We study how cells ensure that proteins fold into their correct shape, as well as the role of protein misfolding in disease and normal physiology. We also build innovative tools for broadly exploring organizational principles of biological systems. These include ribosome profiling, which globally monitors protein translation, CRIPSRi/a for controlling the expression of human genes and rewiring the epigenome, and lineage tracing tools, to record the history of cells.
Awards
Ira Herskowitz Award, Genetic Society of America, 2020
European Molecular Biology Organization, Member, 2017
National Academy of Sciences Award for Scientific Discovery, 2015
American Academy of Microbiology, Fellow, 2010
National Academy of Sciences, Member, 2009
Raymond and Beverly Sackler International Prize in Biophysics, Tel Aviv University, 2008
Protein Society Irving Sigal Young Investigator’s Award, 2004
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Assistant Investigator, 2000
Searle Scholars Program Fellowship, 1997
David and Lucile Packard Fellowship, 1996
Differences in male and female gene expression, including those contributing to height differences, found throughout the body in humans and other mammals.
Greta Friar | Whitehead Institute
July 19, 2019
Throughout the animal kingdom, males and females frequently exhibit sexual dimorphism: differences in characteristic traits that often make it easy to tell them apart. In mammals, one of the most common sex-biased traits is size, with males typically being larger than females. This is true in humans: Men are, on average, taller than women. However, biological differences among males and females aren’t limited to physical traits like height. They’re also common in disease. For example, women are much more likely to develop autoimmune diseases, while men are more likely to develop cardiovascular diseases.
In spite of the widespread nature of these sex biases, and their significant implications for medical research and treatment, little is known about the underlying biology that causes sex differences in characteristic traits or disease. In order to address this gap in understanding, Whitehead Institute Director David Page has transformed the focus of his lab in recent years from studying the X and Y sex chromosomes to working to understand the broader biology of sex differences throughout the body. In a paper published in Science, Page, a professor of biology at MIT and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator; Sahin Naqvi, first author and former MIT graduate student (now a postdoc at Stanford University); and colleagues present the results of a wide-ranging investigation into sex biases in gene expression, revealing differences in the levels at which particular genes are expressed in males versus females.
The researchers’ findings span 12 tissue types in five species of mammals, including humans, and led to the discovery that a combination of sex-biased genes accounts for approximately 12 percent of the average height difference between men and women. This finding demonstrates a functional role for sex-biased gene expression in contributing to sex differences. The researchers also found that the majority of sex biases in gene expression are not shared between mammalian species, suggesting that — in some cases — sex-biased gene expression that can contribute to disease may differ between humans and the animals used as models in medical research.
Having the same gene expressed at different levels in each sex is one way to perpetuate sex differences in traits in spite of the genetic similarity of males and females within a species — since with the exception of the 46th chromosome (the Y in males or the second X in females), the sexes share the same pool of genes. For example, if a tall parent passes on a gene associated with an increase in height to both a son and a daughter, but the gene has male-biased expression, then that gene will be more highly expressed in the son, and so may contribute more height to the son than the daughter.
The researchers searched for sex-biased genes in tissues across the body in humans, macaques, mice, rats, and dogs, and they found hundreds of examples in every tissue. They used height for their first demonstration of the contribution of sex-biased gene expression to sex differences in traits because height is an easy-to-measure and heavily studied trait in quantitative genetics.
“Discovering contributions of sex-biased gene expression to height is exciting because identifying the determinants of height is a classic, century-old problem, and yet by looking at sex differences in this new way we were able to provide new insights,” Page says. “My hope is that we and other researchers can repeat this model to similarly gain new insights into diseases that show sex bias.”
Because height is so well studied, the researchers had access to public data on the identity of hundreds of genes that affect height. Naqvi decided to see how many of those height genes appeared in the researchers’ new dataset of sex-biased genes, and whether the genes’ sex biases corresponded to the expected effects on height. He found that sex-biased gene expression contributed approximately 1.6 centimeters to the average height difference between men and women, or 12 percent of the overall observed difference.
The scope of the researchers’ findings goes beyond height, however. Their database contains thousands of sex-biased genes. Slightly less than a quarter of the sex-biased genes that they catalogued appear to have evolved that sex bias in an early mammalian ancestor, and to have maintained that sex bias today in at least four of the five species studied. The majority of the genes appear to have evolved their sex biases more recently, and are specific to either one species or a certain lineage, such as rodents or primates.
Whether or not a sex-biased gene is shared across species is a particularly important consideration for medical and pharmaceutical research using animal models. For example, previous research identified certain genetic variants that increase the risk of Type 2 diabetes specifically in women; however, the same variants increase the risk of Type 2 diabetes indiscriminately in male and female mice. Therefore, mice would not be a good model to study the genetic basis of this sex difference in humans. Even when the animal appears to have the same sex difference in disease as humans, the specific sex-biased genes involved might be different. Based on their finding that most sex bias is not shared between species, Page and colleagues urge researchers to use caution when picking an animal model to study sex differences at the level of gene expression.
“We’re not saying to avoid animal models in sex-differences research, only not to take for granted that the sex-biased gene expression behind a trait or disease observed in an animal will be the same as that in humans. Now that researchers have species and tissue-specific data available to them, we hope they will use it to inform their interpretation of results from animal models,” Naqvi says.
The researchers have also begun to explore what exactly causes sex-biased expression of genes not found on the sex chromosomes. Naqvi discovered a mechanism by which sex-biased expression may be enabled: through sex-biased transcription factors, proteins that help to regulate gene expression. Transcription factors bind to specific DNA sequences called motifs, and he found that certain sex-biased genes had the motif for a sex-biased transcription factor in their promoter regions, the sections of DNA that turn on gene expression. This means that, for example, a male-biased transcription factor was selectively binding to the promoter region for, and so increasing the expression of, male-biased genes — and likewise for female-biased transcription factors and female-biased genes. The question of what regulates the transcription factors remains for further study — but all sex differences are ultimately controlled by either the sex chromosomes or sex hormones.
The researchers see the collective findings of this paper as a foundation for future sex-differences research.
“We’re beginning to build the infrastructure for a systematic understanding of sex biases throughout the body,” Page says. “We hope these datasets are used for further research, and we hope this work gives people a greater appreciation of the need for, and value of, research into the molecular differences in male and female biology.”
This work was supported by Biogen, Whitehead Institute, National Institutes of Health, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and generous gifts from Brit and Alexander d’Arbeloff and Arthur W. and Carol Tobin Brill.
Third-year graduate student Emma Kowal is searching DNA for sequences that regulate gene expression.
Saima Sidik
July 8, 2019
“I went into science because of a certain obsession with the romance of it,” says Emma Kowal, a third-year graduate student in Chris Burge’s lab in the MIT Department of Biology. “I loved the idea of the scientist as an adventurer exploring the frontiers of knowledge and the universe. And I haven’t let go of that yet.”
Kowal has always been an avid science fiction reader, and now she’s living out a real-life scientific odyssey. The quest she’s taken on for her PhD research involves an understudied type of DNA sequence called an intron, and the roles that introns might play in regulating gene expression.
Introns lie between the DNA sequences that cells use for protein production, and are initially incorporated into the messenger RNA, or mRNA, that cells produce as an intermediate step in synthesizing proteins from DNA. But before they complete protein synthesis, cells remove introns from mRNA through a process called splicing, which has led many people to view introns as junk DNA with splicing acting like a garbage disposal.
“Introns appeal to me as the underdog genomic region,” Kowal says. Although they’re often seen as unimportant, introns are ubiquitous and plentiful, collectively making up 24% of the human genome. All eukaryotes have them, and, on average, each human gene encodes eight. Many researchers, including Kowal, think that introns have been underestimated, and that they may play an important role in regulating gene expression.
Introns are only the latest chapter in Kowal’s RNA story. She began her research career as a Harvard University undergraduate student working in the Szostak Lab at Massachusetts General Hospital, where she studied how RNA catalyzed the evolution of cells on the early earth. Although studying primordial life was intellectually stimulating, Kowal wanted to work on something more applied, and so she joined the Church Lab in the Harvard Department of Genetics. There she developed methods for purifying and imaging enigmatic RNA-containing lipid compartments called extracellular vesicles, which cells release into their surrounding environments possibly to communicate with one another.
For the sequel to her bachelor’s degree, Kowal chose to attend MIT Biology because she’d heard that, “at MIT, everyone is one standard deviation nerdier, on average, than they are at other schools.” In this sense, she has not been disappointed. Kowal calls the energy at MIT “unparalleled,” and she says, “people are jazzed about what they’re doing, and the whole campus reflects that.”
In some ways, these reflections are physical. Much of the artwork around MIT pays homage to major scientific discoveries, and Kowal says this reverence for science is one factor that attracted her to MIT. From the mural of DNA in the Biology Department to the golden neurons that descend alongside the staircase in the McGovern Institute for Brain Research, it’s as if the community is saying, “look at how awesome the universe is!” as Kowal puts it.
In other ways, this energy is reflected in the people she converses with daily. “I really like the students here,” Kowal says. “Everyone is enthusiastic, but also down to earth.” When she’s not exploring the realms of science, Kowal sometimes has more fanciful adventures with the Dungeons and Dragons group that she’s formed with some of her classmates.
Kowal didn’t necessarily intend to continue working on RNA at MIT Biology, but when she heard about Chris Burge’s lab, which focuses on RNA and the proteins that mediate its production and stability, she felt a call to action.
The Burge Lab combines high throughput experimental techniques with bioinformatics, and Kowal wants to develop expertise in both these fields. “If you’re skilled in generating and analyzing big data sets, you can ask questions that other people can’t,” she says. The Burge lab seemed like the perfect setting for her PhD.
Over and over, scientists have noticed that cells produce more protein from genes that contain introns than when those same introns are removed. Intron mediated enhancement (IME), as this effect is called, is a “stunningly broad phenomenon,” Kowal says, and scientists have observed it in a wide range of organisms, from yeast to plants to humans.Burge asks his students to begin their degrees with a month-long reading period during which they sift through the literature to find a topic that they want to study. “You’re not allowed to pick up a pipette or do any analysis during your reading period,” Kowal says. “You just read and discuss your ideas and let things percolate.” As she read, Kowal came across a number of studies that discussed the influence that introns have on gene expression levels.
