
==== Front
Genetics
Genetics
genetics
Genetics
0016-6731
1943-2631
Oxford University Press US

37279920
10.1093/genetics/iyad108
iyad108
Investigation
Gene Expression
Fungal Genetics and Genomics
AcademicSubjects/SCI01180
AcademicSubjects/SCI01140
Genetics/132
A dual, catalytic role for the fission yeast Ccr4-Not complex in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading
Challal Drice Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell (I2BC), Gif-sur-Yvette 91198, France

Menant Alexandra Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell (I2BC), Gif-sur-Yvette 91198, France

Goksal Can Department of Microbiology & Immunology, George Williams Hooper Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA

Leroy Estelle Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell (I2BC), Gif-sur-Yvette 91198, France

Al-Sady Bassem Department of Microbiology & Immunology, George Williams Hooper Foundation, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA

Rougemaille Mathieu Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, Institute for Integrative Biology of the Cell (I2BC), Gif-sur-Yvette 91198, France

Rusche L Editor
Corresponding author: mathieu.rougemaille@i2bc.paris-saclay.fr
Conflicts of interest The author(s) declare no conflict of interest.

8 2023
06 6 2023
06 6 2023
224 4 iyad10811 4 2023
31 5 2023
20 6 2023
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Genetics Society of America.
2023
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Heterochromatic gene silencing relies on combinatorial control by specific histone modifications, the occurrence of transcription, and/or RNA degradation. Once nucleated, heterochromatin propagates within defined chromosomal regions and is maintained throughout cell divisions to warrant proper genome expression and integrity. In the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, the Ccr4-Not complex partakes in gene silencing, but its relative contribution to distinct heterochromatin domains and its role in nucleation versus spreading have remained elusive. Here, we unveil major functions for Ccr4-Not in silencing and heterochromatin spreading at the mating type locus and subtelomeres. Mutations of the catalytic subunits Caf1 or Mot2, involved in RNA deadenylation and protein ubiquitinylation, respectively, result in impaired propagation of H3K9me3 and massive accumulation of nucleation-distal heterochromatic transcripts. Both silencing and spreading defects are suppressed upon disruption of the heterochromatin antagonizing factor Epe1. Overall, our results position the Ccr4-Not complex as a critical, dual regulator of heterochromatic gene silencing and spreading.

heterochromatic gene silencing
H3K9me3 propagation
Ccr4-Not complex
jumonji protein Epe1
French Ministry of Research National Science Foundation 10.13039/100000001 2113319 National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002 1R35GM141888 P30 DK063720 Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique the Fondation ARC ARCPJA2021060003978 Agence Nationale de la Recherche 10.13039/501100001665 ANR-16-CE12-0031 ANR-21-CE12-0029 Flow Cytometry UCSF Flow Cytometry Core UCSF Diabetes Center 10.13039/100008030
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Eukaryotic genomes organize into gene-rich, euchromatic regions, and transcriptionally repressed heterochromatin domains. The assembly, maintenance, and inheritance of heterochromatin are essential for major biological processes, including gene expression, chromosome segregation, genome stability, and cell fate (Allshire and Madhani 2018; Janssen et al. 2018). In the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe, heterochromatin assembles at defined chromosomal regions, including pericentromeric repeats, subtelomeric regions, and the silent mating type locus. These domains are enriched in nucleosomes methylated on histone H3 lysine 9 (H3K9me), a modification catalyzed by the sole Suv39 homolog Clr4 and bound by proteins of the HP1 family (Allshire and Madhani 2018). Such structural components constitute a platform for the recruitment of additional silencing and heterochromatin assembly complexes, including histone-remodeling and modifying enzymes as well as the RNA interference (RNAi) machinery (Grewal 2010; Reyes-Turcu and Grewal 2012; Holoch and Moazed 2015; Martienssen and Moazed 2015). These different effectors tightly cooperate in intricate, often interdependent regulatory pathways to mediate transcriptional (TGS) and co- or cis post-transcriptional (C/cis-PTGS) gene silencing, which ultimately restrict RNA polymerase II (RNAPII) accessibility and the accumulation of heterochromatic transcripts, respectively. Heterochromatin also engages factors endowed with antisilencing functions, such as the H3K9me antagonizing protein Epe1 (Ayoub et al. 2003; Zofall and Grewal 2006; Isaac et al. 2007; Trewick et al. 2007; Wang et al. 2013; Garcia et al. 2015), and the dynamic balance between opposite activities is believed to prevent spreading within adjacent euchromatin and maintain heterochromatin throughout cell divisions (Chen et al. 2008; Audergon et al. 2015; Ragunathan et al. 2015; Wang and Moazed 2017; Yu et al. 2018).

Despite commonalities in core components of the silencing machinery, the mechanisms that drive heterochromatin-based silencing substantially differ between loci: while RNAi is essential at pericentromeres, it has little impact at telomeres and the mating type locus due to functional redundancy with RNAi-independent mechanisms. The shelterin complex and the C-AMP Response Element-Binding (CREB)-family proteins Atf1/Pcr1 bind to specific cis-acting DNA sequences and independently recruit Clr4 to nucleate heterochromatin at these regions (Thon et al. 1999; Jia et al. 2004; Kanoh et al. 2005; Yamada et al. 2005; Wang et al. 2016; Wang and Moazed 2017; van Emden et al. 2019; Nickels et al. 2022). The intrinsic capacities of Clr4 to both recognize H3K9me and methylate adjacent nucleosomes define the molecular basis of a “read-write” mechanism by which heterochromatin subsequently propagates throughout entire domains (Zhang et al. 2008; Al-Sady et al. 2013; Obersriebnig et al. 2016; Nickels et al. 2021). Heterochromatin spreading from nucleation sites requires the Clr4-mediated transition from H3K9me2 to H3K9me3, which is important for the switch to TGS (Zhang et al. 2008; Al-Sady et al. 2013; Jih et al. 2017). Despite these progresses, our understanding of the mechanisms underlying heterochromatin propagation is still far from being complete.

Beyond RNAi, other RNA processing/degradation machineries contribute to heterochromatic gene silencing (Bühler et al. 2007; Wang et al. 2008; Reyes-Turcu et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2011; Brönner et al. 2017). Among these is the conserved, multifunctional Ccr4-Not complex, which contains two catalytic modules: one formed by the RNA deadenylases Ccr4 and Caf1 and another comprising the E3 ubiquitin ligase subunit Mot2/Not4 (Miller and Reese 2012; Wahle and Winkler 2013; Collart 2016; Ukleja et al. 2016). Previous studies in S. pombe showed that Ccr4-Not mediates the deposition of H3K9me2 at rDNA repeats, subtelomeric regions, and a subset of meiotic genes (Cotobal et al. 2015; Sugiyama et al. 2016). The complex was also found to act redundantly with the RNAi machinery to target chromatin-bound RNAs for degradation and preserve heterochromatin integrity (Brönner et al. 2017). Recently, Ccr4-Not was involved in the control of transcriptional efficiency by limiting the levels of RNAPII-associated heterochromatic transcripts (Monteagudo-Mesas et al. 2022). Though, the precise function and contribution of Ccr4-Not to gene silencing, heterochromatin assembly, and spreading remain unclear.

Here, we demonstrate that Ccr4-Not on its own is crucial for heterochromatic gene silencing and spreading. Mechanistically, the deadenylation and ubiquitinylation activities of the complex independently mediate gene repression, maintain heterochromatin integrity and ensure its efficient propagation within the mating type locus and at subtelomeres. We further show that these functions of the complex are antagonized by the jumonji protein Epe1. Together, our findings unveil a dual, catalytic role for Ccr4-Not in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading, thereby highlighting its biological relevance to preserving genome expression and integrity.

Materials and methods

Strains, media, and plasmids

The S. pombe strains used in this study are listed in Supplementary Table 1. Strains were generated by transformation following a lithium acetate-based method or by random spore analysis (mating and sporulation on Malt Extract) using a complete medium (YE Broth, Formedium, #PMC0105) supplemented with appropriate antibiotics. Experiments were performed in 1X YE supplemented with 150 mg/L of adenine (ADE, Sigma, #A2786), L-histidine (Sigma, #H8000), L-lysine (Sigma, #L5501), L-leucine (LEU, Sigma, #L8000), and uracil (URA, Sigma, #U750) (YES), while plasmids-containing strains were grown in 1X EMM-LEU-URA minimal medium (EMM-LEU-URA Broth, Formedium, #PMD0810) supplemented with uracil (Sigma, #U750) (EMM-LEU). For silencing assays, cells were grown until midlog phase and plated on both nonselective (YES or EMM-LEU) and selective (YES+5FOA, EMM-LEU+5FOA or YES low ADE) media at an initial OD = 0.2–0.3 followed by 5-fold serial dilutions. Pictures were taken after 3–4 days of growth at 30°C.

The plasmids used for gene cloning/editing are listed in Supplementary Table 2. To construct strains expressing tagged versions of wt or mutant Epe1 from its genomic locus, we first deleted the ORF with a cassette containing the hygromycin resistance marker (hphRMX) fused to the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-encoding gene (HSV-TK) from the pFA6a-HyTkAX vector (Addgene plasmid #73898; http://n2t.net/addgene:73898; RRID:Addgene_73898) (Amelina et al. 2016). The resulting hphR and TK-expressing epe1Δ strain were then transformed with a PCR product of interest (i.e. Epe1-TAP or Epe1H297A-TAP) carrying homology with the promoter and terminator regions. Positive integrants were selected in the presence of 5-fluoro-2′-desoxyuridine, which counter-selects cells expressing TK and became again hygromycin-sensitive due to cassette pop-out.

RNA extraction

Total RNAs were extracted from 4 mL of yeast cells at OD = 0.8–1.0. Following centrifugation, cells were washed in water and frozen in liquid nitrogen. Cell pellets were resuspended in 1 volume of TES buffer (10 mM Tris–HCl pH7.5, 5 mM EDTA, 1% SDS) and 1 volume of acid phenol solution pH4.3 (Sigma, #P4682), and incubated for 1 h at 65°C in a thermomixer with shaking. After centrifugation, the aqueous phase was recovered and 1 volume of chloroform (ThermoFisher Scientific, #383760010) was added. Samples were vortexed and centrifugated followed by ethanol precipitation in the presence of 200 mM of lithium acetate. Pellets were resuspended in water and treated with DNAse (Ambion, #AM1906). RNA concentrations were measured with a Nanodrop.

Reverse transcription and real-time PCR (RT-qPCR)

Two micrograms of DNAse-treated RNAs were denatured at 65°C for 5 min in the presence of strand-specific primers or a mix of random hexamers (ThermoFisher Scientific, #SO142) and oligodT. Reactions were carried out with 100 units of maxima reverse transcriptase (ThermoFisher Scientific, #EP0743) at 50°C for 30 min. The enzyme was then denatured at 85°C for 5 min, and reactions were diluted to a 1:10 ratio. Each experiment included negative controls without reverse transcriptase. Samples were quantified by qPCR with SYBR Green Master Mix and a LightCycler LC480 apparatus (Roche). Measurements were statistically compared using two-tailed t-tests with the following P-value cutoffs for significance: 0.05 > * > 0.01; 0.01 > ** > 0.001; *** < 0.001. Oligonucleotides used in qPCR reactions are listed in Supplementary Table 3.

Chromatin immunoprecipitation and real-time PCR (ChIP-qPCR)

Forty- to fifty-milliliter yeast cultures were grown in an appropriate medium until OD = 0.8–1.0. Crosslinking was performed by adding 1% formaldehyde (Sigma, #F8775) for 20 min at 30°C on the shaker and the reaction was quenched with 250 mM glycine (Sigma, #G7126) for 5 min at room temperature. Cells were washed with 1X ice-cold PBS, harvested by centrifugation, and frozen in liquid nitrogen. Pellets were resuspended in 500 µL 150 mM FA buffer (50 mM Hepes-KOH pH7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% Triton X-100, 0.1% Na deoxycholate) in 2 mL screw-cap tubes. One milliliter of ice-cold, acid-washed glass beads (Sigma, #G8772) was added, and cells were lysed by six cycles of 40 s at 6,000 rpm using a FastPrep-24 5G apparatus (MP). Following centrifugation, pellets were resuspended in 150 mM FA buffer and sonicated for six cycles of 30 s at 40% amplitude using a tip probe VibraCell sonifier (Bioblock Scientific). Chromatin extracts were then cleared by centrifugation for 15 min at 14,000 rpm at 4°C. One hundred microliters were set aside as the input control and 200–400 µL aliquots were typically used for immunoprecipitations. One- to two microliters antibodies against total H3 (Abcam, ab1791), H3K9me2 (Abcam, ab1220), and H3K9me3 (Abcam, ab8898) were added to the lysates and samples were incubated at 4°C on a wheel for 2 h or overnight. Four microliters of prewashed Protein-A or Protein-G Dynabeads (Invitrogen, #10001D or #10003D) were next added and samples were incubated for an additional 2 h at 4°C. For immunoprecipitation of TAP or HTP-tagged proteins (Chp1-TAP, Rpb1-HTP, and Epe1-TAP), 4 µL of prewashed rabbit IgG-conjugated M-270 Epoxy Dynabeads (Invitrogen, #14311D) were added and lysates were incubated on a wheel for 1 h at 4°C. Magnetic beads were then washed at room temperature twice with 150 mM FA buffer, twice with 500 mM FA buffer, and once with wash buffer (10 mM Tris–HCl pH8, 0.25 M LiCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% NP-40, 0,5% Na deoxycholate) and once with TE buffer (10 mM Tris–HCl pH8, 1 mM EDTA). DNA was then eluted with 100 µL ChIP Elution buffer (50 mM Tris pH7.5, 10 mM EDTA, 1% SDS) for 20 min at 80°C in a Thermomixer set to 1,400 rpm. Twenty micrograms of proteinase K (Euromedex, #09-911) were added to the input and IP samples for 30 min at 37°C before overnight decrosslinking at 65°C. The following day, 1 µL RNAseA/T1 mix (Thermo Scientific, #EN0551) was added for 30 min at 37°C and DNA was purified using NucleoSpin Gel and PCR Clean-Up columns (Macherey-Nagel, #740609.250) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Samples were quantified by qPCR with SYBR Green Master Mix and a LightCycler LC480 apparatus (Roche). Measurements were statistically compared using two-tailed t-tests with the following P-value cutoffs for significance: 0.05 > * > 0.01; 0.01 > ** > 0.001; *** < 0.001. Oligonucleotides used in qPCR reactions are listed in Supplementary Table 3.

Total protein analyses

Total proteins were extracted from cell pellets corresponding to 2–5 ODs, as described in (Simonetti et al. 2017). Cell lysis was performed on ice using 0.3 M NaOH and 1% beta-mercaptoethanol before protein precipitation with trichloroacetic acid (TCA) (7% final). Following full-speed centrifugation, pellets were resuspended in HU loading buffer and heat-denaturated at 70°C. Soluble fractions were recovered, and samples were analyzed by standard immunoblotting procedures using 1:3,000 peroxydase-conjugated antiperoxydase (PAP, to detect protein-A-tagged proteins) (Sigma, #P1291, RRID:AB_1079562), 1:3,000 monoclonal anti-FLAG antibody (Sigma, #F3165, RRID:AB_259529), 1:3,000 anti-CDC2 antibody (Abcam, #ab5467, RRID:AB_2074778), 1:1,000 anti-GFP antibody (Roche, #11814460001, RRID: AB_390913) and 1:5,000 goat antimouse IgG-HRP (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, #sc-2005, RRID:AB_631736). Detection was done with SuperSignal West Pico Chemiluminescent Substrate (ThermoFisher Scientific, #34080), ECL Select reagent (GE Healthcare, #RPN2235), and a Vilber Lourmat Fusion Fx7 imager or a ChemiDoc Touch Imaging System (BIORAD).

Northern blotting

Ten micrograms of RNAs were separated on a 1.2% agarose gel and transferred overnight by capillarity on a nylon membrane (GE Healthcare, #RPN203B). RNAs were then UV-crosslinked to the membrane using a Stratalinker apparatus. A radiolabeled PCR probe was prepared by random priming (GE Healthcare, Megaprime kit) using α-P32 dCTP and incubated with the membrane in commercial buffer (Ambion, UltraHyb). Following washes, the membrane was exposed for 24 h and revelation was performed using a Typhoon phosphoimager. Oligonucleotides used to generate the probe are listed in Supplementary Table 3.

Flow cytometry data collection and normalization for validation

Cells were struck out in YES, grown in liquid YES overnight to saturation, and then diluted 1:15 before further growth in liquid YES up to midlog phase. Flow analysis was performed on an LSR Fortessa X50 (BD Biosciences) and color compensation, analysis, and plotting were performed as described previously (Greenstein et al. 2022).

Results

The Ccr4-Not complex mediates heterochromatic gene silencing at the mating type locus

To assess the role of the Ccr4-Not complex in heterochromatic gene silencing, we generated strains carrying the ura4+ reporter gene inserted at pericentromeric repeats (otr1R::ura4+), subtelomeric regions (tel2L::ura4+) or the silent mating type cassette (mat3M::ura4+) in which nonessential subunits (all but the scaffolding subunit Not1) were deleted (Fig. 1, a and b). Gene silencing was probed by growing cells in the presence of 5FOA, which counter-selects those expressing ura4+, and by measuring steady-state ura4+ mRNA levels in RT-qPCR assays. A strain lacking the H3K9 methyltransferase Clr4, defective for silencing at all heterochromatic domains, was assayed in parallel as an internal control. As shown in Fig. 1, c and d, we observed a minor defect in pericentromeric silencing in the caf1Δ mutant, while mot2Δ cells did not accumulate ura4+ transcripts despite a partial sensitivity to 5FOA. These two mutants also exhibited a significant increase in ura4+ mRNA levels when expressed from subtelomeres, although this was considerably lower than that of cells lacking Clr4 (about 15–20-fold compared to 500-fold) (Fig. 1, e and f). Consistent with these results and previous observations (Brönner et al. 2017; Monteagudo-Mesas et al. 2022), endogenous dg pericentromeric repeats and subtelomeric tlh1+ sequences were not or only marginally increased in caf1Δ and mot2Δ mutants (Supplementary Fig. 1a), arguing against a major contribution of the Ccr4-Not complex per se at these loci.

Fig. 1. The Ccr4-Not complex mediates heterochromatic gene silencing at the mating type locus. a) Scheme of the different heterochromatin domains with the position of the ura4+ reporter gene. Red rectangles define heterochromatin regions. b) Scheme illustrating the different subunits of the core Ccr4-Not complex. c, e and g) 5-fold serial diluted silencing assays using the ura4+ reporter gene inserted at pericentromeric repeats (otr1R::ura4+), subtelomeric regions (tel2L::ura4+), and the mating type locus (mat3M::ura4+). Cells of the indicated genotypes were plated on both nonselective (YES) and 5FOA-containing (YES+5FOA) media. Defects in heterochromatic gene silencing result in sensitivity to FOA, which counter-selects cells expressing ura4+. d, f and h) RT-qPCR analyses of ura4+ transcripts (mean ± SD; n = 3; normalized to act1+; relative to wt) produced from the different heterochromatic loci in cells of the indicated genetic background. Two-tailed Student's t-tests were used to calculate P-values. Individual data points are represented by black circles.

Strikingly, however, silencing at the mating type locus was completely abolished in the absence of Caf1 and Mot2, similar to clr4Δ cells, as revealed by the lack of cell growth on 5FOA-containing medium and the marked accumulation of ura4+ transcripts (Fig. 1, g and h). These results were corroborated using strains carrying the ade6+ or gfp+ reporter genes instead of ura4+ (i.e. mat3M::ade6+ and mat3M::gfp+). Indeed, while pink/red colonies were observed for the wt strain on adenine-limiting medium, reflecting ade6+ silencing, caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells formed white colonies, like the clr4Δ mutant, indicative of derepressed ade6+ expression (Supplementary Fig. 1b). Steady-state gfp+ mRNA levels were also strongly increased in these mutants, which correlated with the accumulation of the Gfp protein itself, supporting that heterochromatic transcripts are efficiently exported and translated in these different genetic backgrounds (Supplementary Fig. 1, c and d). We also detected intermediate phenotypes for the ccr4Δ mutant, pointing to a partial contribution of this RNA deadenylase (Fig. 1, g and h; Supplementary Fig. 1, b–d). Moreover, endogenous matMc transcripts strongly accumulated in matP cells lacking Caf1 and Mot2, confirming the requirement for these factors in suppressing the expression of heterochromatic RNAs produced from the mating type locus (Supplementary Fig. 1e). We concluded from these experiments that the RNA deadenylase Caf1 and the E3 ubiquitin ligase Mot2 subunits of the Ccr4-Not complex are major regulators of heterochromatic gene silencing at the mating type locus.

Previous studies, including ours, showed that the Ccr4-Not complex tightly associates with the RNA-binding protein Mmi1 and its partner Erh1 to promote facultative heterochromatin assembly at meiotic genes and rDNA silencing (Cotobal et al. 2015; Sugiyama et al. 2016; Ukleja et al. 2016; Simonetti et al. 2017; Xie et al. 2019; Hazra et al. 2020). We investigated whether these factors also contribute to gene silencing at the mating type locus and found that they were not required (Supplementary Fig. 1, f and g). Hence, Ccr4-Not acts independently of Mmi1 and Erh1.

The Ccr4-Not complex impacts heterochromatin assembly at the mating type locus

We next sought to determine whether defective silencing at the mating type locus in Ccr4-Not mutants is accompanied by an alteration in heterochromatin structural components. ChIP experiments revealed that the absence of Caf1 only modestly impacts H3K9me2 at mat3M::ura4+, while the mot2Δ mutant exhibited a pronounced decrease, albeit lower than that of clr4Δ cells (Fig. 2a). We also assessed H3K9me3 levels and observed a further reduction in both caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells when compared to the wt strain (Fig. 2b). Importantly, these defects were restricted to the mat3M locus, as H3K9me2/3 levels at pericentromeric dg repeat and subtelomeric tlh1+ sequences remained similar to those detected in wt cells, with the exception of a small H3K9me2 decrease at dg in the absence of Mot2 (Fig. 2, a and b). Total H3 levels were similar in all strains (Supplementary Fig. 2a), excluding an indirect effect linked to nucleosome instability. Since H3K9me2/3 constitutes a docking site for proteins of the HP1 family, we next analyzed the recruitment of the chromodomain-containing RNA-Induced Transcriptional Silencing complex (RITS) subunit Chp1 involved in RNAi (Noma et al. 2004; Verdel et al. 2004). Following a similar trend, Chp1 occupancy was reduced specifically at mat3M::ura4+ in Ccr4-Not mutants (Fig. 2c). Together, our results unveil a role for Caf1 and Mot2 in heterochromatin assembly, which correlates with their requirement for gene silencing at the mating type locus (Fig. 1, g and h). They further suggest that both factors operate differentially, Mot2 being more critical for heterochromatin integrity.

Fig. 2. The Ccr4-Not complex impacts heterochromatin assembly at the mating type locus. a and d) ChIP-qPCR analyses (% input; mean ± SD; n = 4) of the indicated histone modifications and tagged proteins in mat3M::ura4+ strains. Shown are the enrichments of ura4+, dg pericentromeric repeats, the tlh1+ subtelomeric locus, and act1+ upon immunoprecipitation with H3K9me2 a), H3K9me3 b) antibodies or rabbit IgG c and d). Immunoprecipitations without antibodies (no Ab) or from untagged strains were performed to determine background levels. In d) “no Ab” values represent the mean of two independent analyses (n = 2). Two-tailed Student's t-tests were used to calculate P-values. Individual data points are represented by black circles.

Clr4-mediated heterochromatin assembly at centromeres and telomeres is essential to limit RNAPII accessibility and hence trigger efficient TGS, whereas its impact on the transcription machinery at the mating type locus is moderate, reflecting a predominance of C/cis-PTGS (Bühler et al. 2007). In agreement with these notions, we found that RNAPII strongly accumulated at dg and tlh1+ sequences but only modestly at mat3M::ura4+ in the absence of Clr4 (Fig. 2d). In caf1Δ and mot2Δ mutants, RNAPII levels increased similarly at mat3M but only marginally at pericentromeric or subtelomeric loci when compared to clr4Δ cells (Fig. 2d), consistent with the relative impact of Ccr4-Not in silencing/heterochromatin formation at these different regions. We also assessed whether Caf1 and Mot2 themselves are recruited to the mating type locus but failed to detect a significant enrichment, as opposed to the RITS component Chp1 (Supplementary Fig. 2b). However, Caf1 binds to chromatin-associated RNAs (Brönner et al. 2017), including at the mating type locus, and the Ccr4 subunit physically interacts with Chp1 (Cotobal et al. 2015), which together supports a direct role for Ccr4-Not in heterochromatic gene silencing.

The Ccr4-Not subunits Caf1 and Mot2 regulate heterochromatin spreading

The transition from H3K9me2 to H3K9me3 contributes to heterochromatin spreading from nucleation sites (Al-Sady et al. 2013; Jih et al. 2017). Our findings that caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells predominantly affect H3K9me3 at mat3M::ura4+ prompted us to examine their potential impact on heterochromatin spreading. Intriguingly, ChIP experiments revealed a gradual decrease of H3K9me3 in Ccr4-Not mutants relative to the wt strain, from the cenH nucleation center up to inverted repeats at the right border (IR-R) of the mating type locus (Fig. 3a). Consistent with the above results, the effect was also more prominent in the absence of Mot2.

Fig. 3. The Ccr4-Not subunits Caf1 and Mot2 regulate heterochromatin spreading. a) H3K9me3 ChIP-qPCR analyses (% input; mean ± SD; n = 5) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. Numbers correspond to the different primer pairs used in qPCR reactions and whose localization is indicated on the scheme below the graph. Immunoprecipitations without antibodies (no Ab) were performed to determine background levels. Two-tailed Student's t-tests were used to calculate P-values. Individual data points are represented by black circles. b) Scheme depicting the heterochromatin spreading sensor with the relative positions of the “green,” “orange,” and “red” reporters. c–f) Two-dimensional-density square bin plots showing the red-normalized green and orange fluorescence for wt c), clr4Δ d), caf1Δ e), and mot2Δ f) REIIImut cells grown at 32°C. A density bar represents the fraction of the most dense bin. One representative isolate is shown for each background.

To substantiate these findings, we used our previously described fluorescent reporter-based, single-cell spreading sensor assay (Greenstein et al. 2018, 2020), whereby three different fluorescent protein-coding genes allow quantitative measurements of gene expression at nucleation-proximal (“green”) and -distal (“orange”) heterochromatin sites, as well as at a euchromatic locus (“red”) for signal normalization purposes (Fig. 3b). Because heterochromatin at the mating type locus can nucleate from two distinct regulatory DNA elements (i.e. cenH and REIII), we analyzed strains in which the Atf1/Pcr1-binding sites within REIII are mutated (REIIImut), thereby allowing to record heterochromatin spreading (“orange”) from the sole cenH nucleation center (“green”) (Fig. 3b).

Flow cytometry analyses revealed that wt REIIImut cells successfully nucleated heterochromatin (“green”OFF), which efficiently spread to the distal reporter (“orange”OFF), as indicated by the strong enrichment of cell populations in the bottom left part of the 2D density square bin plot (Fig. 3c). A minor fraction of cells displayed some “orange” signal though, reflecting a certain degree of stochasticity in the spreading process (Greenstein et al. 2018, 2022). Upon complete loss of heterochromatin and silencing (i.e. in clr4Δ cells), populations concentrated along the diagonal, in the upper right part of the plot, consistent with both reporters being fully derepressed (“green”ON and “orange”ON) (Fig. 3d). Remarkably, Ccr4-Not mutants exhibited radically different patterns, with a strong bias for “orange” versus “green” fluorescence overall (Fig. 3, e and f; Supplementary Fig. 3, a–d). In the absence of Caf1, the majority of cells distributed within a broad range of high “orange” and intermediate “green” signals (Fig. 3e; Supplementary Fig. 3, a and b). This indicates that the deadenylase strongly suppresses the expression of the nucleation-distal reporter while only partially contributing to the silencing of the proximal locus. Of note, we reproducibly observed a subpopulation in the bottom left part of the plot, indicating that some cells maintained both reporters in the repressed state. Cells lacking Mot2 showed instead a narrow, vertical distribution of fluorescence, covering a large range of high “orange” intensities associated with low “green” signals (Fig. 3f; Supplementary Fig. 3, c and d). Such a pattern is reminiscent of what was previously observed for bona fide regulators of heterochromatin spreading (Greenstein et al. 2022). Consistent with these results, cenH proximal-transcripts were only partially increased in Ccr4-Not mutants when compared to clr4Δ cells (Supplementary Fig. 3e), in striking contrast to distal matMc RNAs (Supplementary Fig. 1e).

Because the pericentromeric and subtelomeric reporter strains used in this study (i.e. otr1R::ura4+ and tel2L::ura4+; Fig. 1, c–f) carry the ura4+ gene in proximity to nucleation sites (i.e. dg and tlh1+ sequences, respectively), we next investigated heterochromatin propagation at these regions by ChIP. While H3K9me3 distribution remained similar to wt cells at pericentromeres (Supplementary Fig. 4a), caf1Δ and mot2Δ mutants exhibited lower levels away from the subtelomeric tlh1+ gene (Supplementary Fig. 4b), consistent with former observations for H3K9me2 (Cotobal et al. 2015; Brönner et al. 2017). Expression analyses further revealed that Caf1 suppresses distal subtelomeric transcripts similar to Clr4 (Supplementary Fig. 4c, see primer pairs 4 and 5), while its role in the repression of proximal loci was in comparison much less pronounced (Supplementary Fig. 4c, see primer pairs 1 and 2). The contribution of Mot2 followed a similar tendency, although the most distal genes were instead downregulated in its absence, likely due to additional effects impairing the expression of these loci (Supplementary Fig. 4c).

Overall, our data establish critical, yet different roles for Caf1 and Mot2 in the propagation of H3K9me3 and the repression of nucleation-distal transcripts, pointing to key contributions of Ccr4-Not to heterochromatin spreading at the mating type locus and subtelomeres.

Importance of Caf1 and Mot2 catalytic activities in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading

To determine the mechanisms by which Caf1 and Mot2 mediate heterochromatic gene silencing and spreading, we assessed the impact of mutants defective for their RNA deadenylation and E3 ubiquitin ligase activities, which are carried by Ribonuclease H superfamily and RING-type domains respectively (Fig. 4a).

Fig. 4. Importance of Caf1 and Mot2 catalytic activities in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading. a) Domain organization of Caf1 and Mot2 proteins. b) 5-fold serial diluted silencing assay using the ura4+ reporter gene inserted at the mating type locus (mat3M::ura4+). Cells of the indicated genotypes were plated on both nonselective (EMM-LEU) and 5FOA-containing (EMM-LEU+5FOA) media. c) RT-qPCR analyses of ura4+ transcripts (mean ± SD; n = 3; normalized to act1+; relative to wt pREP41) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. d and e) H3K9me2 and H3K9me3 ChIP-qPCR analyses (% input; mean ± SD; n = 4 or 3) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. Immunoprecipitations without antibodies (no Ab) were performed to determine background levels. In e) numbers correspond to the different primer pairs used in qPCR reactions and whose localization is indicated on the scheme below the graph. c–e) Two-tailed Student's t-tests were used to calculate P-values. Individual data points are represented by black circles.

We first expressed a plasmid-borne, 2xFLAG-tagged version of Caf1D53A mutant, previously shown to impair RNA deadenylation (Stowell et al. 2016), in caf1Δ mat3M::ura4+ cells (Supplementary Fig. 5a). Although we observed only a mild growth defect in the presence of 5FOA (Fig. 4b), ura4+ mRNA levels were significantly increased, yet not as pronounced as caf1+ deletion (Fig. 4c). This likely reflects the contribution of the second deadenylase Ccr4 (Fig. 1h; Supplementary Fig. 1, b–d) (Brönner et al. 2017), which is physically tethered to the complex by Caf1 (Basquin et al. 2012) and hence does not exert its function in caf1Δ cells. Of note, a plasmid-borne, 2xFLAG-tagged wild type Caf1, did not allow us to fully restored growth on 5FOA nor low levels of ura4+ transcripts in caf1Δ cells (Fig. 4, b and c), indicating that ectopic expression of Caf1 also partially inhibits silencing. Overall, these results indicate that the RNA deadenylation activity of Caf1 partially contributes to heterochromatic gene silencing.

Next, we assessed the requirement for Mot2 catalytic activity following the same strategy. Expression of a plasmid-borne Mot2RINGΔ mutant in otherwise mot2Δ cells completely abolished ura4+ silencing, as determined by the lack of growth in the presence of 5FOA and RT-qPCR analyses (Supplementary Fig. 5, b and c). We further studied mutants in which key cysteine residues in the RING domain were substituted by alanine (Mot2C37A, Mot2C45A) (Simonetti et al. 2017) and similarly observed the absence of growth on 5FOA-containing medium as well as a strong accumulation of ura4+ mRNAs, akin to the mot2Δ strain (Fig. 4, b and c). Importantly, these phenotypes did not result from a lowered expression of the mutant proteins (Supplementary Fig. 5d). Since the absence of Mot2 strongly impairs heterochromatin assembly at the mating type locus (Fig. 2, a and b), we also investigated the impact of Mot2C37A on H3K9me at this region. ChIP analyses revealed a marked decrease in both H3K9me2 and H3K9me3 levels at mat3M::ura4+, similar to mot2Δ cells (Fig. 4d). We further assessed the distribution of H3K9me3 from the cenH nucleation center to inverted repeats and reproducibly observed a progressive decrease (Fig. 4e), strongly suggesting a defect in the spreading process. Hence, we concluded that the E3 ubiquitin ligase activity of Mot2 has a major role in gene silencing, heterochromatin assembly, and spreading.

The antisilencing factor Epe1 opposes Ccr4-Not in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading

Previous studies showed that deletion of the JmjC domain-containing protein Epe1 suppresses silencing defects observed in mutants of the heterochromatin machinery (Ayoub et al. 2003; Zofall and Grewal 2006; Braun et al. 2011; Aygün et al. 2013; Barrales et al. 2016; Murawska et al. 2021). To determine whether Epe1 also opposes the function of Ccr4-Not, we constructed caf1Δ epe1Δ and mot2Δ epe1Δ double mutants and assessed their ability to restore heterochromatic gene silencing at the mating type locus. Interestingly, silencing defects in the absence of Caf1 and Mot2 were completely suppressed upon epe1+ deletion (Fig. 5a). This was in marked contrast to clr4Δ cells, consistent with the notion that H3K9me is required for Epe1 recruitment. RT-qPCR assays and Northern blotting further confirmed that the absence of Epe1 restricts the accumulation of ura4+ mRNAs in caf1Δ and mot2Δ, but not clr4Δ mutants (Fig. 5b; Supplementary Fig. 6a). Likewise, defects in H3K9me2 and H3K9me3 in cells lacking Mot2 were alleviated upon loss of Epe1 (Fig. 5c), further indicating that the latter mediates the heterochromatin assembly defects. These results also suggest that caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells maintain sufficient levels of H3K9me to ensure Epe1 recruitment. Indeed, ChIP experiments revealed that the protein was similarly enriched at mat3M::ura4+ when compared to the wt strain (Fig. 5d), and Western blot analyses further excluded an alteration in Epe1 protein levels in the mutants (Supplementary Fig. 6b).

Fig. 5. The antisilencing factor Epe1 opposes Ccr4-Not in gene silencing and heterochromatin spreading. a) 5-fold serial diluted silencing assays using the ura4+ reporter gene inserted at the mating type locus (mat3M::ura4+). Cells of the indicated genotypes were plated on both nonselective (YES) and 5FOA-containing (YES+5FOA) media. b) RT-qPCR analyses of ura4+ transcripts (mean ± SD; n = 3; normalized to act1+; relative to wt) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. c) H3K9me2 and H3K9me3 ChIP-qPCR analyses (% input; mean ± SD; n = 4) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. d) Epe1-TAP ChIP-qPCR analyses (% input; mean ± SD; n = 4) in cells of the indicated genetic backgrounds. An untagged strain was used as a negative control. b–d) Two-tailed Student's t-tests were used to calculate P-values. Individual data points are represented by black circles. e and f) Two-dimensional-density squarebin plots showing the red-normalized green and orange fluorescence for caf1Δ epe1Δ e) and mot2Δ epe1Δ f) REIIImut cells grown at 32°C. A density bar represents the fraction of the most dense bin. One representative isolate is shown for each background.

To determine the contribution of Epe1 to the heterochromatin spreading defects observed in Ccr4-Not mutants, we next performed flow cytometry analyses in the caf1Δ epe1Δ and mot2Δ epe1Δ strains as described above. In both cases, cell populations with a high spreading marker (“orange”) fluorescence was strongly diminished compared to single mutants, yet not fully to wt levels (Fig. 5, e and f). In particular, caf1Δ epe1Δ populations still distributed over a broad range of “orange” signals, while “green” fluorescence was comparable to what was observed in the wt. mot2Δ epe1Δ cells also displayed a pronounced reduction in “orange” and maintained low levels of “green.” We concluded from these experiments that the loss of Epe1 strongly limits the extent and penetrance of heterochromatin spreading defects in Ccr4-Not mutants, akin to its effects on gene repression and heterochromatin formation.

To get additional insights into the mechanism by which it antagonizes Ccr4-Not, we subsequently generated an Epe1 mutant in the JmjC domain (i.e. Epe1H297A) that was inserted at its endogenous locus and expressed from its own promoter (Supplementary Fig. 7a). Combining this allele to the deletion of caf1+ or mot2+ fully restored cell growth in the presence of 5FOA and suppressed the accumulation of ura4+ mRNAs produced from the mat3M locus (Supplementary Fig. 7, b and c). We verified by Western blotting that the mutant protein was similarly expressed to the wt version in the different genetic backgrounds (Supplementary Fig. 7d). Consistent with former work (Raiymbek et al. 2020), ChIP experiments further indicated that Epe1H297A fails to be efficiently recruited to heterochromatin (i.e. mat3M::ura4+) (Supplementary Fig. 7e), providing a rationale for the suppression of silencing defects in caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells. Thus, the loss of heterochromatic gene silencing in mutants of the Ccr4-Not complex strictly depends on the integrity of the Epe1 JmjC domain.

Discussion

In this study, we demonstrate that the Caf1 and Mot2 subunits of Ccr4-Not are two major catalytic effectors of heterochromatic gene silencing and spreading. Our findings not only go beyond former observations by establishing an essential role for the complex in silencing at the mating type locus but also add another layer to its regulatory control, i.e. the implication of its catalytic components in heterochromatin propagation.

The nuclease module of the Ccr4-Not complex comprises the Caf1 and Ccr4 deadenylases, the former anchoring the latter to the Not1 scaffolding subunit (Basquin et al. 2012). Consistent with this and previous analyses implicating the nuclease activity of both enzymes in RNA degradation and heterochromatic gene silencing (Stowell et al. 2016; Brönner et al. 2017), we found that (1) catalytically inactive Caf1 elicits weaker defects than its deletion and, (2) Ccr4 partially contributes to the gene silencing activity. Caf1 and Ccr4 may thus act in concert with polyadenylated, heterochromatic RNAs, although it remains unclear whether they target common or individual transcripts. Both enzymes may further promote the recruitment of additional RNA degradation factors important for silencing activities, as previously suggested (Brönner et al. 2017). The fact that the heterologous mat3M::gfp+ reporter is derepressed in the absence of Caf1 also makes it unlikely that defined factor(s) tether the complex to heterochromatic transcripts in a sequence-dependent manner. It is however possible that poly(A)-binding proteins and/or the Mot2 subunit itself, which carries an RNA Recognition Motif, may recruit Ccr4-Not to promote deadenylation (Kerr et al. 2011; Webster et al. 2018; Yi et al. 2018). Alternatively, the complex may directly associate with the transcription machinery, as illustrated by its interaction in budding yeast with RNAPII and the histone chaperone Spt6 (Kruk et al. 2011; Dronamraju et al. 2018), both of which also contribute to heterochromatic gene silencing in fission yeast (Djupedal et al. 2005; Kato et al. 2005, 2013; Kiely et al. 2011). Regardless of the precise modalities, the recruitment of Ccr4-Not deadenylases is essential to clear RNAs from chromatin, thereby maintaining heterochromatin integrity (this study; Brönner et al. 2017).

Our work also establishes a potent, catalytic role for the E3 ubiquitin ligase Mot2 in gene silencing and heterochromatin assembly. A parsimonious model predicts that Mot2 may target an antisilencing factor for ubiquitinylation-dependent proteasomal degradation, as previously described for the E3 ligase Ddb1 that promotes Epe1 turnover and restricts its accumulation within heterochromatin domains (Braun et al. 2011). However, this factor is unlikely to be such a substrate given its similar abundance and occupancy in wt and mot2Δ cells. Mot2 could instead target other functionally related factors, including the bromodomain-containing protein Bdf2 and the histone acetyltransferase Mst2 (Wang et al. 2013, 2015; Flury et al. 2017), thereby shielding heterochromatin from invading antisilencing activities. Other scenarios include the modification of RNAPII itself, perhaps to stimulate elongation on heterochromatin templates, akin to situations where RNAPII transiently pauses or encounters transcriptional blocks (Kruk et al. 2011; Babbarwal et al. 2014; Dutta et al. 2015; Jiang et al. 2019). Persistence of the transcription machinery, as suggested by our analyses, and/or the accumulation of transcripts in the vicinity of the DNA template may in turn alter heterochromatin structure (Brönner et al. 2017). Interestingly, Ccr4-Not components, including Mot2 and Caf1, were recently proposed to regulate transcriptional efficiency at heterochromatic loci by limiting the levels of RNAPII-associated transcripts (Monteagudo-Mesas et al. 2022). The causal relationship between this process and silencing efficiency (i.e. steady-state RNA levels) remains however opaque.

Another critical aspect of our findings is the requirement for both Caf1 and Mot2 in heterochromatin spreading. This is supported by several lines of evidence in mutant cells: (1) H3K9me3 is further reduced than H3K9me2 at the mat3M locus, consistent with a defect in the transition between these two heterochromatin states, (2) propagation of H3K9me3 from nucleation centers is impaired at the mating type locus and subtelomeres, (3) nucleation-distal reporters/genes are further derepressed than proximal loci, and (4) the absence of Epe1, which antagonizes heterochromatin spreading, suppresses the observed silencing and spreading defects. Further supporting a role for Ccr4-Not in heterochromatin spreading, the Ccr4 and Rcd1 subunits were also recently identified in our screen for modulators of spreading at the mating type locus (Greenstein et al. 2022). From a mechanistic perspective, however, the exact role of the complex still needs to be elucidated. It is possible that the elimination of RNAPII/chromatin-associated transcripts by Ccr4 and Caf1 facilitates the transition from transcriptionally permissive H3K9me2 to H3K9me3 by Clr4 (Brönner et al. 2017; Jih et al. 2017; Monteagudo-Mesas et al. 2022), thereby ensuring efficient spreading. Their minor contribution to RNA degradation at nucleation centers (i.e. cenH and tlh1+) underlies functional redundancy with RNAi (Brönner et al. 2017), yet deadenylases may take over at distal loci due to the lack of siRNA templates. As for Mot2, the enzyme could, beyond the scenarios evoked above, directly control the activity of spreading regulators (Murawska et al. 2021; Greenstein et al. 2022), possibly through nonproteolytic ubiquitinylation. Future studies aimed at identifying the substrate of Mot2 will be instrumental to understand the molecular basis of its involvement in heterochromatin spreading.

Despite reduced H3K9me2/3 levels, caf1Δ and mot2Δ cells maintain Epe1 occupancy at the mat3M locus, suggesting that the balance between pro- and antisilencing activities is altered. Perhaps Epe1 facilitates heterochromatin transcription and/or histone turnover in these genetic contexts (Zofall and Grewal 2006; Aygün et al. 2013; Bao et al. 2019), thereby accounting for the observed mutant phenotypes. Our data showing that the protein opposes Ccr4-Not in a JmjC domain-dependent manner might also indicate that failure to antagonize H3K9me allows restoring silencing and spreading activities. However, the JmjC domain of Epe1 does not support H3K9 demethylase activity in vitro but is instead crucial for a robust association with Swi6/HP1 in vivo (Tsukada et al. 2006; Raiymbek et al. 2020). It is therefore conceivable that the disrupted interaction between Epe1H297A and Swi6 is the main reason why silencing is re-established in Ccr4-Not mutants. Indeed, Epe1H297A is not properly recruited to HP1-coated heterochromatin (this study; Raiymbek et al. 2020), which may restrict antisilencing activities and hence ensure efficient H3K9me3 maintenance and spreading.

Heterochromatin domains are spatially segregated at the nuclear periphery within distinct subcompartments (Holla et al. 2020; Iglesias et al. 2020; Oh et al. 2022). The nuclear envelope protein Amo1 was shown to anchor the mating type locus and to stably associate with the Ccr4-Not complex (Holla et al. 2020), raising the possibility that the latter may also regulate perinuclear sequestration of this heterochromatin domain. Whether additional peripheral proteins may similarly interact with Ccr4-Not to co-regulate telomere positioning remains an open question. Beyond these considerations, Amo1 cooperates with the rixosome and the histone chaperone FACT to mediate RNA degradation and suppress histone turnover for proper silencing and epigenetic inheritance of heterochromatin (Charlton et al. 2020; Holla et al. 2020; Shipkovenska et al. 2020). Intriguingly, Ccr4 was identified in a screen for factors involved in heterochromatin inheritance and Caf1 was found to act in parallel to the rixosome for the degradation of heterochromatic RNAs (Shipkovenska et al. 2020), pointing to a tight relationship between these machineries. Whether Ccr4-Not also partakes in histone turnover and epigenetic inheritance of heterochromatin are fascinating possibilities requiring further investigation.

In conclusion, we demonstrate a fundamental role for the highly conserved Ccr4-Not complex in gene silencing, heterochromatin assembly, and spreading, which implicates its Caf1 and Mot2 subunits. Our findings open new perspectives to dissect the deadenylation- and ubiquitinylation-dependent mechanisms involved and assess the functional and biological relevance of such activities. In S. pombe, heterochromatin spreading by Ccr4-Not may be an important regulatory component of mating type switching, a process that determines the mating type of a haploid cell (either P or M) through regulated recombination between the expressed mat1+ gene and one of the two adjacent donor cassettes, mat2P or mat3M, embedded in heterochromatin (Thon et al. 2019; Arcangioli and Gangloff 2023). Whether the lack of Caf1 or Mot2 introduces biases in donor selection, akin to mutants of various hetero- and euchromatic factors (Maki et al. 2018; Esquivel-Chavez et al. 2022), requires further analyses. Our study may also be relevant to human disease-related models. The cooperation between human CCR4-NOT and the H3K9me3-functionally linked Human Silencing Hub (HUSH) complex in Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) repression provides a meaningful example in this respect (Tchasovnikarova et al. 2015; Matkovic et al. 2022).

Supplementary Material

iyad108_Supplementary_Data

Acknowledgments

We thank Marc Bühler, Alain Jacquier, Jean-Paul Javerzat, and Hiten Madhani for their generous gift of yeast strains and plasmids. We are grateful to Fabrizio Simonetti and Jocelyne Boulay for technical assistance in Northern blotting and Domenico Libri for providing reagents and analytic tools in the early phases of the project.

Data availability

Strains and plasmids are available upon request. The authors affirm that all data necessary for confirming the conclusions of the article are present within the article, figures, and tables.

All the raw data allowing to generate the final results presented here are available in a separate excel file “Supplementary Data 1.”

The R script and primary fcs files used to establish flow cytometry data have been deposited in Zenodo (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7611852).

Supplemental material available at GENETICS online.

Funding

E.L. was supported by a Ph.D. fellowship from the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research (Université Paris-Saclay). This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (2113319 to B.A.-S.), the National Institutes of Health (1R35GM141888 to B.A.-S.), the Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique, the Fondation ARC (ARCPJA2021060003978 to M.R.) and the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-16-CE12-0031 and ANR-21-CE12-0029 to M.R.). Flow cytometry in this work was conducted at the UCSF Flow Cytometry Core, which is supported by the UCSF Diabetes Center and the National Institutes of Health (P30 DK063720).
==== Refs
Literature cited

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 (1 ):80–91. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2013.06.013.23849629
Allshire  RC, Madhani  HD. Ten principles of heterochromatin formation and function. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018;19 (4 ):229–244. doi:10.1038/nrm.2017.119.29235574
Amelina  H, Moiseeva  V, Collopy  LC, Pearson  SR, Armstrong  CA, Tomita  K. Sequential and counter-selectable cassettes for fission yeast. BMC Biotechnol. 2016;16 (1 ):76. doi:10.1186/s12896-016-0307-4.27825338
Arcangioli  B, Gangloff  S. The fission yeast mating-type switching motto: “one-for-two” and “two-for-one”. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2023;87 (1 ):e0000821. doi:10.1128/mmbr.00008-21.
Audergon  PNCB, Catania  S, Kagansky  A, Tong  P, Shukla  M, Pidoux  AL, Allshire  RC. Restricted epigenetic inheritance of H3K9 methylation. Science. 2015;348 (6230 ):132–135. doi:10.1126/science.1260638.25838386
Aygün  O, Mehta  S, Grewal  SIS. HDAC-mediated suppression of histone turnover promotes epigenetic stability of heterochromatin. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2013;20 (5 ):547–554. doi:10.1038/nsmb.2565.23604080
Ayoub  N, Noma  K, Isaac  S, Kahan  T, Grewal  SIS, Cohen  A. A novel jmjC domain protein modulates heterochromatization in fission yeast. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23 (12 ):4356–4370. doi:10.1128/MCB.23.12.4356-4370.2003.12773576
Babbarwal  V, Fu  J, Reese  JC. The Rpb4/7 module of RNA polymerase II is required for carbon catabolite repressor protein 4-negative on TATA (Ccr4-Not) complex to promote elongation. J Biol Chem. 2014;289 (48 ):33125–33130. doi:10.1074/jbc.C114.601088.25315781
Bao  K, Shan  C-M, Moresco  J, Yates  J, III, Jia  S. Anti-silencing factor Epe1 associates with SAGA to regulate transcription within heterochromatin. Genes Dev. 2019;33 (1–2 ):116–126. doi:10.1101/gad.318030.118.30573453
Barrales  RR, Forn  M, Georgescu  PR, Sarkadi  Z, Braun  S. Control of heterochromatin localization and silencing by the nuclear membrane protein Lem2. Genes Dev. 2016;30 (2 ):133–148. doi:10.1101/gad.271288.115.26744419
Basquin  J, Roudko  VV, Rode  M, Basquin  C, Séraphin  B, Conti  E. Architecture of the nuclease module of the yeast Ccr4-not complex: the Not1-Caf1-Ccr4 interaction. Mol Cell. 2012;48 (2 ):207–218. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2012.08.014.22959269
Braun  S, Garcia  JF, Rowley  M, Rougemaille  M, Shankar  S, Madhani  HD. The Cul4-Ddb1(Cdt)² ubiquitin ligase inhibits invasion of a boundary-associated antisilencing factor into heterochromatin. Cell. 2011;144 (1 ):41–54. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2010.11.051.21215368
Brönner  C, Salvi  L, Zocco  M, Ugolini  I, Halic  M. Accumulation of RNA on chromatin disrupts heterochromatic silencing. Genome Res. 2017;27 (7 ):1174–1183. doi:10.1101/gr.216986.116.28404620
Bühler  M, Haas  W, Gygi  SP, Moazed  D. RNAi-dependent and -independent RNA turnover mechanisms contribute to heterochromatic gene silencing. Cell. 2007;129 (4 ):707–721. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.03.038.17512405
Charlton  SJ, Jørgensen  MM, Thon  G. Integrity of a heterochromatic domain ensured by its boundary elements. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117 (35 ):21504–21511. doi:10.1073/pnas.2010062117.32817556
Chen  ES, Zhang  K, Nicolas  E, Cam  HP, Zofall  M, Grewal  SIS. Cell cycle control of centromeric repeat transcription and heterochromatin assembly. Nature. 2008;451 (7179 ):734–737. doi:10.1038/nature06561.18216783
Collart  MA . The Ccr4-Not complex is a key regulator of eukaryotic gene expression. WIREs RNA. 2016;7 (4 ):438–454. doi:10.1002/wrna.1332.26821858
Cotobal  C, Rodriguez-Lopez  M, Duncan  C, Hasan  A, Yamashita  A, Yamamoto  M, Bähler  J, Mata  J. Role of Ccr4-Not complex in heterochromatin formation at meiotic genes and subtelomeres in fission yeast. Epigenet. Chromatin. 2015;8 (1 ):28. doi:10.1186/s13072-015-0018-4.
Djupedal  I, Portoso  M, Spahr  H, Bonilla  C, Gustafsson  CM, Allshire  RC, Ekwall  K. RNA Pol II subunit Rpb7 promotes centromeric transcription and RNAi-directed chromatin silencing. Genes Dev. 2005;19 (19 ):2301–2306. doi:10.1101/gad.344205.16204182
Dronamraju  R, Hepperla  AJ, Shibata  Y, Adams  AT, Magnuson  T, Davis  IJ, Strahl  BD. Spt6 association with RNA polymerase II directs mRNA turnover during transcription. Mol Cell. 2018;70 (6 ):1054–1066.e4. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.020.29932900
Dutta  A, Babbarwal  V, Fu  J, Brunke-Reese  D, Libert  DM, Willis  J, Reese  JC. Ccr4-Not and TFIIS function cooperatively to rescue arrested RNA polymerase II. Mol Cell Biol. 2015;35 (11 ):1915–1925. doi:10.1128/MCB.00044-15.25776559
Esquivel-Chavez  A, Maki  T, Tsubouchi  H, Handa  T, Kimura  H, Haber  JE, Thon  G, Iwasaki  H. Euchromatin factors HULC and Set1C affect heterochromatin organization and mating-type switching in fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genes Genet Syst. 2022;97 (3 ):123–138. doi:10.1266/ggs.22-00012.35908934
Flury  V, Georgescu  PR, Iesmantavicius  V, Shimada  Y, Kuzdere  T, Braun  S, Bühler  M. The histone acetyltransferase Mst2 protects active chromatin from epigenetic silencing by acetylating the ubiquitin ligase Brl1. Mol Cell. 2017;67 (2 ):294–307.e9. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2017.05.026.28648780
Garcia  JF, Al-Sady  B, Madhani  HD. Intrinsic toxicity of unchecked heterochromatin spread is suppressed by redundant chromatin boundary functions in Schizosacchromyces pombe. G3 (Bethesda)  2015;5 (7 ):1453–1461. doi:10.1534/g3.115.018663.25957277
Greenstein  RA, Barrales  RR, Sanchez  NA, Bisanz  JE, Braun  S, Al-Sady  B. Set1/COMPASS repels heterochromatin invasion at euchromatic sites by disrupting Suv39/Clr4 activity and nucleosome stability. Genes Dev. 2020;34 (1–2 ):99–117. doi:10.1101/gad.328468.119.31805521
Greenstein  RA, Jones  SK, Spivey  EC, Rybarski  JR, Finkelstein  IJ, Al-Sady  B. Noncoding RNA-nucleated heterochromatin spreading is intrinsically labile and requires accessory elements for epigenetic stability. eLife. 2018;7 :e32948. doi:10.7554/eLife.32948.
Greenstein  RA, Ng  H, Barrales  RR, Tan  C, Braun  S, Al-Sady  B. Local chromatin context regulates the genetic requirements of the heterochromatin spreading reaction. PLoS Genet. 2022;18 (5 ):e1010201. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1010201.
Grewal  SI . RNAi-dependent formation of heterochromatin and its diverse functions. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2010;20 (2 ):134–141. doi:10.1016/j.gde.2010.02.003.20207534
Hazra  D, Andric  V, Palancade  B, Rougemaille  M, Graille  M. Formation of S. pombe Erh1 homodimer mediates gametogenic gene silencing and meiosis progression. Sci Rep. 2020;10 (1 ):1034. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-57872-4.31974447
Holla  S, Dhakshnamoorthy  J, Folco  DH, 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 (1 ):150–164.e15. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.12.004.31883795
Holoch  D, Moazed  D. RNA-mediated epigenetic regulation of gene expression. Nat Rev Genet. 2015;16 (2 ):71–84. doi:10.1038/nrg3863.25554358
Iglesias  N, Paulo  JA, Tatarakis  A, Wang  X, Edwards  AL, Bhanu  NV, Garcia  BA, Haas  W, Gygi  SP, Moazed  D. Native chromatin proteomics reveals role for specific nucleoporins in heterochromatin organization and maintenance. Mol Cell. 2020;77 (1 ):51–66.e8. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2019.10.018.31784357
Isaac  S, Walfridsson  J, Zohar  T, Lazar  D, Kahan  T, Ekwall  K, Cohen  A. Interaction of Epe1 with the heterochromatin assembly pathway in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genetics. 2007;175 (4 ):1549–1560. doi:10.1534/genetics.106.068684.17449867
Janssen  A, Colmenares  SU, Karpen  GH. Heterochromatin: guardian of the genome. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2018;34 (1 ):265–288. doi:10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100617-062653.30044650
Jia  S, Noma  K, Grewal  SIS. RNAi-independent heterochromatin nucleation by the stress-activated ATF/CREB family proteins. Science. 2004;304 (5679 ):1971–1976. doi:10.1126/science.1099035.15218150
Jiang  H, Wolgast  M, Beebe  LM, Reese  JC. Ccr4-Not maintains genomic integrity by controlling the ubiquitylation and degradation of arrested RNAPII. Genes Dev. 2019;33 (11–12 ):705–717. doi:10.1101/gad.322453.118.30948432
Jih  G, Iglesias  N, Currie  MA, Bhanu  NV, Paulo  JA, Gygi  SP, Garcia  BA, Moazed  D. Unique roles for histone H3K9me states in RNAi and heritable silencing of transcription. Nature. 2017;547 (7664 ):463–467. doi:10.1038/nature23267.28682306
Kanoh  J, Sadaie  M, Urano  T, Ishikawa  F. Telomere binding protein Taz1 establishes Swi6 heterochromatin independently of RNAi at telomeres. Curr Biol. 2005;15 (20 ):1808–1819. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2005.09.041.16243027
Kato  H, Goto  DB, Martienssen  RA, Urano  T, Furukawa  K, Murakami  Y. RNA Polymerase II is required for RNAi-dependent heterochromatin assembly. Science. 2005;309 (5733 ):467–469. doi:10.1126/science.1114955.15947136
Kato  H, Okazaki  K, Iida  T, Nakayama  J-I, Murakami  Y, Urano  T. Spt6 prevents transcription-coupled loss of posttranslationally modified histone H3. Sci Rep. 2013;3 (1 ):2186. doi:10.1038/srep02186.23851719
Kerr  SC, Azzouz  N, Fuchs  SM, Collart  MA, Strahl  BD, Corbett  AH, Laribee  RN. The Ccr4-Not complex interacts with the mRNA export machinery. PLoS One. 2011;6 (3 ):e18302. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018302.
Kiely  CM, Marguerat  S, Garcia  JF, Madhani  HD, Bähler  J, Winston  F. Spt6 is required for heterochromatic silencing in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Mol Cell Biol. 2011;31 (20 ):4193–4204. doi:10.1128/MCB.05568-11.21844224
Kruk  JA, Dutta  A, Fu  J, Gilmour  DS, Reese  JC. The multifunctional Ccr4-Not complex directly promotes transcription elongation. Genes Dev. 2011;25 (6 ):581–593. doi:10.1101/gad.2020911.21406554
