Controlling elements are wild cards in the epigenomic deck.
نویسندگان
چکیده
T he genomes of multicellular eukaryotes are loaded with retrotransposons, parasites that propagate by transcription of their genomes, reverse transcription, and insertion of a new copy into the host genome (1, 2). Waves of replication have formed families of mostly fragmentary or otherwise degenerate retroelements (1, 2). Epigenetic silencing suppresses retrotransposon activity, keeping them from wreaking genetic and epigenetic havoc in their hosts (3, 4), but active suppression must be maintained (2). Discussions of their biological role have focused on genetics: disruption of genomic structure, and adaptation to form regulatory elements and parts of proteins. Less obvious, but possibly far more important, is their ability to disrupt normal patterns of transcription. McClintock observed that DNA transposons in maize could reversibly alter the expression of genes in the general vicinity of their insertion sites, and so termed them ‘‘controlling elements’’ (5). Retrotransposons also have this ability: Depending on their epigenetic state, they may either lie quietly without interfering in affairs or seize control and dramatically change patterns of gene expression. In this issue of PNAS, Kano et al. (6) describe retrotransposon-controlling elements in the murine dactylin gene. Both appear to effect the dactylaplasia phenotype only when epigenetically active, and their activity is regulated by an unlinked modifier. This finding neatly illustrates some properties of controlling elements and promises in time to give new insights into the mechanisms by which they are kept silent (or not). Controlling elements create ‘‘transcriptional interference,’’ in which an inserted or reactivated promoter either alters the activity of a nearby promoter or itself transcribes a gene (7). Importantly, this property is separable from the purely genetic effects of an element’s insertion. The variety of their effects tells us something about how little we understand the mechanisms of gene regulation in complex genomes. Because controlling elements are epigenetically regulated, they may exhibit mosaic and heritable states of activity. Plant geneticists have developed a large body of work on controlling elements (5, 8), but two examples from animals are particularly well studied. In the murine agouti viable yellow (Avy) allele, an intracisternal A-particle (IAP) retrotransposon is inserted 100 kb upstream of agouti (Fig. 1A) (9). Agouti is normally expressed only in one phase of the hair follicle cycle; its product binds to melanocortin receptors and gives fur its agouti pattern (10). When silent, the IAP has little or no effect on the normal pattern of agouti expression, but when it is active, a cryptic promoter in its 5 LTR transcribes agouti in a constitutive pattern (9), producing a syndrome of yellow fur, obesity, type II diabetes, and cancer (10). Epigenetic mosaicism for activity of the IAP causes the phenotypes of isogenic Avy mice to vary from fully affected through a spectrum of mosaic intermediates to completely unaffected (11). The maternal epigenetic state of Avy is weakly heritable, indicating some tendency for germline stability, but a more prominent feature is germline epigenetic instability: Mice of any Avy phenotype will have offspring with a spectrum of phenotypes (11, 12). Thus, Avy mice illustrate key features of controlling elements: abrogation of normal transcriptional controls, epigenetic variation and inheritance, the requirement for an active transcription state, and the ability to act at a distance from the affected gene. The action of the IAP-controlling element on the agouti locus is simple: it transcribes agouti in a new pattern. The gypsy retrotransposon of Drosophila has a more complex mode of action. Gypsy is an LTR retrotransposon; when inserted 5 of yellow, it blocks the action of upstream enhancers on the yellow promoter (Fig. 1B) (13). It has similar effects in other loci (14) and may also
منابع مشابه
Riffle shuffles of decks with repeated cards
By a well-known result of Bayer and Diaconis, the maximum entropy model of the common riffle shuffle implies that the number of riffle shuffles necessary to mix a standard deck of 52 cards is either 7 or 11 — with the former number applying when the metric used to define mixing is the total variation distance and the later when it is the separation distance. This and other related results assum...
متن کاملMagic: The Gathering Deck Performance Prediction
Magic: The Gathering (MTG, or Magic) is the oldest and most popular trading card game played today, due in part to the complex interplay of thousands of cards. In two-player games, each player constructs a "main" deck (referred to as simply 'deck' hereafter) which consists of 60 cards, allowing players to pursue an enormous number of strategies and card combinations. When experienced Magic play...
متن کاملRandomization Time for the Overhand Shuffle
1. THE OVERHAND SHUFFLE (~o The two most common methods of shuffling a deck of playing cards are the riffle shuffle and the overhand shuffle. The riffle shuffle is performed by splitting the deck into two halves and interlacing them. Aldous and Diaconis have shown in Ref. I that approximately 2 log N riffle shuffles suffices to randomize a deck (the meaning of this will be made more precise bel...
متن کاملExploring the Geometric Model of Riffle Shuffling
Card shuffling is an interesting topic to explore because of its complexity. Initially, card shuffling seems simple because it is ubitquitous. The majority of people know how to shuffle a deck of cards but few consider the math behind it. However, when it comes to analyzing the elements of card shuffling, it incorporates linear algebra, group theory, probability theory, and Markov Chains. When ...
متن کاملA Better Way to Deal the Cards
Most of the work on card shuffling assumes that all the cards in a deck are distinct, and that in a well-shuffled deck all orderings need to be equally likely. We consider the case of decks with repeated cards and decks which are dealt into hands, as in bridge and poker. We derive asymptotic formulas for the randomness of the resulting games. Results include the influence of where a poker deck ...
متن کاملRiffle Shuffles and Dynamical Systems on the Unit Interval
The preferred method of randomizing a deck of N cards is the riffle shuffle–cut the deck into two stacks, then riffle the two stacks together. A number of mathematical models have been proposed for this process. The model which has received the most attention, and about which the most is known, is the GSR (for Gilbert, Shannon, and Reeds) shuffle. In this model, all permutations with exactly on...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
دوره 104 48 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2007