A conserved site on Ndc80 complex facilitates dynamic recruitment of Mps1 to yeast kinetochores to promote accurate chromosome segregation.

Accurate chromosome segregation relies on kinetochores carrying out multiple functions, including establishing and maintaining microtubule attachments, forming precise bi-oriented attachments between sister chromatids, and activating the spindle assembly checkpoint. Central to these processes is the highly conserved Ndc80 complex. This kinetochore subcomplex interacts directly with microtubules but also serves as a critical platform for recruiting kinetochore-associated factors and as a key substrate for error correction kinases. The precise manner in which these kinetochore factors interact and regulate each other's function remains unknown, considerably hindering our understanding of how Ndc80 complex-dependent processes function together to orchestrate accurate chromosome segregation. Here, we aimed to uncover the role of Nuf2's CH domain, a component of the Ndc80 complex, in ensuring these processes. Through extensive mutational analysis, we identified a conserved interaction domain composed of two segments in Nuf2's CH domain that form the binding site for Mps1 within the yeast Ndc80 complex. Interestingly, this site also associates with the Dam1 complex, suggesting Mps1 recruitment may be subject to regulation by competitive binding with other factors. Mutants disrupting this "interaction hub" exhibit defects in spindle assembly checkpoint function and severe chromosome segregation errors. Significantly, specifically restoring Mps1-Ndc80 complex association rescues these defects. Our findings shed light on the intricate regulation of Ndc80 complex-dependent functions and highlight the essential role of Mps1 in kinetochore bi-orientation and accurate chromosome segregation.

An interaction hub on Ndc80 complex facilitates dynamic recruitment of Mps1 to yeast kinetochores to promote accurate chromosome segregation.

Accurate chromosome segregation relies on kinetochores carrying out multiple functions, including establishing and maintaining microtubule attachments, forming precise bioriented attachments between sister chromatids, and activating the spindle assembly checkpoint. Central to these processes is the highly conserved Ndc80 complex. This kinetochore subcomplex interacts directly with microtubules, but also serves as a critical platform for recruiting kinetochore-associated factors and as a key substrate for error correction kinases. The precise manner in which these kinetochore factors interact, and regulate each other's function, remains unknown - considerably hindering our understanding of how Ndc80 complex-dependent processes function together to orchestrate accurate chromosome segregation. Here, we aimed to uncover the role of Nuf2's CH domain, a component of the Ndc80 complex, in ensuring accurate chromosome segregation. Through extensive mutational analysis, we identified a conserved "interaction hub" comprising two segments in Nuf2's CH domain, forming the binding site for Mps1 within the yeast Ndc80 complex. Intriguingly, the interaction between Mps1 and the Ndc80 complex seems to be subject to regulation by competitive binding with other factors. Mutants disrupting this interaction hub exhibit defects in spindle assembly checkpoint function and severe chromosome segregation errors. Significantly, specifically restoring Mps1-Ndc80 complex association rescues these defects. Our findings shed light on the intricate regulation of Ndc80 complex-dependent functions and highlight the essential role of Mps1 in kinetochore biorientation and accurate chromosome segregation.

Genetic analysis argues for a coactivator function for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Tup1 corepressor.

The Tup1-Cyc8 corepressor complex of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is recruited to promoters by DNA-binding proteins to repress transcription of genes, including the a-specific mating-type genes. We report here a tup1(S649F) mutant that displays mating irregularities and an α-predominant growth defect. RNA-Seq and ChIP-Seq were used to analyze gene expression and Tup1 occupancy changes in mutant vs wild type in both a and α cells. Increased Tup1(S649F) occupancy tended to occur upstream of upregulated genes, whereas locations with decreased occupancy usually did not show changes in gene expression, suggesting this mutant not only loses corepressor function but also behaves as a coactivator. Based upon studies demonstrating a dual role of Tup1 in both repression and activation, we postulate that the coactivator function of Tup1(S649F) results from diminished interaction with repressor proteins, including α2. We also found that large changes in mating-type-specific gene expression between a and α or between mutant and wild type were not easily explained by the range of Tup1 occupancy levels within their promoters, as predicted by the classic model of a-specific gene repression by Tup1. Most surprisingly, we observed Tup1 occupancy upstream of the a-specific gene MFA2 and the α-specific gene MF(ALPHA)1 in cells in which each gene was expressed rather than repressed. These results, combined with the identification of additional mating-related genes upregulated in the tup1(S649F) α strain, illustrate that the role of Tup1 in distinguishing mating types in yeast appears to be both more comprehensive and more nuanced than previously appreciated.

Ash1 and Tup1 dependent repression of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae HO promoter requires activator-dependent nucleosome eviction.

