Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3RE, UK
(e-mail: peter.cook{at}path.ox.ac.uk)
![]() |
Summary |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: Barrier, Enhancer, Heterochromatin, Locus control region, Position effect, Silencer
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
An important distinction is made between genes (which usually encode proteins) and transcription units (which might be copied into noncoding transcripts). It is now estimated there are tenfold more transcription units than genes in the human genome (Kapranov et al., 2002), and very little is known about the former. Most of these extra transcription units do not encode recognizable structural RNAs like rRNA or tRNA, and most are not found in current transcriptomes [as they are copied into unstable transcripts that lack the poly(A) tails usually used to select RNA molecules for analysis]. A small fraction of these extra units will be pseudogenes, as sequence analysis reveals that many of the
20,000 human pseudogenes have functional promoters. [Note that transcription of one pseudogene (Makorin1-1p) regulates the expression of its coding counterpart (Hirotsune et al., 2003
).] A larger fraction is probably made up of repeated sequences, because many of the retrotransposons in those repeats also contain functional promoters. However, most are probably just `junk' and destroyed rapidly by the nonsense-mediated decay pathway (Iborra et al., 2001
). I will argue that nature utilizes neighbouring transcription units (whether they be genic or nongenic) in gene regulation.
![]() |
Heterochromatin: a repressive context |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Heterochromatinization inactivates most genes (Gerasimova and Corces, 2001; Donze and Kamakaka, 2002
; Schedl and Broach, 2003
). During his famous experiments on the effects of X-rays on Drosophila, Muller noticed some mutants with mottled red and white eyes (Sturtevant and Beadle, 1962
). This was subsequently traced to the translocation of the white gene from euchromatin to heterochromatin (Baker, 1968
). Translocation and not mutation of white causes this variegation, because the phenotype reverts on relocation of the gene back to euchromatin. white encodes a membrane protein that transports pigment precursors into eye cells, and so deficient eyes appear shades of orange to white. white has a weak promoter without a canonical TATA box that is sensitive to adjacent sequences. Inactivation of white in some cells in the primordial eye disc early in development coupled to the subsequent inheritance of that inactivity leads to patches with and without pigment. Inactivation can be accompanied by the spread of heterochromatin hundreds of kilobases into juxtaposed euchromatin, with a consequential alteration in the banding pattern in the giant chromosomes of salivary glands. This spread propagates down one fibre and laterally to others through various modifications (e.g. histone hypoacetylation) until some `barrier' is encountered (Donze and Kamakaka, 2002
; Schedl and Broach, 2003
). Genetic screens in Drosophila originally revealed that almost any euchromatic gene can be inactivated by such position effects (Lindsley et al., 1960
; Baker, 1968
), and this is now being amply confirmed in a wide range of higher eukaryotes by experiments using reporters encoding the green fluorescent protein (GFP) (Spector, 2003
).
Current models for the way regulatory motifs act at a distance are of three non-exclusive types (Gerasimova and Corces, 2001; Schedl and Broach, 2003
). They involve altering the balance between euchromatin and heterochromatin, and the motifs are seen as binding sites for proteins that induce (1) chemical modifications and/or structural alterations that propagate down the fibre, (2) looping to bring regulatory elements into contact with distant promoters, or (3) relocation of elements to permissive (or restrictive) nuclear compartments.
![]() |
Transcription units as barriers, boundaries, insulators, enhancers, LCRs |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The first barrier segregating euchromatin from heterochromatin was defined in the Drosophila 87A7 heat-shock locus (Fig. 1A) (Kellum and Schedl, 1991). This locus possesses flanking `specialized chromatin sequences' (scs and scs') that each contain nuclease-hypersensitive sites and a nuclease-resistant core to which specific transcription factors bind (SBP/Zw5 binds to scs; BEAF32/DREF binds to scs'). When flies are transformed with wild-type white, some flies have wild-type eyes, and others have mutant ones. When white integrates into euchromatin it is expressed, and when integrated into heterochromatin it is repressed. But when it is flanked by scs and scs', most flies have wild-type eyes. Both scs and scs' contain promoters (Avramova and Tikhonov, 1999
). Many similar barriers have now been identified (Gerasimova and Corces, 2001
; West et al., 2002
); hypersensitive site 4 (HS4) of chicken ß-globin (see below) protects white from fly heterochromatin, and active transcription units insulate GFP-encoding reporters from human heterochromatin (Sutter et al., 2003
).
