Biology subjects

Yee, D.

Publications and source records attributed to Yee, D..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2021

RBBP4 modulates gene activity through acetylation and methylation of histone H3 lysine 27

RBBP4 is a core subunit of polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and HDAC1/2-containing complexes, which are responsible for histone H3 lysine 27 (H3K27) methylation and deacetylation respectively. However, the mechanisms by which RBBP4 modulates the functions of these complexes remain largely unknown. We generated viable mouse embryonic stem cell lines with RBBP4 mutations that disturbed methylation and acetylation of H3K27 on target chromatin and found that RBBP4 is required for PRC2 assembly and H3K27me3 establishment on target chromatin. Moreover, in the absence of EED and SUZ12, RBBP4 maintained chromatin binding on PRC2 loci, suggesting that the pre-existence of RBBP4 on nucleosomes serves to recruit PRC2 to restore H3K27me3 on newly synthesized histones. As such, disruption of RBBP4 function led to dramatic changes in transcriptional profiles. In spite of the PRC2 association, we found that transcriptional changes were more closely tied to the deregulation of H3K27ac rather than H3K27me3 where increased levels of H3K27ac were found on numerous cis-regulatory elements, especially putative enhancers. These data suggest that RBBP4 controls acetylation levels by adjusting the activity of HDAC complexes. As histone methylation and acetylation have been implicated in cancer and neural disease, RBBP4 could serve as a potential target for disease treatment.

genomics↗

bioRxiv2021

The oncogenic transcription factor FUS-CHOP can undergo nuclear liquid-liquid phase separation

Myxoid liposarcoma is caused by a chromosomal translocation resulting in a fusion protein comprised of the N-terminus of FUS (fused in sarcoma) and the full-length transcription factor CHOP (CCAAT/Enhancer Binding Protein Homologous Protein). FUS functions in RNA metabolism and CHOP is a stress-induced transcription factor. The FUS-CHOP fusion protein causes unique gene expression and oncogenic transformation. The FUS segment is required for oncogenic transformation, but the mechanism of FUS-CHOP-induced transcriptional activation is unknown. Recently, some transcription factors and super enhancers were proposed to undergo liquid-liquid phase separation and form membraneless compartments that recruit transcription machinery to gene promoters. Since phase separation of FUS depends on its N-terminus, transcriptional activation by FUS-CHOP could result from the N-terminus driving nuclear phase transitions. Here, we characterized FUS-CHOP in cells and in vitro, and observed novel phase-separating properties relative to unmodified CHOP. Our data indicate FUS-CHOP forms phase-separated condensates at super enhancer transcriptional sites. We provide strong evidence that the FUS-CHOP phase transition is a novel oncogenic mechanism and potential therapeutic target for treatment of myxoid liposarcoma.

cell biology↗

bioRxiv2020

Dissociable influences of reward and punishment on adaptive cognitive control

To invest effort into any cognitive task, people must be sufficiently motivated. Whereas prior research has focused primarily on how the cognitive control required to complete these tasks is motivated by the potential rewards for success, it is also known that control investment can be equally motivated by the potential negative consequence for failure. Previous theoretical and experimental work has yet to examine how positive and negative incentives differentially influence the manner and intensity with which people allocate control. Here, we develop and test a normative model of control allocation under conditions of varying positive and negative performance incentives. Our model predicts, and our empirical findings confirm, that rewards for success and punishment for failure should differentially influence adjustments to the evidence accumulation rate versus response threshold, respectively. This dissociation further enabled us to infer how motivated a given person was by the consequences of success versus failure. Author SummaryFrom the school to the workplace, whether someone achieves their goals is determined largely by the mental effort they invest in their tasks. Recent work has demonstrated both why and how people adjust the amount of effort they invest in response to variability in the rewards expected for achieving that goal. However, in the real world, we are motivated both by the positive outcomes our efforts can achieve (e.g., praise) and the negative outcomes they can avoid (e.g., rejection), and these two types of incentives can motivate adjustments not only in the amount of effort we invest but also the types of effort we invest (e.g., whether to prioritize performing the task efficiently or cautiously). Using a combination of computational modeling and a novel task that measures voluntary effort allocation under varying incentive conditions, we show that people should and do engage dissociable forms of mental effort in response to positive versus negative incentives. With increasing rewards for achieving their goal, they prioritize efficient performance, whereas with increasing penalties for failure they prioritize performing cautious performance. We further show that these dissociable strategies enable us to infer how motivated a given person was based on the positive consequences of success relative to the negative consequences of failure.

neuroscience↗