Protecting against promiscuity: the regulatory role of insulators.

Eukaryotic genomes contain transcriptional regulatory elements that alter promoter activity through long-range interactions. Many control elements show a broad range of promoter interactions, suggesting that these elements are capable of inappropriate transcription. The identification of a novel class of directing regulatory elements, called insulators, has provided clues into mechanisms used in eukaryotic genomes to maintain transcription fidelity. Insulators contribute to the organization of independent domains of gene function by restricting enhancer and silencer function. This review describes the properties of insulators and related elements that have been isolated from several eukaryotic genomes. Two classes of models of insulator function are considered. These models provide insights into possible mechanisms used by these diverse elements to provide regulatory autonomy.

Long-range repression by multiple polycomb group (PcG) proteins targeted by fusion to a defined DNA-binding domain in Drosophila.

A tethering assay was developed to study the effects of Polycomb group (PcG) proteins on gene expression in vivo. This system employed the Su(Hw) DNA-binding domain (ZnF) to direct PcG proteins to transposons that carried the white and yellow reporter genes. These reporters constituted naive sensors of PcG effects, as bona fide PcG response elements (PREs) were absent from the constructs. To assess the effects of different genomic environments, reporter transposons integrated at nearly 40 chromosomal sites were analyzed. Three PcG fusion proteins, ZnF-PC, ZnF-SCM, and ZnF-ESC, were studied, since biochemical analyses place these PcG proteins in distinct complexes. Tethered ZnF-PcG proteins repressed white and yellow expression at the majority of sites tested, with each fusion protein displaying a characteristic degree of silencing. Repression by ZnF-PC was stronger than ZnF-SCM, which was stronger than ZnF-ESC, as judged by the percentage of insertion lines affected and the magnitude of the conferred repression. ZnF-PcG repression was more effective at centric and telomeric reporter insertion sites, as compared to euchromatic sites. ZnF-PcG proteins tethered as far as 3.0 kb away from the target promoter produced silencing, indicating that these effects were long range. Repression by ZnF-SCM required a protein interaction domain, the SPM domain, which suggests that this domain is not primarily used to direct SCM to chromosomal loci. This targeting system is useful for studying protein domains and mechanisms involved in PcG repression in vivo.

Differences in insulator properties revealed by enhancer blocking assays on episomes.

Insulators are genomic elements that define domains of transcriptional autonomy. Although a large number of insulators have been isolated, it is unclear whether these elements function by shared molecular mechanisms. Novel applications of FLP recombinase technology were used to dissect and compare the function of the Drosophila: gypsy and scs insulators. Inter actions between FLP monomers bound to chromosomally integrated FRT sites were unimpeded by either insulator, demonstrating that these insulators do not establish a chromosomal environment capable of disrupting all types of protein-protein interactions. The gypsy insulator blocked enhancer-activated transcription on FLP-generated extra-chromosomal episomes, whereas the scs insulator displayed silencing effects. These data indicate that these insulators differ in the mechanisms used to prevent enhancer function. That the gypsy insulator blocked enhancer-promoter communication within small episomes suggests that these effects may be accomplished without a global reorganization of chromatin structure. Instead, the gypsy insulator may disrupt enhancer-activated transcription by direct interference with transmission of the enhancer signal to the promoter.

Enhancer blocking by the Drosophila gypsy insulator depends upon insulator anatomy and enhancer strength.

Insulators are specialized DNA sequences that prevent enhancer-activated transcription only when interposed between an enhancer and its target promoter. The Drosophila gypsy retrotransposon contains an insulator composed of 12 degenerate binding sites for the Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] protein that are separated by AT-rich DNA possessing sequence motifs common to matrix/scaffold attachment regions (MARs/SARs). To further understand mechanisms of insulator function, the parameters required for the gypsy insulator to prevent enhancer-activated transcription were examined. Synthetic binding regions were created by reiteration of a single Su(Hw) binding site that lacked the MAR/SAR motifs. These synthetic binding regions reconstituted insulator activity, suggesting that the property of enhancer blocking may be distinct from matrix association. We found that the number and spacing of Su(Hw) binding sites within the gypsy insulator, as well as the strength of the enhancer to be blocked, were important determinants of insulator function. These results provide a link between transcription and insulation, suggesting that these processes may be mechanistically interconnected.

Core promoter elements can regulate transcription on a separate chromosome in trans.

Transvection can cause the expression of a gene to be sensitive to the proximity of a homolog. It can account for many cases of intragenic complementation at the Drosophila yellow gene, where one mode of transvection involves the action of enhancers in trans on a promoter present on a separate chromosome. Our goal was to identify cis-acting elements that regulate the trans action of enhancers. Using gene replacement, we altered two core promoter elements at yellow and tested the resulting alleles for their ability to support transvection. We found that the TATA box and initiator element can regulate transvection.

