Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Feb 27.
Published in final edited form as: Cell Rep. 2019 Feb 12;26(7):1681–1690.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.01.058

Structural Basis for Recognition of Ubiquitylated Nucleosome by Dot1L Methyltransferase

Cathy J Anderson 1, Matthew R Baird 2,4, Allen Hsu 3, Emily H Barbour 2, Yuka Koyama 2, Mario J Borgnia 3, Robert K McGinty 2,5,*
PMCID: PMC6392056  NIHMSID: NIHMS1521526  PMID: 30759380

SUMMARY

Histone H3 lysine 79 (H3K79) methylation is enriched on actively transcribed genes, and its misregulation is a hallmark of leukemia. Methylation of H3K79, which resides on the structured disk face of the nucleosome, is mediated by the Dot1L methyltransferase. Dot1L activity is part of a trans-histone crosstalk pathway, requiring prior histone H2B ubiquitylation of lysine 120 (H2BK120ub) for optimal activity. However, the molecular details describing both how Dot1L binds to the nucleosome and why Dot1L is activated by H2BK120 ubiquitylation are unknown. Here, we present the cryoelectron microscopy (cryo-EM) structure of Dot1L bound to a nucleosome reconstituted with site-specifically ubiquitylated H2BK120. The structure reveals that Dot1L engages the nucleosome acidic patch using a variant arginine anchor and occupies a conformation poised for methylation. In this conformation, Dot1L and ubiquitin interact directly through complementary hydrophobic surfaces. This study establishes a path to better understand Dot1L function in normal and leukemia cells.

In Brief

Dot1L is a histone H3K79-specific methyltransferase that is critical to the pathogenesis of leukemia. Here, Anderson et al. report the cryo-EM structure of Dot1L in complex with a ubiquitylated nucleosome, providing molecular details of how Dot1L binds its nucleosome substrate and is activated by ubiquitin.

Graphical Abstract

graphic file with name nihms-1521526-f0001.jpg

INTRODUCTION

Histone lysine methylation contributes to the regulation of transcription by tuning the recruitment of effector proteins to specific genomic sites (Hyun et al., 2017). It exists in mono-, di-, and tri-methylated (me1, me2, and me3) forms, and functional outcomes depend on both the methylated histone residue and degree of methylation (Greer and Shi, 2012). Most well-characterized sites of histone lysine methylation are found in the flexible N-terminal tails of histones (Zhao and Garcia, 2015). One counterexample is histone H3 Lys79 (H3K79), which is solvent exposed on the structured disk face of the nucleosome (Luger et al., 1997a). H3K79 methylation is observed within transcriptionally active genes, and methylation levels are highly correlated with gene expression (Schübeler et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2008; Wood et al., 2018). In human cells, H3K79me2 and H3K79me3 are enriched immediately after transcription start sites and decrease gradually across gene bodies, and H3K79me1 is distributed more broadly across the bodies of active genes (Wang et al., 2008).

Dot1L/KMT4 (disruptor of telomeric silencing-1 like/lysine methyltransferase 4) is the primary H3K79 methyltransferase in human cells and is conserved across eukaryotes (Feng et al., 2002; Lacoste et al., 2002; Ng et al., 2002a; van Leeuwen et al., 2002). Rather than having the characteristic SET (Su(var)3–9, enhancer-of-zeste, trithorax) domain found in other histone lysine methyltransferases (Dillon et al., 2005), Dot1 proteins have a catalytic domain resembling class I methyltransferase domains found in DNA and protein arginine methyltransferases (Min et al., 2003; Sawada et al., 2004). Although known to participate in several transcriptional elongation complexes (Wood et al., 2018), Dot1L can bind to and methylate H3K79 in nucleosomes in isolation (Feng et al., 2002; Min et al., 2003). Histone H3 alone is a poor substrate for Dot1L, suggesting that Dot1L requires non-H3 surfaces of the nucleosome for substrate binding and/or activity (Feng et al., 2002; Lacoste et al., 2002; Ng et al., 2002a).

Efficient methylation of H3K79 in cells requires prior ubiquity-lation of H2BK120 (Briggs et al., 2002; Kim et al., 2005; Ng et al., 2002b). H3K79me2 and H3K79me3 are significantly decreased without change to H3K79me1 following knockdown of the H2BK120-targeting ubiquitin E3 ligase, Bre1, in human cells or upon mutation of H2BK120 in S. cerevisiae (Kim et al., 2005; Shahbazian et al., 2005). Using designer nucleosomes assembled with monoubiquitylated H2BK120 (H2BK120ub), this trans-histone crosstalk between H2BK120ub and H3K79 methylation has been shown to be direct and require only the catalytic domain of Dot1L (McGinty et al., 2008). Previous studies implicate the C-terminal tail of ubiquitin and the N-terminal tail of histone H2A in mediating ubiquitin-dependent Dot1L activity (Holt et al., 2015; Zhou et al., 2016). The N-terminal tail of H4 has also been shown to be important for Dot1L activity independent of H2B ubiquitylation (Fingerman et al., 2007; McGinty et al., 2009). In recent years, Dot1L has emerged as a potential therapeutic target for MLL-rearranged leukemias because the catalytic activity of Dot1L is required for leukemogenic transformation following MLL-fusion translocations (Bernt et al., 2011; Winters and Bernt, 2017). Yet key molecular details describing how Dot1L binds to the nucleosome and is activated by H2B ubiquitylation remain elusive.

Here, we report the 3.9 Å cryoelectron microscopy (cryo-EM) structure of the methyltransferase domain of human Dot1L bound to a designer nucleosome core particle assembled with a site-specifically modified H2BK120ub (Figure 1A). The structure captures Dot1L in a poised state in which Dot1L uses an arginine to anchor to the acidic patch on the nucleosome. We also observe critical hydrophobic interactions that mediate ubiquitin-dependent activity of Dot1L. In the structure, the catalytic site of Dot1L is separated from H3K79, indicating that Dot1L and/or the nucleosome must undergo conformational rearrangement from a poised to an active state for methylation.

Figure 1. Cryo-EM Structure of Dot1L-H2BK120ub Nucleosome Complex.

Figure 1.

For a Figure360 author presentation of Figure 1, see https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.01.058. (A) Three orthogonal views of the complex with reconstructed map overlaying molecular model. (B) Scheme of human Dot1L highlighting catalytic domain (dark purple), lysine rich region (blue), and minimal Dot1Lcat fragment used in our studies. (C) Overlay of 3D subclasses showing conformational heterogeneity of Dot1L (shades of purple) and ubiquitin (shades of green). (D) Nucleosome structure with acidic patch and sites of ubiquitylation (H2BK120) and Dot1L-mediated methylation (H3K79) indicated. (E) Zoomed view of Dot1L active site and targeted lysine in our model with distance between H3K79 Ca and SAM cofactor sulfur indicated. See also Figures S1–S4 and Tables S1 and S2.

RESULTS

Dot1L-H2BK120ub Nucleosome Complex Structure

In order to visualize the molecular details of Dot1L function on nucleosomes and activation by H2BK120 ubiquitylation, we first needed to prepare homogeneously site-specifically ubiquity-lated nucleosomes. To this end, we generated and purified an H2BK120ub analog by crosslinking ubiquitin with a Gly76Cys mutation at its terminal residue to an H2BK120C mutant using dichloroacetone (DCA) as previously described (Figures S1A–S1C; Morgan et al., 2016). Importantly, we observe slightly increased Dot1L methyltransferase activity when using nucleosomes reconstituted with two copies of this purified DCA-crosslinked analog as compared to nucleosomes assembled with two copies of a more precise semisynthetic analog of H2BK120ub containing a single Gly76Ala point mutation in ubiquitin (McGinty et al., 2009). As this Gly76Ala analog was previously established to be indistinguishable from natively linked H2BK120ub in a Dot1L methyltransferase assay, we can extrapolate that Dot1L is activated by our DCA-crosslinked analog similarly to, if not to a greater extent than, native H2BK120ub (Figure S1D). We reconstituted our homogeneous DCA-crosslinked H2BK120ub nucleosome core particles with a minimal catalytic fragment of Dot1L (Dot1Lcat) (Figure S1C). This fragment spanning amino acids 2–416 includes the catalytic domain of Dot1L and an adjacent lysine-rich sequence that was previously identified to be necessary and sufficient for nucleosome binding and activity (Figure 1B; Min et al., 2003). Although stable in solution, Dot1Lcat dissociated from H2BK120ub nucleosomes during cryo-EM sample preparation under all conditions tested. To improve complex stability, we crosslinked the complex with glutaraldehyde prior to vitrification. This allowed for visualization of a Dot1Lcat H2BK120ub nucleosome complex by cryo-EM (Table S1).

