DOUBLE-STRAND BREAK REPAIR PATHWAYS IN DNA STRUCTURE-INDUCED GENETIC INSTABILITY

Genetic instability in mammalian cells can occur by many different mechanisms. In the absence of exogenous sources of DNA damage, the DNA structure itself has been implicated in genetic instability. When the canonical B-DNA helix is naturally altered to form a non-canonical DNA structure such as a Z-DNA or H-DNA, this can lead to genetic instability in the form of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) (1, 2). Our laboratory found that the stability of these non-B DNA structures was different in mammals versus Escherichia coli (E.coli) bacteria (1, 2). One explanation for the difference between these species may be a result of how DSBs are repaired within each species. Non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) is primed to repair DSBs in mammalian cells, while bacteria that lack NHEJ (such as E.coli), utilize homologous recombination (HR) to repair DSBs. To investigate the role of the error-prone NHEJ repair pathway in DNA structure-induced genetic instability, E.coli cells were modified to express genes to allow for a functional NHEJ system under different HR backgrounds. The Mycobacterium tuberculosis NHEJ sufficient system is composed of Ku and Ligase D (LigD) (3). These inducible NHEJ components were expressed individually and together in E.coli cells, with or without functional HR (RecA/RecB), and the Z-DNA and H-DNA-induced mutations were characterized. The Z-DNA structure gave rise to higher mutation frequencies compared to the controls, regardless of the DSB repair pathway(s) available; however, the type of mutants produced after repair was greatly dictated on the available DSB repair system, indicated by the shift from 2% large-scale deletions in the total mutant population to 24% large-scale deletions when NHEJ was present (4). This suggests that NHEJ has a role in the large deletions induced by Z-DNA-forming sequences. H-DNA structure, however, did not exhibit an increase in mutagenesis in the newly engineered E.coli environment, suggesting the involvement of other factors in regulating H-DNA formation/stability in bacterial cells. Accurate repair by established DNA DSB repair pathways is essential to maintain the stability of eukaryotic and prokaryotic genomes and our results suggest that an error-prone NHEJ pathway was involved in non-B DNA structure-induced mutagenesis in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes.

Developmental Changes in the Structure and Composition of the Postsynaptic Density

The development of the brain and its underlying circuitry is dependent on the formation of trillions of chemical synapses, which are highly specialized contacts that regulate the flow of information from one neuron to the next. It is through these synaptic connections that neurons wire together into networks capable of performing specific tasks, and activity-dependent changes in their structural and physiological state is one way that the brain is thought to adapt and store information. At the ultrastructural level, developmental and activity-dependent changes in the size and shape of dendritic spines have been well documented, and it is widely believed that structural changes in spines are a hallmark sign of synapse maturation and alteration of synaptic physiology. While changes in spine structure have been studied extensively, changes in one of its most prominent components, the postsynaptic density (PSD), have largely evaded observation. The PSD is a protein-rich organelle on the cytoplasmic side of the postsynaptic membrane, where it sits in direct opposition to the presynaptic terminal. The PSD functions both to cluster neurotransmitter receptors at the cell surface as well as organize the intracellular signaling molecules responsible for transducing extracellular signals to the postsynaptic cell. Much is known about the chemical composition of the PSD, but the structural arrangement of its molecular components is not well documented. Adding to the difficulty of understanding such a complex mass of protein machinery is the fact that its protein composition is known to change in response to synaptic activity, meaning that its structure is plastic and no two PSDs are identical. Here, immuno-gold labeling and electron tomography of PSDs isolated throughout development was used to track changes in both the structure and molecular composition of the PSD. State-of-the-art cryo-electron tomography was used to study the fine structure of the PSD during development, and provides an unprecedented glimpse into its molecular architecture in an un-fixed, unstained and hydrated state. Through this analysis, large structural and compositional changes are apparent and suggest a model by which the PSD is first assembled as a mesh-like lattice of proteins that function as support for the later recruitment of various PSD components. Spatial analysis of the recruitment of proteins into the PSD demonstrated that its assembly has an underlying order.

DEFINITION OF THE LANDSCAPE OF CHROMATIN STRUCTURE AT THE FRATAXIN GENE IN FRIEDREICH’S ATAXIA

Friedreich’s ataxia (FRDA) is caused by the transcriptional silencing of the frataxin (FXN) gene. FRDA patients have expansion of GAA repeats in intron 1 of the FXN gene in both alleles. A number of studies demonstrated that specific histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) affect either histone modifications at the FXN gene or FXN expression in FRDA cells, indicating that the hyperexpanded GAA repeat may facilitate heterochromatin formation. However, the correlation between chromatin structure and transcription at the FXN gene is currently limited due to a lack of more detailed analysis. Therefore, I analyzed the effects of the hyperexpanded GAA repeats on transcription status and chromatin structure using lymphoid cell lines derived from FRDA patients. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation and quantitative PCR, I observed significant changes in the landscape of histone modifications in the vicinity of the GAA tract in FRDA cells relative to control cells. Similar epigenetic changes were observed in GFP reporter construct containing 560 GAA repeats. Further, I detected similar levels of FXN pre-mRNA at a region upstream of hyperexpanded GAA repeats in FRDA and control cells, indicating similar efficiency of transcription initiation in FRDA cells. I also showed that histone modifications associated with hyperexpanded GAA repeats are independent of transcription progression using the GFP reporter system. My data strongly support evidence that FXN deficiency in FRDA patients is consequence of defective transition from initiation to elongation of FXN transcription due to heterochromatin-like structures formed in the proximity of the hyperexpanded GAAs.

