Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages (January 2015)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cosuppression in Drosophila: Gene Silencing of Alcohol dehydrogenase by white-Adh Transgenes Is Polycomb Dependent  Manika Pal-Bhadra, Utpal Bhadra, James.
Advertisements

Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages (April 2006)
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages (November 2007)
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages (May 2010)
Volume 19, Issue 23, Pages (December 2009)
Volume 24, Issue 6, Pages (March 2013)
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages (August 2012)
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages (November 2011)
SAGA Is a General Cofactor for RNA Polymerase II Transcription
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages (February 2011)
Transcriptional Memory in the Drosophila Embryo
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages (January 2014)
Volume 152, Issue 1, Pages (January 2013)
Hyeshik Chang, Jaechul Lim, Minju Ha, V. Narry Kim  Molecular Cell 
Human Senataxin Resolves RNA/DNA Hybrids Formed at Transcriptional Pause Sites to Promote Xrn2-Dependent Termination  Konstantina Skourti-Stathaki, Nicholas J.
John T. Arigo, Kristina L. Carroll, Jessica M. Ames, Jeffry L. Corden 
Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages (February 2008)
Distinct Protein Domains and Expression Patterns Confer Divergent Axon Guidance Functions for Drosophila Robo Receptors  Bettina Spitzweck, Marko Brankatschk,
Volume 50, Issue 6, Pages (June 2013)
Mechanisms of Odor Receptor Gene Choice in Drosophila
The Intracellular Domain of the Frazzled/DCC Receptor Is a Transcription Factor Required for Commissural Axon Guidance  Alexandra Neuhaus-Follini, Greg J.
Splicing-Dependent RNA Polymerase Pausing in Yeast
Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages (April 2001)
Mobile 24 nt Small RNAs Direct Transcriptional Gene Silencing in the Root Meristems of Arabidopsis thaliana  Charles W. Melnyk, Attila Molnar, Andrew.
Joseph Rodriguez, Jerome S. Menet, Michael Rosbash  Molecular Cell 
John T. Arigo, Daniel E. Eyler, Kristina L. Carroll, Jeffry L. Corden 
Hyeshik Chang, Jaechul Lim, Minju Ha, V. Narry Kim  Molecular Cell 
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 9-22 (January 2013)
Daniel F. Tardiff, Scott A. Lacadie, Michael Rosbash  Molecular Cell 
Andrew R. Bassett, Charlotte Tibbit, Chris P. Ponting, Ji-Long Liu 
Shi-Yan Ng, Gireesh K. Bogu, Boon Seng Soh, Lawrence W. Stanton 
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages (November 2012)
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages (March 2015)
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages (July 2013)
Volume 66, Issue 1, Pages e6 (April 2017)
Expression of Alternative Ago2 Isoform Associated with Loss of microRNA-Driven Translational Repression in Mouse Oocytes  Jacob W. Freimer, Raga Krishnakumar,
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages (June 2011)
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages (November 2011)
ELAV, a Drosophila neuron-specific protein, mediates the generation of an alternatively spliced neural protein isoform  Sandhya P. Koushika, Michael J.
Drosophila CRYPTOCHROME Is a Circadian Transcriptional Repressor
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages (October 2014)
Volume 42, Issue 2, Pages e5 (July 2017)
The Snail Family Member Worniu Is Continuously Required in Neuroblasts to Prevent Elav-Induced Premature Differentiation  Sen-Lin Lai, Michael R. Miller,
Volume 124, Issue 5, Pages (March 2006)
insomniac and Cullin-3 Regulate Sleep and Wakefulness in Drosophila
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages (February 2016)
Volume 50, Issue 2, Pages (April 2013)
Volume 21, Issue 9, Pages (November 2017)
Whole-Genome Analysis of Muscle Founder Cells Implicates the Chromatin Regulator Sin3A in Muscle Identity  Krista C. Dobi, Marc S. Halfon, Mary K. Baylies 
Volume 66, Issue 4, Pages e4 (May 2017)
Xudong Wu, Jens Vilstrup Johansen, Kristian Helin  Molecular Cell 
Let-7-Complex MicroRNAs Regulate the Temporal Identity of Drosophila Mushroom Body Neurons via chinmo  Yen-Chi Wu, Ching-Huan Chen, Adam Mercer, Nicholas S.