We initially resolved a 1:1 Dot1Lcat-H2BK120ub nucleosome complex from 3D reconstruction of ~100,000 particles at 3.5 Å resolution (Figure S2; classes 3 and 4). In this reconstruction, high-resolution features in the nucleosome region of the density map are consistent with the estimated resolution. However, conformational heterogeneity in Dot1L and ubiquitin limit resolution in their respective regions of the reconstructed map. To improve Dot1L and ubiquitin visualization, we reclassified the particles used for the 3.5 Å reconstruction into four subclasses, leading to the identification of two major conformational states (Figure S2; classes 2A and 4A). We used class 2A to generate a 3.9 Å reconstruction that, although having a lower overall resolution than our initial map, has improved density for Dot1L and ubiquitin generally and does not compromise high-resolution information at the Dot1L-nucleosome interface. The observed conformational heterogeneity in Dot1L and ubiquitin is further illustrated by finer classification into 10 subclasses, where a continuum of Dot1L and ubiquitin conformations is observed (Figures 1C and S2; classes 5B, 9B, and 10B). As these classes did not have sufficient particles to allow for high-resolution reconstruction, subsequent modeling was completed using the 3.9 Å map. It is worth noting that we anticipated a 2:1 complex (i.e., two copies of Dot1L per ubiquitylated nucleosome) due to the expected ability of the methyltransferase to bind to each face of the pseudosymmetric nucleosome core particle (McGinty et al., 2009; Zhou et al., 2016). However, we initially observed a 1:1 complex with only sparse density in the regions corresponding to Dot1L and ubiquitin on the opposite nucleosome face. This is likely due to loss of Dot1L on one nucleosome face during sample freezing and the resulting conformational heterogeneity of ubiquitin when unconstrained by Dot1L. This is consistent with a previous crystal structure of an unbound H2BK120ub nucleosome that lacks defined density for ubiquitin (Machida et al., 2016). Only in the finer classification described above did we identify minor class averages with definitive density for a 2:1 Dot1L:nucleosome complex (Figure S2; class 4B) or density for ubiquitylated nucleosomes only (Figure S2; class 7B), demonstrating that, despite crosslinking with glutaralde-hyde, our particles include an ensemble of Dot1L:nucleosome stoichiometries.

With the optimal 3.9 Å resolution reconstructed map in hand, we generated a Dot1Lcat-H2BK120ub nucleosome model by docking high-resolution crystal structures of the nucleosome core particle, one Dot1L catalytic domain, and one ubiquitin into the map followed by iterative manual model building and real-space refinement (Figure 1A). Although present on the opposite nucleosome face, ubiquitin was not modeled on the nucleosome face not bound by Dot1L due to poorly resolved density. In our model, Dot1L anchors to the nucleosome on the edge of the nucleosome acidic patch—an emerging hotspot for nucleosome binding (Figure 1D). We do not observe density for the lysine rich region C-terminal to the catalytic domain, suggesting that it binds to the nucleosome in a heterogeneous manner. In fact, no density is unaccounted for by the model in this region or any other region of the map. Ubiquitin, which is covalently attached to H2BK120, occupies a position lifted off the nucleosome surface and packs against the nucleosome-binding region of Dot1L. Interestingly, Dot1L does not engage the nucleosome surface surrounding the targeted H3K79 residue. Rather, a gap exists between H3K79 and the Dot1L active site. Because we do not observe obvious density for the S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) cofactor in the Dot1L active site, we aligned our model with a Dot1L-SAM co-crystal structure, allowing us to determine the position of SAM. This alignment shows an 18 Å distance between the SAM sulfur atom and the H3K79 Ca atom (Figure 1E). We hypothesize that our model represents a poised state and that conformational rearrangement of the nucleosome and/or reorientation of Dot1L relative to the nucleosome is required for catalysis to occur. Interestingly, mass spectrometric analysis of our reconstituted Dot1Lcat-H2BK120ub(DCA) complex shows that the majority of H3 is monomethylated (Figure S1E). As we did not supplement our complex with SAM, this observation suggests that Dot1Lcat purified with endogenous SAM bound and has subsequently methylated the nucleosome. Therefore, the majority of our reconstructed particles contain a bound Dot1Lcat that is poised for H3K79 dimethylation.

It is worth noting that the poised conformation of Dot1L in our cryo-EM model is similar to a molecular replacement model of a non-glutaraldehyde crosslinked, Dot1L-H2BK120ub nucleo-some complex that we solved using an 8 Å resolution X-ray diffraction dataset (Dot1L Cα root-mean-square deviation [RMSD] = 10.4 Å following alignment by histones; Figure S3A; Table S2). This crystal structure shows a 2:1 Dot1LH2BK120ub nucleosome complex in which Dot1L is bound to the identical surface of the nucleosome in a nearly identical manner but held even farther away from H3K79 than in our cryo-EM model (Figure S3B). We initially considered this poised conformation in our crystallographic model to be an artifact of crystal packing due to the presence of a symmetry-related copy of Dot1L wedged between the Dot1L catalytic site and its targeted nucleosome (Figure S3A). However, the convergence of our models generated by cryo-EM and X-ray crystallography suggests a functional role for the observed conformation. Moreover, as our crystallographic complex was not glutaraldehyde crosslinked, it is unlikely that crosslinking has artificially forced Dot1L into the poised state observed in our cryo-EM structure. As the majority of particles in our cryo-EM dataset are classified into 3D classes with visible density for Dot1L in the poised conformation, we expect that this is the preferred equilibrium position of Dot1L on the nucleosome.

Significant variation of resolution exists across the reconstructed cryo-EM map (Figures S4A–S4H). The nucleosome dominates particle alignments and is thus well-resolved, allowing high-confidence modeling of most histone side chains (Figure S4E). Even though we initiated nucleosome modeling with a high-resolution nucleosome crystal structure, the final model closely resembles a published cryo-EM structure of an unbound nucleosome (RMSD = 1.2 Å across shared Cα atoms), which diverges from crystal structures most notably in the slight splaying of the H2B αC helices away from the nucleosome surface (Bilokapic et al., 2018). In contrast to the nucleosome volume, the regions of the reconstructed map corresponding to Dot1L and ubiquitin exhibit more limited high-resolution features. The catalytic domain of Dot1L was easily docked using a well-resolved nucleosome binding loop and surrounding features, including the αK helix that closely borders the ubiquitin density. Secondary structure in nearby Dot1L regions, including the catalytic site, also aligns well to the map, but local resolution is limited due to the aforementioned conformational heterogeneity. More distant regions and large loops of Dot1L are less well resolved in our map. Ubiquitin was most challenging to model due to its smaller size and spheroidal shape. To improve rigid body docking of the ubiquitin structure, we masked the volumes of Dot1L and ubiquitin and continued refinement (Figure S2). Although this approach failed to generate side-chain resolution for Dot1L or ubiquitin, clear density for secondary structure elements allowed high-confidence docking of ubiquitin and further confirmed Dot1L placement in the nucleosome binding and active site regions (Figures S4I and S4J).

Dot1L-Nucleosome Acidic Patch Interaction

The catalytic domain of Dot1L binds to the nucleosome using a long pre-structured loop between Dot1L β9 and β10 sheets. We clearly resolve main-chain and select side-chain density for this Dot1L nucleosome-interaction loop (Figures 2A and S4F). The most striking feature within the loop is the Dot1L Arg282 side chain that clearly inserts into a cavity at the edge of the nucleosome acidic patch, in position to make a salt bridge and a hydrogen bond with the side chains of H2AE56 and H2BQ47, respectively. Two other residues in the loop, Arg278 and Asn280, are positioned to make direct nucleosome interactions, but their side chains are not clearly resolved in the map. To validate the importance of the nucleosome-interaction loop for Dot1L methyltransferase activity, we tested alanine mutants of key loop residues using an enzyme-coupled methyltransferase assay. We first established that the assay could detect Dot1Lcat activity on unmodified nucleosomes and nucleosomes containing a near-native semisynthetic H2BK120ub analog with a Gly76Ala mutation in ubiquitin and that the time points and enzyme concentrations we used were in the linear range of the assay (Figure S1F). We observe a ~6-fold enhancement of Dot1Lcat activity on H2BK120ub nucleosomes as compared to unmodified nucleosomes. This is a smaller enhancement than previously described using a direct assay with 3H-SAM and may result from intrinsic differences between the assays, but the same overall trend is observed (McGinty et al., 2009). Because Dot1L activity could be detected on both ubiquitylated and unmodified nucleosomes, we were able to assess ubiquitin-dependent and independent effects of Dot1L mutations. As predicted by our model, Dot1L Arg282Ala leads to a 90% reduction in H3K79 methylation on ubiquitylated nucleosomes and nearly abolishes all activity on unmodified nucleosomes (Figure 2B). Asn280Ala and Arg278Ala mutations also result in losses of activity, especially on unmodified nucleosomes, although to a lesser degree than the Arg282Ala mutant Dot1L. Notably, the best resolved side chain in Dot1L at the nucleosome interface in our cryo-EM map is also the most important side chain for Dot1L activity, regardless of H2B ubiquitylation. The Dot1L nucleosome interaction loop is well conserved in higher eukaryotes but divergent in S. cerevisiae ortholog Dot1p, leaving open the possibility that Dot1p binds nucleosomes and is activated by ubiquitin through a distinct mechanism compared to human Dot1L (Figure 2C).

Figure 2. Dot1L Interacts with the Nucleo-some Acidic Patch.

Figure 2.

(A) Zoomed view of Dot1L nucleosome-interaction loop engaged with nucleosome acidic patch surface. Model, reconstructed map, and relevant side chains are shown. (B) Quantified Dot1L methyltransferase (MTase) assay using indicated mutants with unmodified (H2B) and ubiquitylated (H2BK120ub) nucleosomes. (C) Sequence alignment of Dot1L nucleosome-interaction loop with positively and negatively charged residues colored blue and red, respectively, and key positions highlighted in yellow. (D) Competitive MTase assay with varying concentrations of wild-type (WT) or nucleosome-binding-deficient (LRS = LRS 8–10 AAA) LANA fusion proteins on unmodified and H2BK120ub nucleosomes. Five replicates performed for all assays and means and SDs are shown. See also Figure S5.

Although our structure shows that Dot1L binds to the acidic patch of ubiquitylated nucleosomes, an alternative binding mode has been suggested for Dot1L on unmodified nucleosomes (Zhou et al., 2016). To test whether Dot1L requires the acidic patch for activity on unmodified nucleosomes, we performed competitive methyltransferase assays by titrating a glutathione S-transferase (GST)-fusion of the nucleosome acidic-patch-binding 23 amino acid LANA (latency-associated nuclear antigen from Kaposi’s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus) sequence into our assays (Figure 2D). Wild-type LANA, but not a nucleosome-binding-deficient mutant (residues 8–10, Leu-Arg-Ser to Ala-Ala-Ala triple mutation [LRS]), is able to inhibit Dot1L activity on unmodified nucleosomes in a dose-dependent manner. Although not ruling out alternative binding modes, this suggests that Dot1L activity on ubiquitylated and unmodified nucleosomes shares a similar acidic patch interaction dependence. To our surprise, LANA fails to substantially inhibit Dot1L enzymatic activity on ubiquitylated nucleosomes even at very high concentrations (Figure 2D). This is not due to the GST-fusion, as pre-assay cleavage of the GST tag leads to identical results (Figures S5A and S5B). This observation could be secondary to tighter Dot1L binding to H2BK120ub nucleosomes or the inability of LANA to bind to H2BK120ub nucleosomes altogether. Further investigation shows that GST-LANA forms a stable complex with unmodified nucleosomes but is unable to bind to H2BK120ub nucleosomes (Figure S5C). Importantly, this presents a mechanism in which H2BK120 ubiquitylation may activate Dot1L in isolation but may also further promote Dot1L activity in cells by acting as a gatekeeper to the acidic patch and neutralizing competition for nucleosome acidic patch binding.

Dot1L-Ubiquitin Hydrophobic Interaction

Ubiquitin occupies a position lifted off the nucleosome surface and rests against the αK helix of Dot1L that scaffolds the structure of the Dot1L nucleosome-interaction loop. Dot1L and ubiquitin exhibit conformational flexibility in our cryo-EM dataset. However, docking of Dot1L and ubiquitin into finely parsed 3D classes followed by alignment by Dot1L shows that Dot1L and ubiquitin move as a unit, suggesting a direct interaction (Figure S6A). Previously reported comprehensive mutagenesis of the ubiquitin surface identified only two ubiquitin side chains necessary for Dot1L activation, Leu71 and Leu73, both located near the C terminus of ubiquitin. Therefore, even though the ubiquitin-Dot1L interface appears large, we expected to find that only the small hydrophobic region of Dot1L adjacent to ubiquitin Leu71 and Leu73 would be responsible for ubiquitin-dependent activity. Although the ubiquitin Leu71 side chain is poorly resolved in our map, Leu71 is at the end of the β4 strand that is part of the globular-fold of ubiquitin, so we can confidently place its side chain in proximity to Dot1L αK residues Leu322 and Phe326 (Figures 3A and S4H). We have less confidence in the location of ubiquitin Leu73 in our model as it resides in the flexible ubiquitin tail. However, based on its importance for ubiquitin-dependent Dot1L activity, we hypothesized that Leu73 makes direct contact with a hydrophobic surface on Dot1L. A likely surface is the exposed Ile290 side chain of Dot1L. We tested the effects of alanine mutations of Ile290, Leu322, and Phe326, as well as Glu323 and Lys330 that are also positioned at the Dot1L-ubiquitin interface but more distant from ubiquitin Leu71 and Leu73 (Figure 3B). To assess H2BK120ub-specific effects, we compared fold increases in Dot1L activity due to H2B ubiquitylation for each of the Dot1L mutants. The Phe326Ala mutation effectively abolished all ubiquitin-dependent activity of Dot1L, with a calculated H2BK120ub fold increase of 0.9 (compared to 6.2 for wild-type Dot1L). An Ile290Ala mutation also preferentially disrupted H2BK120-dependent activity of Dot1L, with a calculated fold increase of 2.8. A Dot1L Leu322Ala mutant methylated both unmodified and ubiquitylated nucleosomes with near wild-type activity, so we prepared a more severe Leu322Glu mutant Dot1L. This mutation resulted in a more pronounced reduction in activity on H2BK120ub nucleosomes than unmodified nucleosomes, leading to a ubiquitin fold increase of 1.3. Glu323Ala and Lys330Ala mutations, which are not in the vicinity of ubiquitin Leu71 or Leu73 in our model, had minimal effects on Dot1L enzymatic activity on both nucleosomes, consistent with the published ubiquitin mutagenesis studies that found no other region of the ubiquitin surface to be necessary for Dot1L activation. Taken together, these results suggest that Dot1L Ile290, Leu322, and Phe326 hydrophobic interactions with ubiquitin are critical to ubiquitin-dependent activity. Similar to the nucleosome-interaction loop, sequences from Dot1L orthologs in higher eukaryotes align well with human Dot1L for positions at the ubiquitin interface (Figure 3C).

Figure 3. Ubiquitin Interacts with Dot1L to Enhance H3K79 Methylation.

Figure 3.

(A) Zoomed view of Dot1L-ubiquitin interaction with relevant side chains indicated. (B) Quantified MTase assay of Dot1L mutants on unmodified (H2B) and ubiquitylated (H2BK120ub) nucleosomes. Numbers above bars indicate fold enhancement by ubiquitin for each Dot1L protein. A value of 1 indicates no difference in activity toward H2BK120ub relative to unmodified nucleosomes. Five replicates performed for all assays and means and SDs are shown. (C) Sequence alignment of Dot1L ubiquitin-binding regions with key positions highlighted in yellow. See also Figure S6.

Dot1L Active State Model

We believe our structure represents a poised conformation of Dot1L on the nucleosome. Our biochemical analysis shows that key interactions observed in the poised state, especially those mediated by Dot1L Arg282, are also required for activity and are thus likely to interact during catalysis. Therefore, we modeled the active state of the Dot1L-H2BK120ub complex by fixing the Dot1L Arg282 Cα as a hinge position and rotating Dot1L and ubiquitin toward H3K79 on the nucleosome surface (Figures 4A and 4B). As no non-SET domain methyltransferase structures exist in complex with a cofactor and a lysine-containing substrate, we used the distance between the S-adenosylhomocysteine (SAH) cofactor and the target lysine Cα in a ternary complex of the SET domain containing SET8 methyltransferase to guide active state modeling (Couture et al., 2005). This SET8 structure shows an 8.8 Å distance between the Cα of the target lysine and the sulfur atom of the cofactor. A 17°rotation of Dot1L about Arg282 was required to replicate this distance in the Dot1L-nucleosome complex while placing the Cα of H3K79 at the entrance to the putative Dot1L substrate channel. This active state results in only minor steric clashes between Dot1L flexible loops and the nucleosome surface. Based on these clashes, we anticipate that the flexible β10–β11 and αE-αF loops in Dot1L will need to move from their locations in the Dot1L crystal structure to allow Dot1L to bind in an active conformation (Figure 4C). Although our model places the Dot1L active site at an optimal distance relative to the H3K79 Cα atom, the H3K79 side chain is oriented along the nucleosome surface in the poised state (Figure 1E). Therefore, our modeling also suggests that the H3 L1 loop containing H3K79 will need to undergo minor conformational rearrangement to direct the H3K79 side chain away from the nucleosome surface and toward the active site (Figure 4C).

Figure 4. Model of Active Conformation of Dot1L on the Nucleosome.

Figure 4.

(A) Scheme of proposed poised to active conformational rearrangement of Dot1L and ubiquitin on the nucleosome. (B) Front view of model of Dot1L and ubiquitin in an active conformation made by a 17° rotation of Dot1L about hinge Arg282 Cα atom of Dot1L. Ubiquitin was adjusted with Dot1L, keeping the orientation of ubiquitin relative to Dot1L constant. Cryo-EM model shown in white for comparison. (C) Zoomed side view of active model with SAM sulfur-H3K79 Cα distance labeled. Loops with anticipated conformational changes are indicated. (D) Front view of active model with key residues of acidic cleft indicated. (E) Quantified MTase assay of Dot1L acidic cleft mutants on unmodified (H2B) and ubiquitylated (H2BK120ub) nucleosomes. Five replicates performed for all assays and means and SDs are shown.

It has been demonstrated that a basic sequence in the H4 N-terminal tail, specifically H4R17 and R19, is critical for Dot1L activity (Fingerman et al., 2007; McGinty et al., 2009). We were only able to model residues starting with H4L22 in our poised structure. Because there is an acidic cleft on the surface of Dot1L adjacent to the location from which the H4 N-terminal tail emerges from the nucleosome, we hypothesized that the H4 tail basic patch can bind to this Dot1L acidic cleft to promote formation of a catalytically active conformation of Dot1L on the nucleosome. To explore this hypothesis, we mutated two prominent residues in the Dot1L acidic cleft (Figure 4D). Interestingly, the Dot1L Glu138Ala mutation, but not a nearby Asp28Ala mutation, led to a substantial loss in Dot1L activity on both unmodified and ubiquitylated nucleosomes (Figure 4E). This result, together with our poised structure, is suggestive of a specific interaction between the H4 tail basic patch and the Dot1L acidic cleft. However, due to the proximity of Glu138 to the Dot1L active site, we cannot rule out other explanations. Future structural characterization of an active complex will illuminate further molecular details.

DISCUSSION

We used cryo-EM to solve the structure of Dot1L bound to an H2BK120ub nucleosome in a poised state. In our structure, Dot1L binds to the nucleosome acidic patch using a nucleo-some-interaction loop. The acidic patch is emerging as a hotspot for nucleosome binding (Kalashnikova et al., 2013; McGinty and Tan, 2016). Examination of structures of proteins and peptides bound to the nucleosome show that a common feature is the use of two arginines to bind to several locations within the acidic patch (Figures 5A–5C). The first example was observed in a crystal structure of the LANA sequence bound to the nucleosome (Barbera et al., 2006). In this structure, LANA Arg9 inserts into a cavity surrounded by H2AE61, D90, and E92 side chains. Other structures, including those with RCC1, Sir3, 53BP1, RING1B, and CENP-C, have demonstrated that many more proteins use arginines with nearly identical conformations to bind in this same acidic patch cavity, leading to the introduction of the term arginine anchor (Armache et al., 2011; Kato et al., 2013; Makde et al., 2010; McGinty et al., 2014; Wilson et al., 2016). All of these proteins also engage the nucleosome with one or more additional arginines that bind to the acidic patch in other locations. Other structures, including our Dot1L-nucleosome structure presented here and a structure of the SAGA deubiquitinating (DUB) module (Morgan et al., 2016), have nucleosome interactions with multiple arginines and no binding in the H2AE61/D90/E92 cavity. In general, the arginines that bind these other acidic patch surfaces exhibit more diversity in both binding sites and arginine side chain conformations than those that bind to the H2AE61/D90/E92 cavity (Figure 5C). We suggest the use of the terms canonical arginine anchor and variant arginine anchor to describe these two classes of arginines. The Dot1L variant arginine anchor Arg282 most closely resembles the CENP-C variant arginine anchor Arg714. Although we do not observe density for Dot1L Arg278 in our cryo-EM map, the position of its Cα atom is similar to that of the LANA variant arginine anchor Arg12. Overall, the analysis of diverse acidic-patch-binding proteins demonstrates both shared and protein-specific molecular mechanisms for nucleosome binding in this region.

Figure 5. Canonical and Variant Arginine Anchors Bind the Nucleo-some Acidic Patch.

Figure 5.

(A) Electrostatic (generated with Adaptive Poisson-Boltzmann Solver [APBS] using AMBER) and histone-colored surfaces of nucleosome. (B) Zoomed views of arginine anchors of Dot1L, LANA (PDB: 1ZLA), Sir3 (PDB: 3TU4), CENP-C (PDB: 4X23), RCC1 (PDB: 3MVD), SAGA DUB module (PDB: 4ZUX), PRC1/RING1B (PDB: 4RP8), and 53BP1 (PDB: 5KGF). (C) Overlay of all canonical (left) and variant (right) arginine anchors.

Interestingly, we found that the LANA sequence is unable to bind to H2BK120ub nucleosomes under conditions where binding to unmodified nucleosomes was observed. This suggests that, in addition to promoting Dot1L activity in a purified system, H2BK120ub may also prevent other proteins from binding the nucleosome in a physiologic cellular environment. This would limit competition, further promoting intranucleosomal methylation, and may also increase local concentrations of Dot1L in areas of the nucleus containing H2BK120ub-modified chromatin. Macromolecular crystals of H2BK120ub nucleosomes do not alter the nucleosome structure and lack density for ubiquitin, suggesting ubiquitin has conformational flexibility in the absence of other bound factors (Machida et al., 2016). Therefore, it is unlikely that ubiquitin competes with LANA by binding directly to the acidic patch. Rather, we favor the explanation that a conformationally flexible ubiquitin in the vicinity of the acidic patch can prevent acidic patch binding of other proteins. Some proteins for which H2BK120ub inhibits chromatin binding may have been identified in nucleosome affinity proteomics experiments with ubiquitylated nucleosomes, including RCC1, another acidic patch binder (Shema-Yaacoby et al., 2013). H2BK120ub is one of many acidic patch proximal histone modifications, and several of these modifications also tune the nucleosome binding and/or activity of chromatin effector proteins (Dann et al., 2017; Fujiki et al., 2011; Jbara et al., 2016). Given the emerging trend of acidic-patch-dependent chromatin binding, this is likely to be a major mechanism in the regulation of chromatin processes.

In our structure, ubiquitin is lifted off the nucleosome surface and is in a position to interact with the catalytic domain of Dot1L. Computational sorting of particles with different conformational states of Dot1L with respect to the nucleosome demonstrates that Dot1L and ubiquitin move together through a continuum of positions. We also identify mutants in Dot1L that preferentially disrupt activity on H2BK120ub nucleosomes over unmodified nucleosomes. Taken together, our data suggest that ubiquitin enhances Dot1L activity through direct interactions with the catalytic domain of Dot1L. Contrary to this model, photocrosslinking studies place ubiquitin Leu71 and Leu73 in proximity to the H2A N-terminal tail (Zhou et al., 2016). We have not observed any density for ubiquitin near the emergence of the H2A tail from the nucleosome disk or for the first 15 residues of the H2A tail either interacting with ubiquitin or other parts of the complex. As our cryo-EM map predicts conformational flexibility in ubiquitin, we anticipate that crosslinking to H2A may occur only in minor ubiquitin conformations. Previous results show that moving ubiquitin from H2BK120 to H2BK125 leads to a modest decrease in Dot1L activity, and moving ubiquitin to H2BK116 or K108 dramatically or entirely inhibits Dot1L, respectively (Figure S6B; Chatterjee et al., 2010). Although we do not see clear density for the ubiquitin-H2BK120 linkage in our cryo-EM map, we hypothesize that the ubiquitin C-terminal tail is flexible enough to allow ubiquitin to reach its observed position in our structure from an H2BK125 attachment site. However, H2BK108 and H2BK116 attachment places ubiquitin between Dot1L and the nucleosome and likely prevents productive binding of Dot1L as a result.

In summary, we solved the cryo-EM structure of Dot1L bound to an H2BK120ub nucleosome. Dot1L binds to the nucleosome acidic patch using a nucleosome-interaction loop and interacts directly with ubiquitin for activation. Dot1L-mediated methylation of H3K79 is essential to the pathogenesis of MLL-rearranged leukemias, prompting the development of Dot1L inhibitors that are now in clinical trials. Our structure and subsequent biochemical validation identify mutations to interrogate the nucleosome-specific and ubiquitin-dependent functions of Dot1L. This will enable precision hypothesis-driven analysis of the functions of Dot1L in normal and leukemia model cells. Further, our studies suggest that H2BK120 ubiquitylation may function as a gatekeeper of the acidic patch. The tuning of acidic patch binding by adjacent post-translational modifications is likely to be a fundamental mechanism in the regulation of chromatin signaling.

STAR★METHODS

CONTACT FOR REAGENT AND RESOURCE SHARING

Further information and requests for resources and reagents should be directed to and will be fulfilled by the Lead Contact, Robert K. McGinty (rmcginty@email.unc.edu).

EXPERIMENTAL MODEL AND SUBJECT DETAILS

BL21(DE3)pLysS and HB101 E. coli cells were used for recombinant expression of proteins and growth of nucleosomal DNA repeat plasmids, respectively. Competent cells of these strains were prepared from cells restreaked from glycerol stocks originally obtained by Song Tan from Novagen and ATCC, respectively.

METHOD DETAILS

Preparation of proteins and nucleosomes

An unpublished plasmid with the gene fragment encoding human Dot1L(2–416) (Dot1Lcat) in the pST50Tr vector with an N-terminal Strep peptide (STR)-hexahistidine (His6) affinity tag was obtained as a gift from Song Tan. STR-His6-hDot1Lcat was expressed in E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells at 18°C. The tagged protein was enriched by metal-affinity chromatography using Talon resin (Clontech). The affinity tag was removed using the tobacco etch virus (TEV) protease prior to further purification by cation exchange chromatography using a Source S resin (GE Healthcare). For structural biology, an additional gel filtration chromatography step with a Superdex 200 increase 10/300 column (GE Healthcare) was performed. All Dot1Lcat point mutants were cloned by site-directed mutagenesis and expressed and purified identically to the wild-type protein fragment. All Dot1L mutants were verified by intact mass spectrometry using an Agilent 6520 Accurate Mass Quadrupole Time-of-Flight mass spectrometer. Unpublished pST50Tr plasmids containing the sequence encoding LANA peptide residues 1–23 or a triple mutant of residues 8–10 (LRS to AAA) with an N-terminal AviTag (AVT)-glutathione-S-transferase (GST)-His6 tag were obtained as a gift from Jiehuan Huang and Song Tan. AVT-GST-His6-LANA and -LANA(LRS > AAA) were expressed in E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells at 37°C. The fusion proteins were purified by Talon metal-affinity chromatography and anion exchange chromatography using a Source Q resin (GE Healthcare). An unpublished pST50Tr plasmid containing STR-His10-tagged E. coli exodeoxyribonucleaseX (ExoX) residues 2–167 with an Asp6Ala inactivating mutant was a gift from Song Tan. This inactive ExoX was expressed and purified as described above for Dot1Lcat. TEV cleavage leaves a 3x Gly-Ser sequence at the N terminus of ExoX.

Consensus sequences from human H2A and H2B and the sequence for H3.2 were cloned into pST50Tr vectors. Recombinant Xenopus and human histones were expressed, purified and reconstituted into nucleosomes as previously described (Luger et al., 1997b, 1999). Nucleosomes were assembled with 147 or 155 bp of the 601 DNA sequence (Lowary and Widom, 1998) with the nucleosome positioning sequence centered in each DNA fragment (Kim et al., 2015; McGinty et al., 2016). H2BK120ub(DCA) was prepared essentially as previously described (Morgan et al., 2016). Briefly, Xenopus H2BK120C was cloned by site-directed mutagenesis and the pST50Tr-STR-His10-ubiquitin(Gly76Cys) plasmid was obtained as a gift from Ryan Henrici and Song Tan. Purified Xenopus H2A/H2BK120C dimer and purified STR-His10-ubiquitin(Gly76Cys) were combined at 0.5 and 1 mM concentrations, respectively, in cross-linking buffer (6 M urea, 33.3 mM sodium borate pH 8.5, 5 mM TCEP) and cooled on ice. Crosslinking was performed by the addition of dichloroacetone (DCA, Sigma-Aldrich) to a final concentration of 2.5 μM. After 60 min on ice, DCA was quenched with the addition of 50 mM β-mercaptoethanol. Histone dimer was refolded from the mixture as previously reported and purified with high density cobalt resin (Agarose Bead Technologies) to remove any H2A/H2BK120C lacking DCA-crosslinked ubiquitin. TEV protease was used to remove the STR-His10 tag on ubiquitin, and H2BK120ub(DCA)-containing histone dimer was purified away from crosslinked ubiquitin dimers by cation exchange chromatography. A Gly-Ser-Gly-Ser sequence remains on the N terminus of ubiquitin after protease cleavage.

Xenopus H2BK120ub(Gly76Ala) was prepared essentially as previously described (McGinty et al., 2009) with the following exceptions. The ubiquitin(1–75)-MES thioester was prepared by cloning ubiquitin residues 1–75 in frame with a fused Npu intein ending in the AAFN sequence (Shah et al., 2012) followed by a SUMO-His10 tag in the pST50Tr vector. The ubiquitin intein fusion protein was expressed in E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells at 37°C, purified using metal-affinity chromatography using Talon resin (Clontech), and dialyzed into 100 mM Na2HPO4, pH 7.2, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA. The ubiquitin(1–75)-MES thioester was formed by the addition of 100 mM 2-mercaptoethanesulfonic acid sodium salt (MESNa, Sigma-Aldrich) and 5 mM tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine hydrochlo-ride (TCEP, VWR) and incubation overnight at 4°C, followed by purification with cation exchange chromatography using a Source S resin. The Xenopus H2B(1–116)-Npu fusion exhibited premature cleavage during expression, so we opted to use a split version (Shah et al., 2012). To this end, the H2B fragment was cloned in frame with the N-terminal Npu fragment (NpuN) with a C-terminal SUMOHis10 tag in a pST50Tr vector. The C-terminal Npu fragment (NpuC) was cloned with a TEV-cleavable N-terminal MBP tag and a C-terminal His6 tag. MBP-NpuC-His6 was expressed in E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells at 37°C and purified using metal-affinity chromatography using Talon resin (Clontech), cleaved with TEV protease, and further purified by cation exchange chromatography using a Source S resin. H2B(1–116)-NpuN-SUMO-His6 was also expressed in E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells at 37°C and extracted from inclusion bodies using standard histone inclusion body purification procedures (Luger et al., 1999). H2B(1–116)-NpuN-SUMO-His6 and NpuC-His6 were dialyzed into 1.6 M guanidine, 100 mM Na2HPO4, 140 mM NaCl, and 1 mM EDTA and combined in roughly equimolar quantities. The H2B(1–116)-MES thioester was formed by addition of 200 mM MESNa and 5 mM TCEP and incubation overnight at 30°C prior to purification by cation exchange chromatography using a Source S resin. Peptide synthesis, expressed protein ligation, and desulfurization were performed exactly as previously described (McGinty et al., 2009). Semisynthetic intermediates and the final H2BK120ub(Gly76Ala) product were purified using Vydac C18 columns (Mac-Mod Analytical) and mass spectrometric characterization was performed using an Agilent 6520 Accurate Mass Quadrupole Time-of-Flight mass spectrometer. H2BK120ub analogs were assembled into nucleosomes as described above.

Reconstitution of Dot1L-nucleosome complexes

The Dot1Lcat-H2BK120ub(DCA) nucleosome complex used for cryo-EM experiments was reconstituted as previously reported for other nucleosome complexes (McGinty et al., 2016). Briefly, 2.5 molar equivalents of Dot1Lcat were added in four steps to H2BK120ub(DCA) nucleosomes containing all Xenopus histones and 147 bp 601 DNA at 5 minute intervals in reconstitution buffer (25 mM Tris-Cl pH 7.6, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM DTT, 0.1 mM PMSF). The complex was purified by gel filtration using a Superdex 200 increase column equilibrated in reconstitution buffer. For crystallography experiments, Dot1Lcat was reconstituted using DCA-cross-linked H2BK120ub nucleosomes containing 155 bp 601 DNA and the inactive ExoX as a crystallization chaperone. Reconstitution of the complex was performed as described above, with the following changes: 1) 2.5 molar equivalents of ExoX was added in four steps after addition of Dot1L and 2) reconstitution and purification were performed in reconstitution buffer containing 50 mM NaCl.

Cryo-EM sample preparation

Dot1Lcat-H2BK120ub(DCA) nucleosome complex at ~10 mg/ml was buffer exchanged into crosslinking buffer (10 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl) using a Zeba spin desalting column (Thermo Fisher). Glutaraldehyde (Sigma-Aldrich) was added to a final concentration of 0.1% and crosslinking was allowed to proceed for 5 min at room temperature. Glutaraldehyde was quenched by the addition of Tris-Cl at pH 7.5 to a final concentration of 20 mM. After 15 min at room temperature, samples were buffer exchanged into crosslinking buffer. Complex was diluted to 0.93 mg/ml in freezing buffer (10 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 48 mM NaCl) prior to spotting on a Quantifoil R1.2/1.3, 300 mesh grid for vitrification after blotting for 4 s using a Vitrobot Mark IV (FEI) cryoplunger at 100% humidity and 4°C. An uncrosslinked complex was analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled mass spectrometry using an Agilent 6520 Accurate Mass Quadrupole Time-of-Flight mass spectrometer to assess the methylation state of histone H3.

Cryo-EM data collection and analysis

Cryo-EM data was collected on a Titan Krios (FEI) operating at 300 kV. The images were recorded using the automated data acquisition software EPU (FEI) using a Falcon III direct electron detector (FEI) operated in electron counting mode at a nominal magnification of 75,000, corresponding to a pixel size of 1.08 Å, and at a defocus range of −1.25 μm to −2.75 mm. Each exposure lasted 60 s and was collected as a 30-frame movie at a dose rate of ~0.8e/pix/s, resulting in a total electron dose of ~42 e2. Whole-frame movie alignment was performed with MotionCor2 (Zheng et al., 2017), CTF parameters were estimated with GCTF (Zhang, 2016), and Relion v2.1 (Kimanius et al., 2016) was used for subsequent data analysis. Initially, ~1,000 particles were manually picked to generate 2D class averages to use as templates for iterative rounds of automatic particle picking. In total, 408,526 automatically selected particles were subjected to reference-free 2D classification. Iterative rounds of 2D classification were used to narrow the set to 156,709 high quality particles. 3D classification using a 50 Å low pass filtered nucleosome structure (PDB: 6ESF) generated in Relion as reference identified two classes (3 and 4) containing clearly defined Dot1L-nucleosome complexes. Movie refinement, particle polishing, 3D refinement, and post-processing of particles in classes 3 and 4 resulted in a 3.5 Å reconstruction showing significant conformational heterogeneity in Dot1L and ubiquitin. Polished particles from classes 3 and 4 were subjected to further 3D classification into 4 new subclasses (designated with A). Refinement and post-processing of the resultant class 2A yielded a 3.9 Å reconstruction used for modeling. Masking of the Dot1L and ubiquitin densities for class 2A and continuing refinement resulted in a 7.6 Å map with improved density for Dot1L and ubiquitin. Finally, the original class 3 and class 4 polished particles were reclassified into 10 3D subclasses (designated with B), allowing further parsing of stoichiometry and conformational heterogeneity. Crystal structures for the nucleo-some (PDB: 3LZ0) (Vasudevan et al., 2010), the catalytic domain of Dot1L (PDB: 1NW3) (Min et al., 2003), and ubiquitin (PDBID 1UBQ) (Vijay-Kumar et al., 1987) were docked into the 3.9 Å reconstructed map using Chimera (Pettersen et al., 2004) and refined by iterative real-space refinement in Phenix (Afonine et al., 2018) and manual model building in Coot (Emsley et al., 2010). Local resolution was calculated with ResMap (Kucukelbir et al., 2014). Resolution of reconstructions was calculated using the gold standard FSC criterion of 0.143. All molecular graphics were prepared with Chimera.

Crystallization and X-ray crystallography

The Dot1Lcat-ExoX-H2BK120ub(DCA) nucleosome complex was concentrated to 10 mg/ml and crystallized by mixing 1:1 with 25 mM Bis-Tris pH 6 (Hampton Research), 25 mM (NH4)2HPO4 (Hampton Research), and 1.5% PEG2000-MME (Sigma-Aldrich) at room temperature using modified microbatch under oil with Al’s oil (equal volumes of silicon fluid (Clearco) and paraffin oil (Fisher)) (D’Arcy et al., 2004). Notably, this complex was not crosslinked with glutaraldehyde. Inactive ExoX was used as a crystallization chaperone (R.K.M. and S. Tan, unpublished data). Crystals were collected after 20–35 days and dehydrated and cryoprotected by soaking at room temperature in 25 mM Bis-Tris pH 6, 25 mM (NH4)2HPO4, and 3.75% PEG2000-MME in drops containing increasing concentrations of PEG400 (final concentration 24%, increment 4%, soak interval 15 min). Upon completion of soaking, crystals were flash cooled in liquid nitrogen. Diffraction data was collected on the Advanced Photon Source SER-CAT 22-ID beamline at 1 Å and 100 K. Data was processed using HKL2000 (Otwinowski and Minor, 1997) in the C2221 space group. A molecular replacement model was generated with CCP4 Phaser MR (McCoy et al., 2007) using a polyalanine half nucleosome model generated from PDB: 1KX5 (Davey et al., 2002) and a polyalanine Dot1L catalytic domain model generated from PDB: 1NW3, with loop residues 296–313 deleted.

Lysine methyltransferase assays

Lysine methyltransferase assays were performed using the MTase-Glo enzyme-methyltransferase kit (Promega) using the manufacturer’s protocol. Briefly, 1 μM nucleosomes were combined with 15 nM wild-type or mutant Dot1Lcat in methyltransferase buffer (20 mM Tris-Cl pH 8.0, 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.1 mg/ml BSA, 1 mM DTT, and 20 μM SAM) in a total volume of 8 μl. The concentration of 15 nM Dot1L was selected as it was very close to the linear range of activity on H2BK120ub nucleosomes, while allowing activity on unmodified nucleosomes to be measured robustly. Using the same concentration allowed the direct comparison of activity on ubiquitylated and unmodified nucleosomes. The assay was allowed to proceed at 30°C for 30 min prior to developing the assay and quantifying luminescence using an Envision 2103 Multilabel plate reader (Perkin Elmer). Assays were performed with 5 replicates. All assays were performed with human histones except for Xenopus unmodified or ubiquitylated H2B. No significant difference in Dot1L activity was observed between nucleosomes containing Xenopus H2B and those containing canonical human H2B, validating the use of chimeric nucleosomes. For LANA competition methyltransferase activity assays, AVT-GST-His6-LANA or AVT-GST-His6-L ANA(LRS > AAA) were added to the assay at 0, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 μM final concentrations. An additional assay was performed after incubation of LANA fusion proteins with 0.025 molar equivalents of TEV protease overnight at room temperature. Cleavage of LANA affinity tags was verified by SDS-PAGE.

Gel filtration-based binding assay

AVT-GST-His6-LANA was reconstituted with H2BK120ub(Gly76Ala) or unmodified nucleosomes as described above for Dot1L-nucleosome reconstitutions at a 4:1 molar ratio (~4.5 μM nucleosome) in 10 mM Tris-Cl pH 8.0, 50 mM NaCl, and 1 mM DTT. Interaction was evaluated by separation on a Superdex 200 increase gel filtration column equilibrated in the same buffer. Chromatography fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE.

QUANTIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Statistical analyses were performed with Microsoft Excel. All methyltransferase data are reported as the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. All samples in a given figure panel were performed simultaneously. Quantification of resolution for and statistical validation of cryo-EM density maps were carried out in RELION 2.1.

DATA AND SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY

The cryo-EM maps and atomic coordinates of the Dot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome complex have been deposited in the EMDB and PDB under ID codes EMD-0458 (3.9 Å map used for poised complex structure), EMD-0459 (3.5 Å map), EMD-0460 (7.6 Å map from Dot1L and ubiquitin masking), and PDB: 6NN6 (poised structure). Coordinates for X-ray crystallography molecular replacement model will be distributed upon request.

Supplementary Material

1
2
Download video file (69.4MB, mp4)
3

KEY RESOURCES TABLE

REAGENT or RESOURCE SOURCE IDENTIFIER
Bacterial and Virus Strains
E. coli BL21 (DE3)pLysS Novagen Cat.#69388-3
E. coli HB101 ATCC Cat.#67593
Chemicals, Peptides, and Recombinant Proteins
TALON Metal Affinity Resin Clontech Cat.#635669
Source S resin GE Healthcare Cat.#17094405
Superdex 200 increase 10/300 column GE Healthcare Cat.#28990944
Source Q resin GE Healthcare Cat.#17094705
High density cobalt resin Agarose Bead Technologies Cat.#6BCL-QHCo
1,7-Dichloroacetone Sigma-Aldrich Cat.#384372
Vydac 218TP 5um C18 Column 150×4.6mm Mac-Mod Analytical Cat.#18TP5415
Vydac 218TP 5um C18 Column 250×10mm Mac-Mod Analytical Cat.#18TP510
Vydac 218TP 10um C18 Column 250×22mm Mac-Mod Analytical Cat.#218TP1022
2-Mercaptoethanesulfonic acid sodium salt Sigma-Aldrich Cat.#M1511
Zeba spin desalting column Thermo Fisher Cat.#PI87764
Glutaraldehyde Sigma-Aldrich Cat.#G5882
Bis-Tris Hampton Research Cat.#HR2-783
Ammonium phosphate dibasic Hampton Research Cat.#HR2-629
Poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether (PEG2000-MME) Sigma-Aldrich Cat.#202509
Silicon fluid Clearco Cat.#PSF-1cSt
Paraffin oil Fisher Cat.#O1214
Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG400) Sigma-Aldrich Cat.#202398
Critical Commercial Assays
MTase-Glo Methyltransferase Assay Promega Cat.#V7601
Deposited Data
hDot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome poised structure This paper PDB: 6NN6
hDot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome 3.9 Å map This paper EMD-0458
hDot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome 3.5 Å map This paper EMD-0459
hDot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome 7.6 Å masked map This paper EMD-0460
Xenopus nucleosome crystal structure with 601 DNA Vasudevan et al., 2010 PDB: 3LZ0
Human Dot1L catalytic domain crystal structure Min et al., 2003 PDB: 1NW3
Human ubiquitin crystal structure Vijay-Kumar et al., 1987 PDB: 1UBQ
Xenopus nucleosome crystal structure with alpha-satellite DNA Davey et al., 2002 PDB: 1KX5
LANA peptide/nucleosome crystal structure Barbera et al., 2006 PDB: 1ZLA
Sir3 BAH domain/nucleosome crystal structure Armache et al., 2011 PDB: 3TU4
CENP-C/nucleosome crystal structure Kato et al., 2013 PDB: 4X23
RCC1/nucleosome crystal structure Makde et al., 2010 PDB: 3MVD
SAGA DUB module/nucleosome crystal structure Morgan et al., 2016 PDB: 4ZUX
PRC1 ubiquitylation module/nucleosome crystal structure McGinty et al., 2014 PDB: 4RP8
53BP1/nucleosome cryo-EM structure Wilson et al., 2016 PDB: 5KGF
Recombinant DNA
Plasmid expressing hDot1L(2-416) gift from Song Tan pST50Tr-STRaHISNhDot1Lt1x1
Plasmid expressing hH2A.D This paper pST50Trc3-hH2A.D
Plasmid expressing hH2B.C This paper pST50Trc4-hH2B.C
Plasmid expressing hH3.2 This paper pST50Tr-hH3.2
Plasmid expressing xH4 Luger et al., 1997b pET3a-xH4
Plasmid containing multiple copies of 147 bp Widom 601 DNA McGinty et al., 2016 pST55-16xNCP601a
Plasmid containing multiple copies of 155 bp Widom 601 DNA Kim et al., 2015 pST55-16xNCP601a155M
Plasmid expressing LANA gift from Song Tan and Jiehuan Huang pST50Tr-AVTGSTHISNLANA
Plasmid expressing LANA(LRS > AAA) mutant gift from Song Tan and Jiehuan Huang pST50Tr-AVTGSTHISNLANAx1
Plasmid expressing ExoX(2-167; D6A) gift from Song Tan pST50Tr-STRaHSTNGS3ExoXt1x1
Plasmid expressing Ubiquitin(G76C) gift from Song Tan and Ryan Henrici pST50Tr-STRaHSTNGS2hUbqx7
Plasmid expressing xH2B(K120C) This paper pST50Trc4-xH2Bx27
Plasmid expressing xH2A Luger et al., 1997b pET3a-xH2A
Plasmid expressing xH2B Luger et al., 1997b pET3a-xH2B
Plasmid expressing xH3 Luger et al., 1997b pET3a-xH3
Plasmid expressing NpuC This paper pST50Tr-MBPNNpuC-HIS
Plasmid expressing xH2B(1-116)-NpuN This paper pST50Tr-xH2Bt6NpuNSMOHST
Plasmid expressing Ubiquitin(1-75)-Npu This paper pST50Tr-hUbqt1NpuSMOHST
Software and Algorithms
Microsoft Excel Microsoft https://products.office.com/en-us/excel
EPU FEI https://www.fei.com/software/epu-automated-single-particles-software-for-life-sciences/
MotionCor2 Zheng et al., 2017 http://msg.ucsf.edu/em/software/motioncor2.html
GCTF Zhang, 2016 https://www.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/kzhang/Gctf/
RELION 2.1 Kimanius et al., 2016 http://www2.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/relion
Chimera Pettersen et al., 2004 https://www.cgl.ucsf.edu/chimera
Phenix Afonine et al., 2018 https://www.phenix-online.org/download/
Coot Emsley et al., 2010 https://www2.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/personal/pemsley/coot/
ResMap Kucukelbir et al., 2014 http://resmap.sourceforge.net/
CCP4 Phaser MR McCoy et al., 2007 http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/html/phaser.html
Other
Holey carbon grid, Cu 300 mesh Quantifoil Micro Tools GmbH Quantifoil R 1.2/1.3

Highlights.

  • Cryo-EM structure of Dot1L bound in a poised state to a ubiquitylated nucleosome

  • Dot1L engages the nucleosome acidic patch using a variant arginine anchor

  • Dot1L-ubiquitin hydrophobic interactions enhance histone H3K79 methylation

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Andrew Thieme and Erin Blanding for reagent preparation. Brittany Ford and Fabiola Jaramillo assisted us with cryo-EM sample preparation and screening. Cryo-EM data were collected at the Shared Materials and Instrumentation Facility at Duke University, within the collaborative framework of the Molecular Microscopy Consortium. X-ray data were collected at SERCAT 22-ID beamline at the Advanced Photon Source (supported by NIH S10_RR25528 and S10_RR028976 and the US DOE contract no. W-31–109-Eng-38). Leonard Collins at the UNC Biomarker Mass Spectrometry Facility collected mass spectrometry data. We thank the McGinty lab, Brian Strahl, and Song Tan for project discussions and comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by Searle Scholars Program, Pew-Stewart Scholars in Cancer Research, and Damon Runyon Dale F. Frey awards to R.K.M.; NIH T32GM008570 to C.J.A.; and by the NIH Intramural Research Program/US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) ZIC ES103326 to M.J.B.

Footnotes

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Supplemental Information includes two tables and six figures and can be found with this article online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.01.058.

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no competing interests.

