Transcriptional cofactors display specificity for distinct types of core promoters.

Transcriptional cofactors (COFs) communicate regulatory cues from enhancers to promoters and are central effectors of transcription activation and gene expression1. Although some COFs have been shown to prefer certain promoter types2-5 over others (for example, see refs 6,7), the extent to which different COFs display intrinsic specificities for distinct promoters is unclear. Here we use a high-throughput promoter-activity assay in Drosophila melanogaster S2 cells to screen 23 COFs for their ability to activate 72,000 candidate core promoters (CPs). We observe differential activation of CPs, indicating distinct regulatory preferences or 'compatibilities'8,9 between COFs and specific types of CPs. These functionally distinct CP types are differentially enriched for known sequence elements2,4, such as the TATA box, downstream promoter element (DPE) or TCT motif, and display distinct chromatin properties at endogenous loci. Notably, the CP types differ in their relative abundance of H3K4me3 and H3K4me1 marks (see also refs 10-12), suggesting that these histone modifications might distinguish trans-regulatory factors rather than promoter- versus enhancer-type cis-regulatory elements. We confirm the existence of distinct COF-CP compatibilities in two additional Drosophila cell lines and in human cells, for which we find COFs that prefer TATA-box or CpG-island promoters, respectively. Distinct compatibilities between COFs and promoters can explain how different enhancers specifically activate distinct sets of genes9, alternative promoters within the same genes, and distinct transcription start sites within the same promoter13. Thus, COF-promoter compatibilities may underlie distinct transcriptional programs in species as divergent as flies and humans.

Resolving systematic errors in widely used enhancer activity assays in human cells.

The identification of transcriptional enhancers in the human genome is a prime goal in biology. Enhancers are typically predicted via chromatin marks, yet their function is primarily assessed with plasmid-based reporter assays. Here, we show that such assays are rendered unreliable by two previously reported phenomena relating to plasmid transfection into human cells: (i) the bacterial plasmid origin of replication (ORI) functions as a conflicting core promoter and (ii) a type I interferon (IFN-I) response is activated. These cause confounding false positives and negatives in luciferase assays and STARR-seq screens. We overcome both problems by employing the ORI as core promoter and by inhibiting two IFN-I-inducing kinases, enabling genome-wide STARR-seq screens in human cells. In HeLa-S3 cells, we uncover strong enhancers, IFN-I-induced enhancers, and enhancers endogenously silenced at the chromatin level. Our findings apply to all episomal enhancer activity assays in mammalian cells and are key to the characterization of human enhancers.

Genome-wide assessment of sequence-intrinsic enhancer responsiveness at single-base-pair resolution.

Gene expression is controlled by enhancers that activate transcription from the core promoters of their target genes. Although a key function of core promoters is to convert enhancer activities into gene transcription, whether and how strongly they activate transcription in response to enhancers has not been systematically assessed on a genome-wide level. Here we describe self-transcribing active core promoter sequencing (STAP-seq), a method to determine the responsiveness of genomic sequences to enhancers, and apply it to the Drosophila melanogaster genome. We cloned candidate fragments at the position of the core promoter (also called minimal promoter) in reporter plasmids with or without a strong enhancer, transfected the resulting library into cells, and quantified the transcripts that initiated from each candidate for each setup by deep sequencing. In the presence of a single strong enhancer, the enhancer responsiveness of different sequences differs by several orders of magnitude, and different levels of responsiveness are associated with genes of different functions. We also identify sequence features that predict enhancer responsiveness and discuss how different core promoters are employed for the regulation of gene expression.

Enhancer-core-promoter specificity separates developmental and housekeeping gene regulation.

Gene transcription in animals involves the assembly of RNA polymerase II at core promoters and its cell-type-specific activation by enhancers that can be located more distally. However, how ubiquitous expression of housekeeping genes is achieved has been less clear. In particular, it is unknown whether ubiquitously active enhancers exist and how developmental and housekeeping gene regulation is separated. An attractive hypothesis is that different core promoters might exhibit an intrinsic specificity to certain enhancers. This is conceivable, as various core promoter sequence elements are differentially distributed between genes of different functions, including elements that are predominantly found at either developmentally regulated or at housekeeping genes. Here we show that thousands of enhancers in Drosophila melanogaster S2 and ovarian somatic cells (OSCs) exhibit a marked specificity to one of two core promoters--one derived from a ubiquitously expressed ribosomal protein gene and another from a developmentally regulated transcription factor--and confirm the existence of these two classes for five additional core promoters from genes with diverse functions. Housekeeping enhancers are active across the two cell types, while developmental enhancers exhibit strong cell-type specificity. Both enhancer classes differ in their genomic distribution, the functions of neighbouring genes, and the core promoter elements of these neighbouring genes. In addition, we identify two transcription factors--Dref and Trl--that bind and activate housekeeping versus developmental enhancers, respectively. Our results provide evidence for a sequence-encoded enhancer-core-promoter specificity that separates developmental and housekeeping gene regulatory programs for thousands of enhancers and their target genes across the entire genome.

Genome-scale functional characterization of Drosophila developmental enhancers in vivo.

Transcriptional enhancers are crucial regulators of gene expression and animal development and the characterization of their genomic organization, spatiotemporal activities and sequence properties is a key goal in modern biology. Here we characterize the in vivo activity of 7,705 Drosophila melanogaster enhancer candidates covering 13.5% of the non-coding non-repetitive genome throughout embryogenesis. 3,557 (46%) candidates are active, suggesting a high density with 50,000 to 100,000 developmental enhancers genome-wide. The vast majority of enhancers display specific spatial patterns that are highly dynamic during development. Most appear to regulate their neighbouring genes, suggesting that the cis-regulatory genome is organized locally into domains, which are supported by chromosomal domains, insulator binding and genome evolution. However, 12 to 21 per cent of enhancers appear to skip non-expressed neighbours and regulate a more distal gene. Finally, we computationally identify cis-regulatory motifs that are predictive and required for enhancer activity, as we validate experimentally. This work provides global insights into the organization of an animal regulatory genome and the make-up of enhancer sequences and confirms and generalizes principles from previous studies. All enhancer patterns are annotated manually with a controlled vocabulary and all results are available through a web interface (http://enhancers.starklab.org), including the raw images of all microscopy slides for manual inspection at arbitrary zoom levels.

Systematic genetic analysis of muscle morphogenesis and function in Drosophila.

Systematic genetic approaches have provided deep insight into the molecular and cellular mechanisms that operate in simple unicellular organisms. For multicellular organisms, however, the pleiotropy of gene function has largely restricted such approaches to the study of early embryogenesis. With the availability of genome-wide transgenic RNA interference (RNAi) libraries in Drosophila, it is now possible to perform a systematic genetic dissection of any cell or tissue type at any stage of the lifespan. Here we apply these methods to define the genetic basis for formation and function of the Drosophila muscle. We identify a role in muscle for 2,785 genes, many of which we assign to specific functions in the organization of muscles, myofibrils or sarcomeres. Many of these genes are phylogenetically conserved, including genes implicated in mammalian sarcomere organization and human muscle diseases.