scholarly journals Biochemically distinct cohesin complexes mediate positioned loops between CTCF sites and dynamic loops within chromatin domains

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Liu ◽  
Job Dekker
Keyword(s):  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Experimental Approach ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Genomic Context ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Chromatin Domains ◽  
Isolated Nuclei ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion

The ring-like cohesin complex mediates sister chromatid cohesion by encircling pairs of sister chromatids. Cohesin also extrudes loops along chromatids. Whether the two activities involve similar mechanisms of DNA engagement is not known. We implemented an experimental approach based on isolated nuclei carrying engineered cleavable RAD21 proteins to precisely control cohesin ring integrity so that its role in chromatin looping could be studied under defined experimental conditions. This approach allowed us to identify cohesin complexes with distinct biochemical, and possibly structural properties, that mediate different sets of chromatin loops. When RAD21 is cleaved and the cohesin ring is opened, cohesin complexes at CTCF sites are released from DNA and loops at these elements are lost. In contrast, cohesin-dependent loops within chromatin domains and that are not anchored at CTCF sites are more resistant to RAD21 cleavage. The results show that the cohesin complex mediates loops in different ways depending on genomic context and suggests that it undergoes structural changes as it dynamically extrudes and encounters CTCF sites.

Getting through anaphase: splitting the sisters and beyond

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 1639-1644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raquel A. Oliveira ◽  
Kim Nasmyth
Keyword(s):  
Chromosome Segregation ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Present Review ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Physical Separation ◽  
Cohesive Forces ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Pulling Forces ◽  
Random Segregation

Sister-chromatid cohesion, thought to be primarily mediated by the cohesin complex, is essential for chromosome segregation. The forces holding the two sisters resist the tendency of microtubules to prematurely pull sister DNAs apart and thereby prevent random segregation of the genome during mitosis, and consequent aneuploidy. By counteracting the spindle pulling forces, cohesion between the two sisters generates the tension necessary to stabilize microtubule–kinetochore attachments. Upon entry into anaphase, however, the linkages that hold the two sister DNAs must be rapidly destroyed to allow physical separation of chromatids. Anaphase cells must therefore possess mechanisms that ensure faithful segregation of single chromatids that are now attached stably to the spindle in a manner no longer dependent on tension. In the present review, we discuss the nature of the cohesive forces that hold sister chromatids together, the mechanisms that trigger their physical separation, and the anaphase-specific changes that ensure proper segregation of single chromatids during the later stages of mitosis.

scholarly journals Interallelic complementation provides functional evidence for cohesin–cohesin interactions on DNA

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (23) ◽  
pp. 4224-4235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Eng ◽  
Vincent Guacci ◽  
Douglas Koshland
Keyword(s):  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Single Copy ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Multiple Roles ◽  
Restrictive Temperature ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Chromosome Architecture ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Interallelic Complementation

The cohesin complex (Mcd1p, Smc1p, Smc3p, and Scc3p) has multiple roles in chromosome architecture, such as promoting sister chromatid cohesion, chromosome condensation, DNA repair, and transcriptional regulation. The prevailing embrace model for sister chromatid cohesion posits that a single cohesin complex entraps both sister chromatids. We report interallelic complementation between pairs of nonfunctional mcd1 alleles (mcd1-1 and mcd1-Q266) or smc3 alleles (smc3-42 and smc3-K113R). Cells bearing individual mcd1 or smc3 mutant alleles are inviable and defective for both sister chromatid cohesion and condensation. However, cells coexpressing two defective mcd1 or two defective smc3 alleles are viable and have cohesion and condensation. Because cohesin contains only a single copy of Smc3p or Mcd1p, these examples of interallelic complementation must result from interplay or communication between the two defective cohesin complexes, each harboring one of the mutant allele products. Neither mcd1-1p nor smc3-42p is bound to chromosomes when expressed individually at its restrictive temperature. However, their chromosome binding is restored when they are coexpressed with their chromosome-bound interallelic complementing partner. Our results support a mechanism by which multiple cohesin complexes interact on DNA to mediate cohesion and condensation.