REFERENCES

  1. Afonine PV, Poon BK, Read RJ, Sobolev OV, Terwilliger TC, Urzhumtsev A, and Adams PD (2018). Real-space refinement in PHENIX for cryo-EM and crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D Struct. Biol 74, 531–544. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Armache KJ, Garlick JD, Canzio D, Narlikar GJ, and Kingston RE (2011). Structural basis of silencing: Sir3 BAH domain in complex with a nucleosome at 3.0 Å resolution. Science 334, 977–982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barbera AJ, Chodaparambil JV, Kelley-Clarke B, Joukov V, Walter JC, Luger K, and Kaye KM (2006). The nucleosomal surface as a docking station for Kaposi’s sarcoma herpesvirus LANA. Science 311, 856–861. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bernt KM, Zhu N, Sinha AU, Vempati S, Faber J, Krivtsov AV, Feng Z, Punt N, Daigle A, Bullinger L, et al. (2011). MLL-rearranged leukemia is dependent on aberrant H3K79 methylation by DOT1L. Cancer Cell 20, 66–78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bilokapic S, Strauss M, and Halic M (2018). Histone octamer rearranges to adapt to DNA unwrapping. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol 25, 101–108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Briggs SD, Xiao T, Sun Z-W, Caldwell JA, Shabanowitz J, Hunt DF, Allis CD, and Strahl BD (2002). Gene silencing: trans-histone regulatory pathway in chromatin. Nature 418, 498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Chatterjee C, McGinty RK, Fierz B, and Muir TW (2010). Disulfide-directed histone ubiquitylation reveals plasticity in hDot1L activation. Nat. Chem. Biol 6, 267–269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Couture J-F, Collazo E, Brunzelle JS, and Trievel RC (2005). Structural and functional analysis of SET8, a histone H4 Lys-20 methyltransferase. Genes Dev. 19, 1455–1465. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. D’Arcy A, Sweeney AM, and Haber A (2004). Practical aspects of using the microbatch method in screening conditions for protein crystallization. Methods 34, 323–328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Dann GP, Liszczak GP, Bagert JD, Müller MM, Nguyen UTT, Wojcik F, Brown ZZ, Bos J, Panchenko T, Pihl R, et al. (2017). ISWI chromatin remodellers sense nucleosome modifications to determine substrate preference. Nature 548, 607–611. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Davey CA, Sargent DF, Luger K, Maeder AW, and Richmond TJ (2002). Solvent mediated interactions in the structure of the nucleosome core particle at 1.9 a resolution. J. Mol. Biol 319, 1097–1113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Dillon SC, Zhang X, Trievel RC, and Cheng X (2005). The SET-domain protein superfamily: protein lysine methyltransferases. Genome Biol. 6, 227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Emsley P, Lohkamp B, Scott WG, and Cowtan K (2010). Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr 66, 486–501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Feng Q, Wang H, Ng HH, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Struhl K, and Zhang Y (2002). Methylation of H3-lysine 79 is mediated by a new family of HMTases without a SET domain. Curr. Biol 12, 1052–1058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Fingerman IM, Li H-C, and Briggs SD (2007). A charge-based interaction between histone H4 and Dot1 is required for H3K79 methylation and telomere silencing: identification of a new trans-histone pathway. Genes Dev. 21, 2018–2029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Fujiki R, Hashiba W, Sekine H, Yokoyama A, Chikanishi T, Ito S, Imai Y, Kim J, He HH, Igarashi K, et al. (2011). GlcNAcylation of histone H2B facilitates its monoubiquitination. Nature 480, 557–560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Greer EL, and Shi Y (2012). Histone methylation: a dynamic mark in health, disease and inheritance. Nat. Rev. Genet 13, 343–357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Holt MT, David Y, Pollock S, Tang Z, Jeon J, Kim J, Roeder RG, and Muir TW (2015). Identification of a functional hotspot on ubiquitin required for stimulation of methyltransferase activity on chromatin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 10365–10370. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hyun K, Jeon J, Park K, and Kim J (2017). Writing, erasing and reading histone lysine methylations. Exp. Mol. Med 49, e324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Jbara M, Maity SK, Morgan M, Wolberger C, and Brik A (2016). Chemical synthesis of phosphorylated histone H2A at Tyr57 reveals insight into the inhibition mode of the SAGA deubiquitinating module. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl 55, 4972–4976. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kalashnikova AA, Porter-Goff ME, Muthurajan UM, Luger K, and Hansen JC (2013). The role of the nucleosome acidic patch in modulating higher order chromatin structure. J. R. Soc. Interface 10, 20121022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kato H, Jiang J, Zhou B-R, Rozendaal M, Feng H, Ghirlando R, Xiao TS, Straight AF, and Bai Y (2013). A conserved mechanism for centromeric nucleosome recognition by centromere protein CENP-C. Science 340, 1110–1113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kim J, Hake SB, and Roeder RG (2005). The human homolog of yeast BRE1 functions as a transcriptional coactivator through direct activator interactions. Mol. Cell 20, 759–770. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kim S-A, Chatterjee N, Jennings MJ, Bartholomew B, and Tan S (2015). Extranucleosomal DNA enhances the activity of the LSD1/CoREST his-tone demethylase complex. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 4868–4880. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Kimanius D, Forsberg BO, Scheres SH, and Lindahl E (2016). Accelerated cryo-EM structure determination with parallelisation using GPUs in RELION-2. eLife 5, e18722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kucukelbir A, Sigworth FJ, and Tagare HD (2014). Quantifying the local resolution of cryo-EM density maps. Nat. Methods 11, 63–65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lacoste N, Utley RT, Hunter JM, Poirier GG, and Côte J (2002). Disruptor of telomeric silencing-1 is a chromatin-specific histone H3 methyltransferase. J. Biol. Chem 277, 30421–30424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Lowary PT, and Widom J (1998). New DNA sequence rules for high affinity binding to histone octamer and sequence-directed nucleosome positioning. J. Mol. Biol 276, 19–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Luger K, Mäder AW, Richmond RK, Sargent DF, and Richmond TJ (1997a). Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 A resolution. Nature 389, 251–260. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Luger K, Rechsteiner TJ, Flaus AJ, Waye MM, and Richmond TJ (1997b). Characterization of nucleosome core particles containing histone proteins made in bacteria. J. Mol. Biol 272, 301–311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Luger K, Rechsteiner TJ, and Richmond TJ (1999). Preparation of nucleosome core particle from recombinant histones. Methods Enzymol. 304, 3–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Machida S, Sekine S, Nishiyama Y, Horikoshi N, and Kurumizaka H (2016). Structural and biochemical analyses of monoubiquitinated human his-tones H2B and H4. Open Biol. 6, 160090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Makde RD, England JR, Yennawar HP, and Tan S (2010). Structure of RCC1 chromatin factor bound to the nucleosome core particle. Nature 467, 562–566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. McCoy AJ, Grosse-Kunstleve RW, Adams PD, Winn MD, Storoni LC, and Read RJ (2007). Phaser crystallographic software. J. Appl. Cryst 40, 658–674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. McGinty RK, and Tan S (2016). Recognition of the nucleosome by chromatin factors and enzymes. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol 37, 54–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. McGinty RK, Kim J, Chatterjee C, Roeder RG, and Muir TW (2008). Chemically ubiquitylated histone H2B stimulates hDot1L-mediated intranucleosomal methylation. Nature 453, 812–816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. McGinty RK, Köhn M, Chatterjee C, Chiang KP, Pratt MR, and Muir TW (2009). Structure-activity analysis of semisynthetic nucleosomes: mechanistic insights into the stimulation of Dot1L by ubiquitylated histone H2B. ACS Chem. Biol 4, 958–968. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. McGinty RK, Henrici RC, and Tan S (2014). Crystal structure of the PRC1 ubiquitylation module bound to the nucleosome. Nature 514, 591–596. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. McGinty RK, Makde RD, and Tan S (2016). Preparation, crystallization, and structure determination of chromatin enzyme/nucleosome complexes. Methods Enzymol. 573, 43–65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Min J, Feng Q, Li Z, Zhang Y, and Xu R-M (2003). Structure of the catalytic domain of human DOT1L, a non-SET domain nucleosomal histone methyltransferase. Cell 112, 711–723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Morgan MT, Haj-Yahya M, Ringel AE, Bandi P, Brik A, and Wolberger C (2016). Structural basis for histone H2B deubiquitination by the SAGA DUB module. Science 351, 725–728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Ng HH, Feng Q, Wang H, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Zhang Y, and Struhl K (2002a). Lysine methylation within the globular domain of histone H3 by Dot1 is important for telomeric silencing and Sir protein association. Genes Dev. 16, 1518–1527. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Ng HH, Xu R-M, Zhang Y, and Struhl K (2002b). Ubiquitination of histone H2B by Rad6 is required for efficient Dot1-mediated methylation of histone H3 lysine 79. J. Biol. Chem 277, 34655–34657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Otwinowski Z, and Minor W (1997). Processing of X-ray diffraction data collected in oscillation mode. Methods Enzymol. 276, 307–326. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC, Couch GS, Greenblatt DM, Meng EC, and Ferrin TE (2004). UCSF Chimera–a visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J. Comput. Chem 25, 1605–1612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Sawada K, Yang Z, Horton JR, Collins RE, Zhang X, and Cheng X (2004). Structure of the conserved core of the yeast Dot1p, a nucleosomal histone H3 lysine 79 methyltransferase. J. Biol. Chem 279, 43296–43306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Schübeler D, MacAlpine DM, Scalzo D, Wirbelauer C, Kooperberg C, van Leeuwen F, Gottschling DE, O’Neill LP, Turner BM, Delrow J, et al. (2004). The histone modification pattern of active genes revealed through genome-wide chromatin analysis of a higher eukaryote. Genes Dev. 18, 1263–1271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Shah NH, Dann GP, Vila-Perelló M, Liu Z, and Muir TW (2012). Ultra-fast protein splicing is common among cyanobacterial split inteins: implications for protein engineering. J. Am. Chem. Soc 134, 11338–11341. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Shahbazian MD, Zhang K, and Grunstein M (2005). Histone H2B ubiquity-lation controls processive methylation but not monomethylation by Dot1 and Set1. Mol. Cell 19, 271–277. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Shema-Yaacoby E, Nikolov M, Haj-Yahya M, Siman P, Allemand E, Yamaguchi Y, Muchardt C, Urlaub H, Brik A, Oren M, and Fischle W (2013). Systematic identification of proteins binding to chromatin-embedded ubiquitylated H2B reveals recruitment of SWI/SNF to regulate transcription. Cell Rep. 4, 601–608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. van Leeuwen F, Gafken PR, and Gottschling DE (2002). Dot1p modulates silencing in yeast by methylation of the nucleosome core. Cell 109, 745–756. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Vasudevan D, Chua EYD, and Davey CA (2010). Crystal structures of nucleosome core particles containing the ‘601’ strong positioning sequence. J. Mol. Biol 403, 1–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Vijay-Kumar S, Bugg CE, and Cook WJ (1987). Structure of ubiquitin refined at 1.8 A resolution. J. Mol. Biol 194, 531–544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Wang Z, Zang C, Rosenfeld JA, Schones DE, Barski A, Cuddapah S, Cui K, Roh T-Y, Peng W, Zhang MQ, and Zhao K (2008). Combinatorial patterns of histone acetylations and methylations in the human genome. Nat. Genet 40, 897–903. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Wilson MD, Benlekbir S, Fradet-Turcotte A, Sherker A, Julien J-P, McEwan A, Noordermeer SM, Sicheri F, Rubinstein JL, and Durocher D (2016). The structural basis of modified nucleosome recognition by 53BP1. Nature 536, 100–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Winters AC, and Bernt KM (2017). MLL-rearranged leukemias-an update on science and clinical approaches. Front Pediatr. 5, 4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Wood K, Tellier M, and Murphy S (2018). DOT1L and H3K79 methylation in transcription and genomic stability. Biomolecules 8, 11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Zhang K (2016). Gctf: real-time CTF determination and correction. J. Struct. Biol 193, 1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhao Y, and Garcia BA (2015). Comprehensive catalog of currently documented histone modifications. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol 7, a025064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Zheng SQ, Palovcak E, Armache J-P, Verba KA, Cheng Y, and Agard DA (2017). MotionCor2: anisotropic correction of beam-induced motion for improved cryo-electron microscopy. Nat. Methods 14, 331–332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Zhou L, Holt MT, Ohashi N, Zhao A, Müller MM, Wang B, and Muir TW (2016). Evidence that ubiquitylated H2B corrals hDot1L on the nucleosomal surface to induce H3K79 methylation. Nat. Commun 7, 10589. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1
2
Download video file (69.4MB, mp4)
3

Data Availability Statement

The cryo-EM maps and atomic coordinates of the Dot1L-H2BK120ub nucleosome complex have been deposited in the EMDB and PDB under ID codes EMD-0458 (3.9 Å map used for poised complex structure), EMD-0459 (3.5 Å map), EMD-0460 (7.6 Å map from Dot1L and ubiquitin masking), and PDB: 6NN6 (poised structure). Coordinates for X-ray crystallography molecular replacement model will be distributed upon request.

RESOURCES