|
|
||||||||
|
First published online March 31, 2006; 10.1105/tpc.106.041400 The Plant Cell 18:1166-1176 (2006) © 2006 American Society of Plant Biologists Locus-Specific Control of DNA Methylation by the Arabidopsis SUVH5 Histone Methyltransferase[W]Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205 1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail jbender{at}mail.jhmi.edu; fax 410-955-2926.
In Arabidopsis thaliana, heterochromatin formation is guided by double-stranded RNA (dsRNA), which triggers methylation of histone H3 at Lys-9 (H3 mK9) and CG plus non-CG methylation on identical DNA sequences. At heterochromatin targets including transposons and centromere repeats, H3 mK9 mediated by the Su(var)3-9 homologue 4 (SUVH4)/KYP histone methyltransferase (MTase) is required for the maintenance of non-CG methylation by the CMT3 DNA MTase. Here, we show that although SUVH4 is the major H3 K9 MTase, the SUVH5 protein also has histone MTase activity in vitro and contributes to the maintenance of H3 mK9 and CMT3-mediated non-CG methylation in vivo. Strikingly, the relative contributions of SUVH4, SUVH5, and a third related histone MTase, SUVH6, to non-CG methylation are locus-specific. For example, SUVH4 and SUVH5 together control transposon sequences with only a minor contribution from SUVH6, whereas SUVH4 and SUVH6 together control a transcribed inverted repeat source of dsRNA with only a minor contribution from SUVH5. This locus-specific variation suggests different mechanisms for recruiting or activating SUVH enzymes at different heterochromatic sequences. The suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 triple mutant loses both monomethyl and dimethyl H3 K9 at target loci. The suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 mutant also displays a loss of non-CG methylation similar to a cmt3 mutant, indicating that SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 together control CMT3 activity.
Correct maintenance of heterochromatin patterns is essential for gene regulation and genome stability in eukaryotes (reviewed in Lippman and Martienssen, 2004
Plant RNA-directed DNA methylation occurs in both CG and non-CG contexts. Genetic studies in Arabidopsis thaliana have implicated three structurally distinct cytosine methyltransferases (MTases) in this process: the DRM1/DRM2 cytosine MTases initiate new DNA methylation imprints in response to a dsRNA signal, whereas the MET1 and CMT3 cytosine MTases maintain methylation in CG and non-CG contexts, respectively (reviewed in Mathieu and Bender, 2004
CMT3-mediated non-CG methylation depends on the Su(var)3-9 homologue 4 (SUVH4)/KYP (hereafter referred to as SUVH4) H3 K9 MTase, suggesting that CMT3 is guided to target sequences by the H3 mK9 modification (Jackson et al., 2002
SUVH6 has similar in vitro H3 K9 MTase activity to SUVH4 (Jackson et al., 2004
We found that double mutation of suvh4 and suvh6 strongly reduced H3 K9 and non-CG methylation on PAI1-PAI4, indicating that SUVH4 and SUVH6 act together to maintain epigenetic modifications at this transcribed inverted repeat locus (Ebbs et al., 2005 Importantly, SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 make different relative contributions to non-CG methylation at different loci. For example, although SUVH4 and SUVH6 control the majority of non-CG methylation at the PAI1-PAI4 transcribed inverted repeat, SUVH4 and SUVH5 control the majority of non-CG methylation at the Ta3 and Mu1 transposons. These results suggest locus-specific variation in the factors that recruit or activate SUVH enzymes at RNA-directed DNA methylation targets. Thus, the Arabidopsis SUVHs can potentially be exploited for genetic and biochemical identification of novel components that connect heterochromatin-modifying enzymes with dsRNA signals.
SUVH5 Has in Vitro H3 K9 MTase Activity In previous work, we determined that a suvh4 suvh6 double H3 K9 MTase mutant retains residual non-CG methylation on the PAI genes, transposon sequences, and centromere repeats relative to a cmt3 cytosine MTase mutant (Ebbs et al., 2005
To determine the specificity of SUVH5 on H3, we tested for activity against a series of recombinant GST-H3 peptide substrates (residues 1 to 57): wild type (H3N), a mutant with only Lys-4 (N4), a mutant with only Lys-9 (N9), a mutant with only Lys-27 (N27), or a mutant with no Lys residues (NT) (Tachibana et al., 2001
Histone MTases can add one, two, or three methyl groups to a substrate Lys side chain. Structural analysis of a known histone mono-MTase, the mammalian SET7/9 enzyme, versus a known histone tri-MTase, the Neurospora DIM-5 enzyme, revealed that this difference in activity can be attributed to a conserved active site position that carries a Tyr in the mono-MTase versus a less bulky Phe in the tri-MTase (Zhang et al., 2003 To test the MTase properties of SUVH5 relative to SUVH4, we engineered tri-MTase mutant variants of these enzymes with the conserved Tyr mutated to Phe (SUVH4Y591F and SUVH5Y761F) and assayed their ability to add a third methyl group to an H3 dimethyl K9 peptide substrate. Both mutant enzymes methylated the dimethylated substrate, demonstrating that they have tri-MTase activity, in contrast with the corresponding wild-type enzymes, which did not methylate this substrate (Figure 1C). The tri-MTase mutant enzymes maintained specificity for H3 K9 similar to the wild-type enzymes. These results show that SUVH4 and SUVH5 each can be converted to a tri-MTase by a single mutation, without disruption of overall enzyme function. These results also suggest that, like SUVH4 and SUVH6, SUVH5 is a mono-/di-MTase. Interestingly, besides its primary MTase activity against H3, the SUVH4Y591F mutant displayed low-level secondary MTase activity against one of the other histones in the bovine histone substrate mix (Figure 1C). However, we did not further characterize this secondary activity.
SUVH5 Contributes to PAI Non-CG Methylation and Transcriptional Silencing in the Absence of SUVH4 and SUVH6
In wild-type Ws, the PAI1 gene in the PAI1-PAI4 inverted repeat provides the major source of PAI enzyme, as a result of expression from a fortuitous upstream unmethylated promoter. To monitor the transcriptional activity of the functional but silenced PAI2, we isolated a pai1 missense mutation that reduces PAI1 enzyme activity without affecting the dsRNA signal for PAI DNA methylation (Bartee and Bender, 2001
In the blue fluorescence assay for PAI2 silencing, the suvh5 mutation did not affect fluorescence in either the pai1 or pai1 suvh4 background relative to the parental background (Figure 2
), as observed previously for the suvh6 mutation (Ebbs et al., 2005
In previous work, we determined that non-CG methylation and H3 mK9 of the PAI1-PAI4 inverted repeat are controlled by the combined action of SUVH4 and SUVH6, such that this locus is demethylated in the suvh4 suvh6 double mutant but not in the suvh4 and suvh6 single mutants (Ebbs et al., 2005 To determine the effects of the suvh5 mutation on PAI DNA methylation patterning, we performed both DNA gel blot and bisulfite genomic sequencing assays. For DNA gel blot analysis, we used three methylation-sensitive enzymes with cleavage sites within methylated PAI sequences: HpaII (sensitive to methylation of either cytosine in 5'-CCGG-3'), MspI (sensitive to methylation of only the outer CCG cytosine in 5'-CCGG-3'), and HincII (sensitive to methylation of the outermost cytosines in 5'-atGTCAACag-3', where the enzyme recognition sequence is shown in uppercase). In these assays, DNA samples isolated from the suvh5 single mutant or the suvh4 suvh5 double mutant displayed cleavage patterns similar to those of the parental wild type or suvh4, respectively (Figures 3A and 3B ). However, MspI and HincII assays revealed that the residual non-CG methylation present on PAI1-PAI4 in the suvh4 suvh6 mutant relative to cmt3 was lost in suvh4 suvh5 suvh6. Thus, at PAI1-PAI4, SUVH5 makes a small contribution to the maintenance of non-CG methylation in the absence of SUVH4 and SUVH6.
Bisulfite sequencing analysis of the proximal promoter regions of PAI1 and PAI2 showed that Ws and suvh5 carried similar patterns of CG plus non-CG methylation at PAI1 and PAI2, suvh4 and suvh4 suvh5 carried similar patterns of CG plus non-CG methylation at PAI1 but mainly CG methylation at PAI2, and cmt3, suvh4 suvh6, and suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 carried similar patterns of mainly CG methylation at PAI1 and PAI2 (see Supplemental Figure 2 online). Overall, these patterns are consistent with the PAI DNA gel blot DNA methylation assay results (Figure 3), although the subtle differences in residual non-CG methylation between suvh4 suvh6 and suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 were not within the resolution of the bisulfite sequencing assay.
We used ChIP analysis of the PAI genes to monitor dimethyl H3 K9 (H3 2mK9) and dimethyl H3 K4 (H3 2mK4), a histone modification associated with transcriptional activity (Gendrel et al., 2002 Together, the PAI2 silencing phenotypes and the PAI non-CG methylation patterns (Figures 2 and 3) suggest that SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 all act at the PAI genes, with the hierarchies SUVH4 > SUVH5 = SUVH6 at the silenced PAI2 and PAI3 target loci and SUVH4 = SUVH6 > SUVH5 at the PAI1-PAI4 transcribed inverted repeat. We also assayed DNA methylation patterning in a suvh5 suvh6 double mutant at the PAI genes as well as the transposons Ta3 and Mu1, using DNA gel blot assays, and found similar patterns to the wild type at all loci tested (see Supplemental Figure 4 online). These results support the view that SUVH4 is the major H3 K9 MTase involved in the CMT3 DNA methylation pathway.
SUVH5 Contributes to Ta3 and Mu1 Transposon Non-CG Methylation and Transcriptional Silencing in the Absence of SUVH4 DNA gel blot analysis of Ta3 or Mu1 using an MspI digest that monitors DNA methylation in the non-CG context 5'-CCG-3' revealed that the suvh5 single mutant showed similar inhibited cleavage patterns to wild-type Ws, diagnostic of dense CCG methylation (Figures 4A and 4B ). By contrast, suvh4 suvh5 displayed increased transposon MspI cleavage, diagnostic of reduced CCG methylation relative to suvh4 or suvh4 suvh6. Similar enhanced transposon cleavage patterns were conferred by the suvh5-2 allele in the suvh4 background (see Supplemental Figure 4 online). These results indicate that in the absence of SUVH4, SUVH5 controls residual CCG methylation at the Ta3 element and at Mu1 duplications.
The suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 triple mutant displayed a more complete MspI cleavage pattern than suvh4 suvh5 at both Ta3 and Mu1, diagnostic of a loss of residual CCG methylation (Figures 4A and 4B). In both cases, the MspI digestion pattern was similar to that of the cmt3 non-CG MTase. These results suggest that SUVH6 makes a small contribution to the maintenance of non-CG methylation at Ta3 and Mu1 in the absence of SUVH4 and SUVH5. We used ChIP analysis to monitor H3 2mK9 and H3 2mK4 at Ta3 and Mu1 in suvh mutant backgrounds. The suvh5 single mutant maintained H3 2mK9 similar to wild-type Ws at both transposons (Figure 4C; see Supplemental Figure 3 online), consistent with the maintenance of full DNA methylation at these sequences (Figures 4A and 4B). The suvh4 mutation reduced Ta3 and Mu1 H3 2mK9, such that we could not determine within the sensitivity of the ChIP assay whether this H3 2mK9 depletion was enhanced in the suvh4 suvh5 and the suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 backgrounds (Figure 4C; see Supplemental Figure 3 online). However, at Ta3, the suvh4 suvh5 and suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 mutants displayed a gain of H3 2mK4, diagnostic of transcriptional activation. Furthermore, semiquantitative RT-PCR analysis showed that Ta3 was transcriptionally reactivated in the suvh4 suvh5 and suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 mutants (Figure 4D). Thus, the Ta3 transcriptional activation patterns correlate with non-CG methylation patterns and demonstrate a role for SUVH5 in transposon silencing. Together, these patterns suggest that SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 all act at Ta3, with the hierarchy SUVH4 > SUVH5 > SUVH6.
Mu1 did not acquire H3 2mK4 or transcriptional activity in any of the suvh mutant backgrounds tested (Figures 4C and 4D), consistent with the previous observation that this element is not transcriptionally activated by defects in the CMT3 non-CG methylation pathway (Lippman et al., 2003
SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 Together Control the Majority of CMT3-Mediated Repetitive Sequence DNA Methylation
At the 5S rDNA repeats, the suvh5 and suvh6 mutants had similar MspI cleavage profiles to wild-type Ws, whereas the suvh4, suvh4 suvh5, and suvh4 suvh6 mutants had a similar partial downward shift in the ladder of cleaved products, and the suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 triple mutant had a stronger downward shift (Figure 5B). These results indicate that at the 5S rDNA repeats, as at the CEN repeats, SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 together control CMT3-mediated DNA methylation, with the hierarchy SUVH4 > SUVH5 = SUVH6. However, in contrast with other loci tested for DNA methylation patterning, the 5S rDNA repeats displayed MspI cleavage patterns diagnostic of residual CCG methylation in suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 relative to cmt3.
SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 Together Control H3 K9 Monomethylation
At Ta3 and Mu1 transposon sequences, the suvh4, suvh5, and suvh6 single mutants maintained similar levels of H3 1mK9 to the wild type (Figure 6A). However, H3 1mK9 was partially reduced in the suvh4 suvh5 and suvh4 suvh6 double mutants and strongly reduced in the suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 triple mutant, indicating that SUVH4, SUVH5, and SUVH6 together control H3 1mK9 at these loci. At Mu1, the loss of H3 1mK9 in suvh4 suvh5, suvh4 suvh6, and suvh4 suvh5 suvh6 cannot be attributed to transcriptional reactivation induced by the loss of non-CG methylation, because Mu1 is not transcriptionally active in these backgrounds (Figure 4D).
At the PAI1-PAI4 transcribed inverted repeat, the suvh single mutants and the suvh4 suvh5 double mutant maintained similar levels of H3 1mK9 to the wild type (Figure 6B). However, H3 1mK9 was reduced in suvh4 suvh6 and lost in suvh4 suvh5 suvh6. This loss of H3 1mK9 cannot be attributed to transcriptional hyperactivation induced by DNA demethylation, because PAI1-PAI4 maintains a constant level of expression from its upstream unmethylated promoter even when internal non-CG methylation is lost in the cmt3 background (Ebbs et al., 2005
At the PAI2 and PAI3 target loci, the suvh4 single mutant displayed reduced H3 1mK9 (Figure 6C), in parallel with the loss of H3 2mK9, non-CG methylation, and transcriptional reactivation (Figures 2 and 3) (Ebbs et al., 2005
RNA-directed heterochromatin formation is associated with H3 mK9 in fission yeast, Drosophila, mammals, and plants, indicating a fundamental mechanistic connection between RNA signals and H3 K9 MTases (Volpe et al., 2003
At all loci we examined except the PAI1-PAI4 transcribed inverted repeat, the suvh4 single mutation reduced H3 2mK9 and/or non-CG methylation, whereas the suvh5 and suvh6 single mutations had no effect (Figures 3 to 5 At PAI1-PAI4, suvh4 suvh6 but not the suvh5 suvh6 or suvh4 suvh5 mutant had reduced H3 mK9 and non-CG methylation (Figures 3 and 6B; see Supplemental Figure 4 online). These results show that either SUVH4 alone or SUVH6 alone can fully maintain heterochromatin-associated modifications at PAI1-PAI4, with only a minor role for SUVH5. By contrast, suvh4 suvh5 displayed a stronger loss of residual non-CG methylation from Ta3 and Mu1 transposons than suvh4 suvh6, and suvh4 suvh5 but not suvh4 suvh6 showed transcriptional reactivation of Ta3 (Figure 4). These data indicate that SUVH5 makes a greater contribution than SUVH6 to heterochromatin modifications at these transposons. The different relative contributions of SUVH5 and SUVH6 at PAI1-PAI4 versus Ta3 and Mu1 transposons suggest that there are locus-specific differences in recruitment or activation of these proteins.
The heterochromatic loci where we observed different relative SUVH activities have different transcriptional activities and derive the dsRNA signal for heterochromatin formation from different sources. The PAI1-PAI4 inverted repeat (SUVH4 = SUVH6 > SUVH5) directly produces dsRNA by constitutive transcription from an upstream promoter, PAI2 and PAI3 (SUVH4 > SUVH5 = SUVH6) are targeted for DNA methylation in trans by PAI1-PAI4 RNA but are not themselves transcribed, and the Ta3 and Mu1 transposons (SUVH4 > SUVH5 > SUVH6) probably generate dsRNA through RNA-dependent RNA polymerase action on transposon-derived transcripts (Melquist and Bender, 2003
At the Ta3 and Mu1 transposons, the suvh4 single mutation was sufficient to reduce H3 2mK9 and non-CG methylation, but it did not affect H3 1mK9 levels or confer transcriptional activation (Figures 4 and 6A). These patterns suggest that H3 1mK9 is more easily maintained than H3 2mK9 by the remaining active SUVH enzymes in suvh4. Consistent with this view, a previous in vitro analysis showed that SUVH4 and SUVH6 are better mono-MTases than di-MTases: both enzymes catalyze monomethylation of a peptide substrate within minutes but catalyze dimethylation only after several hours (Jackson et al., 2004
The six SUVH proteins that lack in vitro histone MTase activity under our assay conditions (Figure 1A) are all structurally divergent in their catalytic domains from the three active SUVH proteins (Baumbusch et al., 2001
Our finding that SUVH5 can methylate both H3 K9 and Arabidopsis histone H2A variants in vitro (Figure 1; see Supplemental Figure 1 online) suggests that this enzyme might catalyze both H3 K9 and H2A methylation in vivo. However, the lack of DNA methylation phenotypes in the suvh5 single mutant (Figures 3 to 5
Similar to the cmt3 mutant (Bartee et al., 2001
Expression of Recombinant Proteins The catalytic segment extending from just downstream of the YDG domain through the C terminus of each Arabidopsis thaliana Ws SUVH gene (Baumbusch et al., 2001 Protein expression plasmids were transformed into Escherichia coli strain BL21 Codon Plus RIL (Stratagene). Bacterial cultures for GST-SUVH proteins were grown at 25°C in 1 liter of 2XYT medium supplemented with 100 mg/L ampicillin and 30 mg/L chloramphenicol. Cultures were induced when they reached midlog phase by adding isopropylthio-ß-galactoside to a 0.1 mM final concentration and then grown for an additional 4 h. GST-H3 (Figure 1) and GST-HTA (see Supplemental Figure1 online) bacterial expression was performed in a similar manner, except that cultures were grown and induced at 37°C. Induced cells were lysed in 50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.1% Triton X-100, 1 mg/mL lysozyme (Sigma-Aldrich), 15 units/mL DNase, and a full complement of protease inhibitors (1 mL/4 g wet cell weight; Sigma-Aldrich P-8340) by freeze/thaw. GST fusion proteins were purified from cell lysates using glutathione-coupled Sepharose beads according to the manufacturer's instructions (Amersham Biosciences). Proteins were concentrated using Ultra-free 0.5 concentrators (Millipore), and protein concentration was determined by SDS-PAGE and Coomassie Brilliant Blue R 250 staining.
In Vitro Histone MTase Assays
In Vitro Analysis of SUVH5 MTase Activity on Arabidopsis H2A Variant Substrates We found that variants HTA2, HTA7, and HTA13 were used as SUVH5 substrates, with HTA13 being the most robustly methylated (see Supplemental Figure 1B online), whereas HTA1, HTA3, HTA5, HTA6, HTA8, HTA9, HTA10, and HTA11 were not detectably methylated (data not shown). For GST-HTA2, GST-HTA7, and GST-HTA13, both the full-length proteins and truncations of between 31 and 35 kD were observed to be used as SUVH5 substrates (see Supplemental Figure 1B online). Because these truncations are most likely missing C-terminal residues, this finding suggested that SUVH5 recognizes residues in HTA N-terminal tails. To determine more precisely which HTA residues are methylated, we focused on HTA13 as a model substrate. We made single Lys-to-Arg mutations at residues 13 and 14 of HTA13 (K13R, K14R), counting from the first amino acid after the predicted Met translational start codon as residue 1, and a double mutation of Lys-13 and Lys-14 (KDM). All mutant variants were expressed, purified, and assayed as full-length N-terminal GST fusion proteins. This analysis showed that only the KDM mutation abolished SUVH5-catalyzed methylation, suggesting that SUVH5 can methylate either K13 or K14 in HTA13 (see Supplemental Figure 1C online). We obtained similar results for mutations of the analogous Lys residues in HTA2 (data not shown). Given the profile of Arabidopsis HTA variants that serve as SUVH5 methylation substrates (see Supplemental Figures 1A and 1B online), the specificity of SUVH5 for Lys-13 and Lys-14 in HTA13 (see Supplemental Figure 1C online), and the specificity of SUVH5 for Lys-9 in histone H3 (Figure 1B), we predicted a recognition sequence context of (V/A)A(R/K*)(R/K*)S for this enzyme, with K* indicating potential substrate Lys residues. To test this prediction, we made a series of context mutations in the HTA13 substrate, including V11A, A12K, K13T, S15A, and S15P. These mutations were chosen based on sequences of HTAs that were not substrates for SUVH5. For example, HTA3, HTA5, and HTA6 all have a T before the K14-analogous residue, whereas HTA9 and HTA11 have a P after the K14-analogous residue (see Supplemental Figure 1A online). Of the context mutations tested, V11A, A12K, K13T, and S15A reduced methylation, whereas only the S15P mutation abolished SUV5-catalyzed methylation (see Supplemental Figure 1C online). Thus, it is likely that particular combinations of amino acid differences in the N termini of nonsubstrate HTAs act together to block SUVH5 activity.
Plant Materials
Plant genomic DNA preparations and DNA gel blots were performed as described previously (Melquist et al., 1999
ChIP Analysis
Semiquantitative RT-PCR
Accession Numbers
Supplemental Data
We thank Yoichi Shinkai for GST-H3 plasmids; the ABRC for HTA plasmids, the 5S rDNA plasmid pCT4.2, and the Salk collection suvh5-2 T-DNA insertion mutant; the Institute of Agronomic Research for the suvh5-1 T-DNA insertion mutant; and Thomas Jenuwein for H3 anti-dimethyl K9 antibodies. We also thank Cecile Pickart for technical advice and Brandi Rocci for assistance with HTA expression. This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant GM-61148 to J.B. and by training grants T32 ES-07141 (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences) and T32 CA-09110 (National Cancer Institute) to M.L.E.
The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantcell.org) is: Judith Bender (jbender{at}mail.jhmi.edu).
[W] Online version contains Web-only data. Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1105/tpc.106.041400. Received January 24, 2006; Revision received February 16, 2006. accepted March 1, 2006.
Alonso, J.M., et al. (2003). Genome-wide insertional mutagenesis of Arabidopsis thaliana. Science 301, 653657. Bartee, L., and Bender, J. (2001). Two Arabidopsis methylation-deficiency mutations confer only partial effects on a methylated endogenous gene family. Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 21272134. Bartee, L., Malagnac, F., and Bender, J. (2001). Arabidopsis cmt3 chromomethylase mutations block non-CG methylation and silencing of an endogenous gene. Genes Dev. 15, 17531758. Baumbusch, L.O., Thorstensen, T., Krauss, V., Fischer, A., Naumann, K., Assalkhou, R., Schulz, I., Reuter, G., and Aalen, R.B. (2001). The Arabidopsis thaliana genome contains at least 29 active genes encoding SET domain proteins that can be assigned to four evolutionarily conserved classes. Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 43194333. Callard, D., and Mazzolini, L. (1997). Identification of proliferation-induced genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Characterization of a new member of the highly evolutionarily conserved histone H2A.F/Z variant subfamily. Plant Physiol. 115, 13851395.[Abstract] Cao, X., Aufsatz, W., Zilberman, D., Mette, M.F., Huang, M.S., Matzke, M., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2003). Role of the DRM and CMT3 methyltransferases in RNA-directed DNA methylation. Curr. Biol. 13, 22122217.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Cao, X., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2002). Locus-specific control of asymmetric and CpNpG methylation by the DRM and CMT3 methyltransferase genes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 (suppl. 4), 1649116498. Celeste, A., et al. (2002). Genomic instability in mice lacking histone H2AX. Science 296, 922927. Collins, R.E., Tachibana, M., Tamaru, H., Smith, K.M., Jia, D., Zhang, X., Selker, E.U., Shinkai, Y., and Cheng, X. (2005). In vitro and in vivo analyses of a Phe/Tyr switch controlling product specificity of histone lysine methyltransferases. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 55635570. Ebbs, M.L., Bartee, L., and Bender, J. (2005). H3 lysine 9 methylation is maintained on a transcribed inverted repeat by combined action of SUVH6 and SUVH4 methyltransferases. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 1050710515. Fernandez-Capetillo, O., Liebe, B., Scherthan, H., and Nussenzweig, A. (2003). H2AX regulates meiotic telomere clustering. J. Cell Biol. 163, 1520. Gendrel, A.V., Lippman, Z., Yordan, C., Colot, V., and Martienssen, R.A. (2002). Dependence of heterochromatic histone H3 methylation patterns on the Arabidopsis gene DDM1. Science 297, 18711873. Haldeman, M.T., Xia, G., Kasperek, E.M., and Pickart, C.M. (1997). Structure and function of ubiquitin conjugating enzyme E2-25K: The tail is a core-dependent activity element. Biochemistry 36, 1052610537.[CrossRef][Medline] Ito, T., Wellmer, F., Yu, H., Das, P., Ito, N., Alves-Ferreira, M., Riechmann, J.L., and Meyerowitz, E.M. (2004). The homeotic protein AGAMOUS controls microsporogenesis by regulation of SPOROCYTELESS. Nature 430, 356360.[CrossRef][Medline] Jackson, J.P., Johnson, L., Jasencakova, Z., Zhang, X., PerezBurgos, L., Singh, P.B., Cheng, X., Schubert, I., Jenuwein, T., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2004). Dimethylation of histone H3 lysine 9 is a critical mark for DNA methylation and gene silencing in Arabidopsis thaliana. Chromosoma 112, 308315.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Jackson, J.P., Lindroth, A.M., Cao, X., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2002). Control of CpNpG DNA methylation by the KRYPTONITE histone H3 methyltransferase. Nature 416, 556560.[CrossRef][Medline] Johnson, L., Cao, X., and Jacobsen, S. (2002). Interplay between two epigenetic marks. DNA methylation and histone H3 lysine 9 methylation. Curr. Biol. 12, 13601367.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kato, M., Miura, A., Bender, J., Jacobsen, S.E., and Kakutani, T. (2003). Role of CG and non-CG methylation in immobilization of transposons in Arabidopsis. Curr. Biol. 13, 421426.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Konieczny, A., Voytas, D.F., Cummings, M.P., and Ausubel, F.M. (1991). A superfamily of Arabidopsis thaliana retrotransposons. Genetics 127, 801809.[Abstract] Kunkel, T.A., Roberts, J.D., and Zakour, R.A. (1987). Rapid and efficient site-specific mutagenesis without phenotypic selection. Methods Enzymol. 154, 367382.[Web of Science][Medline] Lehnertz, B., Ueda, Y., Derijck, A.A., Braunschweig, U., Perez-Burgos, L., Kubicek, S., Chen, T., Li, E., Jenuwein, T., and Peters, A.H. (2003). Suv39h-mediated histone H3 lysine 9 methylation directs DNA methylation to major satellite repeats at pericentric heterochromatin. Curr. Biol. 13, 11921200.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Lindroth, A.M., Cao, X., Jackson, J.P., Zilberman, D., McCallum, C.M., Henikoff, S., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2001). Requirement of CHROMOMETHYLASE3 for maintenance of CpXpG methylation. Science 292, 20772080. Lippman, Z., et al. (2004). Role of transposable elements in heterochromatin and epigenetic control. Nature 430, 471476.[CrossRef][Medline] Lippman, Z., and Martienssen, R. (2004). The role of RNA interference in heterochromatic silencing. Nature 431, 364370.[CrossRef][Medline] Lippman, Z., May, B., Yordan, C., Singer, T., and Martienssen, R. (2003). Distinct mechanisms determine transposon inheritance and methylation via small interfering RNA and histone modification. PLoS Biol. 1, E67.[Medline] Luff, B., Pawlowski, L., and Bender, J. (1999). An inverted repeat triggers cytosine methylation of identical sequences in Arabidopsis. Mol. Cell 3, 505511.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Malagnac, F., Bartee, L., and Bender, J. (2002). An Arabidopsis SET domain protein required for maintenance but not establishment of DNA methylation. EMBO J. 21, 68426852.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Mathieu, O., and Bender, J. (2004). RNA-directed DNA methylation. J. Cell Sci. 117, 48814888. Matzke, M.A., and Birchler, J.A. (2005). RNAi-mediated pathways in the nucleus. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6, 2435.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Melquist, S., and Bender, J. (2003). Transcription from an upstream promoter controls methylation signaling from an inverted repeat of endogenous genes in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev. 17, 20362047. Melquist, S., Luff, B., and Bender, J. (1999). Arabidopsis PAI gene arrangements, cytosine methylation and expression. Genetics 153, 401413. Meneghini, M.D., Wu, M., and Madhani, H.D. (2003). Conserved histone variant H2A.Z protects euchromatin from the ectopic spread of silent heterochromatin. Cell 112, 725736.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Mysore, K.S., Nam, J., and Gelvin, S.B. (2000). An Arabidopsis histone H2A mutant is deficient in Agrobacterium T-DNA integration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 948953. Nam, J., Mysore, K.S., Zheng, C., Knue, M.K., Matthysse, A.G., and Gelvin, S.B. (1999). Identification of T-DNA tagged Arabidopsis mutants that are resistant to transformation by Agrobacterium. Mol. Gen. Genet. 261, 429438.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Naumann, K., Fischer, A., Hofmann, I., Krauss, V., Phalke, S., Irmler, K., Hause, G., Aurich, A.C., Dorn, R., Jenuwein, T., and Reuter, G. (2005). Pivotal role of AtSUVH2 in heterochromatic histone methylation and gene silencing in Arabidopsis. EMBO J. 24, 14181429.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Pal-Bhadra, M., Leibovitch, B.A., Gandhi, S.G., Rao, M., Bhadra, U., Birchler, J.A., and Elgin, S.C. (2004). Heterochromatic silencing and HP1 localization in Drosophila are dependent on the RNAi machinery. Science 303, 669672. Rea, S., Eisenhaber, F., O'Carroll, D., Strahl, B.D., Sun, Z.W., Schmid, M., Opravil, S., Mechtler, K., Ponting, C.P., Allis, C.D., and Jenuwein, T. (2000). Regulation of chromatin structure by site-specific histone H3 methyltransferases. Nature 406, 593599.[CrossRef][Medline] Samson, F., Brunaud, V., Balzergue, S., Dubreucq, B., Lepiniec, L., Pelletier, G., Caboche, M., and Lecharny, A. (2002). FLAGdb/FST: A database of mapped flanking insertion sites (FSTs) of Arabidopsis thaliana T-DNA transformants. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 9497. Singer, T., Yordan, C., and Martienssen, R.A. (2001). Robertson's Mutator transposons in A. thaliana are regulated by the chromatin-remodeling gene Decrease in DNA Methylation (DDM1). Genes Dev. 15, 591602. Springer, N.M., Napoli, C.A., Selinger, D.A., Pandey, R., Cone, K.C., Chandler, V.L., Kaeppler, H.F., and Kaeppler, S.M. (2003). Comparative analysis of SET domain proteins in maize and Arabidopsis reveals multiple duplications preceding the divergence of monocots and dicots. Plant Physiol. 132, 907925. Tachibana, M., Sugimoto, K., Fukushima, T., and Shinkai, Y. (2001). Set domain-containing protein, G9a, is a novel lysine-preferring mammalian histone methyltransferase with hyperactivity and specific selectivity to lysines 9 and 27 of histone H3. J. Biol. Chem. 276, 2530925317. Tamaru, H., and Selker, E.U. (2001). A histone H3 methyltransferase controls DNA methylation in Neurospora crassa. Nature 414, 277283.[CrossRef][Medline] Tamaru, H., Zhang, X., McMillen, D., Singh, P.B., Nakayama, J., Grewal, S.I., Allis, C.D., Cheng, X., and Selker, E.U. (2003). Trimethylated lysine 9 of histone H3 is a mark for DNA methylation in Neurospora crassa. Nat. Genet. 34, 7579.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Ting, A.H., Schuebel, K.E., Herman, J.G., and Baylin, S.B. (2005). Short double-stranded RNA induces transcriptional gene silencing in human cancer cells in the absence of DNA methylation. Nat. Genet. 37, 906910.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Tompa, R., McCallum, C.M., Delrow, J., Henikoff, J.G., van Steensel, B., and Henikoff, S. (2002). Genome-wide profiling of DNA methylation reveals transposon targets of CHROMOMETHYLASE3. Curr. Biol. 12, 6568.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Verdel, A., Jia, S., Gerber, S., Sugiyama, T., Gygi, S., Grewal, S.I., and Moazed, D. (2004). RNAi-mediated targeting of heterochromatin by the RITS complex. Science 303, 672676. Volpe, T., Schramke, V., Hamilton, G.L., White, S.A., Teng, G., Martienssen, R.A., and Allshire, R.C. (2003). RNA interference is required for normal centromere function in fission yeast. Chromosome Res. 11, 137146.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Wyatt, H.R., Liaw, H., Green, G.R., and Lustig, A.J. (2003). Multiple roles for Saccharomyces cerevisiae histone H2A in telomere position effect, Spt phenotypes and double-strand-break repair. Genetics 164, 4764. Xie, Z., Johansen, L.K., Gustafson, A.M., Kasschau, K.D., Lellis, A.D., Zilberman, D., Jacobsen, S.E., and Carrington, J.C. (2004). Genetic and functional diversification of small RNA pathways in plants. PLoS Biol. 2, E104.[CrossRef][Medline] Xin, Z., Tachibana, M., Guggiari, M., Heard, E., Shinkai, Y., and Wagstaff, J. (2003). Role of histone methyltransferase G9a in CpG methylation of the Prader-Willi syndrome imprinting center. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 1499615000. Zhang, X., Yang, Z., Khan, S.I., Horton, J.R., Tamaru, H., Selker, E.U., and Cheng, X. (2003). Structural basis for the product specificity of histone lysine methyltransferases. Mol. Cell 12, 177185.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | THE PLANT CELL | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY | |
|---|---|---|---|