An analysis of transvection at the yellow locus of Drosophila melanogaster.

Studies of a wide variety of organisms have shown that homologous sequences can exert a significant impact on each other, resulting in changes in gene sequence, gene expression, chromatin structure, and global chromosome architecture. Our work has focused on transvection, a process that can cause genes to be sensitive to the proximity of a homologue. Transvection is seen at the yellow gene of Drosophila, where it mediates numerous cases of intragenic complementation. In this article, we describe two approaches that have characterized the process of transvection at yellow. The first entailed a screen for mutations that support intragenic complementation at yellow. The second involved the analysis of 53 yellow alleles, obtained from a variety of sources, with respect to complementation, molecular structure, and transcriptional competence. Our data suggest two ways in which transvection may be regulated at yellow: (1) a transcriptional mechanism, whereby the ability of an allele to support transvection is influenced by its transcriptional competency, and (2) a structural mechanism, whereby the pairing of structurally dissimilar homologues results in conformational changes that affect gene expression.

Two modes of transvection: enhancer action in trans and bypass of a chromatin insulator in cis.

Ed Lewis introduced the term "transvection" in 1954 to describe mechanisms that can cause the expression of a gene to be sensitive to the proximity of its homologue. Transvection since has been reported at an increasing number of loci in Drosophila, where homologous chromosomes are paired in somatic tissues, as well as at loci in other organisms. At the Drosophila yellow gene, transvection can explain intragenic complementation involving the yellow2 allele (y2). Here, transvection was proposed to occur by enhancers of one allele acting in trans on the promoter of a paired homologue. In this report, we describe two yellow alleles that strengthen this model and reveal an unexpected, second mechanism for transvection. Data suggest that, in addition to enhancer action in trans, transvection can occur by enhancer bypass of a chromatin insulator in cis. We propose that bypass results from the topology of paired genes. Finally, transvection at yellow can occur in genotypes not involving y2, implying that it is a feature of yellow itself and not an attribute of one particular allele.

Polycomb group repression is blocked by the Drosophila suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] insulator.

The suppressor of Hairy-wing [SU(HW)] binding region disrupts communication between a large number of enhancers and promoters and protects transgenes from chromosomal position effects. These properties classify the SU(HW) binding region as an insulator. While enhancers are blocked in a general manner, protection from repressors appears to be more variable. In these studies, we address whether repression resulting from the Polycomb group genes can be blocked by the SU(HW) binding region. The effects of this binding region on repression established by an Ultrabithorax Polycomb group Response Element were examined. A transposon carrying two reporter genes, the yellow and white genes, was used so that repression and insulation could be assayed simultaneously. We demonstrate that the SU(HW) binding region is effective at preventing Polycomb group repression. These studies suggest that one role of the su(Hw) protein may be to restrict the range of action of repressors, such as the Polycomb group proteins, throughout the euchromatic regions of the genome.

The role of insulator elements in defining domains of gene expression.

Insulators are naturally occurring DNA sequences that protect transgenes from genomic position effects, thereby establishing independent functional domains within the chromosome. Recent studies have focused on the identification of the cis and trans requirements for insulator activity. These experiments demonstrate that insulators contain multiple components that cooperate to confer their unique properties. Additionally, they suggest that the mechanism of insulation is related to that of enhancer function. Two models of insulator can be considered: a domain boundary and a transcriptional decoy model.

Effects of the su(Hw) insulator protein on the expression of the divergently transcribed Drosophila yolk protein genes.

The suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] protein mediates the mutagenic effects of the gypsy retrotransposon by blocking enhancer activity. These repressive effects are general, can occur over long distances and require that the su(Hw) protein is bound between the affected enhancer and promoter. The effects of the su(Hw) binding region on yolk protein (yp) gene expression were determined. These genes are regulated by shared enhancers in the intergenic region, which provided a method to examine whether an enhancer blocked by the su(Hw) protein remained functional. We demonstrate that a blocked enhancer is completely active, supporting the proposal that the su(Hw) protein is an insulator protein that acts by forming a new boundary in a pre-existing chromatin domain, thereby preventing the interaction of regulatory elements located upstream of the insertion site with the promoter. In addition, we found that yp promoter function is not diminished by sharing enhancers, suggesting that these enhancers are not rate limiting for transcriptional activation. Lastly, our data indicate that yp promoter activity is interdependent, such that transcription from one promoter influences the level of activity of the linked promoter.

A Drosophila insulator protein facilitates dosage compensation of the X chromosome min-white gene located at autosomal insertion sites.

The suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] gene encodes a zinc finger protein that binds to a repeated motif in the gypsy retrotransposon. These DNA sequences, called the su(Hw)-binding region, have properties of an insulator region because they (1) disrupt enhancer/silencer function in a position-dependent manner and (2) protect the mini-white gene from both euchromatic and heterochromatic position effects. To gain further insights into the types of position effects that can be insulated, we determined the effects of the su(Hw)-binding region on dosage compensation of the X-linked mini-white gene. Dosage compensation is the process that equalizes the unequal content of X-linked genes in males and females by increasing the X-linked transcription level twofold in males. Transposition of X-linked genes to the autosomes commonly results in incomplete dosage compensation, indicating that the distinct male X chromatin environment is important for this process. We found that dosage compensation of autosomally integrated mini-white genes flanked by su(Hw)-binding regions was greatly improved, such that complete or nearly complete compensation was observed at the majority of insertion sites. The su(Hw) protein was essential for this enhanced dosage compensation because in a su(Hw) mutant background compensation was incomplete. These experiments provide evidence that the su(Hw)-binding region facilitates dosage compensation of the mini-white gene on the autosomes. This may result from protection of the mini-white gene from a negative autosomal chromatin environment.

A P element containing suppressor of hairy-wing binding regions has novel properties for mutagenesis in Drosophila melanogaster.

P elements are widely used as insertional mutagens to tag genes, facilitating molecular cloning and analyses. We modified a P element so that it carried two copies of the suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] binding regions isolated from the gypsy transposable element. This transposon was mobilized, and the genetic consequences of its insertion were analyzed. Gene expression can be altered by the su(Hw) protein as a result of blocking the interaction between enhancer/silencer elements and their promoter. These effects can occur over long distances and are general. Therefore, a composite transposon (SUPor-P for suppressor-P element) combines the mutagenic efficacy of the gypsy element with the controllable transposition of P elements. We show that, compared to standard P elements, this composite transposon causes an expanded repertoire of mutations and produces alleles that are suppressed by su(Hw) mutations. The large number of heterochromatic insertions obtained is unusual compared to other insertional mutagenesis procedures, indicating that the SUPor-P transposon may be useful for studying the structural and functional properties of heterochromatin.

Developmental analysis of the ovarian tumor gene during Drosophila oogenesis.

Severe alleles of the ovarian tumor (otu) and ovo genes result in female sterility in Drosophila melanogaster, producing adult ovaries that completely lack egg chambers. We examined the developmental stage in which the agametic phenotype first becomes apparent. Germ cell development in embryos was studied using a strategy that allowed simultaneous labeling of pole cells with the determination of embryonic genotype. We found that ovo- or otu- XX embryonic germ cells were indistinguishable in number and morphology from those present in wild-type siblings. The effects of the mutations were not consistently manifested in the female germline until pupariation, and there was no evidence that either gene was required for germ cell viability at earlier stages of development. The requirement for otu function in the pupal and adult ovary is supported by temperature-shift experiments using a heat-inducible otu gene construct. We demonstrate that otu activity limited to prepupal stages was not sufficient to support oogenesis, while induction during the pupal and adult periods caused suppression of the otu mutant phenotype.

The somatic sex determines the requirement for ovarian tumor gene activity in the proliferation of the Drosophila germline.

Gametogenesis in Drosophila requires sex-specific interactions between the soma and germline to control germ cell viability, proliferation, and differentiation. To determine what genetic components are involved in this interaction, we examined whether changes in the sexual identity of the soma affected the function of the ovarian tumor (otu) and ovo genes. These genes are required cell autonomously in the female germline for germ cell proliferation and differentiation. Mutations in otu and ovo cause a range of ovarian defects, including agametic ovaries and tumorous egg cysts, but do not affect spermatogenesis. We demonstrate that XY germ cells do not require otu when developing in testes, but become dependent on otu function for proliferation when placed in an ovary. This soma-induced requirement can be satisfied by the induced expression of the 98 x 10(3) M(r) OTU product, one of two isoforms produced by differential RNA splicing. These results indicate that the female somatic gonad can induce XY germ cells to become 'female-like' because they require an oogenesis-specific gene. In contrast, the requirement for ovo is dependent on a cell autonomous signal derived from the X:A ratio. We propose that differential regulation of the otu and ovo genes provides a mechanism for the female germline to incorporate both somatic and cell autonomous inputs required for oogenesis.

Molecular characterization of ovarian tumors in Drosophila.

Certain female-sterile mutations in Drosophila result in the uncontrolled proliferation of X/X germ cells. It has been proposed that this ovarian tumor phenotype results from the sexual transformation of X/X germ cells to a male identity. We present findings inconsistent with this model. We demonstrate that the tumorous cells produced by mutations in the ovarian tumor (otu), Sex-lethal (Sxl) and sans fille (snf) genes are capable of female-specific transcription and RNA processing. This indicates that these ovarian tumor cells still retain some female identity. Therefore, we propose that mutations in these genes do not cause a male transformation of the X/X germ line but instead either cause an ambiguous sexual identity or block specific stages of oogenesis. Our findings indicate that while Sxl is the master sex determination gene in somatic cells, it appears to play a more subsidiary role in the germ line. Finally, we demonstrate that the germ line function of Sxl depends on the activity of a specific OTU isoform.

