| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Molecular and Cellular Biology, July 2007, p. 5055-5065, Vol. 27, No. 13
0270-7306/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.00127-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Howard Hughes Medical Institute,1 Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center,2 Department of Biology and the Carolina Center for Genome Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 275993
Received 19 January 2007/ Returned for modification 26 February 2007/ Accepted 18 April 2007
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-ketoglutarate as cofactors. Mutation and deletion studies indicate that the JmjC domain and adjacent sequences are critical for Jhd1 enzymatic activity, while the N-terminal PHD domain is dispensable. Overexpression of JHD1 results in a global reduction of H3K36 methylation in vivo. Finally, chromatin immunoprecipitation-coupled microarray studies reveal subtle changes in the distribution of H3K36me2 upon overexpression or deletion of JHD1. Our studies establish Jhd1 as a histone demethylase in budding yeast and suggest that Jhd1 functions to maintain the fidelity of histone methylation patterns along transcription units. | INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Using a novel in vitro histone demethylation assay coupled with protein fractionation, we have recently identified a novel class of histone demethylases (45). This class of histone demethylases is characterized by the presence of a JmjC domain, an evolutionarily conserved motif (8). We have demonstrated that, in the presence of
-ketoglutarate (
-KG) and Fe(II), the JmjC domain-containing histone demethylases can remove the methyl groups from lysine residues to produce succinate and formaldehyde (45). Unlike LSD1, the JmjC domain-containing proteins comprise a large protein family that is conserved from bacteria to humans (19). In addition, the JmjC domain-containing demethylases remove methyl groups from lysine residues through a hydroxylation reaction and, therefore, have the capacity to demethylate trimethyl states (9, 20, 47).
Three lysine residues of histone H3 (K4, K36, and K79) in the budding yeast S. cerevisiae are subjected to methylation (29). Genome-wide location studies indicate that H3K4 trimethylation is mainly enriched at promoter and transcriptional initiation sites of active genes (4, 6, 21, 27, 33, 35, 38), while H3K36 methylation is enriched in the open reading frames (ORFs) of protein-encoding genes (2, 35, 36). Consistent with this distribution, the enzymes responsible for these methylation states, Set1 and Set2, have been linked to the PAF complex and to active RNA polymerase during transcription initiation and elongation, respectively (21, 22, 24, 25, 33, 50). To determine whether histone methylation in yeast is subjected to active demethylation, we screened the five S. cerevisiae JmjC domain-containing proteins for histone demethylation activity. Here we report the identification and characterization of Jhd1, the S. cerevisiae homolog of human JHDM1A. We demonstrate that Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific demethylase. Deletion and mutation studies indicate that both the JmjC domain and its adjacent sequences are required for the demethylase activity. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-coupled microarray analyses reveal that overexpression of JHD1 results in a subtle 3' shift of the H3K36me2 pattern in transcription units. In contrast, deletion of JHD1 causes a more uniform distribution of H3K36me2 across ORFs. Our work uncovers Jhd1 as an H3K36-specific demethylase and suggests that Jhd1 fine-tunes the distribution of H3K36me2.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Strains and culture conditions.
All strains, except those in the telomeric silencing assay, were derived from BY4741. Strains used in telomeric silencing assay were of the YCB647 background (42). Strains harboring individual C-terminal 3x Flag tags of each of the five genes encoding JmjC-domain proteins were generated by PCR (12). The jhd1
and JHD1 overexpression strains were constructed using standard protocols. Unless otherwise described, yeast were grown with shaking at 30°C in yeast YPD medium (1% yeast extract, 2% peptone, 2% dextrose) to an optical density at 600 nm of 0.8 to 1.0.
Preparation of yeast whole-cell extracts and immunoprecipitation. For small-scale experiments, cell pellets were resuspended in lysis buffer and lysed with an equal volume of glass beads using a mini-bead beater. For larger-scale experiments, cell pellets were resuspended in an equal volume using 2x lysis buffer (0.3 M HEPES-KOH, 2 mM EDTA, 40% glycerol, 20 mM ß-glycerophosphate, 1 mM NaF, 2 mM dithiothreitol, 100 mM KCl, and 2x protease inhibitor cocktail; pH 7.6). The resulting yeast paste was extruded from a syringe into liquid nitrogen and crushed manually with a mortar and pestle. Broken cells were resuspended in an equal volume of 1x lysis buffer, and the final KCl concentration was adjusted to 200 mM. The subsequent anti-Flag M2 immunoprecipitation was performed as previously described (30), and the immunoprecipitated samples were analyzed using both our in vitro histone demethylation assay and sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis followed by Western blotting using anti-Flag M2 antibodies.
