighting the mechanisms that are responsible for chromosome end protection and lengthening, and the role of chromatin organization in telomere function. This yeast represents a model for the study of mammalian telomeres that could be reconstituted step-by-step in all their components, moreover it could be useful for the assembly of mammalian artificial chromosome.     

The Ctf18 RFC-like complex positions yeast telomeres but does not specify their replication time

Chromosome ends in Saccharomyces cerevisiae are positioned in clusters at the nuclear rim. We report that Ctf18, Ctf8, and Dcc1, the subunits of a Replication Factor C (RFC)-like complex, are essential for the perinuclear positioning of telomeres. In both yeast and mammalian cells, peripheral nuclear positioning of chromatin during G1 phase correlates with late DNA replication. We find that the mislocalized telomeres of ctf18 cells still replicate late, showing that late DNA replication does not require peripheral positioning during G1. The Ku and Sir complexes have been shown to act through separate pathways to position telomeres, but in the absence of Ctf18 neither pathway can act fully to maintain telomere position. Surprisingly CTF18 is not required for Ku or Sir4-mediated peripheral tethering of a nontelomeric chromosome locus. Our results suggest that the Ctf18 RFC-like complex modifies telomeric chromatin to make it competent for normal localization to the nuclear periphery.