|
The Drosophila bithorax complex (BX-C) contains many well-studied enhancers, silencers and insulators that ensure that three homeotic genes Ubx, abd-A and Abd-B are expressed appropriately along the anterior-posterior axis of the developing fly (Fig. 1B) (Martin et al., 1995). A significant number of these regulators extend over many kilobases, and there has been no satisfactory explanation of why they are so long. Moreover, it has only recently been recognized that it is the act of transcription that underlies their activity. For example, first, deleting an unrelated gene (Glut3) encoding a glucose transporter that happens to be embedded in the locus alters abd-A expression and transforms the first abdominal segment into the second segment (Martin et al., 1995
). Second, P element insertions downstream of abd-A also transform the first abdominal segment into the second and third segments; the P element promoter drives transcription across intergenic regions regulating segmental development, and blocking it reverts the mutant phenotype (Bender and Fitzgerald, 2002
). Third, disrupting the transcription of each of the iab-4 to iab-8 enhancers transforms the segments they control into more posterior ones (Drewell et al., 2002a
; Hogga and Karch, 2002
). Fourth, activating transcription of the cellular memory modules (CMMs) associated with the bxd, Mcp and Fab7 regulators correlates with the alteration in epigenetic state (Rank et al., 2002
). Fifth, transcription of the Mcp and Fab8 insulators correlates with their activity (Drewell et al., 2002a
).
Saccharomyces cerevisiae lacks cytologically detectable heterochromatin (it is too small to be visible), but insertions in a few sites are subject to position effects. Their DNA is resistant to nucleases and their nucleosomes are hypoacetylated, but CpGs plus lysine 9 of histone H3 are unmethylated, and SIR (silent information regulator) proteins replace HP1. The most-studied region is HMR, which contains silent copies of the mating-type specific gene, MATa (Fig. 1C). A reporter gene such as URA3 is silenced when inserted into HMR (Richards and Elgin, 2002). Silencing depends on context, because excised DNA rings soon reactivate (Cheng and Gartenberg, 2000
). Barriers marking the limit of the silent domain contain promoters, and mutating the tRNAThr promoter in the right-hand one reduces barrier activity (Donze and Kamakaka, 2001
). [tRNA genes also limit the spreading of heterochromatin in fission yeast (Partridge et al., 2000
).]
HS4, which lies 5' of the chicken ß-globin locus, is the best-characterized vertebrate boundary (Burgess-Beusse et al., 2002). It marks the border between nuclease-sensitive and nuclease-resistant chromatin, blocks enhancer action and screens reporters against position effects. Although it has not been shown to be a promoter in vivo, it is nevertheless a CpG island that bears the histone code (i.e. H3 hyperacetylation and methylation of lys4) characteristic of one (Litt et al., 2001
).
Enhancers promote the activity of linked promoters (Hertel et al., 1997). They invariably contain binding sites for transcription factors and some are transcribed, including those regulating BX-C (above) and a subset known as locus control regions (LCRs). LCRs enable inserted transgenes to be expressed independently of position effects at physiological levels in a manner that is tissue specific and dependent on copy number (Li et al., 2002
). The first LCR was found in the human ß-globin locus (Fig. 1D). In transgenic mice that contain only the minimal ß-globin gene, inserted transgenes were subject to position effects; however, adding distant hypersensitive sites (HS1-HS5) led to high-level expression in erythroid cells regardless of the insertion site. Both human and mouse LCRs contain multiple transcription units (Ashe et al., 1997
; Routledge et al., 2002), and active RNA polymerase II can be immunoprecipitated bound to HS2 (Johnson et al., 2001
). Other transcribed LCRs include those controlling the expression of
-globin, keratin 18, adenosine deaminase, growth hormone and major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II genes (Li et al., 2002
). Significantly, a point mutation in the promoter of the keratin 18 LCR an alu repeat destroys some of its insulating activity (Willoughby et al., 2000
).