Volume 53, Issue 6, Pages (March 2014)
Drosophila Maelstrom Ensures Proper Germline Stem Cell Lineage Differentiation by Repressing microRNA-7  Jun Wei Pek, Ai Khim Lim, Toshie Kai  Developmental.
Yuichiro Mishima, Yukihide Tomari  Molecular Cell 
DNA Looping Facilitates Targeting of a Chromatin Remodeling Enzyme
Volume 67, Issue 6, Pages e9 (September 2017)
Volume 39, Issue 3, Pages (September 2013)
Hung-Chun Chang, Leonard Guarente  Cell 
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages (July 2005)
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages (April 2006)
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages (October 2014)
Islet Coordinately Regulates Motor Axon Guidance and Dendrite Targeting through the Frazzled/DCC Receptor  Celine Santiago, Greg J. Bashaw  Cell Reports 
Jacques P. Bothma, Joe Magliocco, Michael Levine  Current Biology 
Volume 9, Pages (November 2018)
Volume 41, Issue 2, Pages (January 2011)
Volume 22, Issue 19, Pages (October 2012)
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages (July 2008)
Enhancer Control of Transcriptional Bursting
Volume 26, Issue 11, Pages e3 (March 2019)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 341-348 (January 2015) ELAV Links Paused Pol II to Alternative Polyadenylation in the Drosophila Nervous System  Katarzyna Oktaba, Wei Zhang, Thea Sabrina Lotz, David Jayhyun Jun, Sandra Beatrice Lemke, Samuel Pak Ng, Emilia Esposito, Michael Levine, Valérie Hilgers  Molecular Cell  Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 341-348 (January 2015) DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024 Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Molecular Cell 2015 57, 341-348DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024) Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Native Promoters Are Required for Expression of 3′ Extensions (A) elav-Gal4 drives expression of a GFP transgene in the nervous system. There are two different promoter regions that were used, DSCP, or the native elav promoter. The GFP coding sequence was placed upstream of the entire extended 7.2 kb elav 3′ UTR. CPA at the proximal poly(A) produces the short 3′ UTR form of the mRNA, whereas CPA at the distal-most poly(A) produces the fully extended transcript. RNA probes directed against different regions of the transcripts were used to detect mRNAs. (B and C) Double fluorescent in situ hybridization assays using probes indicated in (A). Single confocal sections of a portion of the developing CNS in stage 13 embryos. Note that the extension probe detects not only the transgene, but also the endogenous elav transcript, which is expressed in the nervous system. Colocalization of the GFP and extension probes indicates expression of extended transcripts from the transgene. (B) The reporter transgene carrying the DSCP does not exhibit colocalization of GFP and extension probes. Extension signals (magenta arrows) do not colocalize with the green GFP signal, indicating that they correspond to endogenous elav mRNAs. (C) Replacing the DSCP with the native elav promoter region induces 3′ extension of the GFP transgene. There is extensive colocalization of the GFP (green arrows) and extension probes (magenta arrows), indicating expression of extended 3′ UTR sequences from the transgene (white arrows in merged image). The percentages of GFP foci that colocalized with extension foci are indicated. Numbers represent mean ± SD of six embryos for each promoter. See also Figures S1 and S2. Molecular Cell 2015 57, 341-348DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024) Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 The Native elav Promoter Mediates 3′ Extension in Muscle (A) Mef2-Gal4 drives expression of a GFP transgene in muscle cells. The promoter used for expression was either the DSCP or the native elav promoter. The GFP coding sequence was placed upstream of the entire extended 7.2 kb elav 3′ UTR. CPA at the proximal poly(A) produces the short 3′ UTR form of the mRNA, whereas CPA at the distal-most poly(A) produces the fully extended transcript. An RNA probe directed against the elav extension was used to detect the extended transcript. (B and C) Left panels show projections of consecutive confocal sections of stage 13 embryos stained with antibodies against ELAV (white, in the nervous system) and Mef2 (magenta, in muscle). Ventral views, anterior is up. Middle panels, hybridization signals with the elav extension probe (green). Signal in the CNS corresponds to the endogenous elav mRNA. Panels on the right