Transcriptional regulation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae HO gene is highly complex, requiring a balance of multiple activating and repressing factors to ensure that only a few transcripts are produced in mother cells within a narrow window of the cell cycle. Here, we show that the Ash1 repressor associates with two DNA sequences that are usually concealed within nucleosomes in the HO promoter and recruits the Tup1 corepressor and the Rpd3 histone deacetylase, both of which are required for full repression in daughters. Genome-wide ChIP identified greater than 200 additional sites of co-localization of these factors, primarily within large, intergenic regions from which they could regulate adjacent genes. Most Ash1 binding sites are in nucleosome depleted regions (NDRs), while a small number overlap nucleosomes, similar to HO. We demonstrate that Ash1 binding to the HO promoter does not occur in the absence of the Swi5 transcription factor, which recruits coactivators that evict nucleosomes, including the nucleosomes obscuring the Ash1 binding sites. In the absence of Swi5, artificial nucleosome depletion allowed Ash1 to bind, demonstrating that nucleosomes are inhibitory to Ash1 binding. The location of binding sites within nucleosomes may therefore be a mechanism for limiting repressive activity to periods of nucleosome eviction that are otherwise associated with activation of the promoter. Our results illustrate that activation and repression can be intricately connected, and events set in motion by an activator may also ensure the appropriate level of repression and reset the promoter for the next activation cycle.

Multiple Negative Regulators Restrict Recruitment of the SWI/SNF Chromatin Remodeler to the HO Promoter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Activation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae HO promoter is highly regulated, requiring the ordered recruitment of activators and coactivators and allowing production of only a few transcripts in mother cells within a short cell cycle window. We conducted genetic screens to identify the negative regulators of HO expression necessary to limit HO transcription. Known repressors of HO (Ash1 and Rpd3) were identified, as well as several additional chromatin-associated factors including the Hda1 histone deacetylase, the Isw2 chromatin remodeler, and the corepressor Tup1 We also identified clusters of HO promoter mutations that suggested roles for the Dot6/Tod6 (PAC site) and Ume6 repression pathways. We used ChIP assays with synchronized cells to validate the involvement of these factors and map the association of Ash1, Dot6, and Ume6 with the HO promoter to a brief window in the cell cycle between binding of the initial activating transcription factor and initiation of transcription. We found that Ash1 and Ume6 each recruit the Rpd3 histone deacetylase to HO, and their effects are additive. In contrast, Rpd3 was not recruited significantly to the PAC site, suggesting this site has a distinct mechanism for repression. Increases in HO expression and SWI/SNF recruitment were all additive upon loss of Ash1, Ume6, and PAC site factors, indicating the convergence of independent pathways for repression. Our results demonstrate that multiple protein complexes are important for limiting the spread of SWI/SNF-mediated nucleosome eviction across the HO promoter, suggesting that regulation requires a delicate balance of activities that promote and repress transcription.

The Rts1 regulatory subunit of PP2A phosphatase controls expression of the HO endonuclease via localization of the Ace2 transcription factor.

The RTS1 gene encodes a subunit of the PP2A phosphatase that regulates cell cycle progression. Ace2 and Swi5 are cell cycle-regulated transcription factors, and we recently showed that phosphorylation of Ace2 and Swi5 is altered in an rts1 mutant. Here we examine expression of Ace2 and Swi5 target genes and find that an rts1 mutation markedly reduces expression of the HO gene. The decreased HO expression in an rts1 mutant is significantly restored by an additional ace2 mutation, a surprising result because HO is normally activated by Swi5 but not by Ace2. Ace2 normally accumulates only in daughter cells, and only activates transcription in daughters. However, in an rts1 mutant, Ace2 is present in both mother and daughter cells. One of the genes activated by Ace2 is ASH1, a protein that normally accumulates mostly in daughter cells; Ash1 is a transcriptional repressor, and it blocks HO expression in daughters. We show that in the rts1 mutant, Ace2 accumulation in mother cells results in Ash1 expression in mothers, and the Ash1 can now repress HO expression in mothers.

PP2ARts1 is a master regulator of pathways that control cell size.

Cell size checkpoints ensure that passage through G1 and mitosis occurs only when sufficient growth has occurred. The mechanisms by which these checkpoints work are largely unknown. PP2A associated with the Rts1 regulatory subunit (PP2A(Rts1)) is required for cell size control in budding yeast, but the relevant targets are unknown. In this paper, we used quantitative proteome-wide mass spectrometry to identify proteins controlled by PP2A(Rts1). This revealed that PP2A(Rts1) controls the two key checkpoint pathways thought to regulate the cell cycle in response to cell growth. To investigate the role of PP2A(Rts1) in these pathways, we focused on the Ace2 transcription factor, which is thought to delay cell cycle entry by repressing transcription of the G1 cyclin CLN3. Diverse experiments suggest that PP2A(Rts1) promotes cell cycle entry by inhibiting the repressor functions of Ace2. We hypothesize that control of Ace2 by PP2A(Rts1) plays a role in mechanisms that link G1 cyclin accumulation to cell growth.

Stochastic expression and epigenetic memory at the yeast HO promoter.