Antibodies and ChIP assays. Histone H3K36me2 rabbit polyclonal antibodies have been previously described (45), and the following other methyl-lysine-specific histone antibodies were obtained commercially from Abcam: H3K36me3 (Ab9050), H3K36me1(Ab9048), and H3 (Ab1791). Flag M2 antibody and M2 agarose were purchased from Sigma (F3165). ChIP assays were performed as described previously (36).
DNA amplification and labeling. All samples and references were amplified using a random primed PCR-based method (5). The first amplification round involved the use of primer A (5'-GTTTCCCAGTCACGATCNNNNNNNNN-3') in conjunction with Sequenase, a modified T7 DNA polymerase. In the second round, primer B (5'-GTTTCCCAGTCACGATC-3') was used with Taq DNA polymerase in 25 cycles of PCR. In the final round, the fluorescent nucleotide Cy3-dUTP or Cy5-dUTP was then incorporated directly into the reference or sample in an additional 25 cycles of PCR by using primer B and Taq DNA polymerase.
DNA microarray hybridization and scanning. Labeled ChIP DNA was purified and hybridized to DNA microarrays as previously described (17). DNA microarrays were manufactured using a robotic arrayer to print PCR products on poly-L-lysine-coated glass slides as described elsewhere (17). The microarray consisted of two types of probes. The first type represents the whole genome, based on annotated functional boundaries. These PCR-amplified products represent ORFs, intergenic regions, and other noncoding regions (rDNA, tRNA, transposons, transposon long terminal repeats, telomeres, centromeres, and introns). Generally, each ORF was represented from start codon to stop codon. The intergenic regions consisted of the DNA between annotated ORFs divided such that PCR products were not longer than 1.5 kb, with a few exceptions. The noncoding regions conform to boundaries as annotated by the Saccharomyces Genome Database (SGD; http://www.yeastgenome.org) as of the year 2000. Mitochondrial segments did not necessarily conform to annotated functional boundaries. The second type of probes are higher-resolution PCR-amplified products that span almost all of chromosome III at 200-bp resolution with additional overlapping products covering one-third of the chromosome at 100-bp resolution (coordinates 10,000 to 83,000). Images were acquired using a GenePix 4000B scanner and Genepix software (Molecular Devices).
Data acquisition and normalization.
Acquired images were inspected visually to remove low-quality probes. Raw data were submitted to the University of North Carolina (UNC) Microarray Database (http://genome.unc.edu). We retrieved the value from each probe as the log2-normalized ratio of the median intensity of sample pixels divided by the median intensity of reference pixels, and only the probes with a regression correlation of >0.6 (i.e., those comprised of pixels with consistent ratio values) were downloaded. The log2 ratio of each probe was transformed to a z-score by using the formula zx = (X µ)/
, where X is a retrieved probe value, µ is the mean of all retrieved probes from one array, and
is the standard deviation of all retrieved probes from that same array. Following z-score transformation, any technical replicates from dye-swap experiments were averaged and treated as one biological replicate, followed by averaging all biological replicates. Each ChIP-chip experiment was performed using three biological replicates.
Microarray data accession number. Raw microarray data are available from the UNC Microarray Database (UMD; https://genome.unc.edu). The data have also been deposited in the National Center for Biotechnology Information's Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo) and are accessible through GEO series accession number GSE7627.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
-KG-dependent manner.
To verify that Jhd1, but not a protein that coimmunoprecipitates with Jhd1, is responsible for the detected activity, we generated a recombinant Jhd1 protein. Consistent with our previous report (45), recombinant Jhd1 exhibited robust demethylase activity toward methylated H3K36me2 substrates. However, it did not exhibit any detectable activity towards H3K4me1 or H3K79me methylated substrates generated by hSET7 or hDOT1L (Fig. 1D). These data confirm that the JmjC domain-containing protein Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific histone demethylase in vitro.
We have previously demonstrated that JmjC domain-containing protein-mediated histone demethylation uses the same oxidative demethylation mechanism as that used by the AlkB family of DNA demethylases (45), which requires Fe(II) and
-KG as cofactors. To confirm the same oxidation mechanism applies to Jhd1, we tested the importance of the cofactors for the Jhd1-mediated demethylation reaction by omitting each cofactor individually from the demethylation reaction. As expected, omitting either Fe(II) or
-KG from the reaction mixture resulted in a significant decrease of the enzymatic activity, whereas omitting ascorbate alone had a mild effect (Fig. 1E). These data indicated that both Fe(II) and
-KG are critical for the enzymatic activity of Jhd1, while ascorbate can stimulate the activity, most likely due to its ability to regenerate Fe(II) from Fe(III). The above results demonstrate that Jhd1, the S. cerevisiae counterpart to human JHDM1, uses the same oxidative mechanism to specifically demethylate H3K36 in vitro.
Jhd1 is capable of modulating H3K36 methylation levels in vivo.
