4.7 Article

A dual flip-out mechanism for 5mC recognition by the Arabidopsis SUVH5 SRA domain and its impact on DNA methylation and H3K9 dimethylation in vivo

期刊

GENES & DEVELOPMENT
卷 25, 期 2, 页码 137-152

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1101/gad.1980311

关键词

DNA methylation; dual-base flip out; epigenetics; H3K9 methylation; SET domain; 5mC-binding pocket

资金

  1. U.S. National Institutes of Health [GM60398]
  2. Abby Rockefeller Mauze Trust
  3. Maloris Foundation
  4. National Institutes of Health [GM064844, R37GM037120, 5F32GM820453]
  5. Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina [LPDS 2009-5]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytosine DNA methylation is evolutionarily ancient, and in eukaryotes this epigenetic modification is associated with gene silencing. Proteins with SRA (SET-or RING-associated) methyl-binding domains are required for the establishment and/or maintenance of DNA methylation in both plants and mammals. The 5-methyl-cytosine (5mC)-binding specificity of several SRA domains have been characterized, and each one has a preference for DNA methylation in different sequence contexts. Here we demonstrate through mobility shift assays and calorimetric measurements that the SU(VAR)3-9 HOMOLOG 5 (SUVH5) SRA domain differs from other SRA domains in that it can bind methylated DNA in all contexts to similar extents. Crystal structures of the SUVH5 SRA domain bound to 5mC-containing DNA in either the fully or hemimethylated CG context or the methylated CHH context revealed a dual flip-out mechanism where both the 5mC and a base (5mC, C, or G, respectively) from the partner strand are simultaneously extruded from the DNA duplex and positioned within binding pockets of individual SRA domains. Our structure-based in vivo studies suggest that a functional SUVH5 SRA domain is required for both DNA methylation and accumulation of the H3K9 dimethyl modification in vivo, suggesting a role for the SRA domain in recruitment of SUVH5 to genomic loci.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据