Regulation of chromatin structure, Smad binding and AFP expression by the Forkhead box transcription factor: Foxa1

Transcription factors must be able to access their DNA binding sites to either activate or repress transcription. However, DNA wrapping and compaction into chromatin occludes most binding sites from ready access by proteins. Pioneer transcription factors are capable of binding their DNA elements within a condensed chromatin context and then reducing the level of nucleosome occupancy so that the chromatin structure is more accessible. This altered accessibility increases the probability of other transcription factors binding to their own DNA binding elements. My hypothesis is that Foxa1, a ‘pioneer’ transcription factor, activates alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) expression by binding DNA in a chromatinized environment, reducing the nucleosome occupancy and facilitating binding of additional transcription factors.^ Using retinoic-acid differentiated mouse embryonic stem cells, we illustrate a mechanism for activation of the tumor marker AFP by the pioneer transcription factor Foxa1 and TGF-β downstream effector transcription factors Smad2 and Smad4. In differentiating embryonic stem cells, binding of the Foxa1 forkhead box transcription factor to chromatin reduces nucleosome occupancy and levels of linker histone H1 at the AFP distal promoter. The more accessible DNA is subsequently bound by the Smad2 and Smad4 transcription factors, concurrent with activation of transcription. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analyses combined with siRNA-mediated knockdown indicate that Smad protein binding and the reduction of nucleosome occupancy at the AFP distal promoter is dependent on Foxa1. In addition to facilitating transcription factor binding, Foxa1 is also associated with histone modifications related to active gene expression. Acetylation of lysine 9 on histone H3, a mark that is associated active transcription, is dependent on Foxa1, while methylation of H3K4, also associated with active transcription, is independent of Foxa1. I propose that Foxa1 potentiates a region of chromatin to respond to Smad proteins, leading to active expression of AFP.^ These studies demonstrate one mechanism whereby a transcription factor can alter the accessibility of additional transcription factors to chromatin, by altering nucleosome positions. Specifically, Foxa1 exposes DNA so that Smad4 can bind to its regulatory element and activate transcription of the tumor-marker gene AFP.^

Structure-function analysis of human Integrator subunit-4

Structure-function analysis of human Integrator subunit 4 Anupama Sataluri Advisor: Eric. J. Wagner, Ph.D. Uridine-rich small nuclear RNAs (U snRNA) are RNA Polymerase-II (RNAPII) transcripts that are ubiquitously expressed and are known to be essential for gene expression. snRNAs play a key role in mRNA splicing and in histone mRNA expression. Inaccurate snRNA biosynthesis can lead to diseases related to defective splicing and histone mRNA expression. Although the 3′ end formation mechanism and processing machinery of other RNAPII transcripts such as mRNA has been well studied, the mechanism of snRNA 3′ end processing has remained a mystery until the recent discovery of the machinery that mediates this process. In 2005, a complex of 14 subunits (the Integrator complex) associated with RNA Polymerase-II was discovered. The 14subunits were annotated Integrator 1-14 based on their size. The subunits of this complex together were found to facilitate 3′ end processing of snRNA. Identification of the Integrator complex propelled research in the direction of understanding the events of snRNA 3’end processing. Recent studies from our lab confirmed that Integrator subunit (IntS) 9 and 11 together perform the endonucleolytic cleavage of the nascent snRNA 3′ end to generate mature snRNA. However, the role of other members of the Integrator complex remains elusive. Current research in our lab is focused on deciphering the role of each subunit within the Integrator complex This work specifically focuses on elucidating the role of human Integrator subunit 4 (IntS4) and understanding how it facilitates the overall function of the complex. IntS4 has structural similarity with a protein called “Symplekin”, which is part of the mRNA 3’end processing machinery. Symplekin has been thoroughly researched in recent years and structure-function correlation studies in the context of mRNA 3’end processing have reported a scaffold function for Symplekin due to the presence of HEAT repeat motifs in its N-terminus. Based upon the structural similarity between IntS4 and Symplekin, we hypothesized that Integrator subunit 4 may be behaving as a Symplekin-like scaffold molecule that facilitates the interaction between other members of the Integrator Complex. To answer this question, the two important goals of this study were to: 1) identify the region of IntS4, which is important for snRNA 3′ end processing and 2) determine binding partners of IntS4 which promote its function as a scaffold. IntS4 structurally consists of a highly conserved N-terminus with 8 HEAT repeats, followed by a nonconserved C- terminus. A series of siRNA resistant N and C-terminus deletion constructs as well as specific point mutants within its N-terminal HEAT repeats were generated for human IntS4 and, utilizing a snRNA transcriptional readthrough GFP-reporter assay, we tested their ability to rescue misprocessing. This assay revealed a possible scaffold like property of IntS4. To probe IntS4 for interaction partners, we performed co-immunoprecipitation on nuclear extracts of IntS4 expressing stable cell lines and identified IntS3 and IntS5 among other Integrator subunits to be binding partners which facilitate the scaffold like function of hIntS4. These findings have established a critical role for IntS4 in snRNA 3′ end processing, identified that both its N and C termini are essential for its function, and mapped putative interaction domains with other Integrator subunits.