ABSTRACT
Genome-wide analyses have revolutionized our ability to study the transcriptional regulation of circadian rhythms. The advent of next-generation sequencing methods has facilitated the use of two such technologies, ChIP-seq and RNA-seq. In this chapter, we describe detailed methods and protocols for these two techniques, with emphasis on their usage in circadian rhythm experiments in the mouse liver, a major target organ of the circadian clock system. Critical factors for these methods are highlighted and issues arising with time series samples for ChIP-seq and RNA-seq are discussed. Finally, detailed protocols for library preparation suitable for Illumina sequencing platforms are presented.
Subject(s)
Circadian Clocks , Gene Expression Regulation , Acetylation , Animals , CLOCK Proteins/isolation & purification , CLOCK Proteins/metabolism , Cell Line , Chromatin Immunoprecipitation , Histones/metabolism , Humans , Methylation , Protein Processing, Post-Translational , Sequence Analysis, RNA , Transcription, GeneticABSTRACT
The current consensus model for the circadian clock in mammals is based on a transcription-translation feedback loop. In this model, CRY and PER proteins repress their own transcription by suppressing the transactivator function of the CLOCK:BMAL1 heterodimer directly (physical model) and by facilitating post-translational modifications (chemical model). Most of the data for this model come from genetic and cell biological experiments. Here, we have purified all of the core clock proteins and performed in vitro and in vivo biochemical experiments to test the physical model. We find that CLOCK:BMAL1 binds to an E-box sequence in DNA and that CRY binds stably to the CLOCK:BMAL1:E-box ternary complex independently of PER. Both CRY and PER bind to CLOCK and BMAL1 off DNA but, in contrast to CRY, PER does not bind to the CLOCK:BMAL1:E-box complex. Unexpectedly, PER actually interferes with the binding of CRY to the CLOCK:BMAL1:E-box ternary complex. CRY likely destabilizes the CLOCK:BMAL1 heterodimer on DNA by a post-translational mechanism after binding to the complex. These findings support some aspects of the canonical model, but also suggest that some key features of the model need to be revised.
