Histone deacetylase (HDAC) 1 and 2 complexes regulate both histone acetylation and crotonylation in vivo.

Proteomic analysis of histones has shown that they are subject to a superabundance of acylations, which extend far beyond acetylation, to include: crotonylation, propionylation, butyrylation, malonylation, succinylation, ß-hydroxybutyrylation and 2-hydroxyisobutyrylation. To date, much of the functional data has focussed on histone crotonylation which, similar to acetylation, has been associated with positive gene regulation and is added by the acyltransferase, p300. Although Sirtuins 1-3, along with HDAC3, have been shown to possess decrotonylase activity in vitro, there is relatively little known about the regulation of histone crotonylation in vivo. Here we show that Histone Deacetylase 1 and 2 (HDAC1/2), the catalytic core of numerous co-repressor complexes, are important histone decrotonylase enzymes. A ternary complex of HDAC1/CoREST1/LSD1 is able to hydrolyse both histone H3 Lys18-acetyl (H3K18ac) and H3 Lys18-crotonyl (H3K18cr) peptide substrates. Genetic deletion of HDAC1/2 in ES cells increases global levels of histone crotonylation and causes an 85% reduction in total decrotonylase activity. Furthermore, we mapped H3K18cr in cells using ChIP-seq, with and without HDAC1/2, and observed increased levels of crotonylation, which largely overlaps with H3K18ac in the vicinity of transcriptional start sites. Collectively, our data indicate that HDAC1/2 containing complexes are critical regulators of histone crotonylation in vivo.

A dominant negative human peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR){alpha} is a constitutive transcriptional corepressor and inhibits signaling through all PPAR isoforms.

Several missense mutations in the ligand-binding domain of human peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)gamma have been described in subjects with dominantly inherited severe insulin resistance associated with partial lipodystrophy, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. These mutant receptors behave as dominant-negative inhibitors of PPARgamma signaling when studied in transfected cells. The extent to which such dominant-negative effects extend to signaling through other coexpressed PPAR isoforms has not been evaluated. To examine these issues further, we have created a PPARalpha mutant harboring twin substitutions, Leu459Ala and Glu462Ala, within the ligand binding domain (PPARalpha(mut)), examined its signaling properties, and compared the effects of dominant-negative PPARalpha and PPARgamma mutants on basal and ligand-induced gene transcription in adipocytes and hepatocytes. PPARalpha(mut) was transcriptionally inactive, repressed basal activity from a PPAR response element-containing promoter, inhibited the coactivator function of cotransfected PPAR-gamma coactivator 1alpha, and strongly inhibited the transcriptional response to cotransfected wild-type receptor. In contrast to PPARgamma, wild-type PPARalpha failed to recruit the transcriptional corepressors NCoR and SMRT. However, PPARalpha(mut) avidly recruited these corepressors in a ligand-dissociable manner. In hepatocytes and adipocytes, both PPARalpha(mut) and the corresponding PPARgamma mutant were capable of inhibiting the expression of genes primarily regulated by PPARalpha, -gamma, or -delta ligands, albeit with some differences in potency. Thus, dominant-negative forms of PPARalpha and PPARgamma are capable of interfering with PPAR signaling in a manner that is not wholly restricted to their cognate target genes. These findings may have implications for the pathogenesis of human syndromes resulting from mutations in this family of transcription factors.