
==== Front
Epigenetics Chromatin
Epigenetics Chromatin
Epigenetics & Chromatin
1756-8935
BioMed Central London

39272151
553
10.1186/s13072-024-00553-7
Review
Transcriptional silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: known unknowns
Dhillon Namrita 1
Kamakaka Rohinton T. Rohinton@ucsc.edu

2
1 grid.205975.c 0000 0001 0740 6917 Department of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA
2 grid.205975.c 0000 0001 0740 6917 Department of MCD Biology, University of California, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA
14 9 2024
14 9 2024
2024
17 282 7 2024
2 9 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Transcriptional silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a persistent and highly stable form of gene repression. It involves DNA silencers and repressor proteins that bind nucleosomes. The silenced state is influenced by numerous factors including the concentration of repressors, nature of activators, architecture of regulatory elements, modifying enzymes and the dynamics of chromatin.Silencers function to increase the residence time of repressor Sir proteins at silenced domains while clustering of silenced domains enables increased concentrations of repressors and helps facilitate long-range interactions. The presence of an accessible NDR at the regulatory regions of silenced genes, the cycling of chromatin configurations at regulatory sites, the mobility of Sir proteins, and the non-uniform distribution of the Sir proteins across the silenced domain, all result in silenced chromatin that only stably silences weak promoters and enhancers via changes in transcription burst duration and frequency.These data collectively suggest that silencing is probabilistic and the robustness of silencing is achieved through sub-optimization of many different nodes of action such that a stable expression state is generated and maintained even though individual constituents are in constant flux.

http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100006358 University of California, Santa Cruz COR CFA issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcThe DNA in a eukaryotic nucleus is wrapped around histones to form nucleosomes. The interplay between non-histone proteins and nucleosomal filaments leads to stable programs of gene expression [1] resulting in a continuum of expression levels [2–4]. Transcriptional activation involves sequence specific transcription factors (TFs) and general transcription factors (GTFs) [5, 6]. The former bind upstream activating sequence (UAS) enhancers to regulate transcription while the GTFs bind sequences in the core promoter to initiate transcription. Transcriptional repression refers to an inactive state dependent upon the continual presence of the repressing signal and specific repressor proteins that often bind specific sequences [7, 8]. Silencing is a position-independent persistent and stable form of repression that requires proteins that bind to DNA sequences called silencers as well as repressor proteins that interact with nucleosomes to create a structure that silences multiple genes with diverse regulatory elements and once established the expression state is maintained and propagated with high fidelity [9].

The aim of this review is to highlight recent advances and key outstanding questions on gene silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It is not a comprehensive review of the subject and the reader is directed to several excellent comprehensive reviews on this subject [9–13]. There are many parallels between Sir mediated silencing in S. cerevisiae and HP1 and Polycomb mediated silencing in other eukaryotes and some of these similarities will be highlighted in the course of this review (also see [14–18]).

What is Silencing?

Based on recent and prior results:

1) Silencers are critical in establishing and maintaining silencing. Their function is to increase the concentration of the repressor Sir proteins in the vicinity of the silenced chromatin domains.

2) The regulatory elements involved in gene activation are key arbiters that determine the effectiveness of silencing and only weak constitutively active genes are stably and effectively silenced.

3) Silencing is the result of a web of multivalent stereo-specific interactions between Sir proteins, silencer bound proteins and nucleosomes. These interactions create a chromatin environment that reduces nucleosome mobility and hinders the rate of factor access with attendant negative effects on transcription.

4) Silencing is influenced by clustering of silenced domains. The formation of membrane-less compartments increases Sir protein concentration; helps mediate long-range Sir-nucleosome interactions and possibly hinders the ability of cofactors to function.

5) Silencing is an energy dissipating, non-equilibrium, stochastic probabilistic process driven by constituents that are constantly in flux. The process is governed in part by concentration, affinity and residence times of many different individual components. These different parameters together determine the silenced state of a gene.

6) The stability of the silenced state is likely to be governed by diffuse forms of “co-operativity” resulting in elevated avidity of the Sir proteins across the entire domain.

Silencing has been investigated using a myriad of approaches, each of which interrogates distinct and specific aspects of silencing. The individual vignettes integrated together generate a picture of the process. The principles of silenced chromatin gleaned and enunciated in this review, the known unknowns highlighted and the models proposed to explain silenced chromatin are focused on S. cerevisiae silencing. The experiments and the models proposed often rely on studies on facultative and constitutive silenced chromatin in other eukaryotes and are also arguably relevant for studies in these organisms.

Transcription activation

Gene regulation is mediated by proteins that bind specific DNA sequences as well as proteins that interact with and alter the chromatin template and involves tens of molecular reactions. Transcription of a gene is initiated when a site in the enhancer is bound by TFs. Understanding how TFs find and bind DNA is necessary for the understanding of silencing since silencers are bound by proteins that follow the same rules as TF binding to enhancers. Most TFs recognize and bind short DNA sequences and explore the genome through transient interactions until they find and bind a sequence with high affinity for significant periods resulting in “sequence-specific” binding [19–25].

TFs bind DNA sites in the genome with varying strengths, specificities and lengths of time and these interactions then result in functional consequences. Their function is dependent upon their binding domains, their ability to phase separate into condensates, the number of high affinity binding sites for TFs, the density of binding sites, cooperativity of binding and the ability of TFs to interact with multiple components such as other TFs, cofactors, histone modifiers and chromatin remodellers. TF binding can thus be regulated by altering their concentration, biochemical characteristics or binding affinities or by altering their access to binding sites. The residence times of TFs at these elements are also influenced by other factors such as adjacent flanking sequences, chromatin dynamics and silencing [24, 26–34].

While sequence specific interactions are critical for gene regulation, non-specific interactions also play a supporting but important role. The association and dissociation of TFs between clusters of binding sites can trap TFs in a specific region of the nucleus creating membrane-less nuclear compartments with high local concentrations of TFs [26, 35]. The presence of elevated levels of specific proteins in the nucleoplasm can also lead to negative effects by inducing unbinding of TFs via facilitated dissociation akin to squelching [36], a mechanism that could play a role in gene silencing.

The transient interactions between TFs and DNA result in functional consequences. There is a temporal coupling between binding events at the enhancer and the promoter but the relationship is not simple [37–39]. TFs bind their sites transiently in chromatin and recruit chromatin modifiers and remodellers to stabilize open sites [40]. Stable TF and mediator binding then create temporal windows during which information is transferred, possibly through allostery, to the GTFs bound to the core promoter resulting in transcription initiation and convoys of RNA polymerase [41]. The length of a transcription burst, how often a burst of transcription occurs and how many transcripts are produced in a burst are regulated. In broad terms, the frequency of TF binding to an enhancer affects transcription burst frequency while core promoter sequences affect burst duration by modulating residence times of GTFs [37, 42, 43]. There are different individual binding timescales that collectively determine bursting. These include TF binding and unbinding, mediator dynamics, chromatin modifier and remodeller binding dynamics, nucleosome cycling and GTF binding and release amongst others [39]. Furthermore, the different steps do not have identical reaction rates and this coupled with fluctuations in concentrations of factors generates transcription initiation events that fluctuate. Some genes like housekeeping genes are highly transcribed, more or less continuously, while others are rarely transcribed or transcribed only under inducing conditions in bursts [44]. Within this framework, transcriptional silencing could be visualized as the ultimate endpoint of burst regulation resulting in a completely inactive state that dampens some or all of these steps and persists across multiple cell cycles (Figs. 1 and 7) but questions remain regarding the identity of the specific step/s and the mechanism by which silencing is affected.

Current data suggest that a simple thermodynamic equilibrium framework is not sufficient to fully describe gene regulation [45, 46] and nucleosome dynamics play an important role in this process [37, 47]. The affinity of a nucleosome for a site is typically greater than the affinity of the TF for that site [27, 48, 49]. The DNA wrapped around nucleosomes also constantly breathes via thermal motion creating temporal windows of accessibility and inaccessibility for TF binding [40, 50–53].

There is a high degree of nucleosome organization at regulatory regions with well-positioned + 1 and − 1 nucleosomes flanking a nucleosome depleted region (NDR). The NDR encompasses the UAS enhancer and core promoter [54–57] and the NDR is actively generated and maintained by ATP expending chromatin remodelers aided by post translational modifications of histones [6, 31, 46, 49, 58–64]. The precise location of the + 1-nucleosome adjacent to the NDR influences transcription initiation [65] and is likely an important arbiter of transcription bursting. If the rate of sliding/removal of nucleosomes or the rate of unwrapping of the DNA from the nucleosome surface is decreased, then nucleosomes hinder accessibility of sites even when TFs are present and the probability of transcription corresponds in part to the rate of TF binding site exposure in nucleosomes and it is likely that silencing affects these rates.

In a population of cells there exist different nucleosome configurations over the regulatory regions of genes; some that are conducive for transcription and others not (Fig. 2). Surprisingly, all possible nucleosome configurations are observed in the population regardless of the gene’s average expression state [47, 66]. The gene cycles through different nucleosome configurations and dwells for different lengths of time in each configuration. The key difference is the frequency of the different nucleosome configurations. The fully nucleosomal configuration is more often found under repressing conditions (right panels in Fig. 2) while very few gene regulatory regions are fully nucleosomal under activating conditions (left panels in Fig. 2). TFs and chromatin remodelers regulate transcription by changing the probability distribution of different nucleosomal configurations at regulatory sites and the Sir proteins may function to alter the frequency of these probability distributions during silencing.

Some genes such as housekeeping genes are regulated in a deterministic (less noisy) manner while others utilize opportunistic mechanisms [67]. Some TFs called general regulatory factors function deterministically- they are constitutively present at high concentrations and recruit chromatin remodellers to reposition and mobilize nucleosomes (see top panel in Fig. 2). In a population of cells, they increase the likelihood of chromatin configurations that favour high levels of transcription burst frequency and duration (see [68] for a detailed description). Inducible genes are regulated by TFs whose biochemical characteristics and concentration in the nucleus change under inducing conditions and these TFs then alter the nucleosome configurations using varied mechanisms [5, 6] (middle panel in Fig. 2). The end point of this is a change in the probability distribution of active versus inactive nucleosome configurations leading to sustained bursts of transcription under inducing conditions [47]. The final class of genes are entirely opportunistic- they may not rely on TFs [67] but on stochastic removal of nucleosomes from core promoters by free floating chromatin remodellers and histone modifiers allowing PIC formation and these genes are the weakest in terms of transcription output (bottom panel in Fig. 2). Thus, each class of genes has different probabilistic expression profiles dependent on the frequency of the different nucleosomal architectures that are generated by chromatin remodellers and histone modifiers and the responses of these genes to silencing factors is correspondingly different [69].

Silencer activity

Silencers are essential for silencing [70] and possess a robust NDR bound by combinations of multi-functional DNA binding proteins ORC, Rap1, Abf1 and Sum1 [71, 72]. A signature function of silencers is the “recruitment” of the Sir2, Sir3, Sir4 proteins to the silenced domain [73–78] and possibly in channeling chromatin remodelers to generate evenly spaced nucleosomes thus creating a directionality in the spread of silencing [79–81]. Once Sir2 and Sir4 are recruited to the silencers, Sir2 then deacetylates histones in adjacent nucleosomes enabling Sir3 and Sir4 to bind to the hypoacetylated evenly positioned nucleosomes [76, 77, 82–84]. Repetition of this process leads to Sir protein spreading creating a silenced domain [9, 13, 71].

We understand the function of the silencers but several questions persist regarding their mode of action. How the specific configuration of sites and proteins at silencers result in silencing as opposed to gene activation remains unclear. Like models for enhancer function, do silencers and their associated proteins function like billboards performing distinct, independent roles or do they function by forming a large complex analogous to the enhanceosome [85, 86]? Whether silencer bound proteins are regulated during silencing is also not known [87, 88] and whether their binding to the silencer depends upon cofactors such as Sir1, chromatin modifying and remodeling factors is also not known.

Like enhancers, different silencers have varying strengths [89, 90]. This is likely due to the differences in the binding parameters of silencer bound proteins with one another, with DNA and with the Sir proteins. While silencer bound proteins are undoubtedly subject to the laws of thermodynamics, surprisingly little is known about the affinities, residence times and cooperativity of these proteins at silencers. The binding of ORC to the silencers appears to be stronger than its interaction with euchromatic origins of replication [91] while measurements of residence time of Rap1 show faster turnover at silenced telomeres compared to sites at enhancers [92]. Thus, while additional research is necessary, one model is that differences in thermodynamic and kinetic parameters result in differences in the amount of Sir proteins retained/recruited in the vicinity of the silencers leading to differences in silencer strengths.

In vertebrates, DNA sequence elements functioning as silencers have not been identified for HP1 or polycomb mediated silencing but silencer like elements have been annotated and analyzed in S. pombe [93, 94] and Drosophila [95]. In the instances where silencers have been demarcated, the functions ascribed to these DNA elements are analogous to the roles ascribed to silencers in S. cerevisiae (reviewed in [15, 96–101]). Like Sir mediated silencing, nucleation and spread of heterochromatin in other eukaryotes involves targeting methylases to methylate histones in nucleosomes followed by binding of the methylases and repressor proteins to the methylated histone leading to the spread of silenced chromatin [102, 103].

The nature of silenced chromatin domains

Chromatin plays a critical role in gene silencing. One defining property of silenced chromatin is that it is marked by hypoacetylated histones H3 and H4 that are necessary for Sir protein binding (reviewed in [13]). Consistent with this, ChIP-seq mapping of H4K16 acetylation reveals uniformly hypoacetylated histones across entire silenced domains [104–106]. The silenced domain is also marked by evenly spaced nucleosomes with long linker DNAs. This nucleosome configuration is silencer dependent and disrupted in Sir mutants suggesting that Sir-nucleosome interactions play a role in organizing/stabilizing nucleosome configurations [81, 107, 108]. Surprisingly, the regulatory regions of silenced genes have accessible NDRs [109, 110]. Furthermore, ChIP indicate that the Sir proteins are highly enriched at the silencers with reduced levels at the enhancers/promoters of the silenced genes [104–106, 111] (Fig. 3). Alternative methods mapping dynamic interactions also show localized peaks of Sir proteins at silencers [110]. Consonant with these are studies which show highly localized peaks of Sir protein at sub-telomeric sites with flanking nucleosomes bound by Abf1 and Reb1 creating a trinucleosome repressed domain [67, 112] consistent with early data showing discontinuous silencing domains [113–115] though it is unclear if this architecture is present in all cells or is a population average image derived from heterogeneity of binding.

Data show that the Sir proteins are mobile in the nucleus [70, 82, 116, 117] and constantly exchange between sites. The peaks of Sir proteins at the silencers suggest that their residence time at silencers is likely to be high while the lower levels within the silenced domain suggest that their binding to nucleosomes is more transient. This raises the question of whether stable Sir protein binding to nucleosomes is necessary to block transcription or whether deacetylation of histones and/or preventing movement of nucleosomes across the entire domain is the key driver in silencing and illustrates the importance of considering binding kinetics. While the binding affinities of Sir3 for acetylated and unacetylated nucleosomes are known [118], we do not have information on affinities of the other Sir proteins or the residence time of the Sir proteins bound to chromatin. To gain a more granular picture, it is necessary to compare residence times and binding constants of Sir proteins at silencers versus nucleosomes as well as the turnover rates of histone modifications.

The end point of Sir protein binding to nucleosomes is the inhibition of transcription. A classical study measuring accessibility of chromatin to a DAM methylase enzyme demonstrated that the Sir proteins reduced access to DNA [119] though a recent study failed to observe significant reduction in accessibility at silenced chromatin to other probes [120]. In vitro studies of Sir bound chromatin also highlight reduced accessibility to various enzymatic probes [118, 121, 122] (see [123] for detailed discussion on chromatin accessibility assays). While these studies showed reduced accessibility but not inaccessibility, they highlight the dynamic but restrictive nature of silenced chromatin. It should be noted that most of the in vitro studies were performed in the absence of active chromatin modifying and remodeling complexes under conditions that favor stable binding of Sir proteins to nucleosomes.

Based on these studies simple steric hindrance models were proposed where Sir proteins bound to key nucleosomes stereospecifically blocked the binding of TFs or GTFs to regulatory sequences. Consistent with these models, ChIP mapping experiments with different reporter genes showed that silenced chromatin restricts different transcription proteins from binding at different enhancers and promoters [124–128].

The question then is how the Sir proteins block multiple factors and processes via a single binding mode. The presence of an accessible NDR at the regulatory regions of silenced genes, the cycling of different chromatin configurations at regulatory sites, the mobility of Sir proteins, and the non-uniform distribution of the Sir proteins across the silenced domain raise questions regarding these simple steric hindrance models for silencing. Gene activation is a multi-step dynamic process and different gene regulatory elements and their cognate TFs use different cofactors in different temporal order to generate a PIC and initiate transcription [5, 6]. It is likely that the Sir proteins alter specific rate-limiting steps in this process to mediate silencing. One possibility is that the Sir proteins alter a common early step while being agnostic to the diversity of downstream effector proteins. One early common step in gene activation is the mobilization of nucleosomes from regulatory sequences prior to transcription. Sir proteins could directly or indirectly affect the rate of sliding and/or removal of nucleosomes from regulatory sites. This would alter the probability distribution of active versus repressed nucleosomal configurations which would then have downstream effects on TF binding, PIC formation or post initiation events. While replication-independent histone exchange is infrequent and affects only 1 to 10% of nucleosomes [64], there is a correlation between the level of exchange and RNA polymerase levels [129]. Consistent with this, silenced heterochromatic genes have lower histone exchange compared to active euchromatic genes [130] though the promoters of silenced genes have increased histone turnover compared to the coding regions of these genes (which might help explain the NDR at these loci). In addition, an in vitro study suggests that the Swi/Snf chromatin remodeller interacts with Sir3 and this interaction is necessary for the eviction of Sir3 from reconstituted heterochromatin [131]. A recent study also showed that reducing nucleosome density and increasing the degree of freedom for nucleosome movement destabilized the silenced state [132]. While in vivo data with remodeller mutants could be due to indirect pleiotropic effects a recent analysis of chromatin remodeler mutants with silenced reporter genes [69] was consistent with and as such supportive of this model.

It will be interesting to know the frequency distributions of different nucleosomal configurations when a gene is active versus silent as well as the precise positioning of nucleosomes and the role of chromatin remodellers in this process. Knowing the binding affinities and residence time of the GTF/TFs at silenced enhancers and promoters would also be informative and allow the testing of different models.

This model builds on pioneering studies in other eukaryotes showing that polycomb and trithorax complexes colocalize [133] and facultative heterochromatin mediated repression is mediated in part by inhibiting chromatin remodellers and histone acetylases [15, 31, 134–138]. Similar mechanisms have also been shown to operate for constitutive HP1 containing heterochromatin. The turnover dynamics of nucleosomes are conserved across sites in S. pombe and Drosophila [139–142] raising the possibility that different silencing proteins (and different chromatin modifications) might utilize similar mechanisms to mediate silencing in all eukaryotes.

Sir protein structures and models for gene silencing

The next question is how the Sir proteins alter nucleosome dynamics. Sir proteins bind nucleosomes and each other and the nature of this stereospecific binding is central to silencing. The web of multivalent interactions (Fig. 4) suggests coordinated and/or sequential interactions between Sir proteins and their partners in silencing.

The structure of several Sir protein domains has been solved though the structure of the holocomplex has not yet been determined [122, 143–152]. These structural studies highlight possibilities by which Sir binding to nucleosomes could affect chromatin configurations and silencing. Sir3 contains a winged helix domain which is important for Sir3-Sir3 interactions that are necessary for its binding to nucleosomes [122]. Structural studies on the H1 winged helix-nucleosome interactions are suggestive of how Sir protein binding might play a role in nucleosome mediated silencing [153, 154]. Analogous to the H1-nucleosome structures, the binding of the Sir3 winged helix to the nucleosome and the induced clamping of the H4 tail with intranucleosomal DNA could reduce nucleosome mobility thus indirectly restricting access of the transcription machinery (Fig. 5). In this model Sir protein binding would raise the energetic barrier for the opening of chromatin thus inhibiting transcription. Second, Sir2 mediated histone deacetylation is likely to strengthen histone-DNA interactions thus reducing breathing of nucleosomal DNA [156] and thus reducing the rate of chromatin opening. The reduced breathing of the clamped nucleosomal DNA would close a window of opportunity for TF binding. Third, unacetylated tails have a reduced affinity for chromatin remodeler binding thus discouraging nucleosome movement [157]. Sir protein binding to nucleosomal linker DNA [110] results in even spacing and positioning of nucleosomes with long linkers [81, 107, 108] which would likely help in nucleosome stacking and interdigitation of the chromatin filament [158] thus enabling internucleosomal interactions and chromatin compaction [159–161] which could reduce TF access to DNA.

There are two classes of BAH domains in yeast- Sir3 like and RSC like [155] and these domains are involved in protein-nucleosome interactions. Structure determinations show that Rsc binds nucleosomes at sites close to those occupied by the Sir3 BAH domain [148, 155, 157, 162–164] (Fig. 5). A higher koff for Rsc compared to Sir3 (whose koff is currently unknown) could therefore favor a Sir3-nucleosome bound state at genes undergoing silencing thus highlighting another molecular mechanism that could influence chromatin remodeler mediated nucleosome mobility.

BAH domains are also necessary for H3K27me3 recognition in nucleosomes by polycomb proteins [165] while interactions between HP1 and histone H1 have been shown to function in HP1 mediated silencing [18]. All these models are speculative and in need to testing. Thus, while the structures of Sir protein domains have been informative, the structure of a Sir holocomplex with oligonucleosomes would be illuminating. Biochemical reconstitutions of silenced chromatin in the presence of silencers, sub-saturating levels of the Sir proteins and chromatin with different repeat lengths would also be informative.

The role of Sir protein compartments in silencing

Silenced domains localize to the nuclear periphery and are anchored by numerous factors (reviewed in [166–171]) leading to the tethering of chromatin fibers and the clustering of these domains. While differential properties of chromatin have been suggested to promote phase separation and compartmentalization of the nucleoplasm [172], there is as yet no evidence of Sir proteins forming liquid droplets. Clustering of domains creates silencing compartments enriched for Sir proteins (reviewed in [12, 168, 169, 173, 174]) and this is important for transcription repression [175]. There are approximately 57,000 nucleosomes in yeast [57] and roughly 10% of these are hypoacetylated [176]. Given the sizes of silenced regions, one can estimate that ~ 2/3 of the hypoacetylated nucleosomes are present at silenced domains. High-throughput studies suggest that there are ~ 1400 molecules of Sir3 and Sir4 protein in a typical yeast cell [177] which is significantly fewer than the number of unacetylated nucleosomes. Consistent with this, analysis has shown that Sir proteins are a limiting component of stable silencing [83, 90, 156, 178, 179].

Clustering of silenced domains would aid in trapping of Sir proteins amongst the clustered loci (pinball effect) creating a compartment with elevated concentrations of Sir proteins which would then in turn influence binding equilibria [111, 169, 180] (Fig. 6). It is informative to consider a hypothetical scenario. If one Sir protein is present in a yeast nucleus with a diameter of 2 μm (volume ~ 4 μm [3] or 4 fl.), this is equal to a concentration of ~ 2 nM. If the nucleus is compartmentalized and if one were to restrict one Sir protein to a compartment that is 10% of the diameter of the typical nucleus, the Sir protein concentration would increase nearly 1000-fold providing a powerful way to increase the effective concentration. Recent data show that one of the earliest steps in the establishment of silencing involves the perinuclear anchoring of silenced loci that aids in the accumulation of Sir proteins which reinforced anchoring culminating in a self-reinforcing loop in silencing [181].

Clustering could therefore alter thermodynamic parameters and Sir concentration is likely to be one important parameter. Measurements in mammalian cells show an approximately two-fold difference in nucleosome density between euchromatin and heterochromatin [182] but this leads to subtle effects on molecular diffusion and movement of transcription factors [183, 184] and it is therefore unlikely that silencing can be solely described by these values alone especially given the non-equilibrium nature of gene regulation and the relative immobility of tethered chromatin fibers.

Alterations in concentration will also not alter stereospecific interactions between Sir proteins and nucleosomes but would create a “circe” effect [180]. Increased Sir concentrations would reduce the search times required for Sir proteins to find, deacetylate and bind unacetylated nucleosomes (kon) and would alter the probability distribution of hypoacetylated Sir bound nucleosomes. Nucleosomes that localize within clouds of high Sir protein concentration would have a higher probability of becoming and remaining hypoacetylated. The concentration dependent macromolecular crowding might also alter TF search times and Kon thus hindering TF and chromatin remodeler access [183–188]. This is consistent with studies where merely tethering a locus to the nuclear periphery results in Sir mediated repression of reporter genes [189, 190]. The increased concentration may aid in cooperativity between Sir proteins though no Hill coefficient measurements have been reported for silencing components. While clustering should not alter the residence times of the Sir proteins bound to nucleosomes, the higher concentration of free-floating Sir proteins in the nucleoplasm might also facilitate dissociation of TFs from UAS enhancers thus indirectly increasing the effectiveness of silencing.

The clustering of silenced domains also brings distant sequences into close three-dimensional proximity [111, 191, 192] and this helps in Sir protein dependent long-range internucleosomal interactions [122, 159, 193]. Recent analysis with specific mutant alleles showed that Sir3-Sir3 internucleosomal interactions promoted long-range chromatin contacts most likely via the winged helix domain of Sir3 [161]. The three-dimensional web of interactions between silencers, Sir proteins and nucleosomes would create a dynamic 3D structure with a self-enforcing loop that stabilizes the silenced state [194, 195].

The importance of subnuclear compartments in silencing is highly conserved across eukaryotes. Polycomb and Swi6 mediated compaction and phase separation aids in H3K27me3 and H3K9me3 mediated facultative and constitutive heterochromatin [141, 196–203] highlighting some commonalities in processes between different heterochromatic systems.

Differential susceptibility of enhancers and core promoters to silencing

Silencing has traditionally been considered a gene agnostic phenomenon that could silence most genes. However, recent analysis of native genes at silenced loci using mRNA-Seq showed that only a few genes at native telomeres are silenced while many others resist/escape silencing [104–106]. Detailed analysis of discontinuous silencing at native telomeres showed that a dynamic competition between TFs and histone deacetylation by Sir2 determines the extent of silencing at these sites [112]. Recent studies measuring silencing of a set of gene regulatory elements using multiple reporter assays including directly visualizing transcription in single cells also showed that Sir proteins stably silence only weak and uninduced stress response regulatory elements but are unable to stably repress strong housekeeping gene regulatory elements and they do so by altering transcription bursting [69].

Chromatin configurations at regulatory sites constantly cycle between open and closed states. The enhancers that are silenced have weak or non-existent TF binding sites with low burst frequency and duration and thus succumb to silencing - monostable repression. For activation, these genes utilize opportunistic mechanisms, where chance opening of the regulatory sequences by nucleosome sliding/movement by free floating chromatin remodellers allows for the transcription machinery to initiate transcription. The presence of Sir proteins bound to nucleosomes would reduce the mobility of nucleosomes and in a population of cells these genes would predominantly be packaged in chromatin configurations that disfavor transcription thus reducing the probability of gene activation (Fig. 2). In this statistical scenario, the Sir proteins would function not by increased condensation of chromatin or physically blocking a factor from binding but by reducing the rate of chromatin opening.

Strong housekeeping genes resist silencing and remain active- monostable activation. These strong constitutively active regulatory elements bound by general regulatory TFs, with their attendant biochemical properties, exhibit high burst frequency and duration and remain active [69]. The ability of these genes to resist silencing (monostable activation) is likely determined by varied criteria such as the type of TFs, the number of binding sites for the TFs, the concentrations and the binding characteristics of these proteins and their ability to recruit chromatin remodelers and modifying enzymes [68, 112]. These factors together likely affect the probability distribution of active versus inactive chromatin configurations to favor the accessible chromatin states. This may also be the underlying reason why heterochromatin barrier insulators are populated by such sequences [115, 204–206].

Under certain circumstances, bistable expression states arise for genes undergoing silencing [207–209]. Bimodal expression patterns in genetically identical cells arise from direct competition between TFs and repressors for binding to the same site [210]. Bimodal expression states become bistable (expression states that persist through cell division) due to either positive feedback or double negative feedback coupled with cooperativity (non-linearity) [211, 212]. Bistable expression states arise at silenced loci under specific conditions- when mutations in the silencers weaken silencing, when a relatively strong activator binds the UAS enhancer of a reporter gene or when a silenced domain is transposed to a euchromatic site in the nucleus where Sir protein concentrations are lower [69, 70, 207–209].

In the context of bistable expression states, one question that naturally arises is how the active state persists in competition with silencing (and vice versa) given that activation is a multi-step probabilistic process where each step is naturally inefficient, stochastic and transient (bursty) [37, 213, 214]. One possibility the active state is stably maintained is because the establishment of the silenced state is an inherently slower process, compared to activation, and requires an extended period of transcription inactivity to fully form [181, 215]. A gene that is repeatedly activated (even for short bursts) would prevent a stable silent state from forming (Fig. 7).

Another reason for the observed stability is that the silenced domains exhibit hysteresis (see [216–218] for a description of hysteresis). The response of the silenced domain to changes in histone acetylation depends on whether the system is in its off or its on state and Sir2 enzymatic activity is the driver of the hysteresis effect [219, 220]. Recent work shows that if the locus is silent, then 75% of nucleosomes need to become acetylated (acquire an acetyl mimic histone H4 (K16Q)) before the system loses silencing [90]. If the locus is active (because of the presence of the histone H4K16Q allele), then greater than 75% of nucleosomes must acquire unacetylated histones (wild-type H4K16) for an extended period of time to establish silencing (Ken Wu and RTK unpublished results). This Sir2 and histone acetylation mediated hysteresis effect could therefore also contribute towards the observed stability of the silenced state (Fig. 8).

The observations that Sir proteins can only stably silence a subset of genes is also reminiscent of earlier observations with polycomb proteins [221]. These proteins were shown to only stably silence specific promoters and most importantly the primary function of these proteins was the stable maintenance of the inactive state after transcription of the gene had ceased (reviewed in [15]). Recent studies with synthetic silencing systems mirror these conclusions [222, 223].

Domain wide regulation of stable heritable silencing

One defining property of silencing (albeit of weakly transcribing genes) is stable maintenance of the silenced state and the high fidelity of inheritance of this state once it is established [224, 225]. The silent domain is a stable structure created by Sir proteins in constant flux. Measurements of the stability of silencing showed that in wild type cells, silencing at HML is stochastically lost in one out of every 1000 cells with a similar value at HMR [224].

Interestingly, once the silenced domain is established it can tolerate significant fluctuations in the levels of Sir proteins and nucleosomal acetylation without loss of silencing. Silencing is only lost when approximately 75% of the nucleosomes across the silenced domain acquire H4K16 acetyl like marks [90]. While it is possible that the deacetylation of a single nucleosome is important in silencing, these data argue against this. Interestingly, simple calculations based on these data highlight the possibility that a rather small (less than two-fold) reduction in the ability of acetyltransferases to acetylate a nucleosome, spread across a domain of 20 nucleosomes, might be enough to establish a silent domain [90]. What these data also suggest is that the nucleosomes across the clustered silent domains function together where each nucleosome bound by Sir proteins acts as weak point silencer helping maintain transient elevated local concentrations of Sir proteins. The many multivalent interactions between Sir proteins and nucleosomes would create a 3D-mesh of interactions (Fig. 4) and each interaction would create a reinforcing feedback loop where Sir2 deacetylation of histones would facilitate Sir3 binding which in turn could facilitate interactions with Sir4 and its interacting partner Sir2 [211, 212]. Once a critical mass of Sir proteins bound to nucleosomes is achieved, the system becomes self-sustaining and stable. Thus, while the individual Sir-nucleosomes interactions are weak and therefore transient, the overall system would exhibit stability so long as multiple nucleosomal sites remain bound by Sir proteins for sufficiently long periods of time. In this system the transient removal of Sir proteins from a single nucleosome, even one over a key regulatory sequence would be unlikely to initiate or allow persistent and sustained gene activity.

In conclusion, silencing is a weak form of repression and there are numerous factors that together result in a stable silenced state. Silenced chromatin only efficiently represses weak enhancers and promoters. The silencer and silencer bound proteins are necessary for the efficient maintenance of the silent state. They function by increasing the local concentration of the Sir proteins. The clustering of silenced loci is important in this process. The data suggest that the silenced state depends on local Sir-nucleosome interactions as well as a domain wide web of interactions analogous to what has been proposed for phase separation in gene activation [26]. The stability of the final state is likely influenced by numerous factors such as the concentration of the Sir proteins, transcription activators, architecture of gene enhancers and promoters, histone modifying enzymes, the positioning and dynamics of nucleosomes over regulatory sequences and modifications of histone residues. The robustness of silencing is achieved through sub-optimization of many different factors such that in the presence of all these structures and processes a stable expression state is generated and maintained even though individual constituents are in constant flux.

Fig. 1 A schematic of different transcription initiation frequencies and burst durations. Green trails represent transcription events. The number and clustering of transcription trails reflect bursting frequency and duration. X-axis reflects time

Fig. 2 Schematic of nucleosomes cycling through different active and repressed chromatin configurations for different classes of UAS enhancers. Full circles indicate nucleosome presence, dashed circles indicate nucleosome depletion. Core promoters are shown as black rectangles while gray rectangles highlight TF binding sites in UAS enhancers

Fig. 3 Schematic of the distribution of Sir proteins and TFs at silenced loci with different classes of UAS enhancer/core promoters. Red dots represent Sir proteins and peaks of distribution, green ovals represent TFs, blue squares indicate free-floating chromatin remodellers. Vertical black bars represent silencers and gray boxes represent enhancers and black boxes represent promoters

Fig. 4 Schematic of the numerous multivalent interactions between the different factors involved in transcriptional silencing. Red arrows depict interactions involved in silencing while green arrows depict interactions involved in activation

Fig. 5 Molecular structures of various nucleosome bound and free protein complexes. Histones H3 and H4 are coloured dark and light blue while the histones H2A and H2B are coloured dark and light green. A Structure of a nucleosome bound by the winged helix (in red) of histone H1. B Structure of the winged helix domain of Sir3. C Structure of a nucleosome bound by the Sir3 BAH domain (in red). D Structure of a nucleosome bound by the RSC complex (BAH domain containing subunits of RSC are shown in red)

Fig. 6 Schematic of the effects of clustering of the silenced chromatin domains. Red dots represent Sir proteins, green ovals represent TFs, rectangles represent silencers. Trapezoids represent enhancers

Fig. 7 Relationship between stability of silencing and the inheritance of expression states through the cell cycle. Red lines highlight silenced state while the green lines reflect the active state. Green trails indicate transcription. Blue line represents phases of the cell cycle

Fig. 8 Hysteresis in gene silencing. An active domain requires deacetylation of 75% of the nucleosomes to become silenced. A silent domain requires acetylation of 75% or more nucleosomes to lose silencing. Red circles denote unacetylated histones and green circles denote acetylated histones. Moon shapes denote Sir proteins; gray rectangles are silencers and black rectangles are enhancers and promoters

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank J. Rine, J.T. Kadonaga, D.J. Clark, M. Gartenberg, G. Hartzog, S. Strome, M. Oki, H. Boeger, K. Wu, M. Peterson and F. Camakaka for comments and suggestions on the manuscript.

Author contributions

ND wrote and edited the manuscript. RTK edited the manuscript and generated the figures.

Funding

The writing of this manuscript was funded by the University of California COR CFA.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All appropriate ethical rules and regulations of the University of California were followed during the performance of the work described in this manuscript.

Consent for publication

All authors have consented to the material in this review and to submit the review for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Kim S Wysocka J Deciphering the multi-scale, quantitative cis-regulatory code Mol Cell 2023 83 373 92 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.12.032 36693380
Kim S, Wysocka J. Deciphering the multi-scale, quantitative cis-regulatory code. Mol Cell. 2023;83:373–92. 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.12.032.36693380 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.12.032
2. Pelechano V Chavez S Perez-Ortin JE A complete set of nascent transcription rates for yeast genes PLoS ONE 2010 5 e15442 10.1371/journal.pone.0015442 21103382
Pelechano V, Chavez S, Perez-Ortin JE. A complete set of nascent transcription rates for yeast genes. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e15442. 10.1371/journal.pone.0015442.21103382 10.1371/journal.pone.0015442
3. Miller C Schwalb B Maier K Schulz D Dumcke S Zacher B Mayer A Sydow J Marcinowski L Dolken L Dynamic transcriptome analysis measures rates of mRNA synthesis and decay in yeast Mol Syst Biol 2011 7 458 10.1038/msb.2010.112 21206491
Miller C, Schwalb B, Maier K, Schulz D, Dumcke S, Zacher B, Mayer A, Sydow J, Marcinowski L, Dolken L, et al. Dynamic transcriptome analysis measures rates of mRNA synthesis and decay in yeast. Mol Syst Biol. 2011;7:458. 10.1038/msb.2010.112.21206491 10.1038/msb.2010.112
4. Gasch AP Spellman PT Kao CM Carmel-Harel O Eisen MB Storz G Botstein D Brown PO Genomic expression programs in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes Mol Biol Cell 2000 11 4241 57 10.1091/mbc.11.12.4241 11102521
Gasch AP, Spellman PT, Kao CM, Carmel-Harel O, Eisen MB, Storz G, Botstein D, Brown PO. Genomic expression programs in the response of yeast cells to environmental changes. Mol Biol Cell. 2000;11:4241–57.11102521 10.1091/mbc.11.12.4241
5. Hahn S Young ET Transcriptional regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: transcription factor regulation and function, mechanisms of initiation, and roles of activators and coactivators Genetics 2011 189 705 36 10.1534/genetics.111.127019 22084422
Hahn S, Young ET. Transcriptional regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: transcription factor regulation and function, mechanisms of initiation, and roles of activators and coactivators. Genetics. 2011;189:705–36. 10.1534/genetics.111.127019.22084422 10.1534/genetics.111.127019
6. Rando OJ Winston F Chromatin and transcription in yeast Genetics 2012 190 351 87 10.1534/genetics.111.132266 22345607
Rando OJ, Winston F. Chromatin and transcription in yeast. Genetics. 2012;190:351–87. 10.1534/genetics.111.132266.22345607 10.1534/genetics.111.132266
7. Gaston K Jayaraman PS Transcriptional repression in eukaryotes: repressors and repression mechanisms Cell Mol Life Sci 2003 60 721 41 10.1007/s00018-003-2260-3 12785719
Gaston K, Jayaraman PS. Transcriptional repression in eukaryotes: repressors and repression mechanisms. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2003;60:721–41. 10.1007/s00018-003-2260-3.12785719 10.1007/s00018-003-2260-3
8. Arnosti DN Soft repression and chromatin modification by conserved transcriptional corepressors Enzymes 2023 53 69 96 10.1016/bs.enz.2023.08.001 37748837
Arnosti DN. Soft repression and chromatin modification by conserved transcriptional corepressors. Enzymes. 2023;53:69–96. 10.1016/bs.enz.2023.08.001.37748837 10.1016/bs.enz.2023.08.001
9. Gartenberg MR Smith JS The nuts and bolts of transcriptionally silent chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics 2016 203 1563 99 10.1534/genetics.112.145243 27516616
Gartenberg MR, Smith JS. The nuts and bolts of transcriptionally silent chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics. 2016;203:1563–99. 10.1534/genetics.112.145243.27516616 10.1534/genetics.112.145243
10. Allshire RC Madhani HD Ten principles of heterochromatin formation and function Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2018 19 229 44 10.1038/nrm.2017.119 29235574
Allshire RC, Madhani HD. Ten principles of heterochromatin formation and function. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018;19:229–44. 10.1038/nrm.2017.119.29235574 10.1038/nrm.2017.119
11. Bi X Heterochromatin structure: lessons from the budding yeast IUBMB Life 2014 66 657 66 10.1002/iub.1322 25355678
Bi X. Heterochromatin structure: lessons from the budding yeast. IUBMB Life. 2014;66:657–66. 10.1002/iub.1322.25355678 10.1002/iub.1322
12. Kueng S Oppikofer M Gasser SM SIR proteins and the assembly of silent chromatin in budding yeast Annu Rev Genet 2013 47 275 306 10.1146/annurev-genet-021313-173730 24016189
Kueng S, Oppikofer M, Gasser SM. SIR proteins and the assembly of silent chromatin in budding yeast. Annu Rev Genet. 2013;47:275–306. 10.1146/annurev-genet-021313-173730.24016189 10.1146/annurev-genet-021313-173730
13. Grunstein M, Gasser SM. Epigenetics in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2013;5. 10.1101/cshperspect.a017491.
14. Trojer P Reinberg D Facultative heterochromatin: is there a distinctive molecular signature? Mol Cell 2007 28 1 13 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.09.011 17936700
Trojer P, Reinberg D. Facultative heterochromatin: is there a distinctive molecular signature? Mol Cell. 2007;28:1–13.17936700 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.09.011
15. Schuettengruber B Bourbon HM Di Croce L Cavalli G Genome regulation by Polycomb and trithorax: 70 years and counting Cell 2017 171 34 57 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.002 28938122
Schuettengruber B, Bourbon HM, Di Croce L, Cavalli G. Genome regulation by Polycomb and trithorax: 70 years and counting. Cell. 2017;171:34–57. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.002.28938122 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.002
16. Blackledge NP Klose RJ The molecular principles of gene regulation by polycomb repressive complexes Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2021 22 815 33 10.1038/s41580-021-00398-y 34400841
Blackledge NP, Klose RJ. The molecular principles of gene regulation by polycomb repressive complexes. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2021;22:815–33. 10.1038/s41580-021-00398-y.34400841 10.1038/s41580-021-00398-y
17. Uckelmann M Davidovich C Chromatin compaction by polycomb group proteins revisited Curr Opin Struct Biol 2024 86 102806 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102806 38537534
Uckelmann M, Davidovich C. Chromatin compaction by polycomb group proteins revisited. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2024;86:102806. 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102806.38537534 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102806
18. Kumar A Kono H Heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1): interactions with itself and chromatin components Biophys Rev 2020 12 387 400 10.1007/s12551-020-00663-y 32144738
Kumar A, Kono H. Heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1): interactions with itself and chromatin components. Biophys Rev. 2020;12:387–400. 10.1007/s12551-020-00663-y.32144738 10.1007/s12551-020-00663-y
19. von Hippel PH From simple DNA-protein interactions to the macromolecular machines of gene expression Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2007 36 79 105 10.1146/annurev.biophys.34.040204.144521 17477836
von Hippel PH. From simple DNA-protein interactions to the macromolecular machines of gene expression. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct. 2007;36:79–105. 10.1146/annurev.biophys.34.040204.144521.17477836 10.1146/annurev.biophys.34.040204.144521
20. Biggin MD Animal transcription networks as highly connected, quantitative continua Dev Cell 2011 21 611 26 10.1016/j.devcel.2011.09.008 22014521
Biggin MD. Animal transcription networks as highly connected, quantitative continua. Dev Cell. 2011;21:611–26. 10.1016/j.devcel.2011.09.008.22014521 10.1016/j.devcel.2011.09.008
21. Wagh K Stavreva DA Upadhyaya A Hager GL Transcription factor dynamics: one molecule at a time Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2023 39 277 305 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-022823-013847 37540844
Wagh K, Stavreva DA, Upadhyaya A, Hager GL. Transcription factor dynamics: one molecule at a time. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2023;39:277–305. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-022823-013847.37540844 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-022823-013847
22. Larson DR What do expression dynamics tell us about the mechanism of transcription? Curr Opin Genet Dev 2011 21 591 9 10.1016/j.gde.2011.07.010 21862317
Larson DR. What do expression dynamics tell us about the mechanism of transcription? Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2011;21:591–9. 10.1016/j.gde.2011.07.010.21862317 10.1016/j.gde.2011.07.010
23. Suter DM Transcription factors and DNA play hide and seek Trends Cell Biol 2020 30 491 500 10.1016/j.tcb.2020.03.003 32413318
Suter DM. Transcription factors and DNA play hide and seek. Trends Cell Biol. 2020;30:491–500. 10.1016/j.tcb.2020.03.003.32413318 10.1016/j.tcb.2020.03.003
24. Jana T Brodsky S Barkai N Speed-specificity trade-offs in the transcription factors search for their genomic binding sites Trends Genet 2021 37 421 32 10.1016/j.tig.2020.12.001 33414013
Jana T, Brodsky S, Barkai N. Speed-specificity trade-offs in the transcription factors search for their genomic binding sites. Trends Genet. 2021;37:421–32. 10.1016/j.tig.2020.12.001.33414013 10.1016/j.tig.2020.12.001
25. Carminati M Vecchia L Stoos L Thoma NH Pioneer factors: emerging rules of engagement for transcription factors on chromatinized DNA Curr Opin Struct Biol 2024 88 102875 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102875 38991237
Carminati M, Vecchia L, Stoos L, Thoma NH. Pioneer factors: emerging rules of engagement for transcription factors on chromatinized DNA. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2024;88:102875. 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102875.38991237 10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102875
26. Hnisz D Shrinivas K Young RA Chakraborty AK Sharp PA Phase Sep Model Transcriptional Control Cell 2017 169 13 23 10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.007
Hnisz D, Shrinivas K, Young RA, Chakraborty AK, Sharp PA. Phase Sep Model Transcriptional Control Cell. 2017;169:13–23. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.007.10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.007
27. Weingarten-Gabbay S Segal E The grammar of transcriptional regulation Hum Genet 2014 133 701 11 10.1007/s00439-013-1413-1 24390306
Weingarten-Gabbay S, Segal E. The grammar of transcriptional regulation. Hum Genet. 2014;133:701–11. 10.1007/s00439-013-1413-1.24390306 10.1007/s00439-013-1413-1
28. Friedman N Rando OJ Epigenomics and the structure of the living genome Genome Res 2015 25 1482 90 10.1101/gr.190165.115 26430158
Friedman N, Rando OJ. Epigenomics and the structure of the living genome. Genome Res. 2015;25:1482–90. 10.1101/gr.190165.115.26430158 10.1101/gr.190165.115
29. Lai WKM Pugh BF Understanding nucleosome dynamics and their links to gene expression and DNA replication Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2017 18 548 62 10.1038/nrm.2017.47 28537572
Lai WKM, Pugh BF. Understanding nucleosome dynamics and their links to gene expression and DNA replication. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2017;18:548–62. 10.1038/nrm.2017.47.28537572 10.1038/nrm.2017.47
30. Cramer P Organization and regulation of gene transcription Nature 2019 573 45 54 10.1038/s41586-019-1517-4 31462772
Cramer P. Organization and regulation of gene transcription. Nature. 2019;573:45–54. 10.1038/s41586-019-1517-4.31462772 10.1038/s41586-019-1517-4
31. Brahma S Henikoff S Epigenome Regulation by Dynamic Nucleosome Unwrapping Trends Biochem Sci 2020 45 13 26 10.1016/j.tibs.2019.09.003 31630896
Brahma S, Henikoff S. Epigenome Regulation by Dynamic Nucleosome Unwrapping. Trends Biochem Sci. 2020;45:13–26. 10.1016/j.tibs.2019.09.003.31630896 10.1016/j.tibs.2019.09.003
32. de Jonge WJ Patel HP Meeussen JVW Lenstra TL Following the tracks: how transcription factor binding dynamics control transcription Biophys J 2022 121 1583 92 10.1016/j.bpj.2022.03.026 35337845
de Jonge WJ, Patel HP, Meeussen JVW, Lenstra TL. Following the tracks: how transcription factor binding dynamics control transcription. Biophys J. 2022;121:1583–92. 10.1016/j.bpj.2022.03.026.35337845 10.1016/j.bpj.2022.03.026
33. Boeger H Kinetic proofreading Annu Rev Biochem 2022 91 423 47 10.1146/annurev-biochem-040320-103630 35363508
Boeger H. Kinetic proofreading. Annu Rev Biochem. 2022;91:423–47. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-040320-103630.35363508 10.1146/annurev-biochem-040320-103630
34. Brodsky S Jana T Barkai N Order through disorder: the role of intrinsically disordered regions in transcription factor binding specificity Curr Opin Struct Biol 2021 71 110 5 10.1016/j.sbi.2021.06.011 34303077
Brodsky S, Jana T, Barkai N. Order through disorder: the role of intrinsically disordered regions in transcription factor binding specificity. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2021;71:110–5. 10.1016/j.sbi.2021.06.011.34303077 10.1016/j.sbi.2021.06.011
35. Darzacq X Tjian R Weak multivalent biomolecular interactions: a strength versus numbers tug of war with implications for phase partitioning RNA 2022 28 48 51 10.1261/rna.079004.121 34772790
Darzacq X, Tjian R. Weak multivalent biomolecular interactions: a strength versus numbers tug of war with implications for phase partitioning. RNA. 2022;28:48–51. 10.1261/rna.079004.121.34772790 10.1261/rna.079004.121
36. Koşar Z, Erbaş A. Can the concentration of a transcription factor affect gene expression? Front Soft Matter. 2022;2. 10.3389/frsfm.2022.914494.
37. Rodriguez J Larson DR Transcription in living cells: Molecular mechanisms of bursting Annu Rev Biochem 2020 89 189 212 10.1146/annurev-biochem-011520-105250 32208766
Rodriguez J, Larson DR. Transcription in living cells: Molecular mechanisms of bursting. Annu Rev Biochem. 2020;89:189–212. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-011520-105250.32208766 10.1146/annurev-biochem-011520-105250
38. Panigrahi A O’Malley BW Mechanisms of enhancer action: the known and the unknown Genome Biol 2021 22 108 10.1186/s13059-021-02322-1 33858480
Panigrahi A, O’Malley BW. Mechanisms of enhancer action: the known and the unknown. Genome Biol. 2021;22:108. 10.1186/s13059-021-02322-1.33858480 10.1186/s13059-021-02322-1
39. Lammers NC Kim YJ Zhao J Garcia HG A matter of time: using dynamics and theory to uncover mechanisms of transcriptional bursting Curr Opin Cell Biol 2020 67 147 57 10.1016/j.ceb.2020.08.001 33242838
Lammers NC, Kim YJ, Zhao J, Garcia HG. A matter of time: using dynamics and theory to uncover mechanisms of transcriptional bursting. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2020;67:147–57. 10.1016/j.ceb.2020.08.001.33242838 10.1016/j.ceb.2020.08.001
40. Michael AK Thoma NH Reading the chromatinized genome Cell 2021 184 3599 611 10.1016/j.cell.2021.05.029 34146479
Michael AK, Thoma NH. Reading the chromatinized genome. Cell. 2021;184:3599–611. 10.1016/j.cell.2021.05.029.34146479 10.1016/j.cell.2021.05.029
41. Wang Y Ni T Wang W Liu F Gene transcription in bursting: a unified mode for realizing accuracy and stochasticity Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2019 94 248 58 10.1111/brv.12452 30024089
Wang Y, Ni T, Wang W, Liu F. Gene transcription in bursting: a unified mode for realizing accuracy and stochasticity. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2019;94:248–58. 10.1111/brv.12452.30024089 10.1111/brv.12452
42. Tunnacliffe E Chubb JR What is a Transcriptional Burst? Trends Genet 2020 36 288 97 10.1016/j.tig.2020.01.003 32035656
Tunnacliffe E, Chubb JR. What is a Transcriptional Burst? Trends Genet. 2020;36:288–97. 10.1016/j.tig.2020.01.003.32035656 10.1016/j.tig.2020.01.003
43. Otto G Enhancers and promoters regulate burst kinetics Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2019 20 134 5 10.1038/s41580-019-0100-z 30647472
Otto G. Enhancers and promoters regulate burst kinetics. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2019;20:134–5. 10.1038/s41580-019-0100-z.30647472 10.1038/s41580-019-0100-z
44. Corrigan AM, Tunnacliffe E, Cannon D, Chubb JR. A continuum model of transcriptional bursting. Elife. 2016;5. 10.7554/eLife.13051.
45. Eck E, Liu J, Kazemzadeh-Atoufi M, Ghoreishi S, Blythe SA, Garcia HG. Quantitative dissection of transcription in development yields evidence for transcription-factor-driven chromatin accessibility. Elife. 2020;9. 10.7554/eLife.56429.
46. Estrada J Wong F DePace A Gunawardena J Information Integration and Energy expenditure in Gene Regulation Cell 2016 166 234 44 10.1016/j.cell.2016.06.012 27368104
Estrada J, Wong F, DePace A, Gunawardena J. Information Integration and Energy expenditure in Gene Regulation. Cell. 2016;166:234–44. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.06.012.27368104 10.1016/j.cell.2016.06.012
47. Boeger H Shelansky R Patel H Brown CR From structural variation of gene molecules to Chromatin Dynamics and Transcriptional Bursting Genes (Basel) 2015 6 469 83 10.3390/genes6030469 26136240
Boeger H, Shelansky R, Patel H, Brown CR. From structural variation of gene molecules to Chromatin Dynamics and Transcriptional Bursting. Genes (Basel). 2015;6:469–83. 10.3390/genes6030469.26136240 10.3390/genes6030469
48. Miller JA Widom J Collaborative competition mechanism for gene activation in vivo Mol Cell Biol 2003 23 1623 32 10.1128/MCB.23.5.1623-1632.2003 12588982
Miller JA, Widom J. Collaborative competition mechanism for gene activation in vivo. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23:1623–32. 10.1128/MCB.23.5.1623-1632.2003.12588982 10.1128/MCB.23.5.1623-1632.2003
49. Struhl K Segal E Determinants of nucleosome positioning Nat Struct Mol Biol 2013 20 267 73 10.1038/nsmb.2506 23463311
Struhl K, Segal E. Determinants of nucleosome positioning. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2013;20:267–73. 10.1038/nsmb.2506.23463311 10.1038/nsmb.2506
50. Tims HS Gurunathan K Levitus M Widom J Dynamics of nucleosome invasion by DNA binding proteins J Mol Biol 2011 411 430 48 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.05.044 21669206
Tims HS, Gurunathan K, Levitus M, Widom J. Dynamics of nucleosome invasion by DNA binding proteins. J Mol Biol. 2011;411:430–48. 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.05.044.21669206 10.1016/j.jmb.2011.05.044
51. Bowman GD Poirier MG Post-translational modifications of histones that influence nucleosome dynamics Chem Rev 2015 115 2274 95 10.1021/cr500350x 25424540
Bowman GD, Poirier MG. Post-translational modifications of histones that influence nucleosome dynamics. Chem Rev. 2015;115:2274–95. 10.1021/cr500350x.25424540 10.1021/cr500350x
52. Luo Y North JA Rose SD Poirier MG Nucleosomes accelerate transcription factor dissociation Nucleic Acids Res 2014 42 3017 27 10.1093/nar/gkt1319 24353316
Luo Y, North JA, Rose SD, Poirier MG. Nucleosomes accelerate transcription factor dissociation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:3017–27. 10.1093/nar/gkt1319.24353316 10.1093/nar/gkt1319
53. Donovan BT Luo Y Meng Z Poirier MG The nucleosome unwrapping free energy landscape defines distinct regions of transcription factor accessibility and kinetics Nucleic Acids Res 2023 51 1139 53 10.1093/nar/gkac1267 36688297
Donovan BT, Luo Y, Meng Z, Poirier MG. The nucleosome unwrapping free energy landscape defines distinct regions of transcription factor accessibility and kinetics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51:1139–53. 10.1093/nar/gkac1267.36688297 10.1093/nar/gkac1267
54. Kubik S, Bruzzone MJ, Shore D. (2017). Establishing nucleosome architecture and stability at promoters: Roles of pioneer transcription factors and the RSC chromatin remodeler. Bioessays 39. 10.1002/bies.201600237
55. Chereji RV Clark DJ Major determinants of Nucleosome Positioning Biophys J 2018 114 2279 89 10.1016/j.bpj.2018.03.015 29628211
Chereji RV, Clark DJ. Major determinants of Nucleosome Positioning. Biophys J. 2018;114:2279–89. 10.1016/j.bpj.2018.03.015.29628211 10.1016/j.bpj.2018.03.015
56. Jansen A Verstrepen KJ Nucleosome positioning in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2011 75 301 20 10.1128/MMBR.00046-10 21646431
Jansen A, Verstrepen KJ. Nucleosome positioning in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2011;75:301–20. 10.1128/MMBR.00046-10.21646431 10.1128/MMBR.00046-10
57. Oberbeckmann E Wolff M Krietenstein N Heron M Ellins JL Schmid A Krebs S Blum H Gerland U Korber P Absolute nucleosome occupancy map for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome Genome Res 2019 29 1996 2009 10.1101/gr.253419.119 31694866
Oberbeckmann E, Wolff M, Krietenstein N, Heron M, Ellins JL, Schmid A, Krebs S, Blum H, Gerland U, Korber P. Absolute nucleosome occupancy map for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Genome Res. 2019;29:1996–2009. 10.1101/gr.253419.119.31694866 10.1101/gr.253419.119
58. Becker PB, Workman JL. Nucleosome remodeling and epigenetics. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2013;5. 10.1101/cshperspect.a017905.
59. Kubik S Bruzzone MJ Challal D Dreos R Mattarocci S Bucher P Libri D Shore D Opposing chromatin remodelers control transcription initiation frequency and start site selection Nat Struct Mol Biol 2019 26 744 54 10.1038/s41594-019-0273-3 31384063
Kubik S, Bruzzone MJ, Challal D, Dreos R, Mattarocci S, Bucher P, Libri D, Shore D. Opposing chromatin remodelers control transcription initiation frequency and start site selection. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2019;26:744–54. 10.1038/s41594-019-0273-3.31384063 10.1038/s41594-019-0273-3
60. Ganguli D Chereji RV Iben JR Cole HA Clark DJ RSC-dependent constructive and destructive interference between opposing arrays of phased nucleosomes in yeast Genome Res 2014 24 1637 49 10.1101/gr.177014.114 25015381
Ganguli D, Chereji RV, Iben JR, Cole HA, Clark DJ. RSC-dependent constructive and destructive interference between opposing arrays of phased nucleosomes in yeast. Genome Res. 2014;24:1637–49. 10.1101/gr.177014.114.25015381 10.1101/gr.177014.114
61. Kubik S O’Duibhir E de Jonge WJ Mattarocci S Albert B Falcone JL Bruzzone MJ Holstege FCP Shore D Sequence-Directed Action of RSC Remodeler and General Regulatory Factors modulates + 1 nucleosome position to facilitate transcription Mol Cell 2018 71 89 e102105 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.030 29979971
Kubik S, O’Duibhir E, de Jonge WJ, Mattarocci S, Albert B, Falcone JL, Bruzzone MJ, Holstege FCP, Shore D. Sequence-Directed Action of RSC Remodeler and General Regulatory Factors modulates + 1 nucleosome position to facilitate transcription. Mol Cell. 2018;71:89–e102105. 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.030.29979971 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.030
62. North JA Javaid S Ferdinand MB Chatterjee N Picking JW Shoffner M Nakkula RJ Bartholomew B Ottesen JJ Fishel R Poirier MG Phosphorylation of histone H3(T118) alters nucleosome dynamics and remodeling Nucleic Acids Res 2011 39 6465 74 10.1093/nar/gkr304 21576235
North JA, Javaid S, Ferdinand MB, Chatterjee N, Picking JW, Shoffner M, Nakkula RJ, Bartholomew B, Ottesen JJ, Fishel R, Poirier MG. Phosphorylation of histone H3(T118) alters nucleosome dynamics and remodeling. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:6465–74. 10.1093/nar/gkr304.21576235 10.1093/nar/gkr304
63. Kim JM, Visanpattanasin P, Jou V, Liu S, Tang X, Zheng Q, Li KY, Snedeker J, Lavis LD, Lionnet T, Wu C. Single-molecule imaging of chromatin remodelers reveals role of ATPase in promoting fast kinetics of target search and dissociation from chromatin. Elife. 2021;10. 10.7554/eLife.69387.
64. Yaakov G Jonas F Barkai N Measurement of histone replacement dynamics with genetically encoded exchange timers in yeast Nat Biotechnol 2021 39 1434 43 10.1038/s41587-021-00959-8 34239087
Yaakov G, Jonas F, Barkai N. Measurement of histone replacement dynamics with genetically encoded exchange timers in yeast. Nat Biotechnol. 2021;39:1434–43. 10.1038/s41587-021-00959-8.34239087 10.1038/s41587-021-00959-8
65. Abril-Garrido J Dienemann C Grabbe F Velychko T Lidschreiber M Wang H Cramer P Structural basis of transcription reduction by a promoter-proximal + 1 nucleosome Mol Cell 2023 83 1798 e18091797 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.04.011 37148879
Abril-Garrido J, Dienemann C, Grabbe F, Velychko T, Lidschreiber M, Wang H, Cramer P. Structural basis of transcription reduction by a promoter-proximal + 1 nucleosome. Mol Cell. 2023;83:1798–e18091797. 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.04.011.37148879 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.04.011
66. Brown CR Mao C Falkovskaia E Jurica MS Boeger H Linking stochastic fluctuations in chromatin structure and gene expression PLoS Biol 2013 11 e1001621 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001621 23940458
Brown CR, Mao C, Falkovskaia E, Jurica MS, Boeger H. Linking stochastic fluctuations in chromatin structure and gene expression. PLoS Biol. 2013;11:e1001621. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001621.23940458 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001621
67. Rossi MJ Kuntala PK Lai WKM Yamada N Badjatia N Mittal C Kuzu G Bocklund K Farrell NP Blanda TR A high-resolution protein architecture of the budding yeast genome Nature 2021 592 309 14 10.1038/s41586-021-03314-8 33692541
Rossi MJ, Kuntala PK, Lai WKM, Yamada N, Badjatia N, Mittal C, Kuzu G, Bocklund K, Farrell NP, Blanda TR, et al. A high-resolution protein architecture of the budding yeast genome. Nature. 2021;592:309–14. 10.1038/s41586-021-03314-8.33692541 10.1038/s41586-021-03314-8
68. Stoeber S, Godin H, Xu C, Bai L. Pioneer factors: nature or nurture? Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2024;1–15. 10.1080/10409238.2024.2355885.
69. Wu K Dhillon N Bajor A Abrahamsson S Kamakaka RT Yeast heterochromatin stably silences only weak regulatory elements by altering burst duration Cell Rep 2024 43 113983 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113983 38517895
Wu K, Dhillon N, Bajor A, Abrahamsson S, Kamakaka RT. Yeast heterochromatin stably silences only weak regulatory elements by altering burst duration. Cell Rep. 2024;43:113983. 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113983.38517895 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113983
70. Cheng TH Gartenberg MR Yeast heterochromatin is a dynamic structure that requires silencers continuously Genes Dev 2000 14 452 63 10.1101/gad.14.4.452 10691737
Cheng TH, Gartenberg MR. Yeast heterochromatin is a dynamic structure that requires silencers continuously. Genes Dev. 2000;14:452–63.10691737 10.1101/gad.14.4.452
71. Rusche LN, Kirchmaier AL, Rine J. The establishment, inheritance, and function of silenced chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Annu Rev Biochem; 2003.
72. Irlbacher H Franke J Manke T Vingron M Ehrenhofer-Murray AE Control of replication initiation and heterochromatin formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by a regulator of meiotic gene expression Genes Dev 2005 19 1811 22 10.1101/gad.334805 16077008
Irlbacher H, Franke J, Manke T, Vingron M, Ehrenhofer-Murray AE. Control of replication initiation and heterochromatin formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by a regulator of meiotic gene expression. Genes Dev. 2005;19:1811–22. 10.1101/gad.334805.16077008 10.1101/gad.334805
73. Chien CT Buck S Sternglanz R Shore D Targeting of SIR1 protein establishes transcriptional silencing at HM loci and telomeres in yeast Cell 1993 75 531 41 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90387-6 8221892
Chien CT, Buck S, Sternglanz R, Shore D. Targeting of SIR1 protein establishes transcriptional silencing at HM loci and telomeres in yeast. Cell. 1993;75:531–41. 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90387-6.8221892 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90387-6
74. Fox CA Ehrenhofer-Murray AE Loo S Rine J The origin recognition complex, SIR1, and the S phase requirement for silencing Science 1997 276 1547 51 10.1126/science.276.5318.1547 9171055
Fox CA, Ehrenhofer-Murray AE, Loo S, Rine J. The origin recognition complex, SIR1, and the S phase requirement for silencing. Science. 1997;276:1547–51.9171055 10.1126/science.276.5318.1547
75. Dhillon N Kamakaka RT A histone variant, Htz1p, and a Sir1p-like protein, Esc2p, mediate silencing at HMR Mol Cell 2000 6 769 80 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)00076-9 11090616
Dhillon N, Kamakaka RT. A histone variant, Htz1p, and a Sir1p-like protein, Esc2p, mediate silencing at HMR. Mol Cell. 2000;6:769–80. 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)00076-9.11090616 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)00076-9
76. Rusche LN Kirchmaier AL Rine J Ordered nucleation and spreading of silenced chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mol Biol Cell 2002 13 2207 22 10.1091/mbc.e02-03-0175 12134062
Rusche LN, Kirchmaier AL, Rine J. Ordered nucleation and spreading of silenced chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Biol Cell. 2002;13:2207–22. 10.1091/mbc.e02-03-0175.12134062 10.1091/mbc.e02-03-0175
77. Luo K Vega-Palas MA Grunstein M Rap1-Sir4 binding independent of other Sir, yKu, or histone interactions initiates the assembly of telomeric heterochromatin in yeast Genes Dev 2002 16 1528 39 10.1101/gad.988802 12080091
Luo K, Vega-Palas MA, Grunstein M. Rap1-Sir4 binding independent of other Sir, yKu, or histone interactions initiates the assembly of telomeric heterochromatin in yeast. Genes Dev. 2002;16:1528–39. 10.1101/gad.988802.12080091 10.1101/gad.988802
78. Saxton DS Rine J Distinct silencer states generate epigenetic states of heterochromatin Mol Cell 2022 82 3566 e35793565 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.08.002 36041432
Saxton DS, Rine J. Distinct silencer states generate epigenetic states of heterochromatin. Mol Cell. 2022;82:3566–e35793565. 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.08.002.36041432 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.08.002
79. Bi X Braunstein M Shei GJ Broach JR The yeast HML I silencer defines a heterochromatin domain boundary by directional establishment of silencing Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999 96 11934 9 10.1073/pnas.96.21.11934 10518554
Bi X, Braunstein M, Shei GJ, Broach JR. The yeast HML I silencer defines a heterochromatin domain boundary by directional establishment of silencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:11934–9. 10.1073/pnas.96.21.11934.10518554 10.1073/pnas.96.21.11934
80. Krietenstein N Wal M Watanabe S Park B Peterson CL Pugh BF Korber P Genomic Nucleosome Organization Reconstituted with pure proteins Cell 2016 167 709 e721712 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.045 27768892
Krietenstein N, Wal M, Watanabe S, Park B, Peterson CL, Pugh BF, Korber P. Genomic Nucleosome Organization Reconstituted with pure proteins. Cell. 2016;167:709–e721712. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.045.27768892 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.045
81. Zou Y Yu Q Bi X Asymmetric positioning of nucleosomes and directional establishment of transcriptionally silent chromatin by Saccharomyces cerevisiae silencers Mol Cell Biol 2006 26 7806 19 10.1128/MCB.01197-06 16908533
Zou Y, Yu Q, Bi X. Asymmetric positioning of nucleosomes and directional establishment of transcriptionally silent chromatin by Saccharomyces cerevisiae silencers. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26:7806–19. 10.1128/MCB.01197-06.16908533 10.1128/MCB.01197-06
82. Hecht A Laroche T Strahl-Bolsinger S Gasser SM Grunstein M Histone H3 and H4 N-termini interact with SIR3 and SIR4 proteins: a molecular model for the formation of heterochromatin in yeast Cell 1995 80 583 92 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90512-X 7867066
Hecht A, Laroche T, Strahl-Bolsinger S, Gasser SM, Grunstein M. Histone H3 and H4 N-termini interact with SIR3 and SIR4 proteins: a molecular model for the formation of heterochromatin in yeast. Cell. 1995;80:583–92.7867066 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90512-X
83. Hecht A Strahl-Bolsinger S Grunstein M Spreading of transcriptional repressor SIR3 from telomeric heterochromatin Nature 1996 383 92 6 10.1038/383092a0 8779721
Hecht A, Strahl-Bolsinger S, Grunstein M. Spreading of transcriptional repressor SIR3 from telomeric heterochromatin. Nature. 1996;383:92–6. 10.1038/383092a0.8779721 10.1038/383092a0
84. Strahl-Bolsinger S Hecht A Luo K Grunstein M SIR2 and SIR4 interactions differ in core and extended telomeric heterochromatin in yeast Genes Dev 1997 11 83 93 10.1101/gad.11.1.83 9000052
Strahl-Bolsinger S, Hecht A, Luo K, Grunstein M. SIR2 and SIR4 interactions differ in core and extended telomeric heterochromatin in yeast. Genes Dev. 1997;11:83–93. 10.1101/gad.11.1.83.9000052 10.1101/gad.11.1.83
85. Arnosti DN Kulkarni MM Transcriptional enhancers: Intelligent enhanceosomes or flexible billboards? J Cell Biochem 2005 94 890 8 10.1002/jcb.20352 15696541
Arnosti DN, Kulkarni MM. Transcriptional enhancers: Intelligent enhanceosomes or flexible billboards? J Cell Biochem. 2005;94:890–8. 10.1002/jcb.20352.15696541 10.1002/jcb.20352
86. Panne D The enhanceosome Curr Opin Struct Biol 2008 18 236 42 10.1016/j.sbi.2007.12.002 18206362
Panne D. The enhanceosome. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2008;18:236–42.18206362 10.1016/j.sbi.2007.12.002
87. Li X Gerber SA Rudner AD Beausoleil SA Haas W Villen J Elias JE Gygi SP Large-scale phosphorylation analysis of alpha-factor-arrested Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Proteome Res 2007 6 1190 7 10.1021/pr060559j 17330950
Li X, Gerber SA, Rudner AD, Beausoleil SA, Haas W, Villen J, Elias JE, Gygi SP. Large-scale phosphorylation analysis of alpha-factor-arrested Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Proteome Res. 2007;6:1190–7. 10.1021/pr060559j.17330950 10.1021/pr060559j
88. Albuquerque CP Smolka MB Payne SH Bafna V Eng J Zhou H A multidimensional chromatography technology for in-depth phosphoproteome analysis Mol Cell Proteom 2008 7 1389 96 10.1074/mcp.M700468-MCP200
Albuquerque CP, Smolka MB, Payne SH, Bafna V, Eng J, Zhou H. A multidimensional chromatography technology for in-depth phosphoproteome analysis. Mol Cell Proteom. 2008;7:1389–96. 10.1074/mcp.M700468-MCP200.10.1074/mcp.M700468-MCP200
89. Shei GJ Broach JR Yeast silencers can act as orientation-dependent gene inactivation centers that respond to environmental signals Mol Cell Biol 1995 15 3496 506 10.1128/MCB.15.7.3496 7791756
Shei GJ, Broach JR. Yeast silencers can act as orientation-dependent gene inactivation centers that respond to environmental signals. Mol Cell Biol. 1995;15:3496–506.7791756 10.1128/MCB.15.7.3496
90. Wu K, Dhillon N, Du K, Kamakaka RT. Measuring the buffering capacity of gene silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021;118. 10.1073/pnas.2111841118.
91. Palacios DeBeer MA Muller U Fox CA Differential DNA affinity specifies roles for the origin recognition complex in budding yeast heterochromatin Genes Dev 2003 17 1817 22 10.1101/gad.1096703 12897051
Palacios DeBeer MA, Muller U, Fox CA. Differential DNA affinity specifies roles for the origin recognition complex in budding yeast heterochromatin. Genes Dev. 2003;17:1817–22.12897051 10.1101/gad.1096703
92. Lickwar CR Mueller F Hanlon SE McNally JG Lieb JD Genome-wide protein-DNA binding dynamics suggest a molecular clutch for transcription factor function Nature 2012 484 251 5 10.1038/nature10985 22498630
Lickwar CR, Mueller F, Hanlon SE, McNally JG, Lieb JD. Genome-wide protein-DNA binding dynamics suggest a molecular clutch for transcription factor function. Nature. 2012;484:251–5. 10.1038/nature10985.22498630 10.1038/nature10985
93. Jia S Noma K Grewal SI RNAi-independent heterochromatin nucleation by the stress-activated ATF/CREB family proteins Science 2004 304 1971 6 10.1126/science.1099035 15218150
Jia S, Noma K, Grewal SI. RNAi-independent heterochromatin nucleation by the stress-activated ATF/CREB family proteins. Science. 2004;304:1971–6. 10.1126/science.1099035.15218150 10.1126/science.1099035
94. Kanoh J Sadaie M Urano T Ishikawa F Telomere binding protein Taz1 establishes Swi6 heterochromatin independently of RNAi at telomeres Curr Biol 2005 15 1808 19 10.1016/j.cub.2005.09.041 16243027
Kanoh J, Sadaie M, Urano T, Ishikawa F. Telomere binding protein Taz1 establishes Swi6 heterochromatin independently of RNAi at telomeres. Curr Biol. 2005;15:1808–19. 10.1016/j.cub.2005.09.041.16243027 10.1016/j.cub.2005.09.041
95. Simon J Chiang A Bender W Shimell MJ O’Connor M Elements of the Drosophila bithorax complex that mediate repression by polycomb group products Dev Biol 1993 158 131 44 10.1006/dbio.1993.1174 8101171
Simon J, Chiang A, Bender W, Shimell MJ, O’Connor M. Elements of the Drosophila bithorax complex that mediate repression by polycomb group products. Dev Biol. 1993;158:131–44. 10.1006/dbio.1993.1174.8101171 10.1006/dbio.1993.1174
96. Simon JA Tamkun JW Programming off and on states in chromatin: mechanisms of polycomb and trithorax group complexes Curr Opin Genet Dev 2002 12 210 8 10.1016/S0959-437X(02)00288-5 11893495
Simon JA, Tamkun JW. Programming off and on states in chromatin: mechanisms of polycomb and trithorax group complexes. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2002;12:210–8.11893495 10.1016/S0959-437X(02)00288-5
97. Entrevan M Schuettengruber B Cavalli G Regulation of Genome Architecture and function by Polycomb Proteins Trends Cell Biol 2016 26 511 25 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.04.009 27198635
Entrevan M, Schuettengruber B, Cavalli G. Regulation of Genome Architecture and function by Polycomb Proteins. Trends Cell Biol. 2016;26:511–25. 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.04.009.27198635 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.04.009
98. Simon J Locking in stable states of gene expression: transcriptional control during Drosophila development Curr Opin Cell Biol 1995 7 376 85 10.1016/0955-0674(95)80093-X 7662368
Simon J. Locking in stable states of gene expression: transcriptional control during Drosophila development. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1995;7:376–85.7662368 10.1016/0955-0674(95)80093-X
99. Danzer JR Wallrath LL Mechanisms of HP1-mediated gene silencing in Drosophila Development 2004 131 3571 80 10.1242/dev.01223 15215206
Danzer JR, Wallrath LL. Mechanisms of HP1-mediated gene silencing in Drosophila. Development. 2004;131:3571–80. 10.1242/dev.01223.15215206 10.1242/dev.01223
100. Blackledge NP Farcas AM Kondo T King HW McGouran JF Hanssen LLP Ito S Cooper S Kondo K Koseki Y Variant PRC1 complex-dependent H2A ubiquitylation drives PRC2 recruitment and polycomb domain formation Cell 2014 157 1445 59 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.004 24856970
Blackledge NP, Farcas AM, Kondo T, King HW, McGouran JF, Hanssen LLP, Ito S, Cooper S, Kondo K, Koseki Y, et al. Variant PRC1 complex-dependent H2A ubiquitylation drives PRC2 recruitment and polycomb domain formation. Cell. 2014;157:1445–59. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.004.24856970 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.004
101. Grewal SI Jia S Heterochromatin revisited Nat Rev Genet 2007 8 35 46 10.1038/nrg2008 17173056
Grewal SI, Jia S. Heterochromatin revisited. Nat Rev Genet. 2007;8:35–46. 10.1038/nrg2008.17173056 10.1038/nrg2008
102. Al-Sady B Madhani HD Narlikar GJ Division of labor between the chromodomains of HP1 and Suv39 methylase enables coordination of heterochromatin spread Mol Cell 2013 51 80 91 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.06.013 23849629
Al-Sady B, Madhani HD, Narlikar GJ. Division of labor between the chromodomains of HP1 and Suv39 methylase enables coordination of heterochromatin spread. Mol Cell. 2013;51:80–91. 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.06.013.23849629 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.06.013
103. Zhang K Mosch K Fischle W Grewal SI Roles of the Clr4 methyltransferase complex in nucleation, spreading and maintenance of heterochromatin Nat Struct Mol Biol 2008 15 381 8 10.1038/nsmb.1406 18345014
Zhang K, Mosch K, Fischle W, Grewal SI. Roles of the Clr4 methyltransferase complex in nucleation, spreading and maintenance of heterochromatin. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2008;15:381–8. 10.1038/nsmb.1406.18345014 10.1038/nsmb.1406
104. Ellahi A Thurtle DM Rine J The chromatin and Transcriptional Landscape of native Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeres and Subtelomeric domains Genetics 2015 200 505 21 10.1534/genetics.115.175711 25823445
Ellahi A, Thurtle DM, Rine J. The chromatin and Transcriptional Landscape of native Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeres and Subtelomeric domains. Genetics. 2015;200:505–21. 10.1534/genetics.115.175711.25823445 10.1534/genetics.115.175711
105. Thurtle DM Rine J The molecular topography of silenced chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genes Dev 2014 28 245 58 10.1101/gad.230532.113 24493645
Thurtle DM, Rine J. The molecular topography of silenced chromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev. 2014;28:245–58. 10.1101/gad.230532.113.24493645 10.1101/gad.230532.113
106. Hocher A Ruault M Kaferle P Descrimes M Garnier M Morillon A Taddei A Expanding heterochromatin reveals discrete subtelomeric domains delimited by chromatin landscape transitions Genome Res 2018 28 1867 81 10.1101/gr.236554.118 30355601
Hocher A, Ruault M, Kaferle P, Descrimes M, Garnier M, Morillon A, Taddei A. Expanding heterochromatin reveals discrete subtelomeric domains delimited by chromatin landscape transitions. Genome Res. 2018;28:1867–81. 10.1101/gr.236554.118.30355601 10.1101/gr.236554.118
107. Weiss K Simpson RT High-resolution structural analysis of chromatin at specific loci: Saccharomyces cerevisiae silent mating type locus HMLalpha Mol Cell Biol 1998 18 5392 403 10.1128/MCB.18.9.5392 9710623
Weiss K, Simpson RT. High-resolution structural analysis of chromatin at specific loci: Saccharomyces cerevisiae silent mating type locus HMLalpha. Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18:5392–403.9710623 10.1128/MCB.18.9.5392
108. Ravindra A Weiss K Simpson RT High-resolution structural analysis of chromatin at specific loci: Saccharomyces cerevisiae silent mating-type locus HMRa Mol Cell Biol 1999 19 7944 50 10.1128/MCB.19.12.7944 10567520
Ravindra A, Weiss K, Simpson RT. High-resolution structural analysis of chromatin at specific loci: Saccharomyces cerevisiae silent mating-type locus HMRa. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19:7944–50.10567520 10.1128/MCB.19.12.7944
109. Chereji RV Ocampo J Clark DJ MNase-Sensitive complexes in yeast: nucleosomes and non-histone barriers Mol Cell 2017 65 565 e577563 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.009 28157509
Chereji RV, Ocampo J, Clark DJ. MNase-Sensitive complexes in yeast: nucleosomes and non-histone barriers. Mol Cell. 2017;65:565–e577563. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.009.28157509 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.009
110. Brothers M, Rine J. Distinguishing between recruitment and spread of silent chromatin structures in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Elife. 2022;11. 10.7554/eLife.75653.
111. Valenzuela L Dhillon N Dubey RN Gartenberg MR Kamakaka RT Long-range communication between the silencers of HMR Mol Cell Biol 2008 28 1924 35 10.1128/MCB.01647-07 18195043
Valenzuela L, Dhillon N, Dubey RN, Gartenberg MR, Kamakaka RT. Long-range communication between the silencers of HMR. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28:1924–35.18195043 10.1128/MCB.01647-07
112. Bauer SL Grochalski TNT Smialowska A Astrom SU Sir2 and Reb1 antagonistically regulate nucleosome occupancy in subtelomeric X-elements and repress TERRAs by distinct mechanisms PLoS Genet 2022 18 e1010419 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010419 36137093
Bauer SL, Grochalski TNT, Smialowska A, Astrom SU. Sir2 and Reb1 antagonistically regulate nucleosome occupancy in subtelomeric X-elements and repress TERRAs by distinct mechanisms. PLoS Genet. 2022;18:e1010419. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010419.36137093 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010419
113. Lebrun E Revardel E Boscheron C Li R Gilson E Fourel G Protosilencers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae subtelomeric regions Genetics 2001 158 167 76 10.1093/genetics/158.1.167 11333227
Lebrun E, Revardel E, Boscheron C, Li R, Gilson E, Fourel G. Protosilencers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae subtelomeric regions. Genetics. 2001;158:167–76.11333227 10.1093/genetics/158.1.167
114. Fourel G Revardel E Koering CE Gilson E Cohabitation of insulators and silencing elements in yeast subtelomeric regions Embo J 1999 18 2522 37 10.1093/emboj/18.9.2522 10228166
Fourel G, Revardel E, Koering CE, Gilson E. Cohabitation of insulators and silencing elements in yeast subtelomeric regions. Embo J. 1999;18:2522–37.10228166 10.1093/emboj/18.9.2522
115. Fourel G Magdinier F Gilson E Insulator dynamics and the setting of chromatin domains BioEssays 2004 26 523 32 10.1002/bies.20028 15112232
Fourel G, Magdinier F, Gilson E. Insulator dynamics and the setting of chromatin domains. BioEssays. 2004;26:523–32.15112232 10.1002/bies.20028
116. Buck SW Shore D Action of a RAP1 carboxy-terminal silencing domain reveals an underlying competetion between HMR and telomeres in yeast Genes Dev 1995 9 370 84 10.1101/gad.9.3.370 7867933
Buck SW, Shore D. Action of a RAP1 carboxy-terminal silencing domain reveals an underlying competetion between HMR and telomeres in yeast. Genes Dev. 1995;9:370–84.7867933 10.1101/gad.9.3.370
117. Maillet L Boscheron C Gotta M Marcand S Gilson E Gasser SM Evidence for silencing compartments within the yeast nucleus: a role for telomere proximity and sir protein concentration in silencer-mediated repression Genes Dev 1996 10 1796 811 10.1101/gad.10.14.1796 8698239
Maillet L, Boscheron C, Gotta M, Marcand S, Gilson E, Gasser SM. Evidence for silencing compartments within the yeast nucleus: a role for telomere proximity and sir protein concentration in silencer-mediated repression. Genes Dev. 1996;10:1796–811. 10.1101/gad.10.14.1796.8698239 10.1101/gad.10.14.1796
118. Johnson A Li G Sikorski TW Buratowski S Woodcock CL Moazed D Reconstitution of heterochromatin-dependent transcriptional gene silencing Mol Cell 2009 35 769 81 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.07.030 19782027
Johnson A, Li G, Sikorski TW, Buratowski S, Woodcock CL, Moazed D. Reconstitution of heterochromatin-dependent transcriptional gene silencing. Mol Cell. 2009;35:769–81. 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.07.030.19782027 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.07.030
119. Gottschling DE Telomere-proximal DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is refractory to methyltransferase activity in vivo Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1992 89 4062 5 10.1073/pnas.89.9.4062 1570334
Gottschling DE. Telomere-proximal DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is refractory to methyltransferase activity in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89:4062–5.1570334 10.1073/pnas.89.9.4062
120. Marr LT, Ocampo J, Clark DJ, Hayes JJ. Global histone protein surface accessibility in yeast indicates a uniformly loosely packed genome with canonical nucleosomes. Epigenetics Chromatin. 2021;14. 10.1186/s13072-020-00381-5.
121. Ghidelli S Donze D Dhillon N Kamakaka RT Sir2p exists in two nucleosome-binding complexes with distinct deacetylase activities Embo J 2001 20 4522 35 10.1093/emboj/20.16.4522 11500379
Ghidelli S, Donze D, Dhillon N, Kamakaka RT. Sir2p exists in two nucleosome-binding complexes with distinct deacetylase activities. Embo J. 2001;20:4522–35.11500379 10.1093/emboj/20.16.4522
122. Oppikofer M Kueng S Keusch JJ Hassler M Ladurner AG Gut H Gasser SM Dimerization of Sir3 via its C-terminal winged helix domain is essential for yeast heterochromatin formation EMBO J 2013 32 437 49 10.1038/emboj.2012.343 23299941
Oppikofer M, Kueng S, Keusch JJ, Hassler M, Ladurner AG, Gut H, Gasser SM. Dimerization of Sir3 via its C-terminal winged helix domain is essential for yeast heterochromatin formation. EMBO J. 2013;32:437–49. 10.1038/emboj.2012.343.23299941 10.1038/emboj.2012.343
123. Mansisidor AR Risca VI Chromatin accessibility: methods, mechanisms, and biological insights Nucleus 2022 13 236 76 10.1080/19491034.2022.2143106 36404679
Mansisidor AR, Risca VI. Chromatin accessibility: methods, mechanisms, and biological insights. Nucleus. 2022;13:236–76. 10.1080/19491034.2022.2143106.36404679 10.1080/19491034.2022.2143106
124. Chen L Widom J Mechanism of transcriptional silencing in yeast Cell 2005 120 37 48 10.1016/j.cell.2004.11.030 15652480
Chen L, Widom J. Mechanism of transcriptional silencing in yeast. Cell. 2005;120:37–48.15652480 10.1016/j.cell.2004.11.030
125. Steakley DL Rine J On the mechanism of gene silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae G3 (Bethesda) 2015 5 1751 63 10.1534/g3.115.018515 26082137
Steakley DL, Rine J. On the mechanism of gene silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. G3 (Bethesda). 2015;5:1751–63. 10.1534/g3.115.018515.26082137 10.1534/g3.115.018515
126. Aparicio OM Gottschling DE Overcoming telomeric silencing: a trans-activator competes to establish gene expression in a cell cycle-dependent way Genes Dev 1994 8 1133 46 10.1101/gad.8.10.1133 7926719
Aparicio OM, Gottschling DE. Overcoming telomeric silencing: a trans-activator competes to establish gene expression in a cell cycle-dependent way. Genes Dev. 1994;8:1133–46.7926719 10.1101/gad.8.10.1133
127. Wang X Bryant G Zhao A Ptashne M Nucleosome avidities and transcriptional silencing in yeast Curr Biol 2015 25 1215 20 10.1016/j.cub.2015.03.004 25891403
Wang X, Bryant G, Zhao A, Ptashne M. Nucleosome avidities and transcriptional silencing in yeast. Curr Biol. 2015;25:1215–20. 10.1016/j.cub.2015.03.004.25891403 10.1016/j.cub.2015.03.004
128. Sekinger EA Gross DS Silenced chromatin is permissive to activator binding and PIC recruitment Cell 2001 105 403 14 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00329-4 11348596
Sekinger EA, Gross DS. Silenced chromatin is permissive to activator binding and PIC recruitment. Cell. 2001;105:403–14.11348596 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00329-4
129. Rufiange A Jacques PE Bhat W Robert F Nourani A Genome-wide replication-independent histone H3 exchange occurs predominantly at promoters and implicates H3 K56 acetylation and Asf1 Mol Cell 2007 27 393 405 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.07.011 17679090
Rufiange A, Jacques PE, Bhat W, Robert F, Nourani A. Genome-wide replication-independent histone H3 exchange occurs predominantly at promoters and implicates H3 K56 acetylation and Asf1. Mol Cell. 2007;27:393–405.17679090 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.07.011
130. Dion MF Kaplan T Kim M Buratowski S Friedman N Rando OJ Dynamics of replication-independent histone turnover in budding yeast Science 2007 315 1405 8 10.1126/science.1134053 17347438
Dion MF, Kaplan T, Kim M, Buratowski S, Friedman N, Rando OJ. Dynamics of replication-independent histone turnover in budding yeast. Science. 2007;315:1405–8.17347438 10.1126/science.1134053
131. Manning BJ Peterson CL Direct interactions promote eviction of the Sir3 heterochromatin protein by the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzyme Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 111 17827 32 10.1073/pnas.1420096111 25453095
Manning BJ, Peterson CL. Direct interactions promote eviction of the Sir3 heterochromatin protein by the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzyme. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111:17827–32. 10.1073/pnas.1420096111.25453095 10.1073/pnas.1420096111
132. Saxton DS Rine J Nucleosome positioning regulates the Establishment, Stability, and inheritance of Heterochromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2020 117 27493 501 10.1073/pnas.2004111117 33077593
Saxton DS, Rine J. Nucleosome positioning regulates the Establishment, Stability, and inheritance of Heterochromatin in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117:27493–501. 10.1073/pnas.2004111117.33077593 10.1073/pnas.2004111117
133. Enderle D Beisel C Stadler MB Gerstung M Athri P Paro R Polycomb preferentially targets stalled promoters of coding and noncoding transcripts Genome Res 2011 21 216 26 10.1101/gr.114348.110 21177970
Enderle D, Beisel C, Stadler MB, Gerstung M, Athri P, Paro R. Polycomb preferentially targets stalled promoters of coding and noncoding transcripts. Genome Res. 2011;21:216–26. 10.1101/gr.114348.110.21177970 10.1101/gr.114348.110
134. Shao Z Raible F Mollaaghababa R Guyon JR Wu CT Bender W Kingston RE Stabilization of chromatin structure by PRC1, a polycomb complex Cell 1999 98 37 46 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80604-2 10412979
Shao Z, Raible F, Mollaaghababa R, Guyon JR, Wu CT, Bender W, Kingston RE. Stabilization of chromatin structure by PRC1, a polycomb complex. Cell. 1999;98:37–46.10412979 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80604-2
135. Kadoch C Williams RT Calarco JP Miller EL Weber CM Braun SM Pulice JL Chory EJ Crabtree GR Dynamics of BAF-Polycomb complex opposition on heterochromatin in normal and oncogenic states Nat Genet 2017 49 213 22 10.1038/ng.3734 27941796
Kadoch C, Williams RT, Calarco JP, Miller EL, Weber CM, Braun SM, Pulice JL, Chory EJ, Crabtree GR. Dynamics of BAF-Polycomb complex opposition on heterochromatin in normal and oncogenic states. Nat Genet. 2017;49:213–22. 10.1038/ng.3734.27941796 10.1038/ng.3734
136. Tamkun JW Deuring R Scott MP Kissinger M Pattatucci AM Kaufman TC Kennison JA Brahma: a regulator of Drosophila homeotic genes structurally related to the yeast transcriptional activator SNF2/SWI2 Cell 1992 68 561 72 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90191-e 1346755
Tamkun JW, Deuring R, Scott MP, Kissinger M, Pattatucci AM, Kaufman TC, Kennison JA. Brahma: a regulator of Drosophila homeotic genes structurally related to the yeast transcriptional activator SNF2/SWI2. Cell. 1992;68:561–72. 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90191-e.1346755 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90191-e
137. Tie F Banerjee R Stratton CA Prasad-Sinha J Stepanik V Zlobin A Diaz MO Scacheri PC Harte PJ CBP-mediated acetylation of histone H3 lysine 27 antagonizes Drosophila polycomb silencing Development 2009 136 3131 41 10.1242/dev.037127 19700617
Tie F, Banerjee R, Stratton CA, Prasad-Sinha J, Stepanik V, Zlobin A, Diaz MO, Scacheri PC, Harte PJ. CBP-mediated acetylation of histone H3 lysine 27 antagonizes Drosophila polycomb silencing. Development. 2009;136:3131–41. 10.1242/dev.037127.19700617 10.1242/dev.037127
138. Seman M Levashkevich A Larkin A Huang F Ragunathan K Uncoupling the distinct functions of HP1 proteins during heterochromatin establishment and maintenance Cell Rep 2023 42 113428 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.113428 37952152
Seman M, Levashkevich A, Larkin A, Huang F, Ragunathan K. Uncoupling the distinct functions of HP1 proteins during heterochromatin establishment and maintenance. Cell Rep. 2023;42:113428. 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.113428.37952152 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.113428
139. Garcia JF Dumesic PA Hartley PD El-Samad H Madhani HD Combinatorial, site-specific requirement for heterochromatic silencing factors in the elimination of nucleosome-free regions Genes Dev 2010 24 1758 71 10.1101/gad.1946410 20675407
Garcia JF, Dumesic PA, Hartley PD, El-Samad H, Madhani HD. Combinatorial, site-specific requirement for heterochromatic silencing factors in the elimination of nucleosome-free regions. Genes Dev. 2010;24:1758–71. 10.1101/gad.1946410.20675407 10.1101/gad.1946410
140. Deal RB Henikoff JG Henikoff S Genome-wide kinetics of nucleosome turnover determined by metabolic labeling of histones Science 2010 328 1161 4 10.1126/science.1186777 20508129
Deal RB, Henikoff JG, Henikoff S. Genome-wide kinetics of nucleosome turnover determined by metabolic labeling of histones. Science. 2010;328:1161–4. 10.1126/science.1186777.20508129 10.1126/science.1186777
141. Holla S Dhakshnamoorthy J Folco HD Balachandran V Xiao H Sun LL Wheeler D Zofall M Grewal SIS Positioning Heterochromatin at the Nuclear Periphery suppresses histone turnover to promote epigenetic inheritance Cell 2020 180 150 e164115 10.1016/j.cell.2019.12.004 31883795
Holla S, Dhakshnamoorthy J, Folco HD, Balachandran V, Xiao H, Sun LL, Wheeler D, Zofall M, Grewal SIS. Positioning Heterochromatin at the Nuclear Periphery suppresses histone turnover to promote epigenetic inheritance. Cell. 2020;180:150–e164115. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.12.004.31883795 10.1016/j.cell.2019.12.004
142. Aygun O Mehta S Grewal SI HDAC-mediated suppression of histone turnover promotes epigenetic stability of heterochromatin Nat Struct Mol Biol 2013 20 547 54 10.1038/nsmb.2565 23604080
Aygun O, Mehta S, Grewal SI. HDAC-mediated suppression of histone turnover promotes epigenetic stability of heterochromatin. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2013;20:547–54. 10.1038/nsmb.2565.23604080 10.1038/nsmb.2565
143. Chang JF Hall BE Tanny JC Moazed D Filman D Ellenberger T Structure of the coiled-coil dimerization motif of Sir4 and its interaction with Sir3 Structure 2003 11 637 49 10.1016/s0969-2126(03)00093-5 12791253
Chang JF, Hall BE, Tanny JC, Moazed D, Filman D, Ellenberger T. Structure of the coiled-coil dimerization motif of Sir4 and its interaction with Sir3. Structure. 2003;11:637–49. 10.1016/s0969-2126(03)00093-5.12791253 10.1016/s0969-2126(03)00093-5
144. Min J Landry J Sternglanz R Xu RM Crystal structure of a SIR2 homolog-NAD complex Cell 2001 105 269 79 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00317-8 11336676
Min J, Landry J, Sternglanz R, Xu RM. Crystal structure of a SIR2 homolog-NAD complex. Cell. 2001;105:269–79.11336676 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00317-8
145. Hsu HC Wang CL Wang M Yang N Chen Z Sternglanz R Xu RM Structural basis for allosteric stimulation of Sir2 activity by Sir4 binding Genes Dev 2013 27 64 73 10.1101/gad.208140.112 23307867
Hsu HC, Wang CL, Wang M, Yang N, Chen Z, Sternglanz R, Xu RM. Structural basis for allosteric stimulation of Sir2 activity by Sir4 binding. Genes Dev. 2013;27:64–73. 10.1101/gad.208140.112.23307867 10.1101/gad.208140.112
146. Hou Z Danzer JR Fox CA Keck JL Structure of the Sir3 protein bromo adjacent homology (BAH) domain from S. Cerevisiae at 1.95 a resolution Protein Sci 2006 15 1182 6 10.1110/ps.052061006 16641491
Hou Z, Danzer JR, Fox CA, Keck JL. Structure of the Sir3 protein bromo adjacent homology (BAH) domain from S. Cerevisiae at 1.95 a resolution. Protein Sci. 2006;15:1182–6. 10.1110/ps.052061006.16641491 10.1110/ps.052061006
147. Ehrentraut S Hassler M Oppikofer M Kueng S Weber JM Mueller JW Gasser SM Ladurner AG Ehrenhofer-Murray AE Structural basis for the role of the Sir3 AAA + domain in silencing: interaction with Sir4 and unmethylated histone H3K79 Genes Dev 2011 25 1835 46 10.1101/gad.17175111 21896656
Ehrentraut S, Hassler M, Oppikofer M, Kueng S, Weber JM, Mueller JW, Gasser SM, Ladurner AG, Ehrenhofer-Murray AE. Structural basis for the role of the Sir3 AAA + domain in silencing: interaction with Sir4 and unmethylated histone H3K79. Genes Dev. 2011;25:1835–46. 10.1101/gad.17175111.21896656 10.1101/gad.17175111
148. Armache KJ Garlick JD Canzio D Narlikar GJ Kingston RE Structural basis of silencing: Sir3 BAH domain in complex with a nucleosome at 3.0 a resolution Science 2011 334 977 82 10.1126/science.1210915 22096199
Armache KJ, Garlick JD, Canzio D, Narlikar GJ, Kingston RE. Structural basis of silencing: Sir3 BAH domain in complex with a nucleosome at 3.0 a resolution. Science. 2011;334:977–82. 10.1126/science.1210915.22096199 10.1126/science.1210915
149. Arnaudo N Fernandez IS McLaughlin SH Peak-Chew SY Rhodes D Martino F The N-terminal acetylation of Sir3 stabilizes its binding to the nucleosome core particle Nat Struct Mol Biol 2013 20 1119 21 10.1038/nsmb.2641 23934150
Arnaudo N, Fernandez IS, McLaughlin SH, Peak-Chew SY, Rhodes D, Martino F. The N-terminal acetylation of Sir3 stabilizes its binding to the nucleosome core particle. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2013;20:1119–21. 10.1038/nsmb.2641.23934150 10.1038/nsmb.2641
150. Wang F Li G Altaf M Lu C Currie MA Johnson A Moazed D Heterochromatin protein Sir3 induces contacts between the amino terminus of histone H4 and nucleosomal DNA Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013 110 8495 500 10.1073/pnas.1300126110 23650358
Wang F, Li G, Altaf M, Lu C, Currie MA, Johnson A, Moazed D. Heterochromatin protein Sir3 induces contacts between the amino terminus of histone H4 and nucleosomal DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:8495–500. 10.1073/pnas.1300126110.23650358 10.1073/pnas.1300126110
151. Deshpande I Keusch JJ Challa K Iesmantavicius V Gasser SM Gut H The Sir4 H-BRCT domain interacts with phospho-proteins to sequester and repress yeast heterochromatin EMBO J 2019 38 e101744 10.15252/embj.2019101744 31515872
Deshpande I, Keusch JJ, Challa K, Iesmantavicius V, Gasser SM, Gut H. The Sir4 H-BRCT domain interacts with phospho-proteins to sequester and repress yeast heterochromatin. EMBO J. 2019;38:e101744. 10.15252/embj.2019101744.31515872 10.15252/embj.2019101744
152. Liou GG Tanny JC Kruger RG Walz T Moazed D Assembly of the SIR complex and its regulation by O-acetyl-ADP-ribose, a product of NAD-dependent histone deacetylation Cell 2005 121 515 27 10.1016/j.cell.2005.03.035 15907466
Liou GG, Tanny JC, Kruger RG, Walz T, Moazed D. Assembly of the SIR complex and its regulation by O-acetyl-ADP-ribose, a product of NAD-dependent histone deacetylation. Cell. 2005;121:515–27. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.03.035.15907466 10.1016/j.cell.2005.03.035
153. Zhou BR Feng H Kale S Fox T Khant H de Val N Ghirlando R Panchenko AR Bai Y Distinct structures and dynamics of chromatosomes with different human Linker Histone Isoforms Mol Cell 2021 81 166 e182166 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.10.038 33238161
Zhou BR, Feng H, Kale S, Fox T, Khant H, de Val N, Ghirlando R, Panchenko AR, Bai Y. Distinct structures and dynamics of chromatosomes with different human Linker Histone Isoforms. Mol Cell. 2021;81:166–e182166. 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.10.038.33238161 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.10.038
154. Dombrowski M Engeholm M Dienemann C Dodonova S Cramer P Histone H1 binding to nucleosome arrays depends on linker DNA length and trajectory Nat Struct Mol Biol 2022 29 493 501 10.1038/s41594-022-00768-w 35581345
Dombrowski M, Engeholm M, Dienemann C, Dodonova S, Cramer P. Histone H1 binding to nucleosome arrays depends on linker DNA length and trajectory. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2022;29:493–501. 10.1038/s41594-022-00768-w.35581345 10.1038/s41594-022-00768-w
155. Jang S Song JJ The big picture of chromatin biology by cryo-EM Curr Opin Struct Biol 2019 58 76 87 10.1016/j.sbi.2019.05.017 31233978
Jang S, Song JJ. The big picture of chromatin biology by cryo-EM. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2019;58:76–87. 10.1016/j.sbi.2019.05.017.31233978 10.1016/j.sbi.2019.05.017
156. Farris D, Saxton DS, Rine J. (2021). A novel allele of SIR2 reveals a heritable intermediate state of gene silencing. Genetics 218. 10.1093/genetics/iyab041
157. Chambers AL Pearl LH Oliver AW Downs JA The BAH domain of Rsc2 is a histone H3 binding domain Nucleic Acids Res 2013 41 9168 82 10.1093/nar/gkt662 23907388
Chambers AL, Pearl LH, Oliver AW, Downs JA. The BAH domain of Rsc2 is a histone H3 binding domain. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:9168–82. 10.1093/nar/gkt662.23907388 10.1093/nar/gkt662
158. Aljahani A Mauksch C Oudelaar AM The relationship between nucleosome positioning and higher-order genome folding Curr Opin Cell Biol 2024 89 102398 10.1016/j.ceb.2024.102398 38991477
Aljahani A, Mauksch C, Oudelaar AM. The relationship between nucleosome positioning and higher-order genome folding. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2024;89:102398. 10.1016/j.ceb.2024.102398.38991477 10.1016/j.ceb.2024.102398
159. Behrouzi R, Lu C, Currie MA, Jih G, Iglesias N, Moazed D. (2016). Heterochromatin assembly by interrupted Sir3 bridges across neighboring nucleosomes. Elife 5. 10.7554/eLife.17556
160. Swygert SG Senapati S Bolukbasi MF Wolfe SA Lindsay S Peterson CL SIR proteins create compact heterochromatin fibers Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018 115 12447 52 10.1073/pnas.1810647115 30455303
Swygert SG, Senapati S, Bolukbasi MF, Wolfe SA, Lindsay S, Peterson CL. SIR proteins create compact heterochromatin fibers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115:12447–52. 10.1073/pnas.1810647115.30455303 10.1073/pnas.1810647115
161. Ruault M Scolari VF Lazar-Stefanita L Hocher A Loiodice I Koszul R Taddei A Sir3 mediates long-range chromosome interactions in budding yeast Genome Res 2021 31 411 25 10.1101/gr.267872.120 33579753
Ruault M, Scolari VF, Lazar-Stefanita L, Hocher A, Loiodice I, Koszul R, Taddei A. Sir3 mediates long-range chromosome interactions in budding yeast. Genome Res. 2021;31:411–25. 10.1101/gr.267872.120.33579753 10.1101/gr.267872.120
162. Ye Y Wu H Chen K Clapier CR Verma N Zhang W Deng H Cairns BR Gao N Chen Z Structure of the RSC complex bound to the nucleosome Science 2019 366 838 43 10.1126/science.aay0033 31672915
Ye Y, Wu H, Chen K, Clapier CR, Verma N, Zhang W, Deng H, Cairns BR, Gao N, Chen Z. Structure of the RSC complex bound to the nucleosome. Science. 2019;366:838–43. 10.1126/science.aay0033.31672915 10.1126/science.aay0033
163. Wagner FR Dienemann C Wang H Stutzer A Tegunov D Urlaub H Cramer P Structure of SWI/SNF chromatin remodeller RSC bound to a nucleosome Nature 2020 579 448 51 10.1038/s41586-020-2088-0 32188943
Wagner FR, Dienemann C, Wang H, Stutzer A, Tegunov D, Urlaub H, Cramer P. Structure of SWI/SNF chromatin remodeller RSC bound to a nucleosome. Nature. 2020;579:448–51. 10.1038/s41586-020-2088-0.32188943 10.1038/s41586-020-2088-0
164. Onishi M Liou GG Buchberger JR Walz T Moazed D Role of the conserved Sir3-BAH domain in nucleosome binding and silent chromatin assembly Mol Cell 2007 28 1015 28 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.12.004 18158899
Onishi M, Liou GG, Buchberger JR, Walz T, Moazed D. Role of the conserved Sir3-BAH domain in nucleosome binding and silent chromatin assembly. Mol Cell. 2007;28:1015–28. 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.12.004.18158899 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.12.004
165. Fan H Guo Y Tsai YH Storey AJ Kim A Gong W Edmondson RD Mackintosh SG Li H Byrum SD A conserved BAH module within mammalian BAHD1 connects H3K27me3 to polycomb gene silencing Nucleic Acids Res 2021 49 4441 55 10.1093/nar/gkab210 33823544
Fan H, Guo Y, Tsai YH, Storey AJ, Kim A, Gong W, Edmondson RD, Mackintosh SG, Li H, Byrum SD, et al. A conserved BAH module within mammalian BAHD1 connects H3K27me3 to polycomb gene silencing. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49:4441–55. 10.1093/nar/gkab210.33823544 10.1093/nar/gkab210
166. Palladino F Laroche T Gilson E Pillus L Gasser SM The positioning of yeast telomeres depends on SIR3, SIR4, and the integrity of the nuclear membrane Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 1993 58 733 46 10.1101/SQB.1993.058.01.081 7956091
Palladino F, Laroche T, Gilson E, Pillus L, Gasser SM. The positioning of yeast telomeres depends on SIR3, SIR4, and the integrity of the nuclear membrane. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1993;58:733–46.7956091 10.1101/SQB.1993.058.01.081
167. Fabre E, Spichal M. (2014). Subnuclear Architecture of telomeres and subtelomeres in yeast. In SubTelomeres, E.J. Louis, and M.M. Becker, eds. (Springer), pp. 13–37.
168. Taddei A Hediger F Neumann FR Gasser SM The function of nuclear architecture: a genetic approach Annu Rev Genet 2004 38 305 45 10.1146/annurev.genet.37.110801.142705 15568979
Taddei A, Hediger F, Neumann FR, Gasser SM. The function of nuclear architecture: a genetic approach. Annu Rev Genet. 2004;38:305–45.15568979 10.1146/annurev.genet.37.110801.142705
169. Taddei A Schober H Gasser SM The budding yeast nucleus Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2010 2 a000612 10.1101/cshperspect.a000612 20554704
Taddei A, Schober H, Gasser SM. The budding yeast nucleus. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2010;2:a000612. 10.1101/cshperspect.a000612.20554704 10.1101/cshperspect.a000612
170. Oh J, Yeom S, Park J, Lee JS. The regional sequestration of heterochromatin structural proteins is critical to form and maintain silent chromatin. Epigenetics Chromatin. 2022;15. 10.1186/s13072-022-00435-w.
171. Akhtar A Gasser SM The nuclear envelope and transcriptional control Nat Rev Genet 2007 8 507 17 10.1038/nrg2122 17549064
Akhtar A, Gasser SM. The nuclear envelope and transcriptional control. Nat Rev Genet. 2007;8:507–17. 10.1038/nrg2122.17549064 10.1038/nrg2122
172. Tatarakis A Behrouzi R Moazed D Evolving models of heterochromatin: from Foci to Liquid droplets Mol Cell 2017 67 725 7 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.022 28886332
Tatarakis A, Behrouzi R, Moazed D. Evolving models of heterochromatin: from Foci to Liquid droplets. Mol Cell. 2017;67:725–7. 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.022.28886332 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.022
173. Taddei A Gartenberg MR Neumann FR Hediger F Gasser SM Multiple pathways tether telomeres and silent chromatin at the nuclear periphery: functional implications for sir-mediated repression Novartis Found Symp 2005 264 140 56 10.1002/0470093765.ch10 15773752
Taddei A, Gartenberg MR, Neumann FR, Hediger F, Gasser SM. Multiple pathways tether telomeres and silent chromatin at the nuclear periphery: functional implications for sir-mediated repression. Novartis Found Symp. 2005;264:140–56. discussion 156–165, 227 – 130.15773752 10.1002/0470093765.ch10
174. O’Kane CJ, Hyland EM. Yeast epigenetics: the inheritance of histone modification states. Biosci Rep. 2019;39. 10.1042/BSR20182006.
175. Du M Zhang Q Bai L Three distinct mechanisms of long-distance modulation of gene expression in yeast PLoS Genet 2017 13 e1006736 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006736 28426659
Du M, Zhang Q, Bai L. Three distinct mechanisms of long-distance modulation of gene expression in yeast. PLoS Genet. 2017;13:e1006736. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006736.28426659 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006736
176. Waterborg JH Dynamics of histone acetylation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Biochemistry 2001 40 2599 605 10.1021/bi002480c 11327883
Waterborg JH. Dynamics of histone acetylation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochemistry. 2001;40:2599–605. 10.1021/bi002480c.11327883 10.1021/bi002480c
177. Ho B Baryshnikova A Brown GW Unification of protein abundance datasets yields a quantitative Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteome Cell Syst 2018 6 192 e205193 10.1016/j.cels.2017.12.004 29361465
Ho B, Baryshnikova A, Brown GW. Unification of protein abundance datasets yields a quantitative Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteome. Cell Syst. 2018;6:192–e205193. 10.1016/j.cels.2017.12.004.29361465 10.1016/j.cels.2017.12.004
178. Renauld H, Aparicio OM, Zierath PD, Billington BL, Chhablani SK, Gottschling DE. Silent domains are assembled continuously from the telomere and are defined by promoter distance and strength, and by SIR3 dosage. Genes & Development; 1993. pp. 1133–45.
179. Osborne EA Dudoit S Rine J The establishment of gene silencing at single-cell resolution Nat Genet 2009 41 800 6 10.1038/ng.402 19543267
Osborne EA, Dudoit S, Rine J. The establishment of gene silencing at single-cell resolution. Nat Genet. 2009;41:800–6. 10.1038/ng.402.19543267 10.1038/ng.402
180. Gasser SM Hediger F Taddei A Neumann FR Gartenberg MR The function of telomere clustering in yeast: the circe effect Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 2004 69 327 37 10.1101/sqb.2004.69.327 16117665
Gasser SM, Hediger F, Taddei A, Neumann FR, Gartenberg MR. The function of telomere clustering in yeast: the circe effect. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2004;69:327–37. 10.1101/sqb.2004.69.327.16117665 10.1101/sqb.2004.69.327
181. Loiodice I Garnier M Nikolov I Taddei A An Inducible System for silencing establishment reveals a stepwise mechanism in which anchoring at the Nuclear Periphery precedes heterochromatin formation Cells 2021 10 103390cells10112810 10.3390/cells10112810
Loiodice I, Garnier M, Nikolov I, Taddei A. An Inducible System for silencing establishment reveals a stepwise mechanism in which anchoring at the Nuclear Periphery precedes heterochromatin formation. Cells. 2021;10:103390cells10112810.10.3390/cells10112810
182. Rippe K Dynamic organization of the cell nucleus Curr Opin Genet Dev 2007 17 373 80 10.1016/j.gde.2007.08.007 17913491
Rippe K. Dynamic organization of the cell nucleus. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2007;17:373–80. 10.1016/j.gde.2007.08.007.17913491 10.1016/j.gde.2007.08.007
183. Bancaud A Huet S Daigle N Mozziconacci J Beaudouin J Ellenberg J Molecular crowding affects diffusion and binding of nuclear proteins in heterochromatin and reveals the fractal organization of chromatin EMBO J 2009 28 3785 98 10.1038/emboj.2009.340 19927119
Bancaud A, Huet S, Daigle N, Mozziconacci J, Beaudouin J, Ellenberg J. Molecular crowding affects diffusion and binding of nuclear proteins in heterochromatin and reveals the fractal organization of chromatin. EMBO J. 2009;28:3785–98. 10.1038/emboj.2009.340.19927119 10.1038/emboj.2009.340
184. Verschure PJ van der Kraan I Manders EM Hoogstraten D Houtsmuller AB van Driel R Condensed chromatin domains in the mammalian nucleus are accessible to large macromolecules EMBO Rep 2003 4 861 6 10.1038/sj.embor.embor922 12947417
Verschure PJ, van der Kraan I, Manders EM, Hoogstraten D, Houtsmuller AB, van Driel R. Condensed chromatin domains in the mammalian nucleus are accessible to large macromolecules. EMBO Rep. 2003;4:861–6. 10.1038/sj.embor.embor922.12947417 10.1038/sj.embor.embor922
185. Minton AP How can biochemical reactions within cells differ from those in test tubes? J Cell Sci 2006 119 2863 9 10.1242/jcs.03063 16825427
Minton AP. How can biochemical reactions within cells differ from those in test tubes? J Cell Sci. 2006;119:2863–9. 10.1242/jcs.03063.16825427 10.1242/jcs.03063
186. Kribelbauer JF Rastogi C Bussemaker HJ Mann RS Low-Affinity binding sites and the transcription factor specificity Paradox in Eukaryotes Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2019 35 357 79 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100617-062719 31283382
Kribelbauer JF, Rastogi C, Bussemaker HJ, Mann RS. Low-Affinity binding sites and the transcription factor specificity Paradox in Eukaryotes. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2019;35:357–79. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100617-062719.31283382 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100617-062719
187. Phair RD Scaffidi P Elbi C Vecerova J Dey A Ozato K Brown DT Hager G Bustin M Misteli T Global nature of dynamic protein-chromatin interactions in vivo: three-dimensional genome scanning and dynamic interaction networks of chromatin proteins Mol Cell Biol 2004 24 6393 402 10.1128/MCB.24.14.6393-6402.2004 15226439
Phair RD, Scaffidi P, Elbi C, Vecerova J, Dey A, Ozato K, Brown DT, Hager G, Bustin M, Misteli T. Global nature of dynamic protein-chromatin interactions in vivo: three-dimensional genome scanning and dynamic interaction networks of chromatin proteins. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24:6393–402. 10.1128/MCB.24.14.6393-6402.2004.15226439 10.1128/MCB.24.14.6393-6402.2004
188. Dross N Spriet C Zwerger M Muller G Waldeck W Langowski J Mapping eGFP oligomer mobility in living cell nuclei PLoS ONE 2009 4 e5041 10.1371/journal.pone.0005041 19347038
Dross N, Spriet C, Zwerger M, Muller G, Waldeck W, Langowski J. Mapping eGFP oligomer mobility in living cell nuclei. PLoS ONE. 2009;4:e5041. 10.1371/journal.pone.0005041.19347038 10.1371/journal.pone.0005041
189. Andrulis ED Neiman AM Zappulla DC Sternglanz R Perinuclear localization of chromatin facilitates transcriptional silencing Nature 1998 394 592 5 10.1038/29100 9707122
Andrulis ED, Neiman AM, Zappulla DC, Sternglanz R. Perinuclear localization of chromatin facilitates transcriptional silencing. Nature. 1998;394:592–5. 10.1038/29100.9707122 10.1038/29100
190. Taddei A Van Houwe G Nagai S Erb I van Nimwegen E Gasser SM The functional importance of telomere clustering: global changes in gene expression result from SIR factor dispersion Genome Res 2009 19 611 25 10.1101/gr.083881.108 19179643
Taddei A, Van Houwe G, Nagai S, Erb I, van Nimwegen E, Gasser SM. The functional importance of telomere clustering: global changes in gene expression result from SIR factor dispersion. Genome Res. 2009;19:611–25. 10.1101/gr.083881.108.19179643 10.1101/gr.083881.108
191. Miele A, Bystricky K, Dekker J. (2009). Yeast silent mating type loci form heterochromatic clusters through silencer protein-dependent long-range interactions. PLoS Genet 5, e1000478.
192. Kirkland JG Kamakaka RT Long-range heterochromatin association is mediated by silencing and double-strand DNA break repair proteins J Cell Biol 2013 201 809 26 10.1083/jcb.201211105 23733345
Kirkland JG, Kamakaka RT. Long-range heterochromatin association is mediated by silencing and double-strand DNA break repair proteins. J Cell Biol. 2013;201:809–26. 10.1083/jcb.201211105.23733345 10.1083/jcb.201211105
193. McBryant SJ Krause C Woodcock CL Hansen JC The silent information regulator 3 protein, SIR3p, binds to chromatin fibers and assembles a hypercondensed chromatin architecture in the presence of salt Mol Cell Biol 2008 28 3563 72 10.1128/MCB.01389-07 18362167
McBryant SJ, Krause C, Woodcock CL, Hansen JC. The silent information regulator 3 protein, SIR3p, binds to chromatin fibers and assembles a hypercondensed chromatin architecture in the presence of salt. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28:3563–72. 10.1128/MCB.01389-07.18362167 10.1128/MCB.01389-07
194. Movilla Miangolarra A Saxton DS Yan Z Rine J Howard M Two-way feedback between chromatin compaction and histone modification state explains Saccharomyces cerevisiae heterochromatin bistability Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2024 121 e2403316121 10.1073/pnas.2403316121 38593082
Movilla Miangolarra A, Saxton DS, Yan Z, Rine J, Howard M. Two-way feedback between chromatin compaction and histone modification state explains Saccharomyces cerevisiae heterochromatin bistability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024;121:e2403316121. 10.1073/pnas.2403316121.38593082 10.1073/pnas.2403316121
195. Meister P Taddei A Building silent compartments at the nuclear periphery: a recurrent theme Curr Opin Genet Dev 2013 23 96 103 10.1016/j.gde.2012.12.001 23312840
Meister P, Taddei A. Building silent compartments at the nuclear periphery: a recurrent theme. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2013;23:96–103. 10.1016/j.gde.2012.12.001.23312840 10.1016/j.gde.2012.12.001
196. Vieux-Rochas M Fabre PJ Leleu M Duboule D Noordermeer D Clustering of mammalian hox genes with other H3K27me3 targets within an active nuclear domain Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015 112 4672 7 10.1073/pnas.1504783112 25825760
Vieux-Rochas M, Fabre PJ, Leleu M, Duboule D, Noordermeer D. Clustering of mammalian hox genes with other H3K27me3 targets within an active nuclear domain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:4672–7. 10.1073/pnas.1504783112.25825760 10.1073/pnas.1504783112
197. Bantignies F Roure V Comet I Leblanc B Schuettengruber B Bonnet J Tixier V Mas A Cavalli G Polycomb-dependent regulatory contacts between distant hox loci in Drosophila Cell 2011 144 214 26 10.1016/j.cell.2010.12.026 21241892
Bantignies F, Roure V, Comet I, Leblanc B, Schuettengruber B, Bonnet J, Tixier V, Mas A, Cavalli G. Polycomb-dependent regulatory contacts between distant hox loci in Drosophila. Cell. 2011;144:214–26. 10.1016/j.cell.2010.12.026.21241892 10.1016/j.cell.2010.12.026
198. Wani AH Boettiger AN Schorderet P Ergun A Munger C Sadreyev RI Zhuang X Kingston RE Francis NJ Chromatin topology is coupled to Polycomb group protein subnuclear organization Nat Commun 2016 7 10291 10.1038/ncomms10291 26759081
Wani AH, Boettiger AN, Schorderet P, Ergun A, Munger C, Sadreyev RI, Zhuang X, Kingston RE, Francis NJ. Chromatin topology is coupled to Polycomb group protein subnuclear organization. Nat Commun. 2016;7:10291. 10.1038/ncomms10291.26759081 10.1038/ncomms10291
199. Grimaud C Bantignies F Pal-Bhadra M Ghana P Bhadra U Cavalli G RNAi components are required for Nuclear clustering of Polycomb Group Response Elements Cell 2006 124 957 71 10.1016/j.cell.2006.01.036 16530043
Grimaud C, Bantignies F, Pal-Bhadra M, Ghana P, Bhadra U, Cavalli G. RNAi components are required for Nuclear clustering of Polycomb Group Response Elements. Cell. 2006;124:957–71.16530043 10.1016/j.cell.2006.01.036
200. Risca VI Denny SK Straight AF Greenleaf WJ Variable chromatin structure revealed by in situ spatially correlated DNA cleavage mapping Nature 2017 541 237 41 10.1038/nature20781 28024297
Risca VI, Denny SK, Straight AF, Greenleaf WJ. Variable chromatin structure revealed by in situ spatially correlated DNA cleavage mapping. Nature. 2017;541:237–41. 10.1038/nature20781.28024297 10.1038/nature20781
201. Plys AJ Davis CP Kim J Rizki G Keenen MM Marr SK Kingston RE Phase separation of polycomb-repressive complex 1 is governed by a charged disordered region of CBX2 Genes Dev 2019 33 799 813 10.1101/gad.326488.119 31171700
Plys AJ, Davis CP, Kim J, Rizki G, Keenen MM, Marr SK, Kingston RE. Phase separation of polycomb-repressive complex 1 is governed by a charged disordered region of CBX2. Genes Dev. 2019;33:799–813. 10.1101/gad.326488.119.31171700 10.1101/gad.326488.119
202. Keenen MM, Brown D, Brennan LD, Renger R, Khoo H, Carlson CR, Huang B, Grill SW, Narlikar GJ, Redding S. HP1 proteins compact DNA into mechanically and positionally stable phase separated domains. Elife. 2021;10. 10.7554/eLife.64563.
203. Yamada T Fischle W Sugiyama T Allis CD Grewal SI The nucleation and maintenance of heterochromatin by a histone deacetylase in fission yeast Mol Cell 2005 20 173 85 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.002 16246721
Yamada T, Fischle W, Sugiyama T, Allis CD, Grewal SI. The nucleation and maintenance of heterochromatin by a histone deacetylase in fission yeast. Mol Cell. 2005;20:173–85.16246721 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.002
204. Donze D Kamakaka RT RNA polymerase III and RNA polymerase II promoter complexes are heterochromatin barriers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Embo J 2001 20 520 31 10.1093/emboj/20.3.520 11157758
Donze D, Kamakaka RT. RNA polymerase III and RNA polymerase II promoter complexes are heterochromatin barriers in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Embo J. 2001;20:520–31.11157758 10.1093/emboj/20.3.520
205. Raab JR Kamakaka RT Insulators and promoters: closer than we think Nat Rev Genet 2010 11 439 46 10.1038/nrg2765 20442713
Raab JR, Kamakaka RT. Insulators and promoters: closer than we think. Nat Rev Genet. 2010;11:439–46. 10.1038/nrg2765.20442713 10.1038/nrg2765
206. Fourel G Lebrun E Gilson E Protosilencers as building blocks for heterochromatin BioEssays 2002 24 828 35 10.1002/bies.10139 12210519
Fourel G, Lebrun E, Gilson E. Protosilencers as building blocks for heterochromatin. BioEssays. 2002;24:828–35.12210519 10.1002/bies.10139
207. Pillus L Rine J Epigenetic inheritance of transcriptional states in S. Cerevisiae Cell 1989 59 637 47 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90009-3 2684414
Pillus L, Rine J. Epigenetic inheritance of transcriptional states in S. Cerevisiae. Cell. 1989;59:637–47.2684414 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90009-3
208. Aparicio OM Billington BL Gottschling DE Modifiers of position effect are shared between telomeric and silent mating-type loci in S. Cerevisiae Cell 1991 66 1279 87 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90049-5 1913809
Aparicio OM, Billington BL, Gottschling DE. Modifiers of position effect are shared between telomeric and silent mating-type loci in S. Cerevisiae. Cell. 1991;66:1279–87.1913809 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90049-5
209. Sussel L Vannier D Shore D Epigenetic switching of transcriptional states: cis- and trans-acting factors affecting establishment of silencing at the HMR locus in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mol Cell Biol 1993 13 3919 28 10.1128/mcb.13.7.3919-3928.1993 8321199
Sussel L, Vannier D, Shore D. Epigenetic switching of transcriptional states: cis- and trans-acting factors affecting establishment of silencing at the HMR locus in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol. 1993;13:3919–28. 10.1128/mcb.13.7.3919-3928.1993.8321199 10.1128/mcb.13.7.3919-3928.1993
210. Rossi FM Kringstein AM Spicher A Guicherit OM Blau HM Transcriptional control: rheostat converted to on/off switch Mol Cell 2000 6 723 8 10.1016/S1097-2765(00)00070-8 11030351
Rossi FM, Kringstein AM, Spicher A, Guicherit OM, Blau HM. Transcriptional control: rheostat converted to on/off switch. Mol Cell. 2000;6:723–8. S1097-2765(00)00070 – 8 [pii].11030351 10.1016/S1097-2765(00)00070-8
211. Dodd IB Micheelsen MA Sneppen K Thon G Theoretical analysis of epigenetic cell memory by nucleosome modification Cell 2007 129 813 22 10.1016/j.cell.2007.02.053 17512413
Dodd IB, Micheelsen MA, Sneppen K, Thon G. Theoretical analysis of epigenetic cell memory by nucleosome modification. Cell. 2007;129:813–22. 10.1016/j.cell.2007.02.053.17512413 10.1016/j.cell.2007.02.053
212. Sneppen K Dodd IB Cooperative stabilization of the SIR complex provides robust epigenetic memory in a model of SIR silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Epigenetics 2015 10 293 302 10.1080/15592294.2015.1017200 25830651
Sneppen K, Dodd IB. Cooperative stabilization of the SIR complex provides robust epigenetic memory in a model of SIR silencing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Epigenetics. 2015;10:293–302. 10.1080/15592294.2015.1017200.25830651 10.1080/15592294.2015.1017200
213. Symmons O Raj A What’s luck got to do with it: single cells, multiple fates, and Biological Nondeterminism Mol Cell 2016 62 788 802 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.05.023 27259209
Symmons O, Raj A. What’s luck got to do with it: single cells, multiple fates, and Biological Nondeterminism. Mol Cell. 2016;62:788–802. 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.05.023.27259209 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.05.023
214. Misteli T The Self-Organizing genome: principles of genome Archit Function Cell 2020 183 28 45 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.014
Misteli T. The Self-Organizing genome: principles of genome. Archit Function Cell. 2020;183:28–45. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.014.10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.014
215. Katan-Khaykovich Y Struhl K Heterochromatin formation involves changes in histone modifications over multiple cell generations EMBO J 2005 24 2138 49 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600692 15920479
Katan-Khaykovich Y, Struhl K. Heterochromatin formation involves changes in histone modifications over multiple cell generations. EMBO J. 2005;24:2138–49. 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600692.15920479 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600692
216. Thomas P Popovic N Grima R Phenotypic switching in gene regulatory networks Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 111 6994 9 10.1073/pnas.1400049111 24782538
Thomas P, Popovic N, Grima R. Phenotypic switching in gene regulatory networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111:6994–9. 10.1073/pnas.1400049111.24782538 10.1073/pnas.1400049111
217. Losick R Desplan C Stochasticity and cell fate Science 2008 320 65 8 10.1126/science.1147888 18388284
Losick R, Desplan C. Stochasticity and cell fate. Science. 2008;320:65–8. 10.1126/science.1147888.18388284 10.1126/science.1147888
218. Ferrell JE Jr Self-perpetuating states in signal transduction: positive feedback, double-negative feedback and bistability Curr Opin Cell Biol 2002 14 140 8 10.1016/s0955-0674(02)00314-9 11891111
Ferrell JE Jr. Self-perpetuating states in signal transduction: positive feedback, double-negative feedback and bistability. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2002;14:140–8. 10.1016/s0955-0674(02)00314-9.11891111 10.1016/s0955-0674(02)00314-9
219. Dayarian A, Sengupta AM. Titration and hysteresis in epigenetic chromatin silencing. Phys Biol. 2013;10. 10.1088/1478-3975/10/3/036005.
220. Nagaraj VH Mukhopadhyay S Dayarian A Sengupta AM Breaking an epigenetic chromatin switch: curious features of hysteresis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeric silencing PLoS ONE 2014 9 e113516 10.1371/journal.pone.0113516 25536038
Nagaraj VH, Mukhopadhyay S, Dayarian A, Sengupta AM. Breaking an epigenetic chromatin switch: curious features of hysteresis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae telomeric silencing. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e113516. 10.1371/journal.pone.0113516.25536038 10.1371/journal.pone.0113516
221. Riising EM Comet I Leblanc B Wu X Johansen JV Helin K Gene silencing triggers polycomb repressive complex 2 recruitment to CpG islands genome wide Mol Cell 2014 55 347 60 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.06.005 24999238
Riising EM, Comet I, Leblanc B, Wu X, Johansen JV, Helin K. Gene silencing triggers polycomb repressive complex 2 recruitment to CpG islands genome wide. Mol Cell. 2014;55:347–60. 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.06.005.24999238 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.06.005
222. Bintu L Yong J Antebi YE McCue K Kazuki Y Uno N Oshimura M Elowitz MB Dynamics of epigenetic regulation at the single-cell level Science 2016 351 720 4 10.1126/science.aab2956 26912859
Bintu L, Yong J, Antebi YE, McCue K, Kazuki Y, Uno N, Oshimura M, Elowitz MB. Dynamics of epigenetic regulation at the single-cell level. Science. 2016;351:720–4. 10.1126/science.aab2956.26912859 10.1126/science.aab2956
223. Lensch S, Herschl MH, Ludwig CH, Sinha J, Hinks MM, Mukund A, Fujimori T, Bintu L. (2022). Dynamic spreading of chromatin-mediated gene silencing and reactivation between neighboring genes in single cells. Elife 11. 10.7554/eLife.75115
224. Dodson AE Rine J Heritable capture of heterochromatin dynamics in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Elife 2015 4 e05007 10.7554/eLife.05007 25581000
Dodson AE, Rine J. Heritable capture of heterochromatin dynamics in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Elife. 2015;4:e05007. 10.7554/eLife.05007.25581000 10.7554/eLife.05007
225. Mano Y Kobayashi TJ Nakayama J Uchida H Oki M Single cell visualization of yeast gene expression shows correlation of epigenetic switching between multiple heterochromatic regions through multiple generations PLoS Biol 2013 11 e1001601 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001601 23843746
Mano Y, Kobayashi TJ, Nakayama J, Uchida H, Oki M. Single cell visualization of yeast gene expression shows correlation of epigenetic switching between multiple heterochromatic regions through multiple generations. PLoS Biol. 2013;11:e1001601. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001601.23843746 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001601