Having demonstrated that Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific histone demethylase in vitro, we then asked whether Jhd1 has the capacity to demethylate H3K36 in vivo. For this purpose, we generated a construct expressing Flag-tagged Jhd1 under control of the ADH1 promoter on a high-copy-number plasmid. JHD1 RNA levels in our overexpression strain were increased 13- to 24-fold relative to the wild type based on DNA microarray measurements of relative transcript levels (data not shown). We then analyzed the H3K36 methylation levels in strains carrying this construct using H3K36 methylation state-specific antibodies. We observed a moderate decrease in H3K36me2 and a slight decrease in H3K36me3 along with unaltered H3K36me1 levels in the JHD1 overexpression strain, whereas all three H3K36 methylation states remained relatively unchanged in the jhd1
strain comparing with the wild type (Fig. 1F). These results indicate that Jhd1, at least when overexpressed, can modulate H3K36 methylation levels in vivo.
The JmjC domain and adjacent sequences are required for Jhd1 demethylase activity.
Having established that Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific histone demethylase, we next evaluated the domain requirements for its demethylase activity. The crystal structure of the histone demethylase JMJD2A/JHDM3A revealed that the active center of the JmjC domain consists of a highly conserved H-X-D/E-Xn-H signature motif that is required for Fe(II) ion binding (7). In addition, structural studies and modeling also revealed the location of
-KG binding sites (44). Sequence alignment of Jhd1 with known active JmjC domain-containing histone demethylases indicated that all Fe(II) and
-KG binding sites of Jhd1 are conserved (Fig. 2A). Given the cofactor requirements (Fig. 1E), we hypothesized that amino acid substitutions within the predicted cofactor binding sites would abrogate the demethylase activity. Results shown in Fig. 2B to D (lanes 2 and 3) confirmed that the single amino acid substitutions T302A and H305A greatly impaired Jhd1's enzymatic activity. We conclude that the JmjC domain is critical for its demethylase activity.
|
-KG. It is therefore possible that this conserved tyrosine could affect the enzyme-
-KG interaction. Alternatively, it may influence the folding of the JmjC domain. We next evaluated whether any other sequences outside the JmjC domain are required for Jhd1 demethylase activity. To this end, we generated a series of N-terminal and C-terminal Jhd1 deletion mutants and evaluated their enzymatic activities in the formaldehyde release assay. Deletion of the 82 amino acids at the extreme C terminus of the JmjC domain almost completely abrogated the enzymatic activity of Jhd1 (Fig. 2B to D, lane 9). On the contrary, deletion of the 72 amino acids at the N terminus that includes the PHD domain only resulted in a 50% loss of Jhd1 activity (Fig. 2B to D, lane 5). Further deletion of the sequences N-terminal to the JmjC domain significantly impaired its enzymatic activity (Fig. 2B to D, lane 6 to 8). These results indicate that sequences adjacent to the JmjC domain are required for demethylase activity. It is possible that these sequences are required for the correct folding of the JmjC domain.
Jhd1 does not form a stable protein complex with other proteins. Having established that Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific demethylase, we attempted to identify its putative in vivo functional protein partners. Previous studies indicated that the human homolog of Jhd1 copurifies with a 20-kDa polypeptide (45). Therefore, we asked whether Jhd1 might associate with other proteins to mediate its biological function. To this end, we fractionated yeast whole-cell lysates from a Flag-tagged Jhd1 strain through six columns (Fig. 3A). Based on its elution profile on a Superdex 200 gel filtration column, although the predicted molecular mass of a Jhd1 monomer is 56.5 kDa, native Jhd1 occurs in a complex with an apparent molecular mass of 250 kDa (Fig. 3B). Several proteins appear to coelute with Jhd1 on this column. However, further purification on a heparin column indicated that these proteins do not coelute with Jhd1 (Fig. 3C). A protein of about 100 kDa cofractionates with Jhd1 on the heparin column (Fig. 3C) but does not coelute with Jhd1 on the gel filtration column (Fig. 3B). Furthermore, recombinant Jhd1 exhibited a similar elution profile as that of the native Jhd1 on the Superdex 200 column (data not shown).
|
Phenotypic analysis in jhd1
and JHD1 overexpression strains.
