Abstract
Cohesin is essential for sister chromatid cohesion, which ensures equal segregation of the chromatids to daughter cells. However, the molecular mechanism by which cohesin mediates this function is elusive. Scc3, one of the four core subunits of cohesin, is vital to cohesin activity. However, the mechanism by which Scc3 contributes to the activity and identity of its functional domains is not fully understood. Here, we describe an in-frame five-amino acid insertion mutation after glutamic acid 704 (scc3-E704ins) in yeast Scc3, located in the middle of the second armadillo repeat. Mutated cohesin-scc3-E704ins complexes are unable to establish cohesion. Detailed molecular and genetic analyses revealed that the mutated cohesin has reduced affinity to the Scc2 loader. This inhibits its enrichment at centromeres and chromosomal arms. Mutant complexes show a slow diffusion rate in live cells suggesting that they induce a major conformational change in the complex. The analysis of systematic mutations in the insertion region of Scc3 revealed two conserved aspartic acid residues that are essential for the activity. The study offers a better understanding of the contribution of Scc3 to cohesin activity and the mechanism by which cohesin tethers the sister chromatids during the cell cycle.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashkenazy H, Erez E, Martz E, Pupko T, Ben-Tal N (2010) ConSurf 2010: calculating evolutionary conservation in sequence and structure of proteins and nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res 38:W529-533. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq399
Ashkenazy H, Abadi S, Martz E, Chay O, Mayrose I, Pupko T, Ben-Tal N (2016) ConSurf 2016: an improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucleic Acids Res 44:W344-350. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw408
Bernard P, Drogat J, Maure JF, Dheur S, Vaur S, Genier S, Javerzat JP (2006) A screen for cohesion mutants uncovers Ssl3, the fission yeast counterpart of the cohesin loading factor Scc4. Curr Biol 16:875–881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.037
Guthrie CaF (1991) Guide to yeast genetics and molecular biology. Methods Enzymol 194: 1–863
Ciosk R, Shirayama M, Shevchenko A, Tanaka T, Toth A, Shevchenko A, Nasmyth K (2000) Cohesin's binding to chromosomes depends on a separate complex consisting of Scc2 and Scc4 proteins. Mol Cell 5: 243–254 doi:
Cuadrado A, Gimenez-Llorente D, Kojic A, Rodriguez-Corsino M, Cuartero Y, Martin-Serrano G, Gomez-Lopez G, Marti-Renom MA, Losada A (2019) Specific contributions of cohesin-SA1 and cohesin-SA2 to TADs and polycomb domains in embryonic stem cells. Cell Rep 27(3500–3510):e3504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.05.078
Cucco F, Musio A (2016) Genome stability: what we have learned from cohesinopathies. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 172:171–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.c.31492
Cui Y, Irudayaraj J (2015) Dissecting the behavior and function of MBD3 in DNA methylation homeostasis by single-molecule spectroscopy and microscopy. Nucleic Acids Res 43:3046–3055. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv098
Edungbola LD, Watts SJ, Kayode OO (1987) Endemicity and striking manifestations of onchocerciasis in Shao, Kwara State, Nigeria. Afr J Med Med Sci 16: 147–156 doi:
Gandhi R, Gillespie PJ, Hirano T (2006) Human Wapl is a cohesin-binding protein that promotes sister-chromatid resolution in mitotic prophase. Curr Biol 16:2406–2417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.10.061
Gruber S, Haering CH, Nasmyth K (2003) Chromosomal cohesin forms a ring. Cell 112: 765–777
Haering CH, Lowe J, Hochwagen A, Nasmyth K (2002) Molecular architecture of SMC proteins and the yeast cohesin complex. Mol Cell 9: 773–788
Hara K, Zheng G, Qu Q, Liu H, Ouyang Z, Chen Z, Tomchick DR, Yu H (2014) Structure of cohesin subcomplex pinpoints direct shugoshin-Wapl antagonism in centromeric cohesion. Nat Struct Mol Biol 21:864–870. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.2880
Hartman T, Stead K, Koshland D, Guacci V (2000) Pds5p is an essential chromosomal protein required for both sister chromatid cohesion and condensation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Cell Biol 151: 613–626
Hill VK, Kim JS, Waldman T (2016) Cohesin mutations in human cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta 1866:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbcan.2016.05.002
Hinshaw SM, Makrantoni V, Kerr A, Marston AL, Harrison SC (2015) Structural evidence for Scc4-dependent localization of cohesin loading. Elife 4:e06057. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06057
Kojic A, Cuadrado A, De Koninck M, Gimenez-Llorente D, Rodriguez-Corsino M, Gomez-Lopez G, Le Dily F, Marti-Renom MA, Losada A (2018) Distinct roles of cohesin-SA1 and cohesin-SA2 in 3D chromosome organization. Nat Struct Mol Biol 25:496–504. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-018-0070-4
Kueng S, Hegemann B, Peters BH, Lipp JJ, Schleiffer A, Mechtler K, Peters JM (2006) Wapl controls the dynamic association of cohesin with chromatin. Cell 127:955–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.040
Ladurner R, Bhaskara V, Huis in 't Veld PJ, Davidson IF, Kreidl E, Petzold G, Peters JM (2014) Cohesin's ATPase activity couples cohesin loading onto DNA with Smc3 acetylation. Curr Biol 24: 2228–2237 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.08.011
Lengronne A, Katou Y, Mori S, Yokobayashi S, Kelly GP, Itoh T, Watanabe Y, Shirahige K, Uhlmann F (2004) Cohesin relocation from sites of chromosomal loading to places of convergent transcription. Nature 430:573–578. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02742
Li Y, Muir KW, Bowler MW, Metz J, Haering CH, Panne D (2018) Structural basis for Scc3-dependent cohesin recruitment to chromatin. Elife. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38356
Liu W, Biton E, Pathania A, Matityahu A, Irudayaraj J, Onn I (2020) Monomeric cohesin state revealed by live-cell single-molecule spectroscopy. EMBO Rep 21:e48211. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201948211
Mannini L, Menga S, Musio A (2010) The expanding universe of cohesin functions: a new genome stability caretaker involved in human disease and cancer. Hum Mutat 31:623–630. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.21252
Matityahu A, Shwartz M, Onn I (2019) Identifying functional domains in subunits of structural maintenance of chromosomes (SMC) complexes by transposon mutagenesis screen in yeast. Methods Mol Biol 2004:63–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-9520-2_6
Morales C, Losada A (2018) Establishing and dissolving cohesion during the vertebrate cell cycle. Curr Opin Cell Biol 52:51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2018.01.010
Mullegama SV, Klein SD, Signer RH, Center UCG, Vilain E, Martinez-Agosto JA (2019) Mutations in STAG2 cause an X-linked cohesinopathy associated with undergrowth, developmental delay, and dysmorphia: expanding the phenotype in males. Mol Genet Genomic Med 7:e00501. https://doi.org/10.1002/mgg3.501
Murayama Y, Uhlmann F (2014) Biochemical reconstitution of topological DNA binding by the cohesin ring. Nature 505:367–371. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12867
Nasmyth K, Haering CH (2005) The structure and function of SMC and kleisin complexes. Annu Rev Biochem 74:595–648. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biochem.74.082803.133219
Onn I, Heidinger-Pauli JM, Guacci V, Unal E, Koshland DE (2008) Sister chromatid cohesion: a simple concept with a complex reality. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 24:105–129. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.cellbio.24.110707.175350
Orgil O, Matityahu A, Eng T, Guacci V, Koshland D, Onn I (2015) A conserved domain in the scc3 subunit of cohesin mediates the interaction with both mcd1 and the cohesin loader complex. PLoS Genet 11:e1005036. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1005036
Panizza S, Tanaka T, Hochwagen A, Eisenhaber F, Nasmyth K (2000) Pds5 cooperates with cohesin in maintaining sister chromatid cohesion. Curr Biol 10: 1557–1564
Petela NJ, Gligoris TG, Metson J, Lee BG, Voulgaris M, Hu B, Kikuchi S, Chapard C, Chen W, Rajendra E, Srinivisan M, Yu H, Lowe J, Nasmyth KA (2018) Scc2 is a potent activator of cohesin’s ATPase that promotes loading by binding Scc1 without Pds5. Mol Cell 70(1134–1148):e1137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.022
Remeseiro S, Cuadrado A, Losada A (2013) Cohesin in development and disease. Development 140:3715–3718. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.090605
Roig MB, Lowe J, Chan KL, Beckouet F, Metson J, Nasmyth K (2014) Structure and function of cohesin’s Scc3/SA regulatory subunit. FEBS Lett 588:3692–3702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2014.08.015
Rolef Ben-Shahar T, Heeger S, Lehane C, East P, Flynn H, Skehel M, Uhlmann F (2008) Eco1-dependent cohesin acetylation during establishment of sister chromatid cohesion. Science 321:563–566. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157774
Romero-Perez L, Surdez D, Brunet E, Delattre O, Grunewald TGP (2019) STAG Mutations in Cancer. Trends Cancer 5:506–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trecan.2019.07.001
Shi Z, Gao H, Bai XC, Yu H (2020) Cryo-EM structure of the human cohesin-NIPBL-DNA complex. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb0981
Shwartz M, Matityahu A, Onn I (2016) Identification of functional domains in the cohesin loader subunit Scc4 by a random insertion/dominant negative screen. G3 (Bethesda) 6: 2655–2663. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.116.031674
Singh VP, Gerton JL (2015) Cohesin and human disease: lessons from mouse models. Curr Opin Cell Biol 37:9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2015.08.003
Sumara I, Vorlaufer E, Gieffers C, Peters BH, Peters JM (2000) Characterization of vertebrate cohesin complexes and their regulation in prophase. J Cell Biol 151: 749–762
Uhlmann F (2016) SMC complexes: from DNA to chromosomes. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 17:399–412. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2016.30
Viny AD, Bowman RL, Liu Y, Lavallee VP, Eisman SE, Xiao W, Durham BH, Navitski A, Park J, Braunstein S, Alija B, Karzai A, Csete IS, Witkin M, Azizi E, Baslan T, Ott CJ, Pe’er D, Dekker J, Koche R, Levine RL (2019) Cohesin members Stag1 and Stag2 display distinct roles in chromatin accessibility and topological control of HSC self-renewal and differentiation. Cell Stem Cell 25(682–696):e688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2019.08.003
Watrin E, Schleiffer A, Tanaka K, Eisenhaber F, Nasmyth K, Peters JM (2006) Human Scc4 is required for cohesin binding to chromatin, sister-chromatid cohesion, and mitotic progression. Curr Biol 16:863–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.049
Wutz G, Ladurner R, St Hilaire BG, Stocsits RR, Nagasaka K, Pignard B, Sanborn A, Tang W, Varnai C, Ivanov MP, Schoenfelder S, van der Lelij P, Huang X, Durnberger G, Roitinger E, Mechtler K, Davidson IF, Fraser P, Lieberman-Aiden E, Peters JM (2020) ESCO1 and CTCF enable formation of long chromatin loops by protecting cohesin(STAG1) from WAPL. Elife. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.52091
Zhang N, Jiang Y, Mao Q, Demeler B, Tao YJ, Pati D (2013) Characterization of the interaction between the cohesin subunits Rad21 and SA1/2. PLoS ONE 8:e69458. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069458
Acknowledgments
We thank Ilia Mistesky for providing reagents and Vincent Guaaci and Doug Koshland for providing yeast strains and reagents. We also thank members of the Onn Lab for their support and Steve Spencer for his editorial review and corrections.
Funding
This work was supported by Israel Science Foundation Grants 1099/16 (IO) and 987/20. JI thanks the W.M. Keck Foundation for their support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by M. Kupiec.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pathania, A., Liu, W., Matityahu, A. et al. Chromosome loading of cohesin depends on conserved residues in Scc3. Curr Genet 67, 447–459 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00294-020-01150-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00294-020-01150-3