4.8 Article

Complete reconstitution of bypass and blocking functions in a minimal artificial Fab-7 insulator from Drosophila bithorax complex

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1907190116

关键词

architectural proteins; distant interactions; chromatin insulator; CLAMP; LBC

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Education of the Russian Federation
  2. Russian Science Foundation [19-14-00103]
  3. National Institutes of Health [R35 GM126975]
  4. Russian Science Foundation [19-14-00103] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Boundaries in the bithorax complex (BX-C) delimit autonomous regulatory domains that drive parasegment-specific expression of the Hox genes Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B. The Fab-7 boundary is located between the iab-6 and iab-7 domains and has two key functions: blocking cross-talk between these domains and at the same time promoting communication (boundary bypass) between iab-6 and the Abd-B promoter. Using a replacement strategy, we found that multimerized binding sites for the architectural proteins Pita, Su(Hw), and dCTCF function as conventional insulators and block cross-talk between the iab-6 and iab-7 domains; however, they lack bypass activity, and iab-6 is unable to regulate Abd-B. Here we show that an similar to 200-bp sequence of dHS1 from the Fab-7 boundary rescues the bypass defects of these multimerized binding sites. The dHS1 sequence is bound in embryos by a large multiprotein complex, Late Boundary Complex (LBC), that contains the zinc finger proteins CLAMP and GAF. Using deletions and mutations in critical GAGAG motifs, we show that bypass activity correlates with the efficiency of recruitment of LBC components CLAMP and GAF to the artificial boundary. These results indicate that LBC orchestrates long-distance communication between the iab-6 regulatory domain and the Abd-B gene, while the Pita, Su(Hw), and dCTCF proteins function to block local cross-talk between the neighboring regulatory domains iab-6 and iab-7.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据