ALBERT

Description: Centromeres are the complex structures responsible for the proper segregation of chromosomes during cell division. Structural or functional alterations of the centromere cause aneuploidies and other chromosomal aberrations that can induce cell death with consequences on health and survival of the organism as a whole. Because of their essential function in the cell, centromeres have evolved high flexibility and mechanisms of tolerance to preserve their function following stress, whether it is originating from within or outside the cell. Here, we review the main epigenetic mechanisms of centromeres’ adaptability to preserve their functional stability, with particular reference to neocentromeres and holocentromeres. The centromere position can shift in response to altered chromosome structures, but how and why neocentromeres appear in a given chromosome region are still open questions. Models of neocentromere formation developed during the last few years will be hereby discussed. Moreover, we will discuss the evolutionary significance of diffuse centromeres (holocentromeres) in organisms such as nematodes. Despite the differences in DNA sequences, protein composition and centromere size, all of these diverse centromere structures promote efficient chromosome segregation, balancing genome stability and adaptability, and ensuring faithful genome inheritance at each cellular generation.

Description: Centromeres are essential genetic elements that enable spindle microtubule attachment for chromosome segregation during mitosis and meiosis. While this function is preserved across species, centromeres display an array of dynamic features, including: (1) rapidly evolving DNA; (2) wide evolutionary diversity in size, shape and organization; (3) evidence of mutational processes to generate homogenized repetitive arrays that characterize centromeres in several species; (4) tolerance to changes in position, as in the case of neocentromeres; and (5) intrinsic fragility derived by sequence composition and secondary DNA structures. Centromere drive underlies rapid centromere DNA evolution due to the “selfish” pursuit to bias meiotic transmission and promote the propagation of stronger centromeres. Yet, the origins of other dynamic features of centromeres remain unclear. Here, we review our current understanding of centromere evolution and plasticity. We also detail the mutagenic processes proposed to shape the divergent genetic nature of centromeres. Changes to centromeres are not simply evolutionary relics, but ongoing shifts that on one side promote centromere flexibility, but on the other can undermine centromere integrity and function with potential pathological implications such as genome instability.

Description: Common fragile sites (CFSs) are particularly vulnerable regions of the genome that become visible as breaks, gaps, or constrictions on metaphase chromosomes when cells are under replicative stress. Impairment in DNA replication, late replication timing, enrichment of A/T nucleotides that tend to form secondary structures, the paucity of active or inducible replication origins, the generation of R-loops, and the collision between replication and transcription machineries on particularly long genes are some of the reported characteristics of CFSs that may contribute to their tissue-specific fragility. Here, we validated the induction of two CFSs previously found in the human fetal lung fibroblast line, Medical Research Council cell strain 5 (MRC-5), in another cell line derived from the same fetal tissue, Institute for Medical Research-90 cells (IMR-90). After induction of CFSs through aphidicolin, we confirmed the expression of the CFS 1p31.1 on chromosome 1 and CFS 3q13.3 on chromosome 3 in both fetal lines. Interestingly, these sites were found to not be fragile in lymphocytes, suggesting a role for epigenetic or transcriptional programs for this tissue specificity. Both these sites contained late-replicating genes NEGR1 (neuronal growth regulator 1) at 1p31.1 and LSAMP (limbic system-associated membrane protein) at 3q13.3, which are much longer, 0.880 and 1.4 Mb, respectively, than the average gene length. Given the established connection between long genes and CFS, we compiled information from the literature on all previously identified CFSs expressed in fibroblasts and lymphocytes in response to aphidicolin, including the size of the genes contained in each fragile region. Our comprehensive analysis confirmed that the genes found within CFSs are longer than the average human gene; interestingly, the two longest genes in the human genome are found within CFSs: Contactin Associated Protein 2 gene (CNTNAP2) in a lymphocytes’ CFS, and Duchenne muscular dystrophy gene (DMD) in a CFS expressed in both lymphocytes and fibroblasts. This indicates that the presence of very long genes is a unifying feature of all CFSs. We also obtained replication profiles of the 1p31.1 and 3q13.3 sites under both perturbed and unperturbed conditions using a combination of fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunofluorescence against bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) on interphase nuclei. Our analysis of the replication dynamics of these CFSs showed that, compared to lymphocytes where these regions are non-fragile, fibroblasts display incomplete replication of the fragile alleles, even in the absence of exogenous replication stress. Our data point to the existence of intrinsic features, in addition to the presence of long genes, which affect DNA replication of the CFSs in fibroblasts, thus promoting chromosomal instability in a tissue-specific manner.