Abstract
Linker histones, e.g., H1, are best known for their ability to bind to nucleosomes and stabilize both nucleosome structure and condensed higher-order chromatin structures. However, over the years many investigators have reported specific interactions between linker histones and proteins involved in important cellular processes. The purpose of this review is to highlight evidence indicating an important alternative mode of action for H1, namely protein-protein interactions. We first review key aspects of the traditional view of linker histone action, including the importance of the H1 C-terminal domain. We then discuss the current state of knowledge of linker histone interactions with other proteins, and, where possible, highlight the mechanism of linker histone-mediated protein-protein interactions. Taken together, the data suggest a combinatorial role for the linker histones, functioning both as primary chromatin architectural proteins and simultaneously as recruitment hubs for proteins involved in accessing and modifying the chromatin fiber.
Similar content being viewed by others
The traditional view: Linker histones and chromatin fiber condensation
Nucleosomes and nucleosomal arrays
Chromosomal DNA is compacted by, and made accessible through, hierarchical levels of ordered chromatin condensation and decondensation. Chromatin is a dynamic nucleoprotein structure formed from histone proteins, DNA, and numerous chromatin-associated proteins. Nucleosomes, the fundamental building blocks of chromatin, are made up of ∼150 base pairs (bp) of DNA and an octamer of core histone proteins 1. The histone octamer consists of two molecules each of histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 2, and is stabile only when wrapped by nucleosomal DNA, or under high-salt solution conditions in vitro 3, 4. Approximately 1.65 superhelical turns of nucleosomal DNA are wrapped around the histone octamer to form the nucleosome, resulting in the first level of DNA condensation. The nucleosome is stabilized by extensive charge-dipole interactions between the main chains of the histones and DNA phosphates, and by hydrogen bonding between the many histone arginine residues inserted into the minor grooves of the DNA 5. The canonical alpha-helical histone-fold motifs of the core histones (Figure 1A) bind nucleosomal DNA and make up the structured core of the nucleosome, while the N-terminal “tail” domains (NTDs) pass outside the gyres of the DNA and extend beyond the nucleosome core structure 6. The NTDs are between 14 and 38 amino acids in length, highly basic (enriched in lysine and arginine residues), and are largely devoid of regular secondary structure 7. The NTDs and the histone-fold domains 8 are sites of numerous, combinatorial post-translational modifications that influence the accessibility of the nucleosomes to chromatin-associated proteins, transcription factors, and other regulatory proteins, and regulate chromatin condensation (for reviews, see 9, 10, 11). A polymer of nucleosomes assembled on a single DNA molecule is known as a nucleosomal array. The nucleosomes in a nucleosomal array are connected by core histone-free, extra-nucleosomal DNA termed linker DNA. Linker DNA is distinguished from nucleosomal DNA in that it is not constrained in the superhelix by the core histones, and it is much more susceptible to nuclease digestion 12. As will be discussed below, linker DNA possesses unique morphology in folded nucleosomal arrays and linker histone-bound chromatin fibers.
Structural dynamics of nucleosomal arrays
Nucleosomal arrays, either extracted from living cells or reconstituted from purified components, undergo a hierarchical series of salt-dependent condensation transitions 13, 14, 15, 16. The primary chromatin structure corresponds to an extended 'beads on a string' conformation, and is observed under very low salt concentrations (and in the absence of linker histone) 17. When imaged under these conditions, the individual nucleosomes do not come in close contact, and the linker DNA is nearly maximally extended, with inter-nucleosome distances of 150-200 Å (this length correlates to 30-50 bp of exposed linker DNA) 18, 19. The addition of salts (e.g., 1-2 mM MgCl2 or 100-200 mM NaCl 20) causes short-range, intra-array nucleosome-nucleosome interactions, resulting in folding of the array into secondary chromatin structures. The endpoint of salt-dependent folding of arrays is widely thought to be the canonical 30-nm fiber described in early physical studies of fragmented chromatin and also observed more recently using model systems 12, 14, 15, 21, 22, 23 (for reviews, see 24, 25, 26, 27). The nature of the structure of the 30-nm fiber itself has been studied and debated at length, yielding two basic models (for reviews, see 21, 25, 26). A two-start helix, consisting of a zig-zag arrangement of stacked nucleosomes, with 5-6 nucleosomes per 11-nm helical rise, was proposed based on biochemical 23 and crystallographic data obtained with a tetranucleosome array having a very short nucleosome repeat length (167 bp) in the absence of linker histone 28. This was reinforced by EM of cross-linked arrays and computer modeling 29. In this study, both simulated and formaldehyde cross-linked EM structures were used to determine internucleosome connectivities. The dominant connectivities in both simulated and cross-linked arrays were found to be between nucleosomes N and N ± 2, though, importantly, the addition of magnesium ions raised the proportion of nearest neighbor (N ± 1) and N ± 3 contacts, indicative of (linker) DNA bending to accommodate greater compaction. These data were thus found to be consistent with the two-start, zig-zag, twisted ribbon model.