Splicing machinery, which removes introns from mRNA, likely plays a role in IME. This machinery binds mRNA as it’s being produced from DNA, then interacts with, and influences, the RNA production machinery. However, researchers have created mutant introns that can’t be recognized by splicing machinery, and sometimes these introns still enhance gene expression, so splicing isn’t the only factor that drives IME. Moreover, replacing one intron with another of the same size containing a different DNA sequence can change its effect, implying that the exact DNA sequences within introns may dictate their effects on gene expression. Kowal is intrigued by this last point, and wants to find these intronic sequences and figure out which have the largest effects on gene expression and why.
“This is an old mystery that’s ripe for new tools,” Kowal says. Over the last decade, researchers have begun using a technique called RNAseq to count the copies of mRNA that are made from each gene in a population of cells. Instead of replacing an intron with a single alternative DNA sequence, Kowal plans to replace an intron with a myriad of random DNA sequences, then use RNAseq to count how many copies of mRNA cells make when they encode each of these random introns.
Preparing to test these random sequences has been an odyssey in and of itself, and Kowal has spent the last year building the system that she’ll use. First, she needed to decide which intron to replace. She chose one from a gene called UbC. Removing this intron reduces expression of UbC by ten-fold.
Besides contributing strongly to IME, the UbC intron is a great candidate for Kowal’s experiment because it lies in a regulatory region of the UbC mRNA that precedes the portion that’s translated into protein. This let her replace the UbC protein coding region with a fluorescent protein that she’ll use to visualize how much protein cells make when they encode each random intron sequence.
Kowal has spent the last year meticulously incorporating a library of random introns into this synthetic version of the UbC gene. She anticipates being able to introduce them into cells soon, to see which random introns result in the highest levels of mRNA and protein production. Thanks to RNAseq, she’ll be able to monitor how much each random intron contributes to mRNA expression. Because she can measure how brightly the fluorescent protein glows, she can correlate these mRNA levels with protein levels. From this, she’ll learn which intron sequences enhance gene expression most strongly, and she’ll also know whether these introns lead to higher levels of mRNA production, or if the same amount of mRNA is made into more protein. This distinction will offer her clues about the mechanism that introns use to enhance gene expression.
Once Kowal knows which intron sequences promote gene expression most effectively, she’ll take advantage of the Burge lab’s bioinformatics expertise to analyze the distribution of these sequences throughout genomes and predict how they affect global gene expression. Kowal suspects certain intron sequences are bound by proteins that mediate mRNA production and stability, and she thinks her work will identify these protein-intron pairs.
Kowal balances her scientific adventures with outdoor adventures. Specifically, she’s recently fallen in love with rock climbing. “Climbing is a great counterpart to science because it’s something you can chip away at, and then there’s this huge satisfaction when you finally achieve a climb,” she says. “And also, between climbing and pipetting, I have really strong fingers.”
As for her love of science fiction, Kowal hopes to one day pen a science-based adventure of her own, but not before she’s made her mark as a scientist, either as a professor or in industry. ”It makes sense for me to focus most of my energy on science right now,” she says. “But after I’ve led a spectacular, adventurous life in science, maybe I’ll use my reflections to write a novel.”
Posted 7.8.19
Researchers develop a new microscopy system for creating maps of cells, using chemical reactions to encode spatial information.
Karen Zusi | Broad Institute
June 14, 2019
The following press release was issued today by the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.
A team of researchers at the McGovern Institute and Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard has developed a new technique for mapping cells. The approach, called DNA microscopy, shows how biomolecules such as DNA and RNA are organized in cells and tissues, revealing spatial and molecular information that is not easily accessible through other microscopy methods. DNA microscopy also does not require specialized equipment, enabling large numbers of samples to be processed simultaneously.
“DNA microscopy is an entirely new way of visualizing cells that captures both spatial and genetic information simultaneously from a single specimen,” says first author Joshua Weinstein, a postdoctoral associate at the Broad Institute. “It will allow us to see how genetically unique cells — those comprising the immune system, cancer, or the gut, for instance — interact with one another and give rise to complex multicellular life.”
The new technique is described in Cell. Aviv Regev, core institute member and director of the Klarman Cell Observatory at the Broad Institute and professor of biology at MIT, and Feng Zhang, core institute member of the Broad Institute, investigator at the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT, and the James and Patricia Poitras Professor of Neuroscience at MIT, are co-authors. Regev and Zhang are also Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators.
The evolution of biological imaging
In recent decades, researchers have developed tools to collect molecular information from tissue samples, data that cannot be captured by either light or electron microscopes. However, attempts to couple this molecular information with spatial data — to see how it is naturally arranged in a sample — are often machinery-intensive, with limited scalability.
DNA microscopy takes a new approach to combining molecular information with spatial data, using DNA itself as a tool.
To visualize a tissue sample, researchers first add small synthetic DNA tags, which latch on to molecules of genetic material inside cells. The tags are then replicated, diffusing in “clouds” across cells and chemically reacting with each other, further combining and creating more unique DNA labels. The labeled biomolecules are collected, sequenced, and computationally decoded to reconstruct their relative positions and a physical image of the sample.
The interactions between these DNA tags enable researchers to calculate the locations of the different molecules — somewhat analogous to cell phone towers triangulating the locations of different cell phones in their vicinity. Because the process only requires standard lab tools, it is efficient and scalable.
In this study, the authors demonstrate the ability to molecularly map the locations of individual human cancer cells in a sample by tagging RNA molecules. DNA microscopy could be used to map any group of molecules that will interact with the synthetic DNA tags, including cellular genomes, RNA, or proteins with DNA-labeled antibodies, according to the team.
“DNA microscopy gives us microscopic information without a microscope-defined coordinate system,” says Weinstein. “We’ve used DNA in a way that’s mathematically similar to photons in light microscopy. This allows us to visualize biology as cells see it and not as the human eye does. We’re excited to use this tool in expanding our understanding of genetic and molecular complexity.”
Funding for this study was provided by the Simons Foundation, Klarman Cell Observatory, NIH (R01HG009276, 1R01- HG009761, 1R01- MH110049, and 1DP1-HL141201), New York Stem Cell Foundation, Simons Foundation, Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, Vallee Foundation, the Poitras Center for Affective Disorders Research at MIT, the Hock E. Tan and K. Lisa Yang Center for Autism Research at MIT, J. and P. Poitras, and R. Metcalfe.
The authors have applied for a patent on this technology.
Education
PhD, 2012, Chemical Biology, Harvard University
BS, 2006, Life Sciences, Peking University
Research Summary
We are curious about how circuits of interacting genes in individual cells enable multicellular functions, such as self-organizing into structured tissues. To address this question, we analyze genetic circuits in natural systems, combining quantitative measurements and mathematical modeling. In parallel, we test the sufficiency of the circuits and understand their design principles by multi-scale reconstitution, from genes to circuits to multicellular behavior, using synthetic biology and bioengineering tools. Together, we aim to provide both a quantitative understanding of embryonic development and new ways to engineer tissues.
Awards
New Innovator Award, National Institutes of Health Common Fund’s High-Risk, High-Reward Research Program, 2021
R.R. Bensley Award in Cell Biology, American Association for Anatomy, 2021
Santa Cruz Developmental Biology Young Investigator Award, 2016
NIH Pathway to Independence Award K99/R00 (NICHD), 2016
American Cancer Society Postdoctoral Fellowship, 2015
Graduate student Darren Parker aims to understand the ratio of ingredients that constitutes the optimal cell.
Raleigh McElvery
May 31, 2019
Fifth-year graduate student Darren Parker is as much a baker as he is a biologist — at least metaphorically speaking. He’s on a mission to understand the ratio of ingredients required to concoct nature’s winning recipe for the optimal cell. Researchers have a solid understanding of which components are essential for cellular function, but they have yet to determine whether it’s critical for cells to generate exactly the right amount of protein.
“In that way, my graduate work is actually pretty simple,” Parker says. “I just want to know if changing the amounts of a specific ingredient has an effect on the overall product.”
The oldest of four brothers, Parker grew up in a suburb just outside of Chicago. When he enrolled in the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign for his undergraduate studies in 2009, he was considering a major in environmental science. “My high school biology classes were mostly rote memorization,” he explains, “so the molecular aspects just didn’t resonate with me. I was more interested in studying life on a larger scale.”
After his first year, he entered the Integrated Biology program, which essentially “encompassed all biology that wasn’t molecular biology.” He was still required to take an introductory molecular biology course, though, as part of the major. But this time around, something clicked.
He remembers performing his first genetic knockdown experiment, decreasing the level of dopamine receptors in roundworms and witnessing the behavioral ramifications in real time. “I finally had a handle on the molecular concepts enough to really get what was going on,” he says.
He attributed his newfound appreciation for the basic mechanisms underlying life to his fortified chemistry skills. At the beginning of his third year, he officially declared a biochemistry major, and joined a lab in the Department of Chemistry studying nucleic acid enzymes.
Parker’s job was to sift through trillions of short DNA strands, selecting only those that could act like enzymes and cut RNA. He would then home in on the nucleotide sequences within those strands that were best suited to carry out the reaction. After a year-and-a-half, he’d successfully identified a few DNA sequences that could cut RNA molecules with a distinct chemistry. After this point he was excited to try “studying life” as opposed to synthetic reactions.
Mid-way through his fourth year, he joined a biology lab in the College of Medicine probing alternative splicing in liver and heart development. It was a new group with only a few members, and Parker had more experience as an undergraduate than some of the first-year graduate students, so he hit the ground running. His last-minute switch to biochemistry meant he had five years of studies instead of the usual four — totaling six full semesters (and several summers) in lab.
After identifying a key splicing protein required for the liver to fully mature in mice and humans, Parker became even more fascinated by molecular biology and determined to pursue a career in science with bigger picture applications.
At the urging of his advisor, Parker sent in his graduate school applications. He was primarily interested in microbiology and infectious disease research — although he had no prior experience working in bacteria, only a longstanding interest in the intersection of science and society. He ultimately chose MIT Biology because of the breadth of labs. He could join a microbiology lab, or pursue an entirely different path, all within the same department. Gene-Wei Li’s lab seemed like “the perfect mix.”
“Gene was asking questions in molecular biology from the unique perspective of a physicist, looking at biological questions in a way I had never even considered before,” he says. “Gene had also just joined the department and wasn’t tied to a specific field or model organism yet, so I had the chance to build my own projects from the bottom up; I wasn’t just slotting in somewhere.”
Best of all, the Li lab was all about drilling down into to the mechanics of protein production in order to understand the cell as a whole — the bigger picture perspective that Parker was longing for.
Parker began by exploring ways to modify high-throughput RNA sequencing. He aimed to make this popular method cheaper and more scalable, in hopes of knocking out many individual genes in E. coli to test the genome-wide effects. He then pivoted his project and applied his new technique to study the effects of reducing essential genes in B. subtilis, another model bacterium. The family of enzymes that was the most interesting to him from these experiments were the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases.
tRNAs, or transfer RNAs, carry amino acids to the ribosome so that the cell can produce proteins. This process requires the help of enzymes — tRNA synthetases — to “charge” the tRNAs with an amino acid. Only then can the ribosome transfer the amino acid from the tRNAs to the growing chain of amino acids that eventually forms the protein. Like an inquisitive baker, Parker wanted to know what would happen if he added more or less tRNA synthetase to the recipe of a bacterial cell.
His results would make Goldilocks proud. Over the past few years, he’s shown that too much or too little tRNA synthetase prevents the cell from growing at a normal rate. The amount must be just right.
“It turns out that what’s most important to the cell is maintaining the ratios of those very conserved ingredients,” Parker says. “The cell will actively use less of those ingredients if the synthetase is limiting, and this leads to a much slower growing cell. Adding too much tRNA synthetase is just a waste because the cell already has as much as it needs to sustain translation.”
This same family of tRNA synthetase proteins, he adds, are also implicated in some neurological diseases in humans, which gives him further impetus to study them.
At this point, Parker has taste-tested his fair share of biological areas, and he’s found his niche. “It was a long process,” he says. “That was probably best, though, because it gave me more time to explore.”
Once he graduates, he plans to go into industry, perhaps continuing to tweak the list of ingredients in order to engineer cells to do new things.
“The next time you’re in the kitchen and you want to add more or less of your favorite ingredient,” he urges, “just think about how the cell might feel if you did so with your favorite gene.”
Photo credit: Raleigh McElvery
Posted 5.30.19
Greta Friar | Whitehead Institute
April 9, 2019
CAMBRIDGE, MA — Cancers have a habit of running in the family. This is due in large part to the inheritance of versions of genes that are linked with cancer, but some researchers are investigating another heritable risk factor: epigenetic modifications. These are not changes in the DNA sequence of a gene itself but rather are processes that change a DNA sequence’s accessibility or ability to be expressed. These changes can regulate gene expression, and in certain circumstances, be passed down from parent to child alongside the genes they regulate. New research published in eLife on April 9 from the lab of Whitehead Member and Institute Director David Page, also a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, and colleagues has found evidence that when atypical epigenetic modifications, or marks, caused by a gene deletion in the parent’s cells, are inherited it can lead to increased cancer incidence and shorter lifespans in mice.
Studying epigenetic inheritance in mammals can be difficult because mammalian embryos undergo strong epigenetic reprogramming, a kind of “erasing and starting over” for the next generation. Some of the parents’ epigenetic marks resist this reprogramming, but the vast majority are erased, and often what may appear to be epigenetic inheritance can be explained by other factors like environmental exposures during fetal development leading to similar epigenetic profiles.
“We had to design an experiment with a specific, well-defined initiating event, so the epigenetic patterns and health effects would be easy to track,” says first author Bluma Lesch, then a postdoctoral researcher in the Page lab at Whitehead Institute and now an assistant professor of Genetics at Yale School of Medicine and a member of the Genomics, Genetics and Epigenetics Program at Yale Cancer Center.
In order to do this, the researchers first deleted Kdm6a (also called Utx), a gene on the X chromosome that encodes a protein involved in epigenetic regulation, in the male mouse germline—the repository of cells that become sperm. Kdm6a removes epigenetic modifications from histones, the spool-like proteins that house strands of DNA. Deleting Kdm6a led to higher than usual levels of specific types of histone modifications in the genome of the mice’s sperm, which in turn prompted a secondary epigenetic shift, an increase in DNA methylation—the addition of a methyl group to DNA that can alter gene expression.
The researchers used the hypermethylated sperm to create a generation of offspring. A crucial aspect of the experiment was creating offspring that inherited the atypical epigenetic marks but not the gene deletion that caused them in order to uncouple the effects of the two changes. Offspring were bred from a modified male germline and an unmodified female germline, so male offspring inherited a healthy X chromosome from their mothers, and an unaffected Y chromosome from their fathers. Genetically, the mice were normal, but they were formed from sperm that had been exposed to the Kdm6a deletion’s epigenetic effects.
When the researchers studied the epigenome of these offspring, they found that while many of the modifications had been erased due to reprogramming, more than 200 of the sections of DNA that had been hypermethylated in the father’s germline following Kdm6a deletion were likewise hypermethylated in the offspring. That persistence is much higher than would be expected by chance or observed in normal mice. The researchers found matching instances of hypermethylation in the offspring’s bone marrow, liver tumors, and spleen, indicating that the inherited epigenetic changes stuck with the offspring though embryonic development into adulthood. The researchers did not pinpoint the mechanism that allowed these epigenetic marks to resist reprogramming; Lesch hopes to pursue that question in the future.
Then the researchers watched the mice grow, waiting to see how the unusual DNA methylation would affect the mice’s health. For a while, the mice appeared perfectly healthy — until they hit middle age. The mice then began developing tumors, experiencing an increase in cancer incidence and a decrease in lifespan.
To get a better understanding of the effects they were seeing, Page and Lesch sought help from cancer experts Benjamin Ebert, chair of medical oncology at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) and member of the Broad Institute; Zuzana Tothova, DFCI investigator and associate member of the Broad Institute; and Roderick Bronson, veterinary pathologist at Harvard Medical School. The experts helped characterize the mice’s diseases. Instead of becoming more susceptible to one specific type of cancer, the mice had a diverse set of diagnoses, similar to what would be expected of normal mice at a much older age. The researchers believe this is due to hypermethylation that they observed in enhancers, regions of DNA that help increase transcription of many genes but are also commonly implicated in cancer.
Although the researchers cannot say whether the same sort of epigenetic inheritance is occurring in humans, they believe that this is a valuable question for future research. Inherited epigenetic marks would not appear in a typical genetic screen for cancer risk, and as such could be overlooked to the detriment of preventative care. Likewise, the researchers note, cancer drugs that target epigenetic mechanisms are on the rise, and there has been no research into the effects that this might have on children conceived by people taking the drugs. If human embryos are inheriting aberrant epigenetic marks in the manner observed in mice in this investigation, then people taking drugs with epigenetic targets should be warned against conceiving children until after they are clear of the effects of their medication.
“We hope that this research demonstrating the cancer risk of inherited epigenetic marks in mice adds to the burgeoning field of mammalian epigenetic inheritance research,” Page says, “and that we have drawn attention to the possible implications for human health.”
Written by Greta Friar
***
David Page’s primary affiliation is with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and a Professor of Biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
***
Full citation:
“Intergenerational epigenetic inheritance of cancer susceptibility in mammals”
Bluma J. Lesch, Zuzana Tothova, Elizabeth A. Morgan, Zhicong Liao, Roderick T. Bronson, Benjamin L. Ebert, and David C. Page.
Greta Friar | Whitehead Institute
February 27, 2019
Cambridge, MA — Cells can divide and multiply in two ways: mitosis, in which the cell replicates itself, creating two copies identical to the original; or meiosis, in which the cell shuffles its DNA and divides twice, creating four genetically unique cells, each with half of the original cell’s number of chromosomes. In mammals, these latter cells become eggs and sperm.
How do germ line cells, the repository of cells that create eggs and sperm, know when to stop replicating themselves and undergo meiosis? Researchers had been aware that a protein called STRA8, which is only active in germ line cells, was involved in initiating meiosis, but they did not know how. New research from Whitehead Member and Institute Director David Page, also a professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an investigator with Howard Hughes Medical Institute; Mina Kojima, formerly a Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate student and now a postdoctoral researcher at Yale; and visiting scientist Dirk de Rooij has revealed that in mice, STRA8 initiates meiosis by activating and amplifying a network of thousands of genes. This network includes genes involved in the early stages of meiosis, DNA replication, and other cell division processes. The research was published in eLife on February 27, 2019.
In the past, researchers have had difficulty collecting enough cells on the cusp of meiosis to investigate STRA8’s role. In mammals, germ line cells are inside the body, difficult to access, and they begin meiosis in staggered fashion so few cells are at the same stage during an extraction. Researchers in Page’s lab had previously come up with an approach to solve this problem using developmental synchronization, manipulating the cells’ exposure to the chemical that triggers their development in order to prompt all of the cells to begin meiosis simultaneously. Once the cells were synced up, first author Kojima could get a large enough sample to observe patterns in gene expression leading up to and during meiosis, and to figure out where STRA8 is binding.
She found that STRA8 binds to the regulatory portions of DNA called promoter regions, which initiate or increase transcription of adjacent genes, of most critical meiosis genes. With some exceptions, STRA8 does not switch genes from off to on. Rather, genes in the STRA8-regulated network are already expressed at low levels and STRA8 binding massively ramps up their production. The researchers posit that meiosis is then initiated once the genes reach a threshold of expression. This finding sheds light on instances in previous studies in which researchers found meiosis-related genes active in cells not yet undergoing meiosis.
The researchers were surprised to find that STRA8 also amplifies many genes involved in mitosis. However, they suggest that the meiosis-specific genes activated by STRA8 take precedence in determining which of the two cell-cycle processes the cell will undergo. STRA8 regulates certain critical genes, such as Meioc and Ythdc2, whichhelp to establish a meiosis-specific cell-cycle program.
This research enriches our understanding of the process of sexual reproduction. Identifying the expansive STRA8-regulated network has elucidated the start of meiosis: the moment a cell commits to recombining and dividing, relinquishing its genetic identity for the chance to create something — or someone — new.
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
Written by Greta Friar
***
David Page’s primary affiliation is with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and a Professor of Biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
***
Full citation:
“Amplification of a broad transcriptional program by a common factor triggers the meiotic cell cycle in mice”
Researchers have devised a faster, more efficient way to design custom peptides and perturb protein-protein interactions.
Raleigh McElvery | Department of Biology
February 15, 2019
One way to probe intricate biological systems is to block their components from interacting and see what happens. This method allows researchers to better understand cellular processes and functions, augmenting everyday laboratory experiments, diagnostic assays, and therapeutic interventions. As a result, reagents that impede interactions between proteins are in high demand. But before scientists can rapidly generate their own custom molecules capable of doing so, they must first parse the complicated relationship between sequence and structure.
Small molecules can enter cells easily, but the interface where two proteins bind to one another is often too large or lacks the tiny cavities required for these molecules to target. Antibodies and nanobodies bind to longer stretches of protein, which makes them better suited to hinder protein-protein interactions, but their large size and complex structure render them difficult to deliver and unstable in the cytoplasm. By contrast, short stretches of amino acids, known as peptides, are large enough to bind long stretches of protein while still being small enough to enter cells.
The Keating lab at the MIT Department of Biology is hard at work developing ways to quickly design peptides that can disrupt protein-protein interactions involving Bcl-2 proteins, which promote cancer growth. Their most recent approach utilizes a computer program called dTERMen, developed by Keating lab alumnus, Gevorg Grigoryan PhD ’07, currently an associate professor of computer science and adjunct associate professor of biological sciences and chemistry at Dartmouth College. Researchers simply feed the program their desired structures, and it spits out amino acid sequences for peptides capable of disrupting specific protein-protein interactions.
“It’s such a simple approach to use,” says Keating, an MIT professor of biology and senior author on the study. “In theory, you could put in any structure and solve for a sequence. In our study, the program came up with new sequence combinations that aren’t like anything found in nature — it deduced a completely unique way to solve the problem. It’s exciting to be uncovering new territories of the sequence universe.”
Former postdoc Vincent Frappier and Justin Jenson PhD ’18 are co-first authors on the study, which appears in the latest issue of Structure.
Same problem, different approach
Jenson, for his part, has tackled the challenge of designing peptides that bind to Bcl-2 proteins using three distinct approaches. The dTERMen-based method, he says, is by far the most efficient and general one he’s tried yet.
Standard approaches for discovering peptide inhibitors often involve modeling entire molecules down to the physics and chemistry behind individual atoms and their forces. Other methods require time-consuming screens for the best binding candidates. In both cases, the process is arduous and the success rate is low.
dTERMen, by contrast, necessitates neither physics nor experimental screening, and leverages common units of known protein structures, like alpha helices and beta strands — called tertiary structural motifs or “TERMs” — which are compiled in collections like the Protein Data Bank. dTERMen extracts these structural elements from the data bank and uses them to calculate which amino acid sequences can adopt a structure capable of binding to and interrupting specific protein-protein interactions. It takes a single day to build the model, and mere seconds to evaluate a thousand sequences or design a new peptide.
“dTERMen allows us to find sequences that are likely to have the binding properties we’re looking for, in a robust, efficient, and general manner with a high rate of success,” Jenson says. “Past approaches have taken years. But using dTERMen, we went from structures to validated designs in a matter of weeks.”
Of the 17 peptides they built using the designed sequences, 15 bound with native-like affinity, disrupting Bcl-2 protein-protein interactions that are notoriously difficult to target. In some cases, their designs were surprisingly selective and bound to a single Bcl-2 family member over the others. The designed sequences deviated from known sequences found in nature, which greatly increases the number of possible peptides.
“This method permits a certain level of flexibility,” Frappier says. “dTERMen is more robust to structural change, which allows us to explore new types of structures and diversify our portfolio of potential binding candidates.”
Probing the sequence universe
Given the therapeutic benefits of inhibiting Bcl-2 function and slowing tumor growth, the Keating lab has already begun extending their design calculations to other members of the Bcl-2 family. They intend to eventually develop new proteins that adopt structures that have never been seen before.
“We have now seen enough examples of various local protein structures that computational models of sequence-structure relationships can be inferred directly from structural data, rather than having to be rediscovered each time from atomistic interaction principles,” says Grigoryan, dTERMen’s creator. “It’s immensely exciting that such structure-based inference works and is accurate enough to enable robust protein design. It provides a fundamentally different tool to help tackle the key problems of structural biology — from protein design to structure prediction.”
Frappier hopes one day to be able to screen the entire human proteome computationally, using methods like dTERMen to generate candidate binding peptides. Jenson suggests that using dTERMen in combination with more traditional approaches to sequence redesign could amplify an already powerful tool, empowering researchers to produce these targeted peptides. Ideally, he says, one day developing peptides that bind and inhibit your favorite protein could be as easy as running a computer program, or as routine as designing a DNA primer.
According to Keating, although that time is still in the future, “our study is the first step towards demonstrating this capacity on a problem of modest scope.”
This research was funded the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Science Foundation, Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Fonds de Recherche du Québec.
The dynamic process is critical to embryonic development and other cellular phenomena.
Anne Trafton | MIT News Office
February 1, 2019
Embryonic development is tightly regulated by genes that control how body parts form. One of the key responsibilities of these genes is to make sure that tissues fold into the correct shapes, forming structures that will become the spine, brain, and other body parts.
During the 1970s and ’80s, the field of embryonic development focused mainly on identifying the genes that control this process. More recently, many biologists have shifted toward investigating the physics behind the tissue movements that occur during development, and how those movements affect the shape of tissues, says Adam Martin, an MIT associate professor of biology.
Martin, who recently earned tenure, has made key discoveries in how tissue folding is controlled by the movement of cells’ internal scaffolding, known as the cytoskeleton. Such discoveries can not only shed light on how tissues form, including how birth defects such as spina bifida occur, but may also help guide scientists who are working on engineering artificial human tissues.
“We’d like to understand the molecular mechanisms that tune how forces are generated by cells in a tissue, such that the tissue then gets into a proper shape,” Martin says. “It’s important that we understand fundamental mechanisms that are in play when tissues are getting sculpted in development, so that we can then harness that knowledge to engineer tissues outside of the body.”
Cellular forces
Martin grew up in Rochester, New York, where both of his parents were teachers. As a biology major at nearby Cornell University, he became interested in genetics and development. He went on to graduate school at the University of California at Berkeley, thinking he would study the genes that control embryonic development.
However, while in his PhD program, Martin became interested in a different phenomenon — the role of the cytoskeleton in a process called endocytosis. Cells use endocytosis to absorb many different kinds of molecules, such as hormones or growth factors.
“I was interested in what generates the force to promote this internalization,” Martin says.
He discovered that the force is generated by the assembly of arrays of actin filaments. These filaments tug on a section of the cell membrane, pulling it inward so that the membrane encloses the molecule being absorbed. He also found that myosin, a protein that can act as a motor and controls muscle contractions, helps to control the assembly of actin filaments.
After finishing his PhD, Martin hoped to find a way to combine his study of cytoskeleton mechanics with his interest in developmental biology. As a postdoc at Princeton University, he started to study the phenomenon of tissue folding in fruit fly embryonic development, which is now one of the main research areas of his lab at MIT. Tissue folding is a ubiquitous shape change in tissues to convert a planar sheet of cells into a three-dimensional structure, such as a tube.
In developing fruit fly embryos, tissue folding invaginates cells that will form internal structures in the fly. This folding process is similar to tissue folding events in vertebrates, such as neural tube formation. The neural tube, which is the precursor to the vertebrate spinal cord and brain, begins as a sheet of cells that must fold over and “zip” itself up along a seam to form a tube. Problems with this process can lead to spina bifida, a birth defect that results from an incomplete closing of the backbone.
When Martin began working in this area, scientists had already discovered many of the transcription factors (proteins that turn on networks of specific genes) that control the folding of the neural tube. However, little was known about the mechanics of this folding.
“We didn’t know what types of forces those transcription factors generate, or what the mechanisms were that generated the force,” he says.
He discovered that the accumulation of myosin helps cells lined up in a row to become bottle-shaped, causing the top layer of the tissue to pucker inward and create a fold in the tissue. More recently, he found that myosin is turned on and off in these cells in a dynamic way, by a protein called RhoA.
“What we found is there’s essentially an oscillator running in the cells, and you get a cycle of this signaling protein, RhoA, that’s being switched on and off in a cyclical manner,” Martin says. “When you don’t have the dynamics, the tissue still tries to contract, but it falls apart.”
He also found that the dynamics of this myosin activity can be disrupted by depleting genes that have been linked to spina bifida.
Breaking free
Another important cellular process that relies on tissue folding is the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). This occurs during embryonic development when cells gain the ability to break free and move to a new location. It is also believed to occur when cancer cells metastasize from tumors to seed new tumors in other parts of the body.
During embryonic development, cells lined up in a row need to orient themselves so that when they divide, both daughter cells remain in the row. Martin has shown that when the mechanism that enables the cells to align correctly is disrupted, one of the daughter cells will be squeezed out of the tissue.
“This has been proposed as one way you can get an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, where you have cells dissociate from native tissue,” Martin says. He now plans to further study what happens to the cells that get squeezed out during the EMT.
In addition to these projects, he is also collaborating with Jörn Dunkel, an MIT associate professor of mathematics, to map the network connections between the myosin proteins that control tissue folding during development. “That project really highlights the benefits of getting people from diverse backgrounds to analyze a problem,” Martin says.