In an attempt to reveal the biological function of Jhd1, we performed phenotypic analysis in JHD1 knockout and overexpression strains. Given that Jhd1 is an H3K36-specific demethylase, deletion of JHD1 could result in phenotypes opposite to those observed for the H3K36 methyltransferase set2
strain. Previous studies indicated that deletion of SET2 confers reduced sensitivity to the IMP dehydrogenase inhibitor 6-azauracil (6-AU), which is thought to inhibit transcription elongation (25, 51). We therefore tested the 6-AU sensitivity of the jhd1
strain. As a positive control, we included the 6-AU-sensitive strain harboring a deletion of the transcription elongation factor RTF1 (restores TBP function) (10). This analysis, however, did not reveal any noticeable difference in 6-AU sensitivity between wild-type and jhd1
strains, although a difference between the set2
or rtf1
strains and the wild-type strain was observed (Fig. 4A). Similarly, overexpression of JHD1 also did not confer a significant change in 6-AU sensitivity (Fig. 4B). Further phenotypic analysis under a variety of conditions (15) revealed no obvious defects upon deletion of JHD1 (Fig. 4C). These data suggest that processes affected by Jhd1 might be regulated by another redundant gene, or Jhd1 might function in a specialized process yet to be revealed.
|
800 bp and higher-resolution probes spanning most of chromosome III at
200-bp resolution (see Materials and Methods). Data from each microarray were log2 transformed and converted to z-scores by centering the mean and normalizing the variance (see Materials and Methods). A previous ChIP-chip study demonstrated that H3K36me2 was enriched over ORFs, beginning at a stereotypic distance into the transcribed region and continuing 3' until termination of transcription (36). The H3K36me2 pattern we obtained for this study using the wild-type strain BY4741 matched the pattern described in the prior study, despite using a different yeast strain and antibody. H3K36me2 ChIP-chip data from the JHD1 overexpression strain correlated highly with data from the wild-type strain (Fig. 5A), revealing ORFs enriched relative to promoters (Fig. 5B). However, H3K36me2 was more enriched in nonpromoter regions (defined as intergenic regions downstream of two convergently transcribed genes) relative to ORFs in the JHD1 overexpression strain (compare Fig. 5C to B). The greater enrichment of nonpromoters raised the possibility that the pattern of H3K36me2 was shifted 3' along transcriptional units in the JHD1 overexpression strains.
|
For further evidence of a 3' shift, H3K36me2 distribution was measured with higher-resolution probes that tile chromosome III. Each probe was assigned to one of eight annotations that reflect their position in the genome with respect to ORFs (Fig. 5F). In the wild type, the peak of H3K36me2 is present in the central region of ORFs, while in the JHD1 overexpression strain, peak levels of H3K36me2 are found in the ORF probes adjacent to the stop codon. Furthermore, higher levels of H3K36me2 were observed in JHD1 overexpression strains at unidirectional promoters (which lie 3' of one gene) and nonpromoters (3' of two genes) but not bidirectional promoters (not 3' of any gene), providing more evidence for a subtle 3' shift of H3K36me2 upon JHD1 overexpression.
JHD1 knockout changes the stereotypic H3K36me2 distribution, resulting in a more uniform distribution across ORFs.
We also explored the pattern of H3K36me2 distribution in the jhd1
strain, despite a lack of detectable change in bulk histone methylation levels (Fig. 1F). We performed H3K36me2 ChIP-chip using extracts derived from the jhd1
strain, and we again found the H3K36me2 enrichment was highly correlated to the wild-type data (Fig. 6A). As in the wild type, ORFs were enriched relative to nonpromoters and promoters (Fig. 6B; compare to Fig. 5B). To detect any subtle changes in H3K36me2, we again analyzed our higher-resolution chromosome III probes. When these probes were assigned to one of eight annotations that reflect their position in the genome with respect to ORFs, we found that in contrast to the sharp increase in H3K36me2 observed just within the ORFs in the wild-type strain, in the jhd1
strain H3K36me2 was more uniformly distributed between the start and stop codons (Fig. 6C). Furthermore, aligning the higher-resolution probes relative to the translation start or stop site revealed changes in the relative distribution of H3K36me2 within genes (Fig. 6D and E). To validate our microarray observations further, we analyzed an 8-kb region located on chromosome III that exhibited differences in H3K36 methylation profiles after deletion of JHD1. Consistent with the ChIP-chip results presented above, in the jhd1
strain the H3K36me2 level was generally decreased within the ORF (Fig. 6F, lanes 1 to 5) and flat or slightly enriched on the 5' ends of some genes (Fig. 6F, lanes 9 to 13).
