XB-ART-57601
Elife
2020 Dec 09;9. doi: 10.7554/eLife.63528.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
The interplay between asymmetric and symmetric DNA loop extrusion.
Banigan EJ
,
Mirny LA
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Chromosome compaction is essential for reliable transmission of genetic information. Experiments suggest that ∼1000-fold compaction is driven by condensin complexes that extrude chromatin loops, by progressively collecting chromatin fiber from one or both sides of the complex to form a growing loop. Theory indicates that symmetric two-sided loop extrusion can achieve such compaction, but recent single-molecule studies (Golfier et al., 2020) observed diverse dynamics of condensins that perform one-sided, symmetric two-sided, and asymmetric two-sided extrusion. We use simulations and theory to determine how these molecular properties lead to chromosome compaction. High compaction can be achieved if even a small fraction of condensins have two essential properties: a long residence time and the ability to perform two-sided (not necessarily symmetric) extrusion. In mixtures of condensins I and II, coupling two-sided extrusion and stable chromatin binding by condensin II promotes compaction. These results provide missing connections between single-molecule observations and chromosome-scale organization.
???displayArticle.pubmedLink??? 33295869
???displayArticle.pmcLink??? PMC7793625
???displayArticle.link??? Elife
???displayArticle.grants??? [+]
U54DK107980 NIH HHS , U54CA193419 NIH HHS , GM114190 NIH HHS , R01 GM114190 NIGMS NIH HHS , U54 CA193419 NCI NIH HHS , U54 DK107980 NIDDK NIH HHS
GO keywords: chromatin binding [+]
???attribute.lit??? ???displayArticles.show???
Figure 1. Linear compaction by asymmetric two-sided loop extrusion.(a) Top: Example position versus time trajectory with inset cartoon of an asymmetric two-sided LEF. Bottom: Arch diagram for a single asymmetric LEF at several times, with early times in red and late times in blue. (b) Top: Cartoon of two asymmetric LEFs, oriented so that both slow subunits extrude the chromatin between the two LEFs. Middle: Arch diagram showing progressive growth of loops from early times (red) to late times (blue) for LEFs with very slowly extruding ‘slow’ subunits. Bottom: Arch diagram showing gap closure by LEFs with ‘slow’ subunits that extrude sufficiently rapidly. (c) Fold compaction, ℱ𝒞, of asymmetric LEFs, with color indicating the degree of asymmetry, quantified by log(vslow/vfast), from blue (small vslow, high asymmetry) to gray to red (vslow≲vfast, small asymmetry). For reference, ℱ𝒞 of chromosomes with symmetric two-sided LEFs and one-sided LEFs (i.e. completely asymmetric) are shown in black. Yellow shading indicates expected physiological range for λ/d (see text). Green box on the color bar indicates range of asymmetries of 2/3 of metaphase (condensin) loop-extrusion events observed by Golfier et al., 2020. Black dashed line indicates 1000-fold linear compaction expected for human mitotic chromosomes. (d) Fold compaction, ℱ𝒞, versus λ/d for chromosomes with LEF populations with distributions of asymmetries, modeling experimental observations by Golfier et al., 2020. Blue circles correspond to 50% asymmetric two-sided LEFs and 50% one-sided LEFs (scenario 1 in the text). Red squares correspond to 100% asymmetric two-sided LEFs with a distribution of asymmetries (scenario 2). Purple triangles correspond to asymmetric two-sided LEFs that can both grow and shrink loops (scenario 3). Blue dashed line indicates theoretical prediction of ℱ𝒞max=60 for a 50/50 mix of one- and two-sided LEFs (Banigan and Mirny, 2019). Yellow shading indicates expected physiological range for λ/d. Standard error for all displayed data points is <3% of the mean value.Figure 1—figure supplement 1. Compaction and elimination of gaps by asymmetric LEFs.