Compatibility logic of human enhancer and promoter sequences

Gene regulation in the human genome is controlled by distal enhancers that activate specific nearby promoters. One model for the specificity of enhancer-promoter regulation is that different promoters might have sequence-encoded preferences for distinct classes of enhancers, for example mediated by interacting sets of transcription factors or cofactors. This “biochemical compatibility” model has been supported by observations at individual human promoters and by genome-wide measurements in Drosophila. However, the degree to which human enhancers and promoters are intrinsically compatible or specific has not been systematically measured, and how their activities combine to control RNA expression remains unclear. To address these questions, we designed a high-throughput reporter assay called enhancer x promoter (ExP) STARR-seq and applied it to examine the combinatorial compatibilities of 1,000 enhancer and 1,000 promoter sequences in human K562 cells. We identify a simple logic for enhancer-promoter compatibility – virtually all enhancers activated all promoters by similar amounts, and intrinsic enhancer and promoter activities combine multiplicatively to determine RNA output (R2=0.82). In addition, two classes of enhancers and promoters showed subtle preferential effects. Promoters of housekeeping genes contained built-in activating sequences, corresponding to motifs for factors such as GABPA and YY1, that correlated with both stronger autonomous promoter activity and enhancer activity, and weaker responsiveness to distal enhancers. Promoters of context-specific genes lacked these motifs and showed stronger responsiveness to enhancers. Together, this systematic assessment of enhancer-promoter compatibility suggests a multiplicative model tuned by enhancer and promoter class to control gene transcription in the human genome.

[1]  B. Cohen,et al.  Genomic environments scale the activities of diverse core promoters , 2021, bioRxiv.

[2]  Ryan L. Collins,et al.  Genome-wide enhancer maps link risk variants to disease genes , 2021, Nature.

[3]  P. Cramer,et al.  Sequence determinants of human gene regulatory elements , 2021, Nature Genetics.

[4]  Z. Weng,et al.  Genetic and epigenetic features of promoters with ubiquitous chromatin accessibility support ubiquitous transcription of cell-essential genes , 2020, bioRxiv.

[5]  Jay Shendure,et al.  A systematic evaluation of the design and context dependencies of massively parallel reporter assays , 2020, Nature Methods.

[6]  Neva C. Durand,et al.  Activity-by-Contact model of enhancer-promoter regulation from thousands of CRISPR perturbations , 2019, Nature Genetics.

[7]  Vanja Haberle,et al.  Transcriptional cofactors display specificity for distinct types of core promoters , 2019, Nature.

[8]  E. Segal,et al.  Systematic interrogation of human promoters , 2019, Genome research.

[9]  R. Sandberg,et al.  Genomic encoding of transcriptional burst kinetics , 2019, Nature.

[10]  B. Cohen,et al.  A massively parallel reporter assay dissects the influence of chromatin structure on cis-regulatory activity , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[11]  A. Stark,et al.  Eukaryotic core promoters and the functional basis of transcription initiation , 2018, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[12]  F. A. Kolpakov,et al.  HOCOMOCO: towards a complete collection of transcription factor binding models for human and mouse via large-scale ChIP-Seq analysis , 2017, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Łukasz M. Boryń,et al.  Resolving systematic errors in widely-used enhancer activity assays in human cells , 2017, Nature Methods.

[14]  Pardis C Sabeti,et al.  Direct Identification of Hundreds of Expression-Modulating Variants using a Multiplexed Reporter Assay , 2016, Cell.

[15]  K. White,et al.  Functional assessment of human enhancer activities using whole-genome STARR-sequencing , 2017, Genome Biology.

[16]  Timothy E. Reddy,et al.  CRISPR–Cas9 epigenome editing enables high-throughput screening for functional regulatory elements in the human genome , 2017, Nature Biotechnology.

[17]  G. Natoli,et al.  High constitutive activity of a broad panel of housekeeping and tissue-specific cis-regulatory elements depends on a subset of ETS proteins. , 2017, Genes & development.

[18]  H. Bussemaker,et al.  Genome-wide mapping of autonomous promoter activity in human cells , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[19]  Martina Rath,et al.  Genome-wide assessment of sequence-intrinsic enhancer responsiveness at single-base-pair resolution , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  E. Lander,et al.  Local regulation of gene expression by lncRNA promoters, transcription and splicing , 2016, Nature.

[21]  Sharon R Grossman,et al.  Systematic mapping of functional enhancer–promoter connections with CRISPR interference , 2016, Science.

[22]  Andreas R. Pfenning,et al.  High-throughput functional comparison of promoter and enhancer activities , 2016, Genome research.

[23]  Eric S. Lander,et al.  Direct Identification of Hundreds of Expression-Modulating Variants using a Multiplexed Reporter Assay , 2016, Cell.

[24]  David M Sabatini,et al.  Large-Scale Single Guide RNA Library Construction and Use for CRISPR-Cas9-Based Genetic Screens. , 2016, Cold Spring Harbor protocols.

[25]  Timothy E. Reddy,et al.  Highly Specific Epigenome Editing by CRISPR/Cas9 Repressors for Silencing of Distal Regulatory Elements , 2015, Nature Methods.

[26]  Lan T M Dao,et al.  High-throughput and quantitative assessment of enhancer activity in mammals by CapStarr-seq , 2015, Nature Communications.

[27]  Martina Rath,et al.  Enhancer–core-promoter specificity separates developmental and housekeeping gene regulation , 2014, Nature.

[28]  André L. Martins,et al.  Analysis of nascent RNA identifies a unified architecture of initiation regions at mammalian promoters and enhancers , 2014, Nature Genetics.

[29]  H. Bussemaker,et al.  In search of the determinants of enhancer-promoter interaction specificity. , 2014, Trends in cell biology.

[30]  Łukasz M. Boryń,et al.  Genome-Wide Quantitative Enhancer Activity Maps Identified by STARR-seq , 2013, Science.

[31]  Data production leads,et al.  An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome , 2012 .

[32]  A. Sandelin,et al.  Metazoan promoters: emerging characteristics and insights into transcriptional regulation , 2012, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[33]  T. Mikkelsen,et al.  Rapid dissection and model-based optimization of inducible enhancers in human cells using a massively parallel reporter assay , 2012, Nature Biotechnology.

[34]  William Stafford Noble,et al.  FIMO: scanning for occurrences of a given motif , 2011, Bioinform..

[35]  Z. Weng,et al.  Sequence features that drive human promoter function and tissue specificity. , 2010, Genome research.

[36]  Jane M J Lin,et al.  Identification and Characterization of Cell Type–Specific and Ubiquitous Chromatin Regulatory Structures in the Human Genome , 2007, PLoS genetics.

[37]  J. T. Kadonaga,et al.  Enhancer-promoter specificity mediated by DPE or TATA core promoter motifs. , 2001, Genes & development.

[38]  M. Levine,et al.  Different core promoters possess distinct regulatory activities in the Drosophila embryo. , 1998, Genes & development.

[39]  S. Smale,et al.  Mechanism of synergy between TATA and initiator: synergistic binding of TFIID following a putative TFIIA-induced isomerization. , 1997, Genes & development.

[40]  M Yu,et al.  GA-binding Protein-dependent Transcription Initiator Elements , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[41]  J. Gralla,et al.  Transcription reinitiation rate: a special role for the TATA box , 1997, Molecular and cellular biology.

[42]  Bernhard Lüscher,et al.  Characterization of the Transcriptional Regulator YY1 , 1997, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[43]  A. Usheva,et al.  YY1 transcriptional initiator: protein interactions and association with a DNA site containing unpaired strands. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  S. Smale,et al.  Core promoter specificities of the Sp1 and VP16 transcriptional activation domains , 1995, Molecular and cellular biology.

[45]  R. Roeder,et al.  Cloning of an intrinsic human TFIID subunit that interacts with multiple transcriptional activators , 1995, Science.

[46]  N. Avadhani,et al.  A novel transcriptional initiator activity of the GABP factor binding ets sequence repeat from the murine cytochrome c oxidase Vb gene. , 1995, Gene expression.

[47]  N. Avadhani,et al.  Cooperative binding of GA-binding protein transcription factors to duplicated transcription initiation region repeats of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit IV gene. , 1994, The Journal of biological chemistry.

[48]  M. Noll,et al.  Compatibility between enhancers and promoters determines the transcriptional specificity of gooseberry and gooseberry neuro in the Drosophila embryo. , 1994, The EMBO journal.

[49]  W. Schaffner,et al.  Every enhancer works with every promoter for all the combinations tested: could new regulatory pathways evolve by enhancer shuffling? , 1991, Gene expression.

[50]  R. S. Williams,et al.  Functional heterogeneity of mammalian TATA-box sequences revealed by interaction with a cell-specific enhancer , 1990, Nature.

[51]  D. Tuan,et al.  An erythroid-specific, developmental-stage-independent enhancer far upstream of the human "beta-like globin" genes. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[52]  F. Grosveld,et al.  The human beta-globin gene 3' enhancer contains multiple binding sites for an erythroid-specific protein. , 1988, Genes & development.

[53]  J. Banerji,et al.  A lymphocyte-specific cellular enhancer is located downstream of the joining region in immunoglobulin heavy chain genes , 1983, Cell.

[54]  J. Banerji,et al.  Expression of a beta-globin gene is enhanced by remote SV40 DNA sequences. , 1981, Cell.

[55]  F. J. Anscombe,et al.  THE TRANSFORMATION OF POISSON, BINOMIAL AND NEGATIVE-BINOMIAL DATA , 1948 .