Choice of binding sites for CTCFL compared to CTCF is driven by chromatin and by sequence preference.

The two paralogous zinc finger factors CTCF and CTCFL differ in expression such that CTCF is ubiquitously expressed, whereas CTCFL is found during spermatogenesis and in some cancer types in addition to other cell types. Both factors share the highly conserved DNA binding domain and are bound to DNA sequences with an identical consensus. In contrast, both factors differ substantially in the number of bound sites in the genome. Here, we addressed the molecular features for this binding specificity. In contrast to CTCF we found CTCFL highly enriched at 'open' chromatin marked by H3K27 acetylation, H3K4 di- and trimethylation, H3K79 dimethylation and H3K9 acetylation plus the histone variant H2A.Z. CTCFL is enriched at transcriptional start sites and regions bound by transcription factors. Consequently, genes deregulated by CTCFL are highly cell specific. In addition to a chromatin-driven choice of binding sites, we determined nucleotide positions critical for DNA binding by CTCFL, but not by CTCF.

The male germ cell gene regulator CTCFL is functionally different from CTCF and binds CTCF-like consensus sites in a nucleosome composition-dependent manner.

BACKGROUND: CTCF is a highly conserved and essential zinc finger protein expressed in virtually all cell types. In conjunction with cohesin, it organizes chromatin into loops, thereby regulating gene expression and epigenetic events. The function of CTCFL or BORIS, the testis-specific paralog of CTCF, is less clear. RESULTS: Using immunohistochemistry on testis sections and fluorescence-based microscopy on intact live seminiferous tubules, we show that CTCFL is only transiently present during spermatogenesis, prior to the onset of meiosis, when the protein co-localizes in nuclei with ubiquitously expressed CTCF. CTCFL distribution overlaps completely with that of Stra8, a retinoic acid-inducible protein essential for the propagation of meiosis. We find that absence of CTCFL in mice causes sub-fertility because of a partially penetrant testicular atrophy. CTCFL deficiency affects the expression of a number of testis-specific genes, including Gal3st1 and Prss50. Combined, these data indicate that CTCFL has a unique role in spermatogenesis. Genome-wide RNA expression studies in ES cells expressing a V5- and GFP-tagged form of CTCFL show that genes that are downregulated in CTCFL-deficient testis are upregulated in ES cells. These data indicate that CTCFL is a male germ cell gene regulator. Furthermore, genome-wide DNA-binding analysis shows that CTCFL binds a consensus sequence that is very similar to that of CTCF. However, only ~3,700 out of the ~5,700 CTCFL- and ~31,000 CTCF-binding sites overlap. CTCFL binds promoters with loosely assembled nucleosomes, whereas CTCF favors consensus sites surrounded by phased nucleosomes. Finally, an ES cell-based rescue assay shows that CTCFL is functionally different from CTCF. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that nucleosome composition specifies the genome-wide binding of CTCFL and CTCF. We propose that the transient expression of CTCFL in spermatogonia and preleptotene spermatocytes serves to occupy a subset of promoters and maintain the expression of male germ cell genes.

Analysis of the phytochrome gene family in Ceratodon purpureus by gene targeting reveals the primary phytochrome responsible for photo- and polarotropism.

Using gene targeting by homologous recombination in Ceratodon purpureus, we were able to knock out four phytochrome photoreceptor genes independently and to analyze their function with respect to red light dependent phototropism, polarotropism, and chlorophyll content. The strongest phenotype was found in knock-out lines of a newly described phytochrome gene termed CpPHY4 lacking photo- and polarotropic responses at moderate fluence rates. Eliminating the atypical phytochrome gene CpPHY1, which is the only known phytochrome-like gene containing a putative C-terminal tyrosine kinase-like domain, affects red light-induced chlorophyll accumulation. This result was surprising, since no light dependent function was ever allocated to this unusual gene.