Rapid DNA replication origin licensing protects stem cell pluripotency

  1. Jacob Peter Matson
  2. Raluca Dumitru
  3. Philip Coryell
  4. Ryan M Baxley
  5. Weili Chen
  6. Kirk Twaroski
  7. Beau R Webber
  8. Jakub Tolar
  9. Anja-Katrin Bielinsky
  10. Jeremy E Purvis
  11. Jeanette Gowen Cook  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States
  2. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States
  3. University of Minnesota, United States
  4. University of Minnesota, United States

Abstract

Complete and robust human genome duplication requires loading MCM helicase complexes at many DNA replication origins, an essential process termed origin licensing. Licensing is restricted to G1 phase of the cell cycle, but G1 length varies widely among cell types. Using quantitative single cell analyses we found that pluripotent stem cells with naturally short G1 phases load MCM much faster than their isogenic differentiated counterparts with long G1 phases. During the earliest stages of differentiation towards all lineages, MCM loading slows concurrently with G1 lengthening, revealing developmental control of MCM loading. In contrast, ectopic Cyclin E overproduction uncouples short G1 from fast MCM loading. Rapid licensing in stem cells is caused by accumulation of the MCM loading protein, Cdt1. Prematurely slowing MCM loading in pluripotent cells not only lengthens G1 but also accelerates differentiation. Thus, rapid origin licensing is an intrinsic characteristic of stem cells that contributes to pluripotency maintenance.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jacob Peter Matson

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Raluca Dumitru

    Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Core Facility, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Philip Coryell

    Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Ryan M Baxley

    Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Weili Chen

    Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kirk Twaroski

    Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Beau R Webber

    Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jakub Tolar

    Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0957-4380
  9. Anja-Katrin Bielinsky

    Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Jeremy E Purvis

    Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6963-0524
  11. Jeanette Gowen Cook

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States
    For correspondence
    jean_cook@med.unc.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0849-7405

Funding

National Institutes of Health (Research Grant GM074917)

  • Anja-Katrin Bielinsky

National Science Foundation (Graduate Student Research Fellowship DGE1144081)

  • Jacob Peter Matson

W. M. Keck Foundation (Research Grant)

  • Jeremy E Purvis
  • Jeanette Gowen Cook

National Institutes of Health (Training Grant T32CA009138)

  • Ryan M Baxley

National Institutes of Health (Research Grant GM083024)

  • Jeanette Gowen Cook

National Institutes of Health (Research Grant DP2HD091800)

  • Jeremy E Purvis

National Institutes of Health (Research Grant GM102413)

  • Jeanette Gowen Cook

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2017, Matson et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,978
    views
  • 1,014
    downloads
  • 90
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Jacob Peter Matson
  2. Raluca Dumitru
  3. Philip Coryell
  4. Ryan M Baxley
  5. Weili Chen
  6. Kirk Twaroski
  7. Beau R Webber
  8. Jakub Tolar
  9. Anja-Katrin Bielinsky
  10. Jeremy E Purvis
  11. Jeanette Gowen Cook
(2017)
Rapid DNA replication origin licensing protects stem cell pluripotency
eLife 6:e30473.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.30473

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.30473

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Omid Gholamalamdari, Tom van Schaik ... Andrew S Belmont
    Research Article

    Models of nuclear genome organization often propose a binary division into active versus inactive compartments yet typically overlook nuclear bodies. Here, we integrated analysis of sequencing and image-based data to compare genome organization in four human cell types relative to three different nuclear locales: the nuclear lamina, nuclear speckles, and nucleoli. Although gene expression correlates mostly with nuclear speckle proximity, DNA replication timing correlates with proximity to multiple nuclear locales. Speckle attachment regions emerge as DNA replication initiation zones whose replication timing and gene composition vary with their attachment frequency. Most facultative LADs retain a partially repressed state as iLADs, despite their positioning in the nuclear interior. Knock out of two lamina proteins, Lamin A and LBR, causes a shift of H3K9me3-enriched LADs from lamina to nucleolus, and a reciprocal relocation of H3K27me3-enriched partially repressed iLADs from nucleolus to lamina. Thus, these partially repressed iLADs appear to compete with LADs for nuclear lamina attachment with consequences for replication timing. The nuclear organization in adherent cells is polarized with nuclear bodies and genomic regions segregating both radially and relative to the equatorial plane. Together, our results underscore the importance of considering genome organization relative to nuclear locales for a more complete understanding of the spatial and functional organization of the human genome.