Maki  T, Ogura  N, Haber  JE, Iwasaki  H, Thon  G. New insights into donor directionality of mating-type switching in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. PLoS Genet. 2018;14 (5 ):e1007424. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1007424.
Martienssen  R, Moazed  D. RNAi and heterochromatin assembly. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2015;7 (8 ):a019323. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a019323.
Matkovic  R, Morel  M, Lanciano  S, Larrous  P, Martin  B, Bejjani  F, Vauthier  V, Hansen  MMK, Emiliani  S, Cristofari  G, et al  TASOR epigenetic repressor cooperates with a CNOT1 RNA degradation pathway to repress HIV. Nat Commun. 2022;13 (1 ):66. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27650-5.35013187
Miller  JE, Reese  JC. Ccr4-Not complex: the control freak of eukaryotic cells. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2012;47 (4 ):315–333. doi:10.3109/10409238.2012.667214.22416820
Monteagudo-Mesas  P, Brönner  C, Kohvaei  P, Amedi  H, Canzar  S, Halic  M. Ccr4-Not complex reduces transcription efficiency in heterochromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50 (10 ):5565–5576. doi:10.1093/nar/gkac403.35640578
Murawska  M, Greenstein  RA, Schauer  T, Olsen  KCF, Ng  H, Ladurner  AG, Al-Sady  B, Braun  S. The histone chaperone FACT facilitates heterochromatin spreading by regulating histone turnover and H3K9 methylation states. Cell Rep. 2021;37 (5 ):109944. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109944.
Nickels  JF, Della-Rosa  ME, Goyeneche  IM, Charlton  SJ, Sneppen  K, Thon  G. The transcription factor Atf1 lowers the transition barrier for nucleosome-mediated establishment of heterochromatin. Cell Rep. 2022;39 (7 ):110828. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110828.
Nickels  JF, Edwards  AK, Charlton  SJ, Mortensen  AM, Hougaard  SCL, Trusina  A, Sneppen  K, Thon  G. Establishment of heterochromatin in domain-size-dependent bursts. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021;118 (15 ):e2022887118. doi:10.1073/pnas.2022887118.
Noma  K, Sugiyama  T, Cam  H, Verdel  A, Zofall  M, Jia  S, Moazed  D, Grewal  SIS. RITS acts in cis to promote RNA interference-mediated transcriptional and post-transcriptional silencing. Nat Genet. 2004;36 (11 ):1174–1180. doi:10.1038/ng1452.15475954
Obersriebnig  MJ, Pallesen  EMH, Sneppen  K, Trusina  A, Thon  G. Nucleation and spreading of a heterochromatic domain in fission yeast. Nat Commun. 2016;7 (1 ):11518. doi:10.1038/ncomms11518.27167753
Oh  J, Yeom  S, Park  J, Lee  J-S. The regional sequestration of heterochromatin structural proteins is critical to form and maintain silent chromatin. Epigenet. Chromatin. 2022;15 (1 ):5. doi:10.1186/s13072-022-00435-w.
Ragunathan  K, Jih  G, Moazed  D. Epigenetic inheritance uncoupled from sequence-specific recruitment. Science. 2015;348 (6230 ):1258699. doi:10.1126/science.1258699.
Raiymbek  G, An  S, Khurana  N, Gopinath  S, Larkin  A, Biswas  S, Trievel  RC, Cho  US, Ragunathan  K. An H3K9 methylation-dependent protein interaction regulates the non-enzymatic functions of a putative histone demethylase. Elife. 2020;9 :e53155. doi:10.7554/eLife.53155.
Reyes-Turcu  FE, Grewal  SIS. Different means, same end—heterochromatin formation by RNAi and RNAi-independent RNA processing factors in fission yeast. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2012;22 (2 ):156–163. doi:10.1016/j.gde.2011.12.004.22243696
Reyes-Turcu  FE, Zhang  K, Zofall  M, Chen  E, Grewal  SIS. Defects in RNA quality control factors reveal RNAi-independent nucleation of heterochromatin. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2011;18 (10 ):1132–1138. doi:10.1038/nsmb.2122.21892171
Shipkovenska  G, Durango  A, Kalocsay  M, Gygi  SP, Moazed  D. A conserved RNA degradation complex required for spreading and epigenetic inheritance of heterochromatin. Elife. 2020;9 :e54341. doi:10.7554/eLife.54341.
Simonetti  F, Candelli  T, Leon  S, Libri  D, Rougemaille  M. Ubiquitination-dependent control of sexual differentiation in fission yeast. Elife. 2017;6 :e28046. doi:10.7554/eLife.28046.
Stowell  JAW, Webster  MW, Kögel  A, Wolf  J, Shelley  KL, Passmore  LA. Reconstitution of targeted deadenylation by the Ccr4-Not complex and the YTH domain protein Mmi1. Cell Rep. 2016;17 (8 ):1978–1989. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.10.066.27851962
Sugiyama  T, Thillainadesan  G, Chalamcharla  VR, Meng  Z, Balachandran  V, Dhakshnamoorthy  J, Zhou  M, Grewal  SIS. Enhancer of rudimentary cooperates with conserved RNA-processing factors to promote meiotic mRNA decay and facultative heterochromatin assembly. Mol Cell. 2016;61 (5 ):747–759. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2016.01.029.26942678
Tchasovnikarova  IA, Timms  RT, Matheson  NJ, Wals  K, Antrobus  R, Göttgens  B, Dougan  G, Dawson  MA, Lehner  PJ. Epigenetic silencing by the HUSH complex mediates position-effect variegation in human cells. Science. 2015;348 (6242 ):1481–1485. doi:10.1126/science.aaa7227.26022416
Thon  G, Bjerling  KP, Nielsen  IS. Localization and properties of a silencing element near the mat3-M mating-type cassette of Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Genetics. 1999;151 (3 ):945–963. doi:10.1093/genetics/151.3.945.10049914
Thon  G, Maki  T, Haber  JE, Iwasaki  H. Mating-type switching by homology-directed recombinational repair: a matter of choice. Curr Genet. 2019;65 (2 ):351–362. doi:10.1007/s00294-018-0900-2.30382337
Trewick  SC, Minc  E, Antonelli  R, Urano  T, Allshire  RC. The JmjC domain protein Epe1 prevents unregulated assembly and disassembly of heterochromatin. EMBO J. 2007;26 (22 ):4670–4682. doi:10.1038/sj.emboj.7601892.17948055
Tsukada  Y, Fang  J, Erdjument-Bromage  H, Warren  ME, Borchers  CH, Tempst  P, Zhang  Y. Histone demethylation by a family of JmjC domain-containing proteins. Nature. 2006;439 (7078 ):811–816. doi:10.1038/nature04433.16362057
Ukleja  M, Cuellar  J, Siwaszek  A, Kasprzak  JM, Czarnocki-Cieciura  M, Bujnicki  JM, Dziembowski  A, Valpuesta  JM. The architecture of the Schizosaccharomyces pombe CCR4-NOT complex. Nat Commun. 2016;7 (1 ):10433. doi:10.1038/ncomms10433.26804377
van Emden  TS, Forn  M, Forné  I, Sarkadi  Z, Capella  M, Martin Caballero  L, Fischer-Burkart  S, Brönner  C, Simonetta  M, Toczyski  D, et al  Shelterin and subtelomeric DNA sequences control nucleosome maintenance and genome stability. EMBO Rep. 2019;20 (1 ):e47181. doi:10.15252/embr.201847181.
Verdel  A, Jia  S, Gerber  S, Sugiyama  T, Gygi  S, Grewal  SI, Moazed  D. RNAi-mediated targeting of heterochromatin by the RITS complex. Science. 2004;303 (5658 ):672–676. doi:10.1126/science.1093686.14704433
Wahle  E, Winkler  GS. RNA decay machines: deadenylation by the Ccr4-not and Pan2-Pan3 complexes. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1829 (6–7 ):561–570. doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2013.01.003.23337855
Wang  J, Cohen  AL, Letian  A, Tadeo  X, Moresco  JJ, Liu  J, Yates  JR  III, Qiao  F, Jia  S. The proper connection between shelterin components is required for telomeric heterochromatin assembly. Genes Dev. 2016;30 (7 ):827–839. doi:10.1101/gad.266718.115.26988418
Wang  X, Moazed  D. DNA sequence-dependent epigenetic inheritance of gene silencing and histone H3K9 methylation. Science. 2017;356 (6333 ):88–91. doi:10.1126/science.aaj2114.28302794
Wang  J, Reddy  BD, Jia  S. Rapid epigenetic adaptation to uncontrolled heterochromatin spreading. Elife. 2015;4 :e06179. doi:10.7554/eLife.06179.
Wang  S-W, Stevenson  AL, Kearsey  SE, Watt  S, Bähler  J. Global role for polyadenylation-assisted nuclear RNA degradation in posttranscriptional gene silencing. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28 (2 ):656–665. doi:10.1128/MCB.01531-07.18025105
Wang  J, Tadeo  X, Hou  H, Tu  PG, Thompson  J, Yates  JR, III, Jia  S. Epe1 recruits BET family bromodomain protein Bdf2 to establish heterochromatin boundaries. Genes Dev. 2013;27 (17 ):1886–1902. doi:10.1101/gad.221010.113.24013502
Webster  MW, Chen  Y-H, Stowell  JAW, Alhusaini  N, Sweet  T, Graveley  BR, Coller  J, Passmore  LA. mRNA deadenylation is coupled to translation rates by the differential activities of Ccr4-Not nucleases. Mol Cell. 2018;70 (6 ):1089–1100.e8. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.033.29932902
Xie  G, Vo  TV, Thillainadesan  G, Holla  S, Zhang  B, Jiang  Y, Lv  M, Xu  Z, Wang  C, Balachandran  V, et al  A conserved dimer interface connects ERH and YTH family proteins to promote gene silencing. Nat Commun. 2019;10 (1 ):251. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-08273-9.30651569
Yamada  T, Fischle  W, Sugiyama  T, Allis  CD, Grewal  SIS. The nucleation and maintenance of heterochromatin by a histone deacetylase in fission yeast. Mol Cell. 2005;20 (2 ):173–185. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.002.16246721
Yi  H, Park  J, Ha  M, Lim  J, Chang  H, Kim  VN. PABP cooperates with the Ccr4-Not complex to promote mRNA deadenylation and block precocious decay. Mol Cell. 2018;70 (6 ):1081–1088.e5. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.05.009.29932901
Yu  R, Wang  X, Moazed  D. Epigenetic inheritance mediated by coupling of RNAi and histone H3K9 methylation. Nature. 2018;558 (7711 ):615–619. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0239-3.29925950
Zhang  K, Fischer  T, Porter  RL, Dhakshnamoorthy  J, Zofall  M, Zhou  M, Veenstra  T, Grewal  SIS. Clr4/Suv39 and RNA quality control factors cooperate to trigger RNAi and suppress antisense RNA. Science. 2011;331 (6024 ):1624–1627. doi:10.1126/science.1198712.21436456
Zhang  K, Mosch  K, Fischle  W, Grewal  SIS. Roles of the Clr4 methyltransferase complex in nucleation, spreading and maintenance of heterochromatin. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2008;15 (4 ):381–388. doi:10.1038/nsmb.1406.18345014
Zofall  M, Grewal  SIS. Swi6/HP1 recruits a JmjC domain protein to facilitate transcription of heterochromatic repeats. Mol Cell. 2006;22 (5 ):681–692. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2006.05.010.16762840