|
strain (Fig. 6G). Apparent H3K36me2 enrichment is observed at smaller ORFs in the jhd1
strain and levels out more quickly with increasing ORF length (Fig. 6G). This is consistent with a subtle 5' shift in the point at which H3K36me2 begins to be found along genes. Furthermore, a subtle 3' shift in the point at which H3K36me2 begins and ends along genes is predicted in the JHD1 overexpression strain. By the metric in Fig. 6G, one would expect the relationship between ORF size and apparent H3K36me2 enrichment to begin at longer ORFs and to proceed with a more gradual slope, which is in fact what we observe in the JHD1 overexpression strain (Fig. 6G). These differences between the wild type and strains with an altered JHD1 status provide additional evidence for Jhd1 function in maintaining a precise pattern of H3K36me2 distribution along genes.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In S. cerevisiae, histone H3K4 methylation and H3K36 methylation are mediated by Set1 and Set2, respectively (6, 37, 43). Previous studies indicate that Set1 and Set2 are recruited to gene coding regions by the PAF complex and play important roles in transcription initiation and elongation (21, 22, 24, 25, 33, 50). During transcriptional initiation, the Set1 complex is first recruited to the promoters where it trimethylates lysine 4 of histone H3. Set2 is then recruited by the PAF complex and travels with RNA polymerase II to methylate H3K36 during the elongation phase of transcription (13, 16). The data we present suggest that H3K36me2 levels are subject to another layer of regulation by Jhd1-mediated demethylation.
Limitations of our methods. While the in vitro radioactive formaldehyde release assay used in our screen is very sensitive, it has its limitations. For example, the methylation state of the substrates is limited by the methyltransferases used to generate the substrates. Given that histone demethylases identified so far exhibit both site and methylation-state specificity (20, 40, 52), it is possible that some of the JmjC domain-containing proteins that did not exhibit enzymatic activity in this study could be active enzymes when alternative substrates are used. Indeed, we have demonstrated using the radioactive formaldehyde release assay that another yeast JmjC domain-containing protein, Yjr119c/Jhd2, cannot demethylate substrates generated by the H3K4me1 methyltransferase hSET7 (23, 48, 49) but does have activity towards H3K4me3 substrates (26). A second limitation of the assay used in this study is the amount of enzyme obtained from the immunoprecipitation (Fig. 1). Although the immunoprecipitated proteins can be detected by Western blotting, the amounts may not be sufficient to catalyze detectable histone demethylation. Nevertheless, our study reveals Jhd1 as an active S. cerevisiae H3K36 demethylase.
We also stress that the results from our ChIP-chip studies reveal relative redistributions of H3K36me2 in response to changes in Jhd1 status, and these changes are most easily observed when many genes are analyzed in aggregate. Nevertheless, the relative changes we observed seem robust, since they were faithfully reproduced among three biological replicates for each strain. We caution against interpreting the data in terms of absolute H3K36me2 levels. For example, enrichment of H3K36me2 is apparently lower throughout the ORFs in JHD1 overexpression strains (Fig. 5D and E). However, because all of the measurements are relative, greater amounts of H3K36me2 elsewhere in the genome could cause an apparent decrease in ORF H3K36me2, even if the absolute amount of H3K36me2 in ORF chromatin remained constant.
A speculative model for Jhd1 function. In addition to being methylated by Set2, a recent study has demonstrated that H3K36 is acetylated by Gcn5p (31), raising the intriguing possibility that Jhd1 plays an important role in an H3K36 "switch" from methylation to acetylation. Such a modification "switch" is also supported by the results of two other recent studies. Proteome-wide analysis in yeast has shown that the PHD finger domain of Jhd1 is capable of specific binding to H3K4me3 but shows much less binding to H3K4me2 and no binding at all to H3K4me1, H3K36me1-3, or H3K79me1-3 (39). The H3K4me3 mark is predominantly found at the 5' end of transcription units where the transition between H3K36ac and H3K36me occurs. It is possible that the PHD domain of Jhd1 might facilitate recruitment of Jhd1 to the 5' end of genes by binding to the H3K4me3 mark, where it maintains low H3K36me2 levels. Furthermore, Gcn5p, which is responsible for H3K36ac, has been demonstrated to promote trimethylation of H3K4 during transcription induction (14). Collectively, our study and other recent studies suggest an intriguing but speculative model in which the transition from H3K36 acetylation to H3K36 methylation in 5' genic regions may proceed as follows: (i) Gcn5p as part of the SAGA complex is recruited to promoters; (ii) Gcn5p stimulates H4K4me3 by Set1; (iii) Jhd1 is recruited to H3K4me3 to ensure a demethylated state at H3K36; (iv) Gcn5p acetylates H3K36 in the promoter region; and (v) methylation of H3K36 proceeds by association of Set2 with RNA polymerase II during transcriptional elongation.
This model would be consistent with the more-5' "early start" of H3K36me2 observed in the JHD1 knockout and with the "delayed start" or more-3' distribution of H3K36me2 observed in the JHD1 overexpression strains. In the knockout, H3K36 would fail to be demethylated at promoters, resulting in an apparent 5' shift in H3K36me2. Thus, the apparent 5' shift is actually caused by failure to remove methyl groups from H3K36 rather than appearance of "new" H3K36me2. In the overexpression strain, we speculate that Jhd1 is overabundant and fails to be restricted precisely within the 5' end of transcription units, causing demethylation to extend further into the gene. This results in an apparent 3' shift in H3K36me2 upon Jhd1 overexpression. We speculate that the loss of methylation at 5' ends of genes is actual and that, due to the relative nature of our measurements, this decrease causes 3' regions to appear more enriched in comparison. This would explain how an enzyme that we postulate to act only at 5' ends of genes could affect measured methylation in both 5' and 3' regions.