scholarly journals Evidence for cohesin sliding along budding yeast chromosomes

Open Biology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 150178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Ocampo-Hafalla ◽  
Sofía Muñoz ◽  
Catarina P. Samora ◽  
Frank Uhlmann
Keyword(s):  
Chromosome Segregation ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Budding Yeast ◽  
Transcription Termination ◽  
Gene Activation ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Active Genes

The ring-shaped cohesin complex is thought to topologically hold sister chromatids together from their synthesis in S phase until chromosome segregation in mitosis. How cohesin stably binds to chromosomes for extended periods, without impeding other chromosomal processes that also require access to the DNA, is poorly understood. Budding yeast cohesin is loaded onto DNA by the Scc2–Scc4 cohesin loader at centromeres and promoters of active genes, from where cohesin translocates to more permanent places of residence at transcription termination sites. Here we show that, at the GAL2 and MET17 loci, pre-existing cohesin is pushed downstream along the DNA in response to transcriptional gene activation, apparently without need for intermittent dissociation or reloading. We observe translocation intermediates and find that the distribution of most chromosomal cohesin is shaped by transcription. Our observations support a model in which cohesin is able to slide laterally along chromosomes while maintaining topological contact with DNA. In this way, stable cohesin binding to DNA and enduring sister chromatid cohesion become compatible with simultaneous underlying chromosomal activities, including but maybe not limited to transcription.

scholarly journals SOLO: a meiotic protein required for centromere cohesion, coorientation, and SMC1 localization in Drosophila melanogaster

2010 ◽  
Vol 188 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rihui Yan ◽  
Sharon E. Thomas ◽  
Jui-He Tsai ◽  
Yukihiro Yamada ◽  
Bruce D. McKee
Keyword(s):  
Drosophila Melanogaster ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Early Prophase ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Mutant Phenotypes ◽  
Meiosis I ◽  
Novel Protein

Sister chromatid cohesion is essential to maintain stable connections between homologues and sister chromatids during meiosis and to establish correct centromere orientation patterns on the meiosis I and II spindles. However, the meiotic cohesion apparatus in Drosophila melanogaster remains largely uncharacterized. We describe a novel protein, sisters on the loose (SOLO), which is essential for meiotic cohesion in Drosophila. In solo mutants, sister centromeres separate before prometaphase I, disrupting meiosis I centromere orientation and causing nondisjunction of both homologous and sister chromatids. Centromeric foci of the cohesin protein SMC1 are absent in solo mutants at all meiotic stages. SOLO and SMC1 colocalize to meiotic centromeres from early prophase I until anaphase II in wild-type males, but both proteins disappear prematurely at anaphase I in mutants for mei-S332, which encodes the Drosophila homologue of the cohesin protector protein shugoshin. The solo mutant phenotypes and the localization patterns of SOLO and SMC1 indicate that they function together to maintain sister chromatid cohesion in Drosophila meiosis.

scholarly journals Absence of the Spindle Assembly Checkpoint restores mitotic fidelity upon loss of sister chromatid cohesion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui D. Silva ◽  
Mihailo Mirkovic ◽  
Leonardo G. Guilgur ◽  
Om S. Rathore ◽  
Rui Gonçalo Martinho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Survival ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Spindle Assembly Checkpoint ◽  
Genome Shuffling ◽  
Spindle Assembly ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Abnormal Development ◽  
Wing Development ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion

AbstractSister chromatid cohesion is essential for faithful mitosis, as premature cohesion loss leads to random chromosome segregation and aneuploidy, resulting in abnormal development. To identify specific conditions capable of restoring defects associated with cohesion loss, we screened for genes whose depletion modulates Drosophila wing development when sister chromatid cohesion is impaired. Cohesion deficiency was induced by knock-down of the acetyltransferase Separation anxiety (San)/Naa50, a cohesin complex stabilizer. Several genes whose function impacts wing development upon cohesion loss were identified. Surprisingly, knockdown of key Spindle Assembly Checkpoint (SAC) proteins, Mad2 and Mps1, suppressed developmental defects associated with San depletion. SAC impairment upon cohesin removal, triggered by San depletion or artificial removal of the cohesin complex, prevented extensive genome shuffling, reduced segregation defects and restored cell survival. This counterintuitive phenotypic suppression was caused by an intrinsic bias for efficient chromosome bi-orientation at mitotic entry, coupled with slow engagement of error-correction reactions. We conclude that mitotic timing determines the severity of defects associated with cohesion deficiency. Therefore, although divisions are still error-prone, SAC inactivation enhances cell survival and tissue homeostasis upon cohesion loss.

scholarly journals Scc2/Nipbl hops between chromosomal cohesin rings after loading

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D.P. Rhodes ◽  
Davide Mazza ◽  
Kim A. Nasmyth ◽  
Stephan Uphoff
Keyword(s):  
Single Molecule ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Fluorescence Recovery After Photobleaching ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Dna Looping ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Single Molecule Tracking ◽  
Loading Function ◽  
Stop And Go ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion

AbstractThe cohesin complex mediates DNA-DNA interactions both between (sister chromatid cohesion) and within chromosomes (DNA looping) via a process thought to involve entrapment of DNAs within its tripartite ring. It has been suggested that intra- chromosome loops are generated through processive extrusion of DNAs through the lumen of cohesin’s ring. Scc2 (Nipbl) is essential for loading cohesin onto chromosomes but not for maintaining sister chromatid cohesion following DNA replication. It has therefore been assumed that Scc2 is involved exclusively in the cohesin loading process. However, it is possible that the stimulation of cohesin’s ABC-like ATPase by Scc2 also has a post-loading function, for example driving loop extrusion. Using fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) and single-molecule tracking, we show that Scc2 binds dynamically to chromatin, principally through an association with cohesin. Scc2’s movement within chromatin is consistent with a “stop-and-go” or “hopping” motion. We suggest that a low diffusion coefficient, a low stoichiometry relative to cohesin, and a high affinity for chromosomal cohesin enables Scc2 to move rapidly from one chromosomal cohesin complex to another, performing a function distinct from loading.

scholarly journals Meiotic cohesin REC8 marks the axial elements of rat synaptonemal complexes before cohesins SMC1β and SMC3

2003 ◽  
Vol 160 (5) ◽  
pp. 657-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Eijpe ◽  
Hildo Offenberg ◽  
Rolf Jessberger ◽  
Ekaterina Revenkova ◽  
Christa Heyting
Keyword(s):  
Synaptonemal Complex ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Meiotic Prophase ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Synaptonemal Complexes ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Axial Element ◽  
Striking Contrast ◽  
Metaphase I

In meiotic prophase, the sister chromatids of each chromosome develop a common axial element (AE) that is integrated into the synaptonemal complex (SC). We analyzed the incorporation of sister chromatid cohesion proteins (cohesins) and other AE components into AEs. Meiotic cohesin REC8 appeared shortly before premeiotic S phase in the nucleus and formed AE-like structures (REC8-AEs) from premeiotic S phase on. Subsequently, meiotic cohesin SMC1β, cohesin SMC3, and AE proteins SCP2 and SCP3 formed dots along REC8-AEs, which extended and fused until they lined REC8-AEs along their length. In metaphase I, SMC1β, SMC3, SCP2, and SCP3 disappeared from the chromosome arms and accumulated around the centromeres, where they stayed until anaphase II. In striking contrast, REC8 persisted along the chromosome arms until anaphase I and near the centromeres until anaphase II. We propose that REC8 provides a basis for AE formation and that the first steps in AE assembly do not require SMC1β, SMC3, SCP2, and SCP3. Furthermore, SMC1β, SMC3, SCP2, and SCP3 cannot provide arm cohesion during metaphase I. We propose that REC8 then provides cohesion. RAD51 and/or DMC1 coimmunoprecipitates with REC8, suggesting that REC8 may also provide a basis for assembly of recombination complexes.

scholarly journals Chromosome interaction over a distance in meiosis

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 150029 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Brady ◽  
Leocadia V. Paliulis
Keyword(s):  
Cell Division ◽  
Sex Chromosomes ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Daughter Cell ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Physical Connection ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Random Segregation