(a) Fold compaction, ℱ𝒞, of asymmetric LEFs, plotted as a function of λslow/d to show increase in ℱ𝒞 when λslow/d≈1. Color indicates the degree of asymmetry, quantified by log(vslow/vfast) for symmetric two-sided LEFs is shown in black. Dashed line shows ℱ𝒞=1000. Dotted line shows ℱ𝒞≈10 compaction limit for one-sided extrusion. (b) The number of of gaps per loop, Ng/Nℓ, versus λ/d for systems in which two-sided LEFs extrude loops asymmetrically. Ng/Nℓ for one-sided and symmetric two-sided extrusion are shown by black data points and asymmetry is indicated by color, ranging from high asymmetry (small vslow) in blue to low asymmetry (vslow≈vfast) in red. | |
Figure 2. Linear compaction by mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs with different residence times.(a) Arch diagram schematically showing two-sided LEFs (orange) and one-sided LEFs (purple) with different unbinding rates (and residence times), k2=1/τ2 and k1=1/τ1, respectively. (b) Top: Example trajectories for mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs illustrating the theoretical limits of very long-lived two-sided LEFs (left) and very short-lived two-sided LEFs (right). In both scenarios, a two-sided LEF (orange) extrudes at speed v2 until encountering a one-sided LEF (blue or purple), which acts as a barrier. Encounters with barriers reduce the effective mean speed, veff, indicated by black dashed lines. Bottom: Arch diagrams from simulation snapshots for the two scenarios. Two-sided LEFs are orange and one-sided LEFs are purple. (c) Fold-compaction, ℱ𝒞, as a function of the ratio, λ/d, for 50/50 mixes of one- and two-sided LEFs in which each species has a different residence time. Color from blue to gray to red indicates increasing ratio, τ2/τ1=k1/k2, of residence times. Green box on the color bar indicates estimated range of residence time ratios for condensin II as compared to condensin I (Gerlich et al., 2006a; Gibcus et al., 2018; Walther et al., 2018). Gray points are data for τ2=τ1. Black dashed line indicates 1000-fold compaction. (d) Maximum fold compaction, ℱ𝒞max, as a function of the ratio of residence times, τ2/τ1. Colors from blue to gray to red indicate increasing fractions, ϕ1, of one-sided LEFs. Dotted lines indicate theory, with results for τ2≪τ1 shown for τ2/τ1<0.1, results for τ2≫τ1 shown for τ2/τ1>10, and the mean-field (τ2/τ1=1) result shown with straight lines interpolating to other theoretical results. Yellow region indicates estimated range of residence time ratios for condensin II as compared to condensin I. Green box indicates approximate range of ϕ1 observed in experiments with metazoan condensins (Golfier et al., 2020; Kong et al., 2020). (e) Phase diagram colored by fold linear compaction, ℱ𝒞, for various fractions, ϕ1, of one-sided LEFs and ratios, τ2/τ1 of residence times (red: high compaction, blue: low compaction, gray: ℱ𝒞≈1000). Yellow region indicates range of residence time ratios for condensin II as compared to condensin I and experimentally observed fractions of one-sided extruders. Black dotted line is the theoretically predicted boundary (ℱ𝒞=1000) between high and low compaction regimes. Standard error for all displayed data points is <3%.Figure 2—figure supplement 1. Compaction by mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs with different extrusion velocities.