Transcription of all these motifs regulates the activity of linked genes. Other well-known mammalian examples include H19 (a noncoding unit that combines with transcribed enhancers to control IGF2 imprinting) (Drewell et al., 2002b), and XIST and Tsix (noncoding units maintaining inactivity of one of the X chromosomes in females) (Plath et al., 2002
).
![]() |
Repression through anisense trasncription and transcriptional interference |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Transcripts copied from noncoding strands can pair with their coding counterparts to regulate gene activity post-transcriptionally for example, through the operation of the RNA interference, alternative splicing, and editing pathways (Gottesman, 2002; Storz, 2002
). Such downstream effects are not discussed here. However, the act of antisense transcription inevitably and directly reduces sense transcription, because both strands cannot be copied simultaneously. Such antisense inhibition is probably significant as at least 300 human genes contain embedded antisense units that are copied into transcripts stable enough to yield expressed sequence tags (ESTs) (Shendure and Church, 2002
).
Transcription of a gene also interferes with the expression of a nonoverlapping but neighbouring one. This kind of transcriptional interference was first seen in mammals in clones harbouring a single (integrated) copy of a retroviral vector encoding resistance to both neomycin and azaguanine (Emerman and Temin, 1986). Expression of the 3' resistance gene was suppressed when selection required expression of the 5' gene, and vice versa. Moreover, few cells grew in both neomycin and azaguanine, showing that only one gene is usually active. Interference can spread at least 10 kbp, but the upper limit remains unknown. It is generally missed in cells with many integrants (and in diploid cells) because one copy might express one gene at any moment, and a second copy another. However, it is likely to be common in human cells, because
20% of genes on chromosomes 21 and 22 lie within 1 kbp of another (in a head-to-head orientation) (Adachi and Lieber, 2002
), and even more common when (unrecognized) transcription units are considered. Such interference also occurs between different kinds of unit; thus, tRNAThr (a polymerase III unit) silences URA3 (a polymerase II unit; above), and other yeast tRNA genes reduce the transcription of polymerase II units lying within
400 bp between three- and sixty-fold (Bolton and Boeke, 2003
). Although we might imagine that two mammalian genes lying within a few kbp on a chromosome could each be loaded with many polymerases, this evidence suggests that only one of the two is transcribed at any moment.
![]() |
Chromatin loops |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Images of lampbrush chromosomes are often thought to provide the best evidence for looping. These chromosomes can be isolated from oocytes of many animals (but not mammals). During the first meiotic division, duplicated homologs pair, and long loops can be seen extending microns away from axial chromomeres. Unusually, these chromosomes are transcribed, and transcripts are attached to both loops and chromomeres (Snow and Callan, 1969). But these loops only become visible on dispersing chromatin in unphysiological buffers, and none are seen in sections of whole oocytes where chromatin appears as a granular aggregate; therefore, the long loops may be created during isolation as active units are stripped off chromomeres (Cook, 2001
).
Supercoiling in linear eukaryotic DNA provides additional evidence for looping. Supercoils cannot be maintained in linear DNA without looping. However, lysing cells in >1 M NaCl releases superhelical loops that are visible in the electron microscope, and nascent transcripts are associated with attachment points (but not loops) (Jackson et al., 1984). Here, artifactual aggregation could induce looping, and so this is also indecisive. Many experiments involving nuclease digestion are also consistent with looping. Cutting an unlooped fibre should release long fragments that are then shortened, but the expected long fragments are not seen; rather, kinetics fit the release of short fragments from loops. Although initial experiments used unphysiological buffers that generated/destroyed attachments (Jackson et al., 1990
), more recent ones with `physiological' buffers confirm looping and show that transcription units mediate attachment (Fig. 2B) (Jackson et al., 1990
; Jackson and Cook, 1993
; Jackson et al., 1996
).