The challenge of cell division is to distribute partner chromosomes (pairs of homologues, pairs of sex chromosomes or pairs of sister chromatids) correctly, one into each daughter cell. In the ‘standard’ meiosis, this problem is solved by linking partners together via a chiasma and/or sister chromatid cohesion, and then separating the linked partners from one another in anaphase; thus, the partners are kept track of, and correctly distributed. Many organisms, however, properly separate chromosomes in the absence of any obvious physical connection, and movements of unconnected partner chromosomes are coordinated at a distance. Meiotic distance interactions happen in many different ways and in different types of organisms. In this review, we discuss several different known types of distance segregation and propose possible explanations for non-random segregation of distance-segregating chromosomes.

scholarly journals Pds5p regulates the maintenance of sister chromatid cohesion and is sumoylated to promote the dissolution of cohesion

2003 ◽  
Vol 163 (4) ◽  
pp. 729-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Stead ◽  
Cristina Aguilar ◽  
Theresa Hartman ◽  
Melissa Drexel ◽  
Pamela Meluh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Temperature Sensitivity ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Cohesin Complex ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Chromosomal Loci

Pds5p and the cohesin complex are required for sister chromatid cohesion and localize to the same chromosomal loci over the same cell cycle window. However, Pds5p and the cohesin complex likely have distinct roles in cohesion. We report that pds5 mutants establish cohesion, but during mitosis exhibit precocious sister dissociation. Thus, unlike the cohesin complex, which is required for cohesion establishment and maintenance, Pds5p is required only for maintenance. We identified SMT4, which encodes a SUMO isopeptidase, as a high copy suppressor of both the temperature sensitivity and precocious sister dissociation of pds5 mutants. In contrast, SMT4 does not suppress temperature sensitivity of cohesin complex mutants. Pds5p is SUMO conjugated, with sumoylation peaking during mitosis. SMT4 overexpression reduces Pds5p sumoylation, whereas smt4 mutants have increased Pds5p sumoylation. smt4 mutants were previously shown to be defective in cohesion maintenance during mitosis. These data provide the first link between a protein required for cohesion, Pds5p, and sumoylation, and suggest that Pds5p sumoylation promotes the dissolution of cohesion.

scholarly journals A conserved activity for cohesin in bridging DNA molecules

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pilar Gutierrez-Escribano ◽  
Matthew D. Newton ◽  
Aida Llauró ◽  
Jonas Huber ◽  
Loredana Tanasie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Molecule ◽  
Sister Chromatid ◽  
Regulation Of Gene Expression ◽  
Sister Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Dna Molecules ◽  
Chromosome Architecture ◽  
Physiological Conditions ◽  
Sister Chromatids ◽  
Chromatid Cohesion ◽  
Core Activity

AbstractEssential processes such as accurate chromosome segregation, regulation of gene expression and DNA repair rely on protein-mediated DNA tethering. Sister chromatid cohesion requires the SMC complex cohesin to act as a protein linker that holds replicated chromatids together (1, 2). The molecular mechanism by which cohesins hold sister chromatids has remained controversial. Here, we used a single molecule approach to visualise the activity of cohesin complexes as they hold DNA molecules. We describe a DNA bridging activity that requires ATP and is conserved from yeast to human cohesin. We show that cohesin can form two distinct classes of bridges at physiological conditions, a “permanent bridge” able to resists high force (over 80pN) and a “reversible bridge” that breaks at lower forces (5-40pN). Both classes of bridges require Scc2/Scc4 in addition to ATP. We demonstrate that bridge formation requires physical proximity of the DNA segments to be tethered and show that “permanent” cohesin bridges can move between two DNA molecules but cannot be removed from DNA when they occur in cis. This suggests that separate physical compartments in cohesin molecules are involved in the bridge. Finally, we show that cohesin tetramers, unlike condensin, cannot compact linear DNA molecules against low force, demonstrating that the core activity of cohesin tetramers is bridging DNA rather than compacting it. Our findings carry important implications for the understanding of the basic mechanisms behind cohesin-dependent establishment of sister chromatid cohesion and chromosome architecture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document