1887

Abstract

The transcriptome from a deletion mutant was one of the first comprehensive yeast transcriptomes published. Subsequent transcriptomes from and mutants firmly established the Tup1-Cyc8 complex as predominantly acting as a repressor of gene transcription. However, transcriptomes from gene deletion or conditional mutants would all have been influenced by the striking flocculation phenotypes that these mutants display. In this study, we have separated the impact of flocculation from the transcriptome in a conditional mutant to reveal those genes (i) subject solely to Cyc8p-dependent regulation, (ii) regulated by flocculation only and (iii) regulated by Cyc8p and further influenced by flocculation. We reveal a more accurate list of Cyc8p-regulated genes that includes newly identified Cyc8p-regulated genes that were masked by the flocculation phenotype and excludes genes which were indirectly influenced by flocculation and not regulated by Cyc8p. Furthermore, we show evidence that flocculation exerts a complex and potentially dynamic influence upon global gene transcription. These data should be of interest to future studies into the mechanism of action of the Tup1-Cyc8 complex and to studies involved in understanding the development of flocculation and its impact upon cell function.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Trinity College Dublin (Award 1252 Award)
    • Principle Award Recipient: BrendaLee
  • King Abdulaziz University (Award 312)
    • Principle Award Recipient: AlastairBruce Fleming
  • King Abdulaziz University (Award 312)
    • Principle Award Recipient: AtifA. Bamagoos
  • Microbiology Society (Award GA003520)
    • Principle Award Recipient: BrendaLee
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001216
2024-03-26
2024-04-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/mgen/10/3/mgen001216.html?itemId=/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001216&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Keleher CA, Redd MJ, Schultz J, Carlson M, Johnson AD. Ssn6-Tup1 is a general repressor of transcription in yeast. Cell 1992; 68:709–719 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Smith RL, Johnson AD. Turning genes off by Ssn6-Tup1: a conserved system of transcriptional repression in eukaryotes. Trends Biochem Sci 2000; 25:325–330 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. DeRisi JL, Iyer VR, Brown PO. Exploring the metabolic and genetic control of gene expression on a genomic scale. Science 1997; 278:680–686 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Lee B, Church M, Hokamp K, Alhussain MM, Bamagoos AA et al. Systematic analysis of TUP1 and CYC8 mutants reveals distinct roles for TUP1 and CYC8 and offers new insight into the regulation of gene transcription by the yeast TUP1-CYC8 complex. PLoS Genet 2023; 19:e1010876 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Varanasi US, Klis M, Mikesell PB, Trumbly RJ. The Cyc8 (Ssn6)-Tup1 corepressor complex is composed of one Cyc8 and four Tup1 subunits. Mol Cell Biol 1996; 16:6707–6714 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Malavé TM, Dent SYR. Transcriptional repression by Tup1–Ssn6This paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 27th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal’s usual peer review process. Biochem Cell Biol 2006; 84:437–443 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hanlon SE, Rizzo JM, Tatomer DC, Lieb JD, Buck MJ. The stress response factors Yap6, Cin5, Phd1, and Skn7 direct targeting of the conserved co-repressor Tup1-Ssn6 in S. cerevisiae. PLoS One 2011; 6:e19060 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Tzamarias D, Struhl K. Functional dissection of the yeast Cyc8-Tup1 transcriptional co-repressor complex. Nature 1994; 369:758–761 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Fleming AB, Beggs S, Church M, Tsukihashi Y, Pennings S. The yeast Cyc8-Tup1 complex cooperates with Hda1p and Rpd3p histone deacetylases to robustly repress transcription of the subtelomeric FLO1 gene. Biochim Biophys Acta 2014; 1839:1242–1255 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Davie JK, Edmondson DG, Coco CB, Dent SYR. Tup1-Ssn6 interacts with multiple class I histone deacetylases in vivo. J Biol Chem 2003; 278:50158–50162 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Davie JK, Trumbly RJ, Dent SYR. Histone-dependent association of Tup1-Ssn6 with repressed genes in vivo. Mol Cell Biol 2002; 22:693–703 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bone JR, Roth SY. Recruitment of the yeast Tup1p-Ssn6p repressor is associated with localized decreases in histone acetylation. J Biol Chem 2001; 276:1808–1813 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Rizzo JM, Mieczkowski PA, Buck MJ. Tup1 stabilizes promoter nucleosome positioning and occupancy at transcriptionally plastic genes. Nucleic Acids Res 2011; 39:8803–8819 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Wong KH, Struhl K. The Cyc8-Tup1 complex inhibits transcription primarily by masking the activation domain of the recruiting protein. Genes Dev 2011; 25:2525–2539 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Li B, Reese JC. Ssn6-Tup1 regulates RNR3 by positioning nucleosomes and affecting the chromatin structure at the upstream repression sequence. J Biol Chem 2001; 276:33788–33797 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cooper JP, Roth SY, Simpson RT. The global transcriptional regulators, SSN6 and TUP1, play distinct roles in the establishment of a repressive chromatin structure. Genes Dev 1994; 8:1400–1410 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Papamichos-Chronakis M, Conlan RS, Gounalaki N, Copf T, Tzamarias D. Hrs1/Med3 is a Cyc8-Tup1 corepressor target in the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. J Biol Chem 2000; 275:8397–8403 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Mennella TA, Klinkenberg LG, Zitomer RS. Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by yeast hypoxic genes and chromatin-independent exclusion of TATA binding protein. Eukaryot Cell 2003; 2:1288–1303 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kuras L, Struhl K. Binding of TBP to promoters in vivo is stimulated by activators and requires Pol II holoenzyme. Nature 1999; 399:609–613 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Chen K, Wilson MA, Hirsch C, Watson A, Liang S et al. Stabilization of the promoter nucleosomes in nucleosome-free regions by the yeast Cyc8-Tup1 corepressor. Genome Res 2013; 23:312–322 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhang Z, Reese JC. Redundant mechanisms are used by Ssn6-Tup1 in repressing chromosomal gene transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem 2004; 279:39240–39250 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Tam J, van Werven FJ. Regulated repression governs the cell fate promoter controlling yeast meiosis. Nat Commun 2020; 11:2271 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Conlan RS, Gounalaki N, Hatzis P, Tzamarias D. The Tup1-Cyc8 protein complex can shift from a transcriptional co-repressor to a transcriptional co-activator. J Biol Chem 1999; 274:205–210 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Parnell EJ, Parnell TJ, Stillman DJ. Genetic analysis argues for a coactivator function for the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Tup1 corepressor. Genetics 2021; 219:iyab120 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Proft M, Struhl K. Hog1 kinase converts the Sko1-Cyc8-Tup1 repressor complex into an activator that recruits SAGA and SWI/SNF in response to osmotic stress. Mol Cell 2002; 9:1307–1317 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lipke PN, Hull-Pillsbury C. Flocculation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae tup1 mutants. J Bacteriol 1984; 159:797–799 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Smukalla S, Caldara M, Pochet N, Beauvais A, Guadagnini S et al. FLO1 is a variable green beard gene that drives biofilm-like cooperation in budding yeast. Cell 2008; 135:726–737 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Soares EV. Flocculation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a review. J Appl Microbiol 2011; 110:1–18 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Teunissen AW, van den Berg JA, Steensma HY. Transcriptional regulation of flocculation genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Yeast 1995; 11:435–446 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Goossens K, Willaert R. Flocculation protein structure and cell-cell adhesion mechanism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Lett 2010; 32:1571–1585 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Stratford M. Lectin-mediated aggregation of yeasts--yeast flocculation. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev 1992; 10:283–341 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Teunissen AW, Steensma HY. Review: the dominant flocculation genes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae constitute a new subtelomeric gene family. Yeast 1995; 11:1001–1013 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Watari J, Takata Y, Ogawa M, Sahara H, Koshino S et al. Molecular cloning and analysis of the yeast flocculation gene FLO1. Yeast 1994; 10:211–225 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Fleming AB, Pennings S. Antagonistic remodelling by Swi-Snf and Tup1-Ssn6 of an extensive chromatin region forms the background for FLO1 gene regulation. EMBO J 2001; 20:5219–5231 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Church M, Smith KC, Alhussain MM, Pennings S, Fleming AB. Sas3 and Ada2(Gcn5)-dependent histone H3 acetylation is required for transcription elongation at the de-repressed FLO1 gene. Nucleic Acids Res 2017; 45:4413–4430 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Church MC, Fleming AB. A role for histone acetylation in regulating transcription elongation. Transcription 2018; 9:225–232 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Verstrepen KJ, Klis FM. Flocculation, adhesion and biofilm formation in yeasts. Mol Microbiol 2006; 60:5–15 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Bony M, Thines-Sempoux D, Barre P, Blondin B. Localization and cell surface anchoring of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae flocculation protein Flo1p. J Bacteriol 1997; 179:4929–4936 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kobayashi O, Hayashi N, Kuroki R, Sone H. Region of FLO1 proteins responsible for sugar recognition. J Bacteriol 1998; 180:6503–6510 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Goossens KVY, Stassen C, Stals I, Donohue DS, Devreese B et al. The N-terminal domain of the Flo1 flocculation protein from Saccharomyces cerevisiae binds specifically to mannose carbohydrates. Eukaryot Cell 2011; 10:110–117 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Miki BL, Poon NH, James AP, Seligy VL. Possible mechanism for flocculation interactions governed by gene FLO1 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Bacteriol 1982; 150:878–889 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Stratford M, Assinder S. Yeast flocculation: Flo1 and NewFlo phenotypes and receptor structure. Yeast 1991; 7:559–574 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Verstrepen KJ, Derdelinckx G, Verachtert H, Delvaux FR. Yeast flocculation: what brewers should know. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2003; 61:197–205 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Sampermans S, Mortier J, Soares EV. Flocculation onset in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: the role of nutrients. J Appl Microbiol 2005; 98:525–531 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Claro FB, Rijsbrack K, Soares EV. Flocculation onset in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: effect of ethanol, heat and osmotic stress. J Appl Microbiol 2007; 102:693–700 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Soares EV, Mota M. Flocculation onset, growth phase, and genealogical age in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Can J Microbiol 1996; 42:539–547 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Bauer FF, Govender P, Bester MC. Yeast flocculation and its biotechnological relevance. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2010; 88:31–39 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Vallejo JA, Sánchez-Pérez A, Martínez JP, Villa TG. Cell aggregations in yeasts and their applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2013; 97:2305–2318 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Soares EV, Soares HMVM. Bioremediation of industrial effluents containing heavy metals using brewing cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a green technology: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2012; 19:1066–1083 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Gonçalves AA, Hackbarth HG, Wisbeck E, Souza O. Evaluation of residual yeast from brewery industry for inactive biosorption of selenium from industrial wastewater: a case study. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2024; 196:314–331 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Machado MD, Santos MSF, Gouveia C, Soares H, Soares EV. Removal of heavy metals using a brewer’s yeast strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: the flocculation as a separation process. Bioresour Technol 2008; 99:2107–2115 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Brückner S, Mösch H-U. Choosing the right lifestyle: adhesion and development in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2012; 36:25–58 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Rossouw D, Bagheri B, Setati ME, Bauer FF. Co-flocculation of yeast species, a new mechanism to govern population dynamics in microbial ecosystems. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0136249 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Opalek M, Wloch-Salamon D. Aspects of multicellularity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast: a review of evolutionary and physiological mechanisms. Genes (Basel) 2020; 11:690 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Kobayashi O, Suda H, Ohtani T, Sone H. Molecular cloning and analysis of the dominant flocculation gene FLO8 from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Gen Genet 1996; 251:707–715 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Liu H, Styles CA, Fink GR. Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C has a mutation in FLO8, a gene required for filamentous growth. Genetics 1996; 144:967–978 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Haruki H, Nishikawa J, Laemmli UK. The anchor-away technique: rapid, conditional establishment of yeast mutant phenotypes. Mol Cell 2008; 31:925–932 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Collart MA, Oliviero S. Preparation of yeast RNA. Curr Protoc Mol Biol 2001; Chapter 13:Unit13 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol 2014; 15:550 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Cherry JM, Adler C, Ball C, Chervitz SA, Dwight SS et al. SGD: Saccharomyces Genome Database. Nucleic Acids Res 1998; 26:73–79 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Boles E, Hollenberg CP. The molecular genetics of hexose transport in yeasts. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1997; 21:85–111 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  62. McAlister L, Holland MJ. Differential expression of the three yeast glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase genes. J Biol Chem 1985; 260:15019–15027 [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Bhoite LT, Yu Y, Stillman DJ. The Swi5 activator recruits the mediator complex to the HO promoter without RNA polymerase II. Genes Dev 2001; 15:2457–2469 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Kankipati HN, Rubio-Texeira M, Castermans D, Diallinas G, Thevelein JM. Sul1 and Sul2 sulfate transceptors signal to protein kinase A upon exit of sulfur starvation. J Biol Chem 2015; 290:10430–10446 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Sprague GF, Herskowitz I. Control of yeast cell type by the mating type locus. I. Identification and control of expression of the a-specific gene BAR1. J Mol Biol 1981; 153:305–321 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Ness F, Bourot S, Régnacq M, Spagnoli R, Bergès T et al. SUT1 is a putative Zn[II]2Cys6-transcription factor whose upregulation enhances both sterol uptake and synthesis in aerobically growing Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells. Eur J Biochem 2001; 268:1585–1595 [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Korber P, Barbaric S. The yeast PHO5 promoter: from single locus to systems biology of a paradigm for gene regulation through chromatin. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42:10888–10902 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Mannhaupt G, Schnall R, Karpov V, Vetter I, Feldmann H. Rpn4p acts as a transcription factor by binding to PACE, a nonamer box found upstream of 26S proteasomal and other genes in yeast. FEBS Lett 1999; 450:27–34 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Özcan S, Vallier LG, Flick JS, Carlson M, Johnston M. Expression of the SUC2 gene of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is induced by low levels of glucose. Yeast 1997; 13:127–137 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Regenberg B, Holmberg S, Olsen LD, Kielland-Brandt MC. Dip5p mediates high-affinity and high-capacity transport of L-glutamate and L-aspartate in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr Genet 1998; 33:171–177 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Dohrmann PR, Butler G, Tamai K, Dorland S, Greene JR et al. Parallel pathways of gene regulation: homologous regulators SWI5 and ACE2 differentially control transcription of HO and chitinase. Genes Dev 1992; 6:93–104 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Belpaire TER, Pešek J, Lories B, Verstrepen KJ, Steenackers HP et al. Permissive aggregative group formation favors coexistence between cooperators and defectors in yeast. ISME J 2022; 16:2305–2312 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Rossouw D, Meiring SP, Bauer FF. Modifying Saccharomyces cerevisiae adhesion properties regulates yeast ecosystem dynamics. mSphere 2018; 3:e00383-18 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Régnacq M, Alimardani P, El Moudni B, Bergès T. SUT1p interaction with Cyc8p(Ssn6p) relieves hypoxic genes from Cyc8p-Tup1p repression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Microbiol 2001; 40:1085–1096 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Teng X, Dayhoff-Brannigan M, Cheng W-C, Gilbert CE, Sing CN et al. Genome-wide consequences of deleting any single gene. Mol Cell 2013; 52:485–494 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001216
Loading
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001216
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Supplementary material 2

EXCEL
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error