show enlarged views of the boxed regions in the left and middle panels. Background staining in muscle tissue is observed with the DSCP transgene (B, right), indicating little or no expression of the extended 3′ UTR. In contrast, there is significant expression of extended transcripts from the transgene containing the elav promoter (C, right). (D) mRNA quantification by qPCR using primer combinations detecting all transgene mRNAs (GFP) or specific to the extended transcript (extension). RNA was extracted from dissected muscle tissue in first instar larvae expressing the transgene depicted in (A), carrying either the DSCP or the elav promoter. Levels were normalized to rp49 RNA. Both promoters foster robust transgene expression as indicated by GFP levels, but expression of extension sequences is only detected with the elav promoter. Error bars represent mean ± SD of six samples for each promoter. See also Figure S3. Molecular Cell 2015 57, 341-348DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024) Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Extended Genes Contain the GAGA Motif and Paused Pol II (A) A motif search among 252 neural-specific transcripts exhibiting 3′ UTR extensions yielded the GAGA motif as the most significantly enriched motif compared to background sequences (all other annotated gene promoters). (B) Quantification of indicated transcripts by qPCR using primer combinations specific to the partially extended (ext 1) or fully extended (ext 2) 3′ UTR forms of each gene. RNA was extracted from brains of yw (control) or Trl mutant (ΔTrl) third instar larvae. Extension levels were normalized to coding regions of each gene to reflect levels relative to the short isoforms. For each primer pair, expression in control larvae was set to the value 1. In Trl mutants, 3′ UTR extension of each of the six analyzed genes is significantly reduced (p values < 0.01, unpaired Student’s t test) compared to control larvae. Error bars represent mean ± SD of three samples for each genotype. (C and C’) Normalized Pol II ChIP-seq reads at the elav (C) and brat (C’) loci in 12–16 hr embryos (Nègre et al., 2011). Short and extended isoforms are represented below the tracks. Arrows denote the start site and directionality of transcription. Pol II peaks indicate promoter-proximal pausing at the elav locus (C) and at the promoter expressing the extended form of brat, but not the short form (C’). (D) PI distribution and median PI values of the promoters of the indicated groups of transcripts in whole embryos. The numbers in parentheses denote the number of transcripts in each group. Promoters of extended transcripts are significantly more paused than promoters of any control group. Wilcoxon rank-sum test p values were calculated by comparing the PI of extended transcripts with each group of controls. See also Figure S4. Molecular Cell 2015 57, 341-348DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024) Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 ELAV Binds to Promoter Regions of Extended Genes (A) Normalized ELAV ChIP-seq reads at the ago1 locus in 10–12 hr embryos. Shown is a merged track of duplicate experiments. ELAV is found at the promoters of the extended ago1 isoforms (red lines), but not the shortest 3′ UTR form (gray line). There are peaks of ELAV binding at each proximal poly(A) site (dotted lines) where it suppresses CPA. The coding region is notably devoid of ELAV binding. (B) Meta-gene plots of ELAV ChIP-seq data sets at the promoter region (±500 bp relative to the start site) in 10–12 hr embryos. Promoter regions of extended transcripts show significantly higher ELAV binding than other neural-specific transcripts (Wilcoxon test p value = 1.3 ×10−9). (C) Meta-gene analysis of ELAV binding across the entire transcription unit in 10–12 hr embryos. ELAV binding is higher in extended transcripts at the 5′ UTR, introns, and the 3′ UTR as compared with other neural-specific transcripts. In all genes, ELAV binding is excluded from the coding sequence. (D and E) Meta-gene analysis of Pol II binding at the promoter region (D) or across the entire transcription unit (E) in 12–16 hr embryos. Promoter regions of extended transcripts show significantly higher Pol II binding than other neural-specific transcripts. Other regions do not differ in their Pol II binding profile between the two groups. See also Tables S1 and S2 and Figure S4. Molecular Cell 2015 57, 341-348DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2014.11.024) Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions