127
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Genome-wide dynamics of Pol II elongation and its interplay with promoter proximal pausing, chromatin, and exons

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Production of mRNA depends critically on the rate of RNA polymerase II (Pol II) elongation. To dissect Pol II dynamics in mouse ES cells, we inhibited Pol II transcription at either initiation or promoter-proximal pause escape with Triptolide or Flavopiridol, and tracked Pol II kinetically using GRO-seq. Both inhibitors block transcription of more than 95% of genes, showing that pause escape, like initiation, is a ubiquitous and crucial step within the transcription cycle. Moreover, paused Pol II is relatively stable, as evidenced from half-life measurements at ∼3200 genes. Finally, tracking the progression of Pol II after drug treatment establishes Pol II elongation rates at over 1000 genes. Notably, Pol II accelerates dramatically while transcribing through genes, but slows at exons. Furthermore, intergenic variance in elongation rates is substantial, and is influenced by a positive effect of H3K79me2 and negative effects of exon density and CG content within genes.

          DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02407.001

          eLife digest

          Many different factors determine how quickly the DNA in genes is transcribed to produce molecules of messenger RNA. The start of the transcription process features two milestones: first, an enzyme called RNA Polymerase II starts the process; shortly afterwards, however, the process pauses and only starts again when other proteins are recruited. This provides two levels of control over the production of messenger RNA and, it also allows the transcription process to be interrupted in order to study the rate of transcription.

          Here, Jonkers, Kwak and Lis used two drugs to block either the start of transcription or the release from the paused state in mouse cells. Both drugs prevented new transcription and disrupted about 95% of the total number of genes. However, RNA Polymerase II that was already copying DNA could continue to copy, and did so at an average rate of 2000 bases per minute. Transcription rates were, however, shown to vary between different genes—highly active genes are transcribed faster. Transcription rates also varied within individual genes, with the enzyme accelerating as it moves along the gene. This suggests that the transcription machinery, including other proteins that improve the enzyme’s efficiency, are recruited or modified after transcription has already started, and that these proteins help the enzyme to reach its maximum transcription speed.

          Other factors also affected the transcription rate: the genetic code is written in four letters—A, C, G and T—and genes that contained more Cs and Gs were transcribed slower than those with lots of As and Ts. Genes also contain regions called exons that code for proteins, and regions called introns that do not: Jonkers, Kwak and Lis found that genes with lots of exons were transcribed slower. Furthermore, DNA is wrapped around proteins into a compacted structure, and genes that had certain chemical markings added to these proteins were transcribed faster.

          The work of Jonkers, Kwak and Lis is the first in-depth look at how transcription is affected by gene structure, and leads the way to uncovering how transcription rates throughout genes are regulated to influence production of messenger RNA.

          DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02407.002

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Promoter-proximal pausing of RNA polymerase II: emerging roles in metazoans.

          Recent years have witnessed a sea change in our understanding of transcription regulation: whereas traditional models focused solely on the events that brought RNA polymerase II (Pol II) to a gene promoter to initiate RNA synthesis, emerging evidence points to the pausing of Pol II during early elongation as a widespread regulatory mechanism in higher eukaryotes. Current data indicate that pausing is particularly enriched at genes in signal-responsive pathways. Here the evidence for pausing of Pol II from recent high-throughput studies will be discussed, as well as the potential interconnected functions of promoter-proximally paused Pol II.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Controlling the elongation phase of transcription with P-TEFb.

            The positive transcription elongation factor b (P-TEFb) is a cyclin-dependent kinase that controls the elongation phase of transcription by RNA polymerase II (RNAPII). This process is made possible by the reversal of effects of negative elongation factors that include NELF and DSIF. In complex organisms, elongation control is critical for the regulated expression of most genes. In those organisms, the function of P-TEFb is influenced negatively by HEXIM proteins and 7SK snRNA and positively by a variety of recruiting factors. Phylogenetic analyses of the components of the human elongation control machinery indicate that the number of mechanisms utilized to regulate P-TEFb function increased as organisms developed more complex developmental patterns.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Chromatin modifying enzymes as modulators of reprogramming

              Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by somatic cell reprogramming involves global epigenetic remodeling 1 . While several proteins are known to regulate chromatin marks associated with the distinct epigenetic states of cells before and after reprogramming 2,3 , the role of specific chromatin modifying enzymes in reprogramming remains to be determined. To address how chromatin-modifying proteins influence reprogramming, we used shRNAs to target genes in DNA and histone methylation pathways, and have identified positive and negative modulators of iPSC generation. While inhibition of the core components of the polycomb repressive complex 1 and 2, including the histone 3 lysine 27 methyltransferase Ezh2, reduced reprogramming efficiency, suppression of SUV39H1, YY1, and Dot1L enhanced reprogramming. Specifically, inhibition of the H3K79 histone methyltransferase Dot1L by shRNA or a small molecule accelerated reprogramming, significantly increased the yield of iPSC colonies, and substituted for Klf4 and c-Myc. Inhibition of Dot1L early in the reprogramming process is associated with a marked increase in two alternative factors, Nanog and Lin28, which play essential functional roles in the enhancement of reprogramming. Genome-wide analysis of H3K79me2 distribution revealed that fibroblast-specific genes associated with the epithelial to mesenchymal transition lose H3K79me2 in the initial phases of reprogramming. Dot1L inhibition facilitates the loss of this mark from genes that are fated to be repressed in the pluripotent state. These findings implicate specific chromatin-modifying enzymes as barriers to or facilitators of reprogramming, and demonstrate how modulation of chromatin-modifying enzymes can be exploited to more efficiently generate iPSCs with fewer exogenous transcription factors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Reviewing editor
                Journal
                eLife
                Elife
                eLife
                eLife
                eLife
                eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
                2050-084X
                29 April 2014
                2014
                : 3
                : e02407
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University , Ithaca, United States
                [2 ]Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Michigan , Ann Harbor, United States
                Harvard Medical School , United States
                Harvard Medical School , United States
                Author notes
                [* ]For correspondence: ihj3@ 123456cornell.edu (IJ);
                [* ]For correspondence: johnlis@ 123456cornell.edu (JTL)
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                02407
                10.7554/eLife.02407
                4001325
                24843027
                263680b7-6e53-4fdd-afd8-ccac9aca917d
                Copyright © 2014, Jonkers et al

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 28 January 2014
                : 21 March 2014
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health FundRef identification ID: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002
                Award ID: GM25232
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Helen Hay Whitney Foundation FundRef identification ID: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100005237
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Howard Hughes Medical Institute FundRef identification ID: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000011
                Award Recipient :
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biochemistry
                Genomics and Evolutionary Biology
                Custom metadata
                0.7
                The elongation rate of RNA Polymerase II varies greatly between and along genes, as this enzyme accelerates from stable pausing to rapid elongation within genes, and is influenced by CG-content, exons and chromatin.

                Life sciences
                pausing,p-tefb,gro-seq,elongation rate,rna polymerase ii,mouse
                Life sciences
                pausing, p-tefb, gro-seq, elongation rate, rna polymerase ii, mouse

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content90

                Cited by267

                Most referenced authors1,049