Based on this model, Jhd1 could play a role in transcription initiation by indirectly facilitating hyperacetylation of promoter nucleosomes. Future studies will allow this model to be tested and the function of Jhd1 in transcription to be revealed.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
, spt4
, rtf1
, snf2
, spt7
, htz1
, and sir2
strains and for his generous help. This work was supported by NIH grants GM68804 to Y.Z. and GM072518 to J.D.L. Y.Z. is an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 30 April 2007. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Bannister, A. J., R. Schneider, F. A. Myers, A. W. Thorne, C. Crane-Robinson, and T. Kouzarides. 2005. Spatial distribution of di- and tri-methyl lysine 36 of histone H3 at active genes. J. Biol. Chem. 280:17732-17736.
3. Basrai, M. A., J. Kingsbury, D. Koshland, F. Spencer, and P. Hieter. 1996. Faithful chromosome transmission requires Spt4p, a putative regulator of chromatin structure in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:2838-2847.[Abstract]
4. Bernstein, B. E., E. L. Humphrey, R. L. Erlich, R. Schneider, P. Bouman, J. S. Liu, T. Kouzarides, and S. L. Schreiber. 2002. Methylation of histone H3 Lys 4 in coding regions of active genes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:8695-8700.
5. Bohlander, S. K., R. Espinosa III, M. M. Le Beau, J. D. Rowley, and M. O. Diaz. 1992. A method for the rapid sequence-independent amplification of microdissected chromosomal material. Genomics 13:1322-1324.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Briggs, S. D., M. Bryk, B. D. Strahl, W. L. Cheung, J. K. Davie, S. Y. Dent, F. Winston, and C. D. Allis. 2001. Histone H3 lysine 4 methylation is mediated by Set1 and required for cell growth and rDNA silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev. 15:3286-3295.
7. Chen, Z., J. Zang, J. Whetstine, X. Hong, F. Davrazou, T. G. Kutateladze, M. Simpson, Q. Mao, C. H. Pan, S. Dai, J. Hagman, K. Hansen, Y. Shi, and G. Zhang. 2006. Structural insights into histone demethylation by JMJD2 family members. Cell 125:691-702.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Clissold, P. M., and C. P. Ponting. 2001. JmjC: cupin metalloenzyme-like domains in jumonji, hairless and phospholipase A2ß. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:7-9.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Cloos, P. A., J. Christensen, K. Agger, A. Maiolica, J. Rappsilber, T. Antal, K. H. Hansen, and K. Helin. 2006. The putative oncogene GASC1 demethylates tri- and dimethylated lysine 9 on histone H3. Nature 442:307-311.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Desmoucelles, C., B. Pinson, C. Saint-Marc, and B. Daignan-Fornier. 2002. Screening the yeast "disruptome" for mutants affecting resistance to the immunosuppressive drug, mycophenolic acid. J. Biol. Chem. 277:27036-27044.
11. Fang, J., H. Wang, and Y. Zhang. 2004. Purification of histone methyltransferases from HeLa cells. Methods Enzymol. 377:213-226.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Gelbart, M. E., T. Rechsteiner, T. J. Richmond, and T. Tsukiyama. 2001. Interactions of Isw2 chromatin remodeling complex with nucleosomal arrays: analyses using recombinant yeast histones and immobilized templates. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21:2098-2106.
13. Gerber, M., and A. Shilatifard. 2003. Transcriptional elongation by RNA polymerase II and histone methylation. J. Biol. Chem. 278:26303-26306.
14. Govind, C. K., F. Zhang, H. Qiu, K. Hofmeyer, and A. G. Hinnebusch. 2007. Gcn5 promotes acetylation, eviction, and methylation of nucleosomes in transcribed coding regions. Mol. Cell 25:31-42.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Hampsey, M. 1997. A review of phenotypes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 13:1099-1133.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Hampsey, M., and D. Reinberg. 2003. Tails of intrigue: phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II mediates histone methylation. Cell 113:429-432.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Iyer, V. R., C. E. Horak, C. S. Scafe, D. Botstein, M. Snyder, and P. O. Brown. 2001. Genomic binding sites of the yeast cell-cycle transcription factors SBF and MBF. Nature 409:533-538.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Jenuwein, T., and C. D. Allis. 2001. Translating the histone code. Science 293:1074-1080.
19. Klose, R. J., E. M. Kallin, and Y. Zhang. 2006. JmjC-domain-containing proteins and histone demethylation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7:715-727.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Klose, R. J., K. Yamane, Y. Bae, D. Zhang, H. Erdjument-Bromage, P. Tempst, J. Wong, and Y. Zhang. 2006. The transcriptional repressor JHDM3A demethylates trimethyl histone H3 lysine 9 and lysine 36. Nature 442:312-316.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Krogan, N. J., J. Dover, A. Wood, J. Schneider, J. Heidt, M. A. Boateng, K. Dean, O. W. Ryan, A. Golshani, M. Johnston, J. F. Greenblatt, and A. Shilatifard. 2003. The Paf1 complex is required for histone H3 methylation by COMPASS and Dot1p: linking transcriptional elongation to histone methylation. Mol. Cell 11:721-729.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Krogan, N. J., M. Kim, A. Tong, A. Golshani, G. Cagney, V. Canadien, D. P. Richards, B. K. Beattie, A. Emili, C. Boone, A. Shilatifard, S. Buratowski, and J. Greenblatt. 2003. Methylation of histone H3 by Set2 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is linked to transcriptional elongation by RNA polymerase II. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23:4207-4218.
23. Kwon, T., J. H. Chang, E. Kwak, C. W. Lee, A. Joachimiak, Y. C. Kim, J. Lee, and Y. Cho. 2003. Mechanism of histone lysine methyl transfer revealed by the structure of SET7/9-AdoMet. EMBO J. 22:292-303.[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Li, B., L. Howe, S. Anderson, J. R. Yates III, and J. L. Workman. 2003. The Set2 histone methyltransferase functions through the phosphorylated carboxyl-terminal domain of RNA polymerase II. J. Biol. Chem. 278:8897-8903.
25. Li, J., D. Moazed, and S. P. Gygi. 2002. Association of the histone methyltransferase Set2 with RNA polymerase II plays a role in transcription elongation. J. Biol. Chem. 277:49383-49388.
26. Liang, G., R. J. Klose, K. E. Gardner, and Y. Zhang. 2007. Yeast Jhd2p is a histone H3 Lys4 trimethyl demethylase. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14:243-245.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Liu, C. L., T. Kaplan, M. Kim, S. Buratowski, S. L. Schreiber, N. Friedman, and O. J. Rando. 2005. Single-nucleosome mapping of histone modifications in S. cerevisiae. PLoS Biol. 3:e328.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Margueron, R., P. Trojer, and D. Reinberg. 2005. The key to development: interpreting the histone code? Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 15:163-176.[CrossRef][Medline]
29. Martin, C., and Y. Zhang. 2005. The diverse functions of histone lysine methylation. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6:838-849.[Medline]
30. Mizuguchi, G., X. Shen, J. Landry, W. H. Wu, S. Sen, and C. Wu. 2004. ATP-driven exchange of histone H2AZ variant catalyzed by SWR1 chromatin remodeling complex. Science 303:343-348.
31. Morris, S. A., B. Rao, B. A. Garcia, S. B. Hake, R. L. Diaz, J. Shabanowitz, D. F. Hunt, C. D. Allis, J. D. Lieb, and B. D. Strahl. 2006. Identification of histone H3 lysine 36 acetylation as a highly conserved histone modification. J. Biol. Chem. 282:7632-7640.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Neigeborn, L., and M. Carlson. 1984. Genes affecting the regulation of SUC2 gene expression by glucose repression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 108:845-858.
33. Ng, H. H., F. Robert, R. A. Young, and K. Struhl. 2003. Targeted recruitment of Set1 histone methylase by elongating Pol II provides a localized mark and memory of recent transcriptional activity. Mol. Cell 11:709-719.[CrossRef][Medline]
34. Patton-Vogt, J. L., and S. A. Henry. 1998. GIT1, a gene encoding a novel transporter for glycerophosphoinositol in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 149:1707-1715.
35. Pokholok, D. K., C. T. Harbison, S. Levine, M. Cole, N. M. Hannett, T. I. Lee, G. W. Bell, K. Walker, P. A. Rolfe, E. Herbolsheimer, J. Zeitlinger, F. Lewitter, D. K. Gifford, and R. A. Young. 2005. Genome-wide map of nucleosome acetylation and methylation in yeast. Cell 122:517-527.[CrossRef][Medline]
36. Rao, B., Y. Shibata, B. D. Strahl, and J. D. Lieb. 2005. Dimethylation of histone H3 at lysine 36 demarcates regulatory and nonregulatory chromatin genome-wide. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25:9447-9459.
37. Roguev, A., D. Schaft, A. Shevchenko, W. W. Pijnappel, M. Wilm, R. Aasland, and A. F. Stewart. 2001. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Set1 complex includes an Ash2 homologue and methylates histone 3 lysine 4. EMBO J. 20:7137-7148.[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Santos-Rosa, H., R. Schneider, A. J. Bannister, J. Sherriff, B. E. Bernstein, N. C. Emre, S. L. Schreiber, J. Mellor, and T. Kouzarides. 2002. Active genes are tri-methylated at K4 of histone H3. Nature 419:407-411.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Shi, X., I. Kachirskaia, K. L. Walter, J. H. Kuo, A. Lake, F. Davrazou, S. M. Chan, D. G. Martin, I. M. Fingerman, S. D. Briggs, L. Howe, P. J. Utz, T. G. Kutateladze, A. A. Lugovskoy, M. T. Bedford, and O. Gozani. 2006. Proteome-wide analysis in S. cerevisiae identifies several PHD fingers as novel direct and selective binding modules of histone H3 methylated at either lysine 4 or lysine 36. J. Biol. Chem. 282:2450-2455.[CrossRef][Medline]
40. Shi, Y., F. Lan, C. Matson, P. Mulligan, J. R. Whetstine, P. A. Cole, R. A. Casero, and Y. Shi. 2004. Histone demethylation mediated by the nuclear amine oxidase homolog LSD1. Cell 119:941-953.[CrossRef][Medline]
41. Siegel, L. M., and K. J. Monty. 1966. Determination of molecular weights and frictional ratios of proteins in impure systems by use of gel filtration and density gradient centrifugation. Application to crude preparations of sulfite and hydroxylamine reductases. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 112:346-362.[Medline]
42. Smith, J. S., C. B. Brachmann, I. Celic, M. A. Kenna, S. Muhammad, V. J. Starai, J. L. Avalos, J. C. Escalante-Semerena, C. Grubmeyer, C. Wolberger, and J. D. Boeke. 2000. A phylogenetically conserved NAD+-dependent protein deacetylase activity in the Sir2 protein family. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:6658-6663.
43. Strahl, B. D., P. A. Grant, S. D. Briggs, Z. W. Sun, J. R. Bone, J. A. Caldwell, S. Mollah, R. G. Cook, J. Shabanowitz, D. F. Hunt, and C. D. Allis. 2002. Set2 is a nucleosomal histone H3-selective methyltransferase that mediates transcriptional repression. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:1298-1306.
44. Trewick, S. C., P. J. McLaughlin, and R. C. Allshire. 2005. Methylation: lost in hydroxylation? EMBO Rep. 6:315-320.[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Tsukada, Y., J. Fang, H. Erdjument-Bromage, M. E. Warren, C. H. Borchers, P. Tempst, and Y. Zhang. 2006. Histone demethylation by a family of JmjC domain-containing proteins. Nature 439:811-816.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Wang, H., R. Cao, L. Xia, H. Erdjument-Bromage, C. Borchers, P. Tempst, and Y. Zhang. 2001. Purification and functional characterization of a histone H3-lysine 4-specific methyltransferase. Mol. Cell 8:1207-1217.[CrossRef][Medline]
47. Whetstine, J. R., A. Nottke, F. Lan, M. Huarte, S. Smolikov, Z. Chen, E. Spooner, E. Li, G. Zhang, M. Colaiacovo, and Y. Shi. 2006. Reversal of histone lysine trimethylation by the JMJD2 family of histone demethylases. Cell 125:467-481.[CrossRef][Medline]
48. Wilson, J. R., C. Jing, P. A. Walker, S. R. Martin, S. A. Howell, G. M. Blackburn, S. J. Gamblin, and B. Xiao. 2002. Crystal structure and functional analysis of the histone methyltransferase SET7/9. Cell 111:105-115.[CrossRef][Medline]
49. Xiao, B., C. Jing, J. R. Wilson, P. A. Walker, N. Vasisht, G. Kelly, S. Howell, I. A. Taylor, G. M. Blackburn, and S. J. Gamblin. 2003. Structure and catalytic mechanism of the human histone methyltransferase SET7/9. Nature 421:652-656.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Xiao, T., H. Hall, K. O. Kizer, Y. Shibata, M. C. Hall, C. H. Borchers, and B. D. Strahl. 2003. Phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II CTD regulates H3 methylation in yeast. Genes Dev. 17:654-663.
51. Xiao, T., C. F. Kao, N. J. Krogan, Z. W. Sun, J. F. Greenblatt, M. A. Osley, and B. D. Strahl. 2005. Histone H2B ubiquitylation is associated with elongating RNA polymerase II. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25:637-651.
52. Yamane, K., C. Toumazou, Y. Tsukada, H. Erdjument-Bromage, P. Tempst, J. Wong, and Y. Zhang. 2006. JHDM2A, a JmjC-containing H3K9 demethylase, facilitates transcription activation by androgen receptor. Cell 125:483-495.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||