Two powerful new methods now provide excellent evidence for looping (Fig. 3) and for a model described below in which the loops are anchored by transcription units. `Chromosome conformation capture' (3C) (Dekker et al., 2002) shows that a distant (transcribed) LCR contacts the (transcribed) ß-globin gene in mouse erythroid cells but not in brain cells (where the gene is inactive) (Tolhuis et al., 2002
). Moreover, (transcribed) scs contacts (transcribed) scs', and looping was confirmed by chromatin immunoprecipitation antibodies against Zw5 (bound to scs) precipitate scs' (Blanton et al., 2003
). The ß-globin loop is also seen by RNA tagging and recovery of associated proteins (RNA TRAP) (Carter et al., 2002
).
|
Although there is no decisive evidence for looping in living cells, the above data can be interpreted simply if two distant and active transcription units come together to tie the intervening fibre into a loop.
![]() |
Combining models for loop structure and action at a distance |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
In this model, a distant regulator (a polymerizing complex) can easily contact the polymerase it regulates. Regulators would have to associate with the appropriate factories before they could exert their effects, because different factories specialize in transcribing different genes. Thus, some contain only RNA polymerase I, others contain only RNA polymerase II, and still others contain only RNA polymerase III (Pombo et al., 1999). Factories containing one kind of polymerase specialize even further. For example, a subset of polymerase II factories are rich in PSE-binding transcription factor (PTF) and Oct1, and they associate with particular chromosomes presumably those carrying transcription units regulated by these factors (Pombo et al., 1998
). In addition, genes encoding the histones and U1, U2 and U3 snRNA often lie near Cajal bodies (Spector, 2003
), again presumably associated with factories dedicated to their transcription. It may even be that an individual factory could become dedicated to the transcription of one gene plus its flanking nongenic transcription units (for example, the ß-globin gene, its LCR, plus other nongenic units). Only three types of `functional' tie currently need to be invoked, although more may have to be added. These would involve (1) nontranscribed motifs (promoters, and a subset of what are currently called enhancers and silencers) bound to their target proteins in a factory, (2) transcribing DNA (including genic introns and exons, silencers, insulators, barriers, and a subset of what are currently called enhancers/LCRs) bound to active polymerases in a factory, and (3) appropriately modified nucleosomes out in the body (or bight) of a loop to other complementary nucleosomes in heterochromatin and/or the lamina (Polioudaki et al., 2001
). The first would be transient, the second would persist for as long as the unit was transcribed (which is in the order of minutes) (Kimura et al., 2002
) and the third could be almost permanent (because histones H3 and H4 in deep heterochromatin only exchange over a period of many hours) (Kimura et al., 2001).
This organization has important consequences (Cook, 2002). In the nucleus of a HeLa cell the concentration of soluble RNA polymerase II is
1 µM, but the local concentration in a factory is 1000-fold higher. Because a promoter can diffuse
100 nm in 15 seconds, one lying near a factory is likely to initiate; moreover, when released at termination it will still lie near a factory, and the movement and modifications (e.g. acetylation) accompanying elongation will leave it in an `open' conformation. Another promoter out in a long loop (i.e. in the bight) is less likely to initiate because the promoter concentration falls off with the cube of the distance from the factory. Moreover, a long tether will buffer it from transcription-induced movement, making it prone to deacetylation, deposition of HP1 and incorporation into heterochromatin (Fig. 4). And because heterochromatin has an affinity for both the lamina (Polioudaki et al., 2001
) and other heterochromatic regions (e.g. flanking ribosomal cistrons), inactive genes will inevitably be drawn to the periphery or to nucleoli (Cockell and Gasser, 1999
; Galy et al., 2000
; Spector, 2003
). The context around a promoter will then be self-sustaining: productive collisions of an active promoter with the factory will attract factors increasing the frequency of initiation, and the longer an inactive promoter remains inactive the more it becomes embedded in heterochromatin.
The probability that promoters collide productively with a factory is increased by increasing promoter mobility (by `opening' chromatin), increasing promoter-factory affinity (through binding of appropriate factors; Fig. 6A,B) and reducing promoter-factory distance (by shortening the tether; Fig. 6C,D) (Iborra et al., 1996). However, transcriptional interference will occur if the tether becomes too short (Fig. 6E). Some active transcription units will also be barriers separating euchromatin from heterochromatin (Fig. 6F). A promoter embedded in a long heterochromatic loop then becomes active by progressively activating units deeper and deeper into the loop; this `opens' chromatin, subdivides the loop into ever smaller ones and brings the promoter closer to the factory. Only then can it compete effectively with others in the vicinity for polymerases in the factory. Here, binary switches do not activate genes flanked by discrete barriers; rather, a surrounding pattern of transcription encodes a fuzzy logic that specifies the probability of initiating.
|
![]() |
Conclusions |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The challenge now is to predict whether a gene is likely to be active from the DNA sequence. Unfortunately, we are still a long way from being able to do so in higher eukaryotes. At the very least, we need to know the location of all flanking transcription units, their relative activities, the concentration of the required transcription factors, how the length of the tether affects initiation rates and how heterochromatinization reduces DNA mobility. Only then can we predict which factories might be in the vicinity, and how the complex balance of conflicting forces that we know as context might be resolved.
![]() |
Acknowledgments |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Abranches, R., Beven, A. F., Aragon-Alcaide, L. and Shaw, P. J. (1998). Transcription sites are not correlated with chromosome territories in wheat nuclei. J. Cell Biol. 143, 5-12.
Adachi, N. and Lieber, M. R. (2002). Bidirectional gene organization: a common architectural feature of the human genome. Cell 109, 807-809.[Medline]
Ashe, H. L., Monks, J., Wijgerde, M., Fraser, P. and Proudfoot, N. J. (1997). Intergenic transcription and transinduction of the human beta-globin locus. Genes Dev. 11, 2494-2509.
Avramova, Z. and Tikhonov, A. (1999). Are scs and scs' `neutral' chromatin domain boundaries of the locus? Trends Genet. 15, 138-139.[CrossRef][Medline]
Baker, W. K. (1968). Position-effect variegation. Adv. Genetics 14, 133-169.[Medline]
Belmont, A. S. (2002). Mitotic chromosome scaffold structure: new approaches to an old controversy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 15855-15857.
Bender, W. and Fitzgerald, D. P. (2002). Transcription activates repressed domains in the Drosophila bithorax complex. Development 129, 4923-4930.
Bi, X. and Broach, J. R. (1999). UASrpg can function as a heterochromatin boundary element in yeast. Genes Dev. 13, 1089-1101.
Blanton, J., Gaszner, M. and Schedl, P. (2003). Protein:protein interactions and the pairing of boundary elements in vivo. Genes Dev. 17, 664-675.
Bolton, E. C. and Boeke, J. D. (2003). Transcriptional interactions between yeast tRNA genes, flanking genes and Ty elements: a genomic point of view. Genome Res. 13, 254-263.
Burgess-Beusse, B., Farrell, C., Gaszner, M., Litt, M., Mutskov, V., Recillas-Targa, F., Simpson, M., West, A. and Felsenfeld, G. (2002). The insulation of genes from external enhancers and silencing chromatin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 (Suppl. 4), 16433-16437.
Carter, D., Chakalova, L., Osborne, C. S., Dai, Y.-f. and Fraser, P. (2002). Long-range chromatin regulatory interactions in vivo. Nat. Genet. 32, 623-626.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cheng, T. H. and Gartenberg, M. R. (2000). Yeast heterochromatin is a dynamic structure that requires silencers continuously. Genes Dev. 14, 452-463.