Alternatively, EM studies of long polynucleosome arrays of varying repeat length, in the presence and absence of linker histone and salt, have provided convincing evidence for the one-start, interdigitated solenoid structure, with ∼11 nucleosomes per 11-nm rise 30, 31. This structure requires ∼6 consecutive nucleosomes containing linker histone in order to complete one helical turn, and thus, the structure is stabilized through N ± 6 connections. This work supports early work using endogenous chromatin fragments purified from chicken erythrocyte nuclei, where neutron scattering supported the notion that linker histone was essential for forming the 30-nm fiber 32. A more recent study using magnetic tweezers to pull on long 197-bp repeat length nucleosome arrays, and comparing arrays with and without linker histone, suggests that based upon the slopes of the stretching curves the arrays respond in a manner consistent with Hooke's law; thus, the structure must be solenoidal, not zig-zag 33. Shorter repeat length arrays (167 bp, more similar to the studies from the Richmond lab 23, 28) are shorter and stiffer when folded, consistent with the two-start helix. Thus, nucleosome repeat length is a predictor of the specific, perhaps local, higher-order structure of the 30-nm fiber.
At a slightly higher concentration of divalent salt than those that induce folding, nucleosomal arrays reversibly self-associate into tertiary chromatin structures. This structural transition was observed in the earliest studies of chromatin, as dating back over 50 years ago it was reported that isolated rat and chicken nuclei underwent a reversible and cooperative transition from a homogenous to granular state when the buffer included 5 mM MgCl2 34, 35, 36, 37. Nucleosomal array model systems and homogenous, recombinant core histone octamers have been used to extensively characterize the self-association transition 20, 38, 39. The use of octamers in which the NTDs had been removed through recombinant DNA techniques 40 showed that the NTDs of H2A, H2B, H3 and H4 contribute additively and independently to nucleosome array oligomerization. Collectively, nucleosomal array folding and self-association are correlated with short-range folding and long-range fiber-fiber interactions, respectively, present in eukaryotic interphase chromosome fibers 14, 16.
Linker histones
The folded secondary structures formed by nucleosomal arrays at physiological ionic strength are intrinsically unstable and require other proteins to “lock” the arrays into stable higher-order secondary chromatin structures 14. These proteins have been termed chromatin architectural proteins 41. The most abundant chromatin architectural proteins in higher eukaryotes are the linker histones, a family of proteins structurally distinct from the core histones. Unlike the highly evolutionarily conserved core histones, which most likely evolved from an archebacterial ancestor 42, the sequences of the linker histone variants are more highly variable across species (for a review, see 43) and are thought to have evolved from eubacteria 44. Linker histones are present at an average of nearly one molecule per nucleosome in living cells 45, 46, less in species with shorter nucleosome repeat length. The stoichiometry is closer to one molecule per nucleosome in highly condensed heterochromatin, and somewhat lower in decondensed euchromatin 46. A nucleosome bound by linker histones is called a chromatosome, while a nucleosome array assembled with linker histones is called a chromatin fiber. For the purpose of simplicity, within this review we will focus on linker histone H1 and its sequence variants (for a review, see 47).
Linker histones have a tripartite structure unlike that of the core histones (Figure 1B), with unstructured N- (13-40 amino acids in length) and C-terminal (∼100 amino acids) domains flanking a well-folded 'globular domain' (GD) of ∼80 amino acids 48. No specific function has been observed for the NTD; thus, its nature remains largely enigmatic. The structure of the central, globular domain 49, 50, 51 contains at least two separate DNA-binding sites: the first involves a classical winged-helix motif and the second a cluster of conserved basic residues on the opposite face of that domain 51. These two DNA-binding domains allow the linker histone globular domain to bridge different DNA molecules and form tram-track structures 52, and explain the preferential binding of linker histone to DNA crossovers 53 and four-way junctions 54. Linker histones asymmetrically bind to the nucleosomes of chromatin fibers at the nucleosomal DNA entry and exit sites 55, 56, 57, 58 and increase the micrococcal nuclease protection of nucleosomes from 146 to ∼168 bp 59.
Linker histones and the structural dynamics of chromatin fibers
Early studies of native chromatin fibers revealed distinct differences in the fiber morphology when stripped of linker histone to form nucleosomal arrays 17, 60. Specifically, H1-containing chromatin fibers had a more regular helical appearance. On the other hand, the addition of salt caused “clumping”, not formation of the defined fibers of regular diameter seen in H1-containing fibers. Thus, it was proposed that H1 must be bound near the entry-exit sites to alter the DNA paths and “induce” folding of chromatin fiber into regular 30-nm diameter structures. As discussed above, many studies have established that nucleosomal arrays in salt equilibrate between extended and highly folded conformations. Three decades after the original research, we now know that the effects of linker histones are to (1) convert a heterogeneous population of folded nucleosomal arrays into stable 30-nm diameter structure(s), and (2) cause chromatin fibers to self-associate at much lower salt concentrations than nucleosomal arrays. These and related results have been interpreted to mean that linker histones stabilize the intrinsic condensed structures formed by nucleosomal arrays 13, 20, 61. Similar conclusions have been derived from recent single-molecule magnetic tweezer studies 33. Of note, H1-dependent formation of stable 30-nm structures is cooperative 30 and dependent on the linker histone being bound to 5-7 contiguous nucleosomes 32. In addition to the stabilizing function, there seems to be little doubt that linker histones promote increased compaction and regularity of the 30-nm structures 30. Thus, linker histones both stabilize the folded fiber and induce specific structural features such as the stem-loop motif described below.