(a) Fold compaction, ℱ𝒞, as a function of the ratio λ/d for mixtures of LEFs in which two-sided extrusion proceeds either 10 times more rapidly (circles) or slowly (triangles) than one-sided extrusion. Colors from blue to gray to red indicate the fraction, ϕ1, of one-sided LEFs. Dotted lines show theoretical predictions for maximum fold compaction from theory with a single mean velocity (Banigan and Mirny, 2019). (b) The number of of gaps per loop, Ng/Nℓ, decreases with λ/d and depends on the fraction, ϕ1, of one-sided LEFs, but the limiting value is independent of the relative velocities, v2/v1 (indicated by symbols). Dotted lines indicate theoretical predictions from previous theory. (c) Phase diagram colored by fold linear compaction, ℱ𝒞 (red: high, blue: low, gray: ℱ𝒞≈1000), for various fractions, ϕ1, of one-sided LEFs and ratios, v2/v1, of velocities. Yellow region indicates estimate of velocity ratios and fractions of one-sided extruders. Black dotted line is the theoretically predicted boundary (ℱ𝒞=1000) between high and low compaction regimes. | |
Figure 2—figure supplement 2. Compaction by mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs with different residence times.(a) Fold compaction by mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs in which each species has a different unbinding rate, k1 or k2 (and residence time, τi=1/ki). Color from blue to red indicates increasing fractions, ϕ1, of LEFs that are one-sided. Triangles indicate short-lived two-sided LEFs (k2>k1) and circles indicate long-lived two-sided LEFs (k2<k1). Colored dotted lines indicate the theoretical prediction for maximum compaction in systems in which all LEFs unbind at the same rate, k2=k1(Banigan and Mirny, 2019). Black dashed line indicates 1000-fold compaction. (b) The number of of gaps per loop, Ng/Nℓ, versus λ/d for mixtures in which 50% of LEFs are one-sided and 50% of LEFs are two-sided (i.e., ϕ1=0.5). The limiting value of Ng/Nℓ decreases with increasing ratios of residence times, τ2/τ1. The green box on the color bar indicates the expected physiological range of τ2/τ1. | |
Figure 2—figure supplement 3. Compaction by mixtures of one- and two-sided LEFs with different extrusion speeds and residence times.Fold compaction, ℱ𝒞, by mixtures of LEFs in which speeds and residence times of one- and two-sided LEFs differ by a factor of 10. Solid symbols: τ2=10τ1; open symbols: τ2=0.1τ1; circles: v2=10v1; triangles: v2=0.1v1. Dotted lines indicate theoretical predictions for τ2=τ1. | |
Figure 2—figure supplement 4. Maximum fold compaction by mixtures one-sided LEFs with different residence times.(a) Maximum fold compaction, ℱmax, plotted versus the ratio of velocities, vfast/vslow, in a system with two populations of one-sided LEFs. The fraction, ϕfast, of fast LEFs is indicated by color from blue to red (small to large fractions). (b) With two different residence times, τL and τS, mixtures of one-sided LEFs can exceed the theoretical ∼10-fold compaction limit (dotted line) predicted for τL/τS=1. Colors indicate fraction of LEFs that have a long residence time. Dashed lines show theoretical results. Dotted line shows ℱ=9.5 predicted by theory (Banigan and Mirny, 2019). (c) Maximum fold compaction across all ratios of residence times as a function of the fraction, ϕL, of long-lived one-sided LEFs. Points are simulation data. The black dashed line is the result of the gap counting theory using the mean-field assumption of one gap per four loops (Equation 20 in Appendix 1). The gray dotted line is the theoretical result with more precise counting of gaps (Equation 26 in Appendix 1). Inset: Number of gaps per loop, Ng/Nℓ, for maximal compaction plotted versus ϕL. Points are simulation data and the gray dotted line is the result of the precise gap-counting theory. Black dashed line shows Ng/Nℓ=0.25 assumed for the effective processivity theory (see Appendix 1). (d) Simulation data showing that the number of gaps per loop, Ng/Nℓ, as a function of λ/d approaches a limiting value of ≈0.25 (dotted line), irrespective of the fraction of long-lived LEFs, the ratio, τL/τS, of long and short residence times, and the ratio, vfast/vslow, of fast and slow extrusion speeds. Color denotes either the fraction, ϕL, of long-lived LEFs (for circles and triangles) or the fraction, ϕfast of fast LEFs (for ‘x’ symbols). (e) Arch diagrams for systems with small and large quantities of long-lived one-sided LEFs. Purple arches represent short-lived LEFs while blue arches represent long-lived LEFs. ϕL=0.09 and ϕL=0.91 for left and right, respectively. | |
Figure 3. Simulations of LEFs with properties of condensins I and II.(a) Arch diagrams schematically illustrating three different scenarios for extrusion by mixtures of condensins I and II. Condensins I and II may be one- or two-sided in all scenarios (purple or orange, respectively). The ratio of condensin I to condensin II is 4:1. Top (blue box): Schematic cartoon of a mixture of condensins I and II in which condensin II has residence time τII=3τI. Middle (red box): Cartoon of scenario with two populations of condensin II. The ‘extra-stable’ population has residence time τII,∗=20τII=60τI. In this scenario, both types of condensin II may be one-sided or two-sided. Bottom (purple box): Scenario in which extra-stable condensin II complexes are two-sided, while the more dynamic condensin II subpopulation is one-sided. Colors of boxes indicate color of corresponding data points in panel (b). (b) Fold linear compaction, ℱ𝒞, versus λ/d for the scenarios described above (blue circles, red squares, and purple triangles, respectively). Open triangles denote the third scenario, but with condensin II complexes extruding with speed vII=0.5vI. Black dashed line denotes 1000-fold compaction. Yellow shading indicates expected physiological range of λ/d. Standard error for all displayed data points is <3%.Figure 3—figure supplement 1. Arch diagrams for simulations with LEFs with the properties of condensins I and II.Orange arches indicate two-sided LEFs, while purple arches indicate one-sided LEFs. Solid lines indicate condensin I, dashed lines indicate condensin II, and dotted lines indicate extra-stable condensin II. | |
Figure 3—figure supplement 2. Condensins I and II simulations with different ratios of condensin I to condensin II.Fold linear compaction, ℱ𝒞, versus λ/d for the scenarios described in Figure 3 (blue circles, red squares, and purple triangles, respectively) for condensin I to condensin II ratios of (a) 1:1 as measured for HeLa cells by Ono et al., 2003 and (b) 9:1 as in DT40 (chicken) cells (Ohta et al., 2010). | |
Figure 4. Summary of chromosome compaction abilities of LEF mixtures with different asymmetries and dynamics.(a) Legend for illustrations of LEFs with different symmetries (left) and/or different dynamics (right). (b) Illustrations of systems with asymmetric LEFs. Systems with both one-sided and asymmetric two-sided LEFs do not fully compact mitotic chromosomes due to the unavoidable presence of unlooped gaps (left). However, asymmetric two-sided LEFs can fully compact chromosomes if the processivity of the slow side (purple) is sufficiently large (right). (c) Illustrations of one- and two-sided LEFs with different dynamics. Mixtures in which one-sided LEFs are long-lived (slowly turn over) and two-sided LEFs are short-lived (rapidly turn over) cannot fully compact mitotic chromosomes (left). Mixtures with long-lived two-sided LEFs and short-lived one-sided LEFs compact chromosomes (right). (d) Illustrations of mixtures of condensins I and II. Mixtures of condensins I and II in which turnover is independent of extrusion symmetry cannot fully compact chromosomes (left). Mixtures in which two-sided condensin II complexes are very long-lived (LEFs with double blue bars) can fully compact chromosomes (right). Note that each LEF represents a molecular complex that performs either one-sided or two-sided extrusion; a two-sided LEF may represent either a single two-sided condensin or a dimer of two one-sided condensins. |
References [+] :
Alipour,
Self-organization of domain structures by DNA-loop-extruding enzymes.