Cockell, M. and Gasser, S. M. (1999). Nuclear compartments and gene regulation. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 9, 199-205.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cook, P. R. (1999). The organization of replication and transcription. Science 284, 1790-1795.
Cook, P. R. (2001). Principles of nuclear structure and function. New York: J. Wiley.
Cook, P. R. (2002). Predicting three-dimensional genome structure from transcriptional activity. Nat. Genet. 32, 347-352.[CrossRef][Medline]
Dekker, J., Rippe, K., Dekker, M. and Kleckner, N. (2002). Capturing chromosome conformation. Science 295, 1306-1311.
Donze, D. and Kamakaka, R. T. (2001). RNA polymerase III and RNA polymerase II promoter complexes are heterochromatin barriers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. EMBO J. 20, 520-531.
Donze, D. and Kamakaka, R. T. (2002). Braking the silence: how heterochromatic gene repression is stopped in its tracks. Bioessays 24, 344-349.[CrossRef][Medline]
Drewell, R. A., Bae, E., Burr, J. and Lewis, E. B. (2002a). Transcription defines the embryonic domains of cis-regulatory activity at the Drosophila bithorax complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 16853-16858.
Drewell, R. A., Arney, K. L., Arima, T., Barton, S. C., Brenton, J. D. and Surani, M. A. (2002b). Novel conserved elements upstream of the H19 gene are transcribed and act as mesodermal enhancers. Development 129, 1205-1213.
Emerman, M. and Temin, H. M. (1986). Quantitative analysis of gene suppression in integrated virus vectors. Mol. Cell. Biol. 6, 792-800.[Medline]
Galy, V., Olivo-Marin, J. C., Scherthan, H., Doye, V., Rascalou, N. and Nehrbass, U. (2000). Nuclear pore complexes in the organization of silent telomeric chromatin. Nature 403, 108-112.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gerasimova, T. I. and Corces, V. G. (2001). Chromatin insulators and boundaries: effects on transcription and nuclear organization. Annu. Rev. Genet. 35, 193-208.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gottesman, S. (2002). Stealth regulation: biological circuits with small RNA switches. Genes Dev. 16, 2829-2842.
Grunstein, M. (1990). Histone function in transcription. Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 6, 643-678.[Medline]
Hertel, K. J., Lynch, K. W. and Maniatis, T. (1997). Common themes in the function of transcription and splicing enhancers. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 9, 350-357.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hirotsune, S., Yoshida, N., Chen, A., Garrett, L., Sugiyama, F., Takahashi, S., Yagami, K., Wynshaw-Boris, A. and Yoshiki, A. (2003). An expressed pseudogene regulates the messenger-RNA stability of its homologous coding gene. Nature 423, 91-96.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hogga, I. and Karch, F. (2002). Transcription through the iab-7 cis-regulatory domain of the bithorax complex interferes with maintenance of Polycombmediated silencing. Development 129, 4915-4922.
Iborra, F. J., Pombo, A., McManus, J., Jackson, D. A. and Cook, P. R. (1996). The topology of transcription by immobilized polymerases. Exp. Cell Res. 229, 167-173.[CrossRef][Medline]
Iborra, F. J., Jackson, D. A. and Cook, P. R. (2001). Coupled transcription and translation within nuclei of mammalian cells. Science 293, 1139-1142.
Ivarie, R. D., Schacter, B. S. and O'Farrell, P. H. (1983). The level of expression of the rat growth hormone gene in liver tumour cells is at least eight orders of magnitude less than that in anterior pituitary cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 3, 1460-1467.[Medline]
Jackson, D. A. and Cook, P. R. (1993). Transcriptionally-active minichromosomes are attached transiently in nuclei through transcription units. J. Cell Sci. 105, 1143-1150.
Jackson, D. A., McCready, S. J. and Cook, P. R. (1984). Replication and transcription depend on attachment of DNA to the nuclear cage. J. Cell Sci. (Suppl. 1), 59-79.
Jackson, D. A., Dickinson, P. and Cook, P. R. (1990). The size of chromatin loops in HeLa cells. EMBO J. 9, 567-571.[Abstract]
Jackson, D. A., Bartlett, J. and Cook, P. R. (1996). Sequences attaching loops of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA to underlying structures in human cells: the role of transcription units. Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 1212-1219.
Jenuwein, T. and Allis, C. D. (2001). Translating the histone code. Science 293, 1074-1080.
Johnson, K. D., Christensen, H. M., Zhao, B. and Bresnick, E. H. (2001). Distinct mechanisms control RNA polymerase II recruitment to a tissue-specific locus control region and a downstream promoter. Mol. Cell 8, 465-471.[Medline]
Kapranov, P., Cawley, S. E., Drenkow, J., Bekiranov, S., Strausberg, R. L., Fodor, S. P. and Gingeras, T. R. (2002). Large-scale transcriptional activity in chromosomes 21 and 22. Science 296, 916-919.
Kellum, R. and Schedl, P. (1991). A position-effect assay for boundaries of higher order chromosomal domains. Cell 64, 941-950.[Medline]
Kimura, H. and Cook, P. R. (2001). Kinetics of core histones in living human cells: little exchange of H3 and H4 and some rapid exchange of H2B. J. Cell Biol. 153, 1341-1353.
Kimura, H., Sugaya, K. and Cook, P. R. (2002). The transcription cycle of RNA polymerase II in living cells. J. Cell Biol. 159, 777-782.
Kurdistani, S. K. and Grunstein, M. (2003). Histone acetylation and deacetylation in yeast. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 4, 276-284.[CrossRef][Medline]
Labrador, M. and Corces, V. G. (2002). Setting the boundaries of chromatin domains and nuclear organization. Cell 111, 151-154.[Medline]
Li, Q., Peterson, K. R., Fang, X. and Stamatoyannopoulos, G. (2002). Locus control regions. Blood 100, 3077-3086.
Lindsley, D. L., Edington, C. W. and von Halle, E. S. (1960). Sex-linked recessive lethals in Drosophila whose expression is suppressed by the Y-chromosome. Genetics 45, 1649-1670.
Litt, M. D., Simpson, M., Gaszner, M., Allis, C. D. and Felsenfeld, G. (2001). Correlation between histone lysine methylation and developmental changes at the chicken beta-globin locus. Science 293, 2453-2455.
Martin, C. H., Mayeda, C. A., Davis, C. A., Ericsson, C. L., Knafels, J. D., Mathog, D. R., Celniker, S. E., Lewis, E. B. and Palazzolo, M. J. (1995). Complete sequence of the bithorax complex of Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92, 8398-8402.[Abstract]
Merika, M. and Thanos, D. (2001). Enhanceosomes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11, 205-208.[CrossRef][Medline]
Misteli, T. (2001). The concept of self-organization in cellular architecture. J. Cell Biol. 155, 181-185.
Partridge, J. F., Borgstrom, B. and Allshire, R. C. (2000). Distinct protein interaction domains and protein spreading in a complex centromere. Genes Dev. 14, 783-791.
Plath, K., Mlynarczyk-Evans, S., Nusinow, D. A. and Panning, B. (2002). Xist RNA and the mechanism of x chromosome inactivation. Annu. Rev. Genet. 36, 233-278.[CrossRef][Medline]
Polioudaki, H., Kourmouli, N., Drosou, V., Bakou, A., Theodoropoulos, P. A., Singh, P. B., Giannakouros, T. and Georgatos, S. D. (2001). Histones H3/H4 form a tight complex with the inner nuclear membrane protein LBR and heterochromatin protein 1. EMBO Rep. 2, 920-925.
Pombo, A., Cuello, P., Schul, W., Yoon, J.-B., Roeder, R. G., Cook, P. R. and Murphy, S. (1998). Regional and temporal specialization in the nucleus: a transcriptionally-active nuclear domain rich in PTF, Oct1 and PIKA antigens associates with specific chromosomes early in the cell cycle. EMBO J. 17, 1768-1778.
Pombo, A., Jackson, D. A., Hollinshead, M., Wang, Z., Roeder, R. G. and Cook, P. R. (1999). Regional specialization in human nuclei: visualization of discrete sites of transcription by RNA polymerase III. EMBO J. 18, 2241-2253.
Rank, G., Prestel, M. and Paro, R. (2002). Transcription through intergenic chromosomal memory elements of the Drosophila bithorax complex correlates with an epigenetic switch. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 8026-8034.
Richards, E. J. and Elgin, S. C. (2002). Epigenetic codes for heterochromatin formation and silencing: rounding up the usual suspects. Cell 108, 489-500.[Medline]
Routledge, S. J. and Proudfoot, N. J. (2002). Definition of transcriptional promoters in the human beta globin locus control region. J. Mol. Biol. 323, 601-611.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schedl, P. and Broach, J. R. (2003). Making good neighbors: the right fence for the right job. Nat. Struct. Biol. 10, 241-243.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shendure, J. and Church, G. M. (2002). Computational discovery of sense-antisense transcription in the human and mouse genomes. Genome Biol. 3, RESEARCH0044.
Skaletsky, H., Kuroda-Kawaguchi, T., Minx, P. J., Cordum, H. S., Hillier, L., Brown, L. G., Repping, S., Pyntikova, T., Ali, J., Bieri, T. et al. (2003). The male-specific region of the human Y chromosome is a mosaic of discrete sequence classes. Nature, 423, 825-837.[CrossRef][Medline]
Snow, M. H. L. and Callan, H. G. (1969). Evidence for a polarized movement of the lateral loops of newt lampbrush chromosomes during oogenesis. J. Cell Sci. 5, 1-25.[Medline]
Spector, D. L. (2003). The dynamics of chromosome organization and gene regulation. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 72, 573-608.[CrossRef][Medline]
Storz, G. (2002). An expanding universe of noncoding RNAs. Science 296, 1260-1263.
Sturtevant, A. H. and Beadle, G. W. (1962). An introduction to Genetics. New York: Dover Publications.
Sudbrak, R., Wieczorek, G., Nuber, U. A., Mann, W., Kirchner, R., Erdogan, F., Brown, C. J., Wohrle, D., Sterk, P., Kalscheuer, V. M. et al. (2001). X chromosome-specific cDNA arrays: identification of genes that escape from X-inactivation and other applications. Hum. Mol. Genet. 10, 77-83.
Sutter, N. B., Scalzo, D., Fiering, S., Groudine, M. and Martin, D. L. (2003). Chromatin insulation by a transcriptional activator. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 1105-1110.
Tanimoto, K., Liu, Q., Bungert, J. and Engel, J. D. (1999). Effects of altered gene order or orientation of the locus control region on human beta-globin gene expression in mice. Nature 398, 344-348.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tolhuis, B., Palstra, R. J., Splinter, E., Grosveld, F. and de Laat, W. (2002). Looping and interaction between hypersensitive sites in the active beta-globin locus. Mol. Cell. 10, 1453-1465.[Medline]
Volpe, T. A., Kidner, C., Hall, I. M., Teng, G., Grewal, S. I. and Martienssen, R. A. (2002). Regulation of heterochromatic silencing and histone H3 lysine-9 methylation by RNAi. Science 297, 1833-1837.
West, A. G., Gaszner, M. and Felsenfeld, G. (2002). Insulators: many functions, many mechanisms. Genes Dev. 16, 271-288.
Willoughby, D. A., Vilalta, A. and Oshima, R. G. (2000). An Alu element from the K18 gene confers position-independent expression in transgenic mice. J. Biol. Chem. 275, 759-768.
Wyrick, J. J., Holstege, F. C., Jennings, E. G., Causton, H. C., Shore, D., Grunstein, M., Lander, E. S. and Young, R. A. (1999). Chromosomal landscape of nucleosome-dependent gene expression and silencing in yeast. Nature 402, 418-421.[CrossRef][Medline]