Eukaryotic gene regulation usually involves sequence-specific transcription factors and sequence-nonspecific cofactors. A large effort has been made to understand how these factors affect the average gene expression level among a population. However, little is known about how they regulate gene expression in individual cells. In this work, we address this question by mutating multiple factors in the regulatory pathway of the yeast HO promoter (HOpr) and probing the corresponding promoter activity in single cells using time-lapse fluorescence microscopy. We show that the HOpr fires in an "on/off" fashion in WT cells as well as in different genetic backgrounds. Many chromatin-related cofactors that affect the average level of HO expression do not actually affect the firing amplitude of the HOpr; instead, they affect the firing frequency among individual cell cycles. With certain mutations, the bimodal expression exhibits short-term epigenetic memory across the mitotic boundary. This memory is propagated in "cis" and reflects enhanced activator binding after a previous "on" cycle. We present evidence that the memory results from slow turnover of the histone acetylation marks.

Shields up: the Tup1-Cyc8 repressor complex blocks coactivator recruitment.

The Tup1-Cyc8 complex is responsible for repression of a large and diverse collection of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The predominant view has been that Tup1-Cyc8 functions as a corepressor, actively associating with regulatory proteins and organizing chromatin to block transcription. A new study by Wong and Struhl in this issue of Genes & Development (pp. 2525-2539) challenges nearly 20 years of models by demonstrating that Tup1-Cyc8 functions primarily as a shield to block DNA-binding proteins from recruiting transcriptional coactivators.

Investigation of the properties of non-gypsy suppressor of hairy-wing-binding sites.

Insulators define interactions between transcriptional control elements in eukaryotic genomes. The gypsy insulator found in the gypsy retrovirus binds the zinc-finger Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] protein that associates with hundreds of non-gypsy regions throughout the Drosophila genome. Models of insulator function predict that the gypsy insulator forms chromatin loop domains through interactions with endogenous Su(Hw) insulators (SIs) to limit the action of transcriptional control elements. Here we study SI 62D and show that interactions occur between two SI 62D elements, but not between SI 62D and the gypsy insulator, limiting the scope of genomic gypsy insulator interactions. Enhancer blocking by SI 62D requires fewer Su(Hw)-binding sites than needed for gypsy insulator function, with these target regions having distinct zinc-finger requirements for in vivo Su(Hw) association. These observations led to an investigation of the role of the Su(Hw) zinc-finger domain in insulator function. Using a combination of in vitro and in vivo studies, we find that this domain makes sequence-dependent and -independent contributions to in vivo chromosome association, but is not essential for enhancer or silencer blocking. These studies extend our understanding of the properties of Su(Hw) and the endogenous genomic regions to which this protein localizes.

Regulation of the yeast Ace2 transcription factor during the cell cycle.

Previous studies have revealed many parallels in the cell cycle regulation of the Ace2 and Swi5 transcription factors. Although both proteins begin entry into the nucleus near the start of mitosis, here we show that Ace2 accumulates in the nucleus and binds DNA about 10 min later in the cell cycle than Swi5. We used chimeric fusions to identify the N-terminal region of Ace2 as responsible for the delay, and this same region of Ace2 was required for interaction with Cbk1, a kinase necessary for both transcriptional activation by Ace2 and asymmetric distribution of Ace2. Ace2 and Swi5 also showed differences in prevalence during the cell cycle. Swi5 is apparently degraded soon after nuclear entry, whereas constant Ace2 levels throughout the cell cycle suggest Ace2 is exported from the nucleus. Our work suggests that the precise timing of Ace2 accumulation in the nucleus involves both a nuclear export sequence and a nuclear localization signal, whose activities are regulated by phosphorylation.

SWI/SNF binding to the HO promoter requires histone acetylation and stimulates TATA-binding protein recruitment.

We use chromatin immunoprecipitation assays to show that the Gcn5 histone acetyltransferase in SAGA is required for SWI/SNF association with the HO promoter and that binding of SWI/SNF and SAGA are interdependent. Previous results showed that SWI/SNF binding to HO was Gcn5 independent, but that work used a strain with a mutation in the Ash1 daughter-specific repressor of HO expression. Here, we show that Ash1 functions as a repressor that inhibits SWI/SNF binding and that Gcn5 is required to overcome Ash1 repression in mother cells to allow HO transcription. Thus, Gcn5 facilitates SWI/SNF binding by antagonizing Ash1. Similarly, a mutation in SIN3, like an ash1 mutation, allows both HO expression and SWI/SNF binding in the absence of Gcn5. Although Ash1 has recently been identified in a Sin3-Rpd3 complex, our genetic analysis shows that Ash1 and Sin3 have distinct functions in regulating HO. Analysis of mutant strains shows that SWI/SNF binding and HO expression are correlated and regulated by histone acetylation. The defect in HO expression caused by a mutant SWI/SNF with a Swi2(E834K) substitution can be partially suppressed by ash1 or spt3 mutation or by a gain-of-function V71E substitution in the TATA-binding protein (TBP). Spt3 inhibits TBP binding at HO, and genetic analysis suggests that Spt3 and TBP(V71E) act in the same pathway, distinct from that of Ash1. We have detected SWI/SNF binding at the HO TATA region, and our results suggest that SWI/SNF, either directly or indirectly, facilitates TBP binding at HO.