2012, Pubmed
Alipour, Self-organization of domain structures by DNA-loop-extruding enzymes. 2012, Pubmed
Anchimiuk, A low Smc flux avoids collisions and facilitates chromosome organization in Bacillus subtilis. 2021, Pubmed
Bakhrebah, Disruption of a conserved CAP-D3 threonine alters condensin loading on mitotic chromosomes leading to chromosome hypercondensation. 2015, Pubmed
Banigan, Chromosome organization by one-sided and two-sided loop extrusion. 2020, Pubmed
Banigan, Loop extrusion: theory meets single-molecule experiments. 2020, Pubmed
Barrington, Enhancer accessibility and CTCF occupancy underlie asymmetric TAD architecture and cell type specific genome topology. 2019, Pubmed
Brandão, DNA-loop-extruding SMC complexes can traverse one another in vivo. 2021, Pubmed
Busslinger, Cohesin is positioned in mammalian genomes by transcription, CTCF and Wapl. 2017, Pubmed
Cattoglio, Determining cellular CTCF and cohesin abundances to constrain 3D genome models. 2019, Pubmed
Davidson, DNA loop extrusion by human cohesin. 2019, Pubmed
Dixon, Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions. 2012, Pubmed
Earnshaw, Architecture of metaphase chromosomes and chromosome scaffolds. 1983, Pubmed
Fudenberg, Formation of Chromosomal Domains by Loop Extrusion. 2016, Pubmed
Fudenberg, Emerging Evidence of Chromosome Folding by Loop Extrusion. 2017, Pubmed
Fukui, Chromosome protein framework from proteome analysis of isolated human metaphase chromosomes. 2007, Pubmed
Ganji, Real-time imaging of DNA loop extrusion by condensin. 2018, Pubmed
Gerlich, Live-cell imaging reveals a stable cohesin-chromatin interaction after but not before DNA replication. 2006, Pubmed
Gerlich, Condensin I stabilizes chromosomes mechanically through a dynamic interaction in live cells. 2006, Pubmed
Gibcus, A pathway for mitotic chromosome formation. 2018, Pubmed , Xenbase
Golfier, Cohesin and condensin extrude DNA loops in a cell cycle-dependent manner. 2020, Pubmed , Xenbase
Goloborodko, Compaction and segregation of sister chromatids via active loop extrusion. 2016, Pubmed
Goloborodko, Chromosome Compaction by Active Loop Extrusion. 2016, Pubmed
Green, Contrasting roles of condensin I and condensin II in mitotic chromosome formation. 2012, Pubmed
Guo, CRISPR Inversion of CTCF Sites Alters Genome Topology and Enhancer/Promoter Function. 2015, Pubmed
Hansen, CTCF and cohesin regulate chromatin loop stability with distinct dynamics. 2017, Pubmed
Hirano, A heterodimeric coiled-coil protein required for mitotic chromosome condensation in vitro. 1994, Pubmed , Xenbase
Hirano, Condensins, chromosome condensation protein complexes containing XCAP-C, XCAP-E and a Xenopus homolog of the Drosophila Barren protein. 1997, Pubmed , Xenbase
Hirano, Condensins: universal organizers of chromosomes with diverse functions. 2012, Pubmed , Xenbase
Hirano, Condensin-Based Chromosome Organization from Bacteria to Vertebrates. 2016, Pubmed
Hirota, Distinct functions of condensin I and II in mitotic chromosome assembly. 2004, Pubmed
Holzmann, Absolute quantification of cohesin, CTCF and their regulators in human cells. 2019, Pubmed
Kalitsis, Condensin, master organizer of the genome. 2017, Pubmed
Kim, DNA-loop extruding condensin complexes can traverse one another. 2020, Pubmed
Kim, Human cohesin compacts DNA by loop extrusion. 2019, Pubmed
Kong, Human Condensin I and II Drive Extensive ATP-Dependent Compaction of Nucleosome-Bound DNA. 2020, Pubmed
Krietenstein, Ultrastructural Details of Mammalian Chromosome Architecture. 2020, Pubmed
Kschonsak, Structural Basis for a Safety-Belt Mechanism That Anchors Condensin to Chromosomes. 2017, Pubmed
Kueng, Wapl controls the dynamic association of cohesin with chromatin. 2006, Pubmed
Le, High-resolution mapping of the spatial organization of a bacterial chromosome. 2013, Pubmed
Maeshima, Chromosome structure: improved immunolabeling for electron microscopy. 2005, Pubmed
Marbouty, Condensin- and Replication-Mediated Bacterial Chromosome Folding and Origin Condensation Revealed by Hi-C and Super-resolution Imaging. 2015, Pubmed
Marsden, Metaphase chromosome structure: evidence for a radial loop model. 1979, Pubmed
Miermans, Bacterial chromosome organization by collective dynamics of SMC condensins. 2018, Pubmed
Nagasaka, Sister chromatid resolution is an intrinsic part of chromosome organization in prophase. 2016, Pubmed
Nora, Targeted Degradation of CTCF Decouples Local Insulation of Chromosome Domains from Genomic Compartmentalization. 2017, Pubmed
Nora, Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre. 2012, Pubmed
Ohta, The protein composition of mitotic chromosomes determined using multiclassifier combinatorial proteomics. 2010, Pubmed
Ono, Condensin II plays an essential role in reversible assembly of mitotic chromosomes in situ. 2017, Pubmed
Ono, Spatial and temporal regulation of Condensins I and II in mitotic chromosome assembly in human cells. 2004, Pubmed
Ono, Differential contributions of condensin I and condensin II to mitotic chromosome architecture in vertebrate cells. 2003, Pubmed , Xenbase
Paulson, The structure of histone-depleted metaphase chromosomes. 1977, Pubmed
Rao, A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. 2014, Pubmed
Riggs, DNA methylation and late replication probably aid cell memory, and type I DNA reeling could aid chromosome folding and enhancer function. 1990, Pubmed
Saitoh, ScII: an abundant chromosome scaffold protein is a member of a family of putative ATPases with an unusual predicted tertiary structure. 1994, Pubmed
Saka, Fission yeast cut3 and cut14, members of a ubiquitous protein family, are required for chromosome condensation and segregation in mitosis. 1994, Pubmed
Sanborn, Chromatin extrusion explains key features of loop and domain formation in wild-type and engineered genomes. 2015, Pubmed
Sexton, Three-dimensional folding and functional organization principles of the Drosophila genome. 2012, Pubmed
Shintomi, The relative ratio of condensin I to II determines chromosome shapes. 2011, Pubmed , Xenbase
Shintomi, Mitotic chromosome assembly despite nucleosome depletion in Xenopus egg extracts. 2017, Pubmed , Xenbase
Shintomi, Reconstitution of mitotic chromatids with a minimum set of purified factors. 2015, Pubmed , Xenbase
Strunnikov, SMC2, a Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene essential for chromosome segregation and condensation, defines a subgroup within the SMC family. 1995, Pubmed
Sun, Condensin controls mitotic chromosome stiffness and stability without forming a structurally contiguous scaffold. 2018, Pubmed
Takahashi, Folding the genome into mitotic chromosomes. 2019, Pubmed
Takemoto, Cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation, nuclear localization, and activation of human condensin. 2004, Pubmed
Tedeschi, Wapl is an essential regulator of chromatin structure and chromosome segregation. 2013, Pubmed
Terakawa, The condensin complex is a mechanochemical motor that translocates along DNA. 2017, Pubmed
Umbarger, The three-dimensional architecture of a bacterial genome and its alteration by genetic perturbation. 2011, Pubmed
Vian, The Energetics and Physiological Impact of Cohesin Extrusion. 2018, Pubmed
Vietri Rudan, Comparative Hi-C reveals that CTCF underlies evolution of chromosomal domain architecture. 2015, Pubmed
Walther, A quantitative map of human Condensins provides new insights into mitotic chromosome architecture. 2018, Pubmed
Wang, Bacillus subtilis SMC complexes juxtapose chromosome arms as they travel from origin to terminus. 2017, Pubmed
Wutz, Topologically associating domains and chromatin loops depend on cohesin and are regulated by CTCF, WAPL, and PDS5 proteins. 2017, Pubmed
Yatskevich, Organization of Chromosomal DNA by SMC Complexes. 2019, Pubmed
de Wit, CTCF Binding Polarity Determines Chromatin Looping. 2015, Pubmed