Genetic and molecular characterization of P element-induced mutations reveals that the Drosophila ovarian tumor gene has maternal activity and a variable null phenotype.

The mutations in the ovarian tumor (otu) gene arrest oogenesis at several stages in development. A series of deletion mutations in the otu region were characterized, each of which causes the absence or reduction of the otu transcript. These alleles range from the most severe class, which results in ovaries lacking egg cysts, to relatively mild mutations that allow the development of late stage oocytes. Heteroallelic combinations of these mutations demonstrate that the phenotypic complexity of otu mutant ovaries is due to a dosage dependent requirement for otu activity. Reciprocal cross and developmental Northern blot studies suggest a maternal requirement for otu in the development of the female germline. In addition we demonstrate that the otu zygotic null phenotype is variable, ranging from the absence of cysts in the most extreme cases, to the presence of tumorous egg chambers.

The su(Hw) protein insulates expression of the Drosophila melanogaster white gene from chromosomal position-effects.

Mutations in the suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)] locus reverse the phenotype of a number of tissue-specific mutations caused by insertion of a gypsy retrotransposon. The su(Hw) gene encodes a zinc finger protein which binds to a 430 bp region of gypsy shown to be both necessary and sufficient for its mutagenic effects. su(Hw) protein causes mutations by inactivation of enhancer elements only when a su(Hw) binding region is located between these regulatory sequences and a promoter. To understand the molecular basis of enhancer inactivation, we tested the effects of su(Hw) protein on expression of the mini-white gene. We find that su(Hw) protein stabilizes mini-white gene expression from chromosomal position-effects in euchromatic locations by inactivating negative and positive regulatory elements present in flanking DNA. Furthermore, the su(Hw) protein partially protects transposon insertions from the negative effects of heterochromatin. To explain our current results, we propose that su(Hw) protein alters the organization of chromatin by creating a new boundary in a pre-existing domain of higher order chromatin structure. This separates enhancers and silencers distal to the su(Hw) binding region into an independent unit of gene activity, thereby causing their inactivation.

DNA position-specific repression of transcription by a Drosophila zinc finger protein.

Expression of the yellow (y) gene of Drosophila melanogaster is controlled by a series of tissue-specific transcriptional enhancers located in the 5' region and intron of the gene. Insertion of the gypsy retrotransposon in the y2 allele at -700 bp from the start of transcription results in a spatially restricted phenotype: Mutant tissues are those in which yellow expression is controlled by enhancers located upstream from the insertion site, but all other structures whose enhancers are downstream of the insertion site are normally pigmented. This observation can be reproduced by inserting just a 430-bp fragment containing the suppressor of Hairy-wing [su(Hw)]-binding region of gypsy into the same position where this element is inserted in y2, suggesting that the su(Hw)-binding region is sufficient to confer the mutant phenotype. Insertion of this sequence into various positions in the y gene gives rise to phenotypes that can be rationalized assuming that the presence of the su(Hw) protein inhibits the action of those tissue-specific enhancers that are located more distally from the su(Hw)-binding region with respect to the promoter. These results are discussed in light of current models that explain long-range effects of enhancers on gene expression.

Mutations in the su(s) gene affect RNA processing in Drosophila melanogaster.

We have studied the effect of mutations in the suppressor of sable [su(s)] gene on P element-induced yellow alleles. Two independent mutations tested, y76d28 and y1#7, contain a 1.1-kilobase (kb) P element inserted in the 5' transcribed untranslated portion of the yellow gene. Sequences responsible for the y1#7 mutation are inserted in the same transcriptional orientation as yellow and cannot be processed by splicing, and this mutation is not suppressed by su(s) mutations. P element sequences are located in a transcriptional orientation opposite to that of the yellow gene in y76d28; these sequences can be spliced from a composite P element-yellow mRNA, resulting in low accumulation of a functional 1.9-kb yellow transcript. The levels of both the putative precursor P element-yellow RNA and the 1.9-kb yellow transcript increase in y76d28 su(s) flies, suggesting that mutations in su(s) do not affect the efficiency of splicing of the P element sequences. Analysis of y76d28 cDNAs isolated from flies carrying a wild-type or mutant su(s) gene demonstrates that the choice of splice junctions to process P element sequences is unchanged in these different backgrounds, suggesting that mutations in su(s) do not affect the selection of donor and acceptor splice sites. We propose that the su(s) protein functions to control the stability of unprocessed RNA during the splicing reaction.