The mechanism through which the linker histones influence chromatin folding has been investigated using both conventional and cryo-electron microscopy to image linker histone-containing trinucleosome fragments from chicken erythrocytes 62. These studies resulted in particularly high-resolution images of a 3D zig-zag conformation showing that linker histones decrease the entry-exit angle of DNA from the nucleosome. In addition, the entering and exiting DNA strands were seen to emerge tangentially from a single origin close to the nucleosome when the linker histone was present. This close approach of the entry-exit DNA is known as a stem or apposed stem motif, and has been studied in great detail by the Woodcock lab and others 62, 63, 64. The three possible orientations of the entry-exit DNA are such that the DNA linking number changes to -2 (the strands cross), -1 (the strands come to parallel, then diverge), or 0 (the strands cross one another and cross the nucleosome). In order to bring the entry-exit strands this close, sufficient screening of the DNA negative charge is likely provided by the large number of positively charged amino acids in the linker histone CTD (and possibly the H3 NTD 65).
The H1 CTD has been directly implicated in chromatin folding: fibers bound to a proteolytically truncated H1 lacking the CTD were not capable of stabilizing 30-nm diameter secondary chromatin structures 66, 67. The amino acid composition (∼40% Lys and Arg, < 10% hydrophobic residues) of the CTD is ideal for allowing ionic interactions of a largely extended domain with the linker DNA. In addition, alternating Lys and Ala residues interspersed with Pro create a uniform charge distribution 68 predisposed to form proline-kinked α-helical elements 69. Two recent papers investigating the role of the H1 CTD in chromatin condensation have provided surprising insight into how this domain functions. In the first paper, the folding and self-association dynamics of chromatin fibers bound to a series of mouse H1-0 CTD truncation mutants were determined. The results indicated that there are two discontinuous “sub-domains” within the CTD that mediate H1 function in stabilizing the condensed chromatin 70. These sub-domains are defined by residues 97-121 (which directly abut the globular domain) and 145–169. Residues 122-144 and 170-196 could be deleted without affecting the function. In the second paper, the role of the unique CTD amino-acid composition 71 was determined by studying the H1 isoforms and performing sub-domain swapping and directed mutagenesis experiments 72. Results showed that the H1 isoforms, which vary significantly in their primary sequence but not in their amino-acid composition, all functioned identically in chromatin condensation assays in vitro. Randomization of amino acids 97-121, while maintaining the unique H1 CTD amino-acid composition, had no effect on condensation transitions, ruling out primary sequence as a determinant of function. Surprisingly, sub-domain “swap” mutants, in which residues 122-144 and 170-196 replaced residues 97-121, functioned as well as wild-type protein in mediating chromatin condensation pathways. These results indicate that the molecular determinants of H1 CTD function in chromatin condensation are its unique amino-acid composition and the specific location of sub-domains of the CTD relative to the globular domain, not its primary sequence.
The determinants of H1 CTD function have been linked to intrinsic protein disorder 72. Intrinsically disordered protein domains lack native structure but often undergo a disorder-to-order transition concomitant with binding to nucleic acids or other proteins 71, 73, 74. There is substantial evidence that the H1 CTD is intrinsically disordered. The CTD and peptides derived from the CTD are random coils in aqueous solution 75, 76. Trifluoroethanol increases the α-helical content of the CTD, as does sodium perchlorate, indicating that the CTD has an inherent propensity to form α-helical structures. Importantly, a peptide corresponding to residues 99-121 of the H1 CTD becomes α-helical upon binding to DNA 77, 78. This peptide closely corresponds to the functional domain that abuts the H1 globular domain and was shown to be important for chromatin condensation (see above, and 70). Most recently, the full-length H1 CTD was studied in a variety of solution conditions in the presence and absence of DNA, and was shown to adopt a full complement of secondary stuctures 79. Taken together, these data suggest that the CTD mediates stabilization of condensed chromatin fibers by assuming α-helical and/or β-strand structure(s) upon binding to linker DNA. As we will see below, intrinsic disorder also appears to play a role in some CTD-mediated protein-protein interactions.
The emerging view: Linker histones and protein-protein interactions
Linker histones bind many different nuclear and cytosolic proteins
The previous sections describe the traditional, well-established functions of H1 as a chromatin architectural protein. However, increasing evidence has accumulated indicating that linker histones also act by interacting with many different non-histone nuclear and cytosolic proteins. Specifically, at least 16 examples of linker histone-protein interactions can be found scattered throughout the literature (summarized in Table 1). Taken together, the data in Table 1 clearly indicate that H1 functions in part by participating in protein-protein interactions. It is therefore appropriate to ask: how many more H1-interacting proteins remain to be identified? Two groups have recently utilized distinct approaches to examine H1-protein interactions in vivo. Fang-Lin Sun and co-workers 80 used antibodies against the N- and C-terminal regions of H1 to co-IP nuclear proteins from Drosophila melanogaster Kc cells. What they identified as H1-binding proteins include H2B and H3, 40S and 60S ribosome components, and two proteins (hnRNP48 and hnRNP36) involved in pre-mRNA processing and cytoplasmic export 81, 82. However, they identified only “the most prominent bands present between 15 and 50 kDa in the gels”, and thus many other interesting H1-binding proteins may have been present and not accounted.
The work from the lab of Woojin An 83 provides more direct insight into the breadth of interactions in which H1 is involved. Using a cell line stably expressing a tandem-tagged H1.2 construct (Flag-HA-H1.2), a series of separation steps (P-11 phosphocellulose and M2 agarose chromatography, glycerol gradient sedimentation) and mass spectrometry were used to identify the binding partners. A stained SDS-PAGE gel demonstrates the presence of nearly 20 prominent bands and many other less abundant stained bands, strongly suggesting that the number of H1-specific binding partners is much larger than indicated in Table 1. In terms of specific proteins, a protein kinase (DNA-PK) and phosphatase (PP1), Poly-ADP-Ribose Polymerase 1 (PARP1) 84, cell-survival transcription factor YB1 85, and the DNA/RNA binding protein PURα 86 were identified.
Mechanisms of linker histone-protein interactions
As with chromatin condensation, it is of interest to know which linker histone domain(s) mediate protein-protein interactions and the mechanism(s) through which they act. The most thoroughly described interaction at the molecular level involves the apoptotic nuclease DNA Fragmentation Factor, DFF40 (for reviews, see 87, 88). DFF40 exists in the nucleus in complex with its chaperone and inhibitor DFF45 89 [caspase-activated DNase (CAD) and inhibitor of CAD in mice]. DFF45 is cleaved at two caspase-3 sites late in the apoptotic pathway, releasing DFF40 from the DFF40/DFF45 dimer and allowing DFF40 to form enzymatically active homo-oligomers 90, 91, 92. Free DFF40 is highly specific and active in cleaving the linker DNA between nucleosomes, in the process releasing small chromatin fragments. Because of its preference for linker DNA, it was soon discovered that DFF40-dependent DNA cleavage was greatly stimulated by linker histones 89, 91, 93.
A detailed biochemical analysis subsequently investigated the mechanism of DFF40-linker histone interactions 94. The first unexpected observation was that the H1 CTD mediated the protein-protein interaction. Using the same H1-0 mutants as Lu and Hansen 70, it was shown that progressive deletion of the 72 most C-terminal residues of the H1 CTD led to progressive loss of DFF40-dependent DNA cleavage. Of note, no further effect was observed when the 24-residue region immediately abutting the globular domain was deleted. Thus, the regions of the CTD needed to mediate chromatin condensation and DFF40 interactions appear to be distinct. The CTD also functioned independently of the rest of the protein; a number of different 48-residue peptides derived from the H1 CTD led to activation levels similar to those of full-length H1. Interestingly, the amino-acid composition of all the activating peptides was very similar. Consistent with this observation, six of the mouse somatic H1 isoforms, which differ significantly in their primary sequence but not amino-acid composition, activated DFF40 equally well. Thus, amino-acid composition appears to be an important determinant of H1-DFF40 interactions in addition to H1-chromatin interactions. These studies further showed that DFF40-H1 interactions enhanced DNA binding by DFF40, and that incubation of DFF40 with the isolated H1 CTD or any of the ∼48 amino-acid peptides significantly enhanced DNA binding, similar to the effect on DNA cleavage. The binding of H1 to the barrier to autointegration factor (BAF) protein is also dependent on the H1 CTD 95, although mechanistic studies of the BAF-H1 interaction were not performed. Taken together, these results support the conclusion that the H1 CTD is capable of mediating interactions with both DNA and specific proteins, thus implicating the CTD as an important determinant of linker histone multifunctionality.
Unfortunately, the majority of studies of H1-dependent protein-protein interactions described have not distinguished whether the GD, NTD, or CTD is responsible for the interaction. The H1 CTD can form an amphipathic (basic residues on one face, hydrophobic residues on the opposing face) α-helix 78, and thus contains a hydrophobic surface, possibly utilized for protein binding. Further, it has been shown that the H1 NTD (residues 11-23, which abut the GD) can form a non-amphipathic α-helix 96. As no chromatin-condensing function has been ascribed to the NTD, perhaps this is also a site of H1-protein interactions, as suggested for Msx-1 97 and HP1 98, 99.
Prothymosin (ProTα) co-IPs with H1, is able to extract a fraction of H1 from reconstituted chromatin, and gel shifts both the full-length H1 and the globular domain 100. ProTα is small (12 kDa), highly acidic, and predicted to be largely unstructured. The interaction with the GD is intriguing, as is the observation that ProTα interferes with H1-chromatin binding, since H1 binding to nucleosomes occurs in part through the GD. However, none of the assays looked for contacts with the linker histone CTD or NTD, and in light of the biochemical nature of ProTα, it seems possible that the basic, unstructured H1 CTD may be able to interact with the highly acidic ProTα. Similar hypotheses can be made for parathymosin, which biochemically is a nearly identical protein to ProTα.
While we can now say with some certainty that H1 functions in part through protein-protein interactions, much more work will be necessary to define the extent to which the three linker histone domains function as protein-protein interfaces. However, in view of what little is known, it seems likely that all three domains are able to serve in this role depending on the specific protein-protein interaction in question.
Linker histone post-translational modifications and protein-protein interactions
The H1 isoforms are phosphoproteins, as numerous serine and threonine residues in the N- and C-terminal domains are phosphorylated in response to various cellular stimuli 101, 102, 103, 104, 105. More recent proteomic approaches have uncovered additional and specific combinations of modifications besides phosphorylation, such as ubiquitylation 106, lysine acetylation 107, and lysine methylation (for excellent reviews, see 101, 108). One intriguing example involving protein-protein interactions comes from the Schneider lab, who determined that the chromodomain of the protein HP1 specifically recognizes methylated lysine 26 (K26Me) of H1 isoform 1.4 99. Of note, phosphorylation of the adjacent serine 27 (S27Phos) blocked binding of HP1, creating an on-off switch for HP1 binding. Interestingly, a more recent study from the Reinberg lab showed that the mono- or di-methylation of H1 lysine 26 (K26Me/Me) leads to binding of a different chromatin-condensing protein (L3MBTL1) at Rb-regulated genes 27, again establishing a link between post-translational modifications of the H1 NTD and H1-mediated protein-protein interactions. Such specific, post-translational modification-controlled recruitment of H1 by a heterochromatin-specific protein such as HP1 acting through H1 N-terminal residues indicates a function other than nucleosomal DNA binding for the linker histone NTD.
Concluding remarks
It is clear from both the large number of specific H1-dependent protein-protein interactions, and the cellular processes with which these H1 interacting proteins are involved, that the linker histones are much more than just a nucleosome-binding protein that stabilizes higher-order chromatin structures. Rather, it appears that H1 also is a multifunctional recruitment hub for a number of overlapping (and often opposing) processes centered on the genomic DNA. It is interesting that many of interactions are with proteins thought to be primarily localized to the cytosol. In the future, more effort needs to be focused on determining the full breadth of H1-mediated protein-protein interactions, as well as on mapping the domains responsible and identifying the mechanisms through which they act. This will lead to clarification of the many gaps in our current understanding of the molecular basis for the multifunctional nature of the linker histone family.
References
Luger K, Mader AW, Richmond RK, Sargent DF, Richmond TJ . Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 A resolution. Nature 1997; 389:251–260.
Burlingame RW, Love WE, Wang BC, Hamlin R, Nguyen HX, Moudrianakis EN . Crystallographic structure of the octameric histone core of the nucleosome at a resolution of 3.3 A. Science 1985; 228:546–553.
Thomas JO, Butler PJ . Characterization of the octamer of histones free in solution. J Mol Biol 1977; 116:769–781.
Ruiz-Carrillo A, Jorcano JL . An octamer of core histones in solution: central role of the H3-H4 tetramer in the self-assembly. Biochemistry 1979; 18:760–768.
Luger K, Richmond TJ . DNA binding within the nucleosome core. Curr Opin Struct Biol 1998; 8:33–40.
Luger K, Richmond TJ . The histone tails of the nucleosome. Curr Opin Genet Dev 1998; 8:140–146.
Hansen JC, Tse C, Wolffe AP . Structure and function of the core histone N-termini: more than meets the eye. Biochemistry 1998; 37:17637–17641.
Mersfelder EL, Parthun MR . The tale beyond the tail: histone core domain modifications and the regulation of chromatin structure. Nucleic Acids Res 2006; 34:2653–2662.
Cedar H, Bergman Y . Linking DNA methylation and histone modification: patterns and paradigms. Nat Rev Genet 2009; 10:295–304.
Lennartsson A, Ekwall, K . Histone modification patterns and epigenetic codes. Biochim Biophys Acta 2009; 1790:863–868.
Shukla A, Chaurasia P, Bhaumik SR . Histone methylation and ubiquitination with their cross-talk and roles in gene expression and stability. Cell Mol Life Sci 2009; 66:1419–1433.
Van Holde K . Chromatin. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.
Garcia-Ramirez M, Dong F, Ausio J . Role of the histone “tails” in the folding of oligonucleosomes depleted of histone H1. J Biol Chem 1992; 267:19587–19595.
Hansen JC . Conformational dynamics of the chromatin fiber in solution: determinants, mechanisms, and functions. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2002; 31:361–392.
Woodcock CL, Dimitrov S . Higher-order structure of chromatin and chromosomes. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2001; 11:130–135.
Lu X, Klonoski JM, Resch MG, Hansen JC . In vitro chromatin self-association and its relevance to genome architecture. Biochem Cell Biol 2006; 84:411–417.
Thoma F, Koller T, Klug A . Involvement of histone H1 in the organization of the nucleosome and of the salt-dependent superstructures of chromatin. J Cell Biol 1979; 83:403–427.
Varshavsky AJ, Bakayev VV, Georgiev GP . Heterogeneity of chromatin subunits in vitro and location of histone H1. Nucleic Acids Res 1976; 3:477–492.
Whitlock JP, Jr, Simpson RT . Removal of histone H1 exposes a fifty base pair DNA segment between nucleosomes. Biochemistry 1976; 15:3307–3314.
Schwarz PM, Felthauser A, Fletcher TM, Hansen JC . Reversible oligonucleosome self-association: dependence on divalent cations and core histone tail domains. Biochemistry 1996; 35:4009–4015.
Robinson PJ, Rhodes D . Structure of the '30 nm' chromatin fibre: a key role for the linker histone. Curr Opin Struct Biol 2006; 16:336–343.
Wolffe A . Chromatin: Structure and Function. 3rd Edition. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998.
Dorigo B, Schalch T, Kulangara A, Duda S, Schroeder RR, Richmond TJ . Nucleosome arrays reveal the two-start organization of the chromatin fiber [see comment]. Science 2004; 306:1571–1573.
Kornberg RD . The molecular basis of eukaryotic transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007; 104:12955–12961.
Staynov DZ . The controversial 30 nm chromatin fibre. Bioessays 2008; 30:1003–1009.
Tremethick DJ . Higher-order structures of chromatin: the elusive 30 nm fiber. Cell 2007; 128:651–654.
Trojer P, Reinberg D . Facultative heterochromatin: is there a distinctive molecular signature? Mol Cell 2007; 28:1–13.
Schalch T, Duda S, Sargent DF, Richmond TJ . X-ray structure of a tetranucleosome and its implications for the chromatin fibre. Nature 2005; 436:138–141.
Grigoryev SA, Arya G, Correll S, Woodcock CL, Schlick T . Evidence for heteromorphic chromatin fibers from analysis of nucleosome interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009; 106:13317–13322.
Routh A, Sandin S, Rhodes D . Nucleosome repeat length and linker histone stoichiometry determine chromatin fiber structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105:8872–8877.
Robinson PJ, Fairall L, Huynh VA, Rhodes D . EM measurements define the dimensions of the “30-nm” chromatin fiber: evidence for a compact, interdigitated structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006; 103:6506–6511.
Graziano V, Gerchman SE, Ramakrishnan V . Reconstitution of chromatin higher-order structure from histone H5 and depleted chromatin. J Mol Biol 1988; 203:997–1007.
Kruithof M, Chien FT, Routh A, Logie C, Rhodes D, van Noort J . Single-molecule force spectroscopy reveals a highly compliant helical folding for the 30-nm chromatin fiber. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2009; 16:534–540.
Anderson NG, Wilbur KM . Studies on isolated cell components. IV. The effect of various solutions on the isolated rat liver nucleus. J Gen Physiol 1952; 35:781–796.
Brasch K, Seligy VL, Setterfield G . Effects of low salt concentration on structural organization and template activity of chromatin in chicken erythrocyte nuclei. Exp Cell Res 1971; 65:61–72.
Philpot JS, Stanier JE . The choice of the suspension medium for rat-liver-cell nuclei. Biochem J 1956; 63:214–223.
Ris H, Mirsky AE . The state of the chromosomes in the interphase nucleus. J Gen Physiol 1949; 32:489–502.
Kan PY, Caterino TL, Hayes JJ . The H4 tail domain participates in intra- and internucleosome interactions with protein and DNA during folding and oligomerization of nucleosome arrays. Mol Cell Biol 2009; 29:538–546.
Kan PY, Lu X, Hansen JC, Hayes JJ . The H3 tail domain participates in multiple interactions during folding and self-association of nucleosome arrays. Mol Cell Biol 2007; 27:2084–2091.
Gordon F, Luger K, Hansen JC . The core histone N-terminal tail domains function independently and additively during salt-dependent oligomerization of nucleosomal arrays. J Biol Chem 2005; 280:33701–33706.
McBryant SJ, Adams VH, Hansen JC . Chromatin architectural proteins. Chromosome Res 2006; 14:39–51.
Reeck GR, Swanson E, Teller DC . The evolution of histones. J Mol Evol 1978; 10:309–317.
Izzo A, Kamieniarz K, Schneider R . The histone H1 family: specific members, specific functions? Biol Chem 2008; 389:333–343.
Kasinsky HE, Lewis JD, Dacks JB, Ausio J . Origin of H1 linker histones. FASEB J 2001; 15:34–42.
Bates DL, Butler PJ, Pearson EC, Thomas JO . Stability of the higher-order structure of chicken-erythrocyte chromatin in solution. Eur J Biochem 1981; 119:469–476.
Woodcock CL, Skoultchi AI, Fan Y . Role of linker histone in chromatin structure and function: H1 stoichiometry and nucleosome repeat length. Chromosome Res 2006; 14:17–25.
Happel N, Doenecke D . Histone H1 and its isoforms: contribution to chromatin structure and function. Gene 2009; 431:1–12.
Allan J, Staynov DZ, Gould H . Reversible dissociation of linker histone from chromatin with preservation of internucleosomal repeat. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1980; 77:885–889.
Clore GM, Gronenborn AM, Nilges M, Sukumaran DK, Zarbock J . The polypeptide fold of the globular domain of histone H5 in solution. A study using nuclear magnetic resonance, distance geometry and restrained molecular dynamics. EMBO J 1987; 6:1833–1842.
Graziano V, Gerchman SE, Wonacott AJ, et al. Crystallization of the globular domain of histone H5. J Mol Biol 1990; 212:253–257.
Ramakrishnan V, Finch JT, Graziano V, Lee PL, Sweet RM . Crystal structure of globular domain of histone H5 and its implications for nucleosome binding. Nature 1993; 362:219–223.
Thomas JO, Rees C, Finch JT . Cooperative binding of the globular domains of histones H1 and H5 to DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 1992; 20:187–194.
Krylov D, Leuba S, van Holde K, Zlatanova J . Histones H1 and H5 interact preferentially with crossovers of double-helical DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993; 90:5052–5056.
Varga-Weisz P, van Holde K, Zlatanova J . Preferential binding of histone H1 to four-way helical junction DNA. J Biol Chem 1993; 268:20699–20700.
Hayes JJ, Wolffe AP . Preferential and asymmetric interaction of linker histones with 5S DNA in the nucleosome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993; 90:6415–6419.
An W, Leuba SH, van Holde K, Zlatanova J . Linker histone protects linker DNA on only one side of the core particle and in a sequence-dependent manner. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95:3396–3401.
An W, van Holde K, Zlatanova J . Linker histone protection of chromatosomes reconstituted on 5S rDNA from Xenopus borealis: a reinvestigation. Nucleic Acids Res 1998; 26:4042–4046.
Hayes JJ, Pruss D, Wolffe AP . Contacts of the globular domain of histone H5 and core histones with DNA in a “chromatosome”. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994; 91:7817–7821.
Noll M, Kornberg RD . Action of micrococcal nuclease on chromatin and the location of histone H1. J Mol Biol 1977; 109:393–404.
Thoma F, Koller T . Influence of histone H1 on chromatin structure. Cell 1977; 12:101–107.
Hansen JC, Ausio J, Stanik VH, van Holde KE . Homogeneous reconstituted oligonucleosomes, evidence for salt-dependent folding in the absence of histone H1. Biochemistry 1989; 28:9129–9136.
Bednar J, Horowitz RA, Dubochet J, Woodcock CL . Chromatin conformation and salt-induced compaction: three-dimensional structural information from cryoelectron microscopy. J Cell Biol 1995; 131:1365–1376.
Hamiche A, Schultz P, Ramakrishnan V, Oudet P, Prunell A . Linker histone-dependent DNA structure in linear mononucleosomes. J Mol Biol 1996; 257:30–42.
Bednar J, Horowitz RA, Grigoryev SA, et al. Nucleosomes, linker DNA, and linker histone form a unique structural motif that directs the higher-order folding and compaction of chromatin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95:14173–14178.
Zlatanova J, Leuba SH, van Holde K . Chromatin fiber structure: morphology, molecular determinants, structural transitions. Biophys J 1998; 74:2554–2566.
Allan J, Hartman PG, Crane-Robinson C, Aviles FX . The structure of histone H1 and its location in chromatin. Nature 1980; 288:675–679.
Allan J, Mitchell T, Harborne N, Bohm L, Crane-Robinson C . Roles of H1 domains in determining higher order chromatin structure and H1 location. J Mol Biol 1986; 187:591–601.
Subirana JA . Analysis of the charge distribution in the C-terminal region of histone H1 as related to its interaction with DNA. Biopolymers 1990; 29:1351–1357.
Churchill ME, Travers AA . Protein motifs that recognize structural features of DNA. Trends Biochem Sci 1991; 16:92–97.
Lu X, Hansen JC . Identification of specific functional subdomains within the linker histone H10 C-terminal domain. J Biol Chem 2004; 279:8701–8707.
Hansen JC, Lu X, Ross ED, Woody RW . Intrinsic protein disorder, amino acid composition, and histone terminal domains. J Biol Chem 2006; 281:1853–1856.
Lu X, Hamkalo B, Parseghian MH, Hansen JC . Chromatin condensing functions of the linker histone C-terminal domain are mediated by specific amino acid composition and intrinsic protein disorder. Biochemistry 2009; 48:164–172.
Dunker AK, Brown CJ, Lawson JD, Iakoucheva LM, Obradovic Z . Intrinsic disorder and protein function. Biochemistry 2002; 41:6573–6582.
Wright PE, Dyson HJ . Intrinsically unstructured proteins: re-assessing the protein structure-function paradigm. J Mol Biol 1999; 293:321–331.
Clark DJ, Hill CS, Martin SR, Thomas J O . Alpha-helix in the carboxy-terminal domains of histones H1 and H5. EMBO J 1988; 7:69–75.
Bradbury EM, Cary PD, Chapman GE, et al. Studies on the role and mode of operation of the very-lysine-rich histone H1 (F1) in eukaryote chromatin. The conformation of histone H1. Eur J Biochem 1975; 52:605–613.
Vila R, Ponte I, Collado M, Arrondo JL, Suau P . Induction of secondary structure in a COOH-terminal peptide of histone H1 by interaction with the DNA: an infrared spectroscopy study. J Biol Chem 2001; 276:30898–30903.
Vila R, Ponte I, Jimenez MA, Rico M, Suau P . A helix-turn motif in the C-terminal domain of histone H1. Prot Sci 2000; 9:627–636.
Roque A, Ilboro I, Arrondo JL, Suau P . DNA-induced secondary structure of the carboxyl-terminal domain of histone H1. J Biol Chem 2005; 280:32141–32147.
Ni JQ, Liu LP, Hess D, Rietdorf J, Sun FL . Drosophila ribosomal proteins are associated with linker histone H1 and suppress gene transcription. Genes Dev 2006; 20:1959–1973.
Lykke-Andersen J . mRNA quality control: marking the message for life or death. Curr Biol 2001; 11:R88–R91.
Krecic AM, Swanson MS . hnRNP complexes: composition, structure, and function. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1999; 11:363–371.
Kim K, Choi J, Heo K, et al. Isolation and characterization of a novel H1.2 complex that acts as a repressor of p53-mediated transcription. J Biol Chem 2008; 283:9113–9126.
Kraus WL . Transcriptional control by PARP-1: chromatin modulation, enhancer-binding, coregulation, and insulation. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2008; 20:294–302.
Kohno K, Izumi H, Uchiumi T, Ashizuka M, Kuwano M . The pleiotropic functions of the Y-box-binding protein, YB-1. Bioessays 2003; 25:691–698.
White MK, Johnson EM, Khalili K . Multiple roles for Puralpha in cellular and viral regulation. Cell Cycle 2009; 8:1–7.
Widlak P, Garrard WT . Discovery, regulation, and action of the major apoptotic nucleases DFF40/CAD and endonuclease G. J Cell Biochem 2005; 94:1078–1087.
Widlak P, Garrard WT . Roles of the major apoptotic nuclease-DNA fragmentation factor-in biology and disease. Cell Mol Life Sci 2009; 66:263–274.
Liu X, Li P, Widlak P, et al. The 40-kDa subunit of DNA fragmentation factor induces DNA fragmentation and chromatin condensation during apoptosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95:8461–8466.
Widlak P, Lanuszewska J, Cary RB, Garrard WT . Subunit structures and stoichiometries of human DNA fragmentation factor proteins before and after induction of apoptosis. J Biol Chem 2003; 278:26915–26922.
Liu X, Zou H, Widlak P, Garrard W, Wang X . Activation of the apoptotic endonuclease DFF40 (caspase-activated DNase or nuclease). Oligomerization and direct interaction with histone H1. J Biol Chem 1999; 274:13836–13840.
Woo EJ, Kim YG, Kim MS, et al. Structural mechanism for inactivation and activation of CAD/DFF40 in the apoptotic pathway. Mol Cell 2004; 14:531–539.
Widlak P, Li P, Wang X, Garrard WT . Cleavage preferences of the apoptotic endonuclease DFF40 (caspase-activated DNase or nuclease) on naked DNA and chromatin substrates. J Biol Chem 2000; 275:8226–8232.
Widlak P, Kalinowska M, Parseghian MH, Lu X, Hansen JC, Garrard WT . The histone H1 C-terminal domain binds to the apoptotic nuclease, DNA fragmentation factor (DFF40/CAD) and stimulates DNA cleavage. Biochemistry 2005; 44:7871–7878.
Montes de Oca R, Lee KK, Wilson KL . Binding of barrier to autointegration factor (BAF) to histone H3 and selected linker histones including H1.1. J Biol Chem 2005; 280:42252–42262.
Vila R, Ponte I, Collado M, et al. DNA-induced alpha-helical structure in the NH2-terminal domain of histone H1. J Biol Chem 2001; 276:46429–46435.
Lee H, Habas R, Abate-Shen C . MSX1 cooperates with histone H1b for inhibition of transcription and myogenesis [see comment]. Science 2004; 304:1675–1678.
Nielsen AL, Oulad-Abdelghani M, Ortiz JA, Remboutsika E, Chambon P, Losson R . Heterochromatin formation in mammalian cells: interaction between histones and HP1 proteins. Mol Cell 2001; 7:729–739.
Daujat S, Zeissler U, Waldmann T, Happel N, Schneider R . HP1 binds specifically to Lys26-methylated histone H1.4, whereas simultaneous Ser27 phosphorylation blocks HP1 binding. J Biol Chem 2005; 280:38090–38095.
Karetsou Z, Sandaltzopoulos R, Frangou-Lazaridis M, et al. Prothymosin alpha modulates the interaction of histone H1 with chromatin. Nucleic Acids Res 1998; 26:3111–3118.
Godde JS, Ura K . Cracking the enigmatic linker histone code. J Biochem 2008; 143:287–293.
Hohmann P . Phosphorylation of H1 histones. Mol Cell Biochem 1983; 57:81–92.
Talasz H, Helliger W, Sarg B, Debbage PL, Puschendorf B, Lindner H . Hyperphosphorylation of histone H2A.X and dephosphorylation of histone H1 subtypes in the course of apoptosis. Cell Death Differ 2002; 9:27–39.
Horn PJ, Carruthers LM, Logie C, et al. Phosