Search

International audience; The degenerate base at position 34 of the tRNA anticodon is the target of numerous modification enzymes. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, five tRNAs exhibit a complex modification of uridine 34 (mcm(5)U(34) and mcm(5)s(2)U(34)), the formation of which requires at least 25 different proteins. The addition of the last methyl group is catalyzed by the methyltransferase Trm9p. Trm9p interacts with Trm112p, a 15-kDa protein with a zinc finger domain. Trm112p is essential for the activity of Trm11p, another tRNA methyltransferase, and for Mtq2p, an enzyme that methylates the translation termination factor eRF1/Sup45. Here, we report that Trm112p is required in vivo for the formation of mcm(5)U(34) and mcm(5)s(2)U(34). When produced in Escherichia coli, Trm112p forms a complex with Trm9p, which renders the latter soluble. This recombinant complex catalyzes the formation of mcm(5)U(34) on tRNA in vitro but not mcm(5)s(2)U(34). An mtq2-0 trm9-0 strain exhibits a synthetic growth defect, thus revealing the existence of an unexpected link between tRNA anticodon modification and termination of translation. Trm112p is associated with other partners involved in ribosome biogenesis and chromatin remodeling, suggesting that it has additional roles in the cell.

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) establishes a life-long latent infection in humans. In proliferating latently infected cells, EBV genomes persist as multiple episomes that undergo one DNA replication event per cell cycle and remain attached to the mitotic chromosomes. EBV nuclear antigen 1 (EBNA-1) binding to the episome and cellular genome is essential to ensure proper episome replication and segregation. However, the nature and regulation of EBNA-1 interaction with chromatin has not been clearly elucidated. This activity has been suggested to involve EBNA-1 binding to DNA, duplex RNA, and/or proteins. EBNA-1 binding protein 2 (EBP2), a nucleolar protein, has been proposed to act as a docking protein for EBNA-1 on mitotic chromosomes. However, there is no direct evidence thus far for EBP2 being associated with EBNA-1 during mitosis. By combining video microscopy and Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) microscopy, we demonstrate here for the first time that EBNA-1 and EBP2 interact in the nucleoplasm, as well as in the nucleoli during interphase. However, in strong contrast to the current proposed model, we were unable to observe any interaction between EBNA-1 and EBP2 on mitotic chromosomes. We also performed a yeast double-hybrid screening, followed by a FRET analysis, that led us to identify HMGB2 (high-mobility group box 2), a well-known chromatin component, as a new partner for EBNA-1 on chromatin during interphase and mitosis. Although the depletion of HMGB2 partly altered EBNA-1 association with chromatin in HeLa cells during interphase and mitosis, it did not significantly impact the maintenance of EBV episomes in Raji cells.

International audience; Genomic imprinting is a developmental mechanism that mediates parent-of-origin-specific expression in a subset of genes. How the tissue specificity of imprinted gene expression is controlled remains poorly understood. As a model to address this question, we studied Grb10, a gene that displays brain-specific expression from the paternal chromosome. Here, we show in the mouse that the paternal promoter region is marked by allelic bivalent chromatin enriched in both H3K4me2 and H3K27me3, from early embryonic stages onwards. This is maintained in all somatic tissues, but brain. The bivalent domain is resolved upon neural commitment, during the developmental window in which paternal expression is activated. Our data indicate that bivalent chromatin, in combination with neuronal factors, controls the paternal expression of Grb10 in brain. This finding highlights a novel mechanism to control tissue-specific imprinting.

International audience; Protein arginine methyltransferase 5 (PRMT5) targets nuclear and cytoplasmic proteins. Here, we identified a nuclear protein, called cooperator of PRMT5 (COPR5), involved in the nuclear functions of PRMT5. COPR5 tightly binds to PRMT5, both in vitro and in living cells, but not to other members of the PRMT family. PRMT5 bound to COPR5 methylates histone H4 (R3) preferentially when compared with histone H3 (R8), suggesting that COPR5 modulates the substrate specificity of nuclear PRMT5-containing complexes, at least towards histones. Markedly, recombinant COPR5 binds to the amino terminus of histone H4 and is required to recruit PRMT5 to reconstituted nucleosomes in vitro. Consistently, COPR5 depletion in cells strongly reduces PRMT5 recruitment on chromatin at the PRMT5 target gene cyclin E1 (CCNE1) in vivo. Moreover, both COPR5 depletion and overexpression affect CCNE1 promoter expression. We propose that COPR5 is an important chromatin adaptor for PRMT5 to function on a subset of its target genes.

International audience; Only some imprinting control regions (ICRs) acquire their DNA methylation in the male germ line. These imprints are protected against the global demethylation of the sperm genome following fertilisation, and are maintained throughout development. We find that in somatic cells and tissues, DNA methylation at these ICRs is associated with histone H4-lysine-20 and H3-lysine-9 trimethylation. The unmethylated allele, in contrast, has H3-lysine-4 dimethylation and H3 acetylation. These differential modifications are also detected at maternally methylated ICRs, and could be involved in the somatic maintenance of imprints. To explore whether the post-fertilisation protection of imprints relates to events during spermatogenesis, we assayed chromatin at stages preceding the global histone-to-protamine exchange. At these stages, H3-lysine-4 methylation and H3 acetylation are enriched at maternally methylated ICRs, but are absent at paternally methylated ICRs. H4 acetylation is enriched at all regions analysed. Thus, paternally and maternally methylated ICRs carry different histone modifications during the stages preceding the global histone-to-protamine exchange. These differences could influence the way ICRs are assembled into specific structures in late spermatogenesis, and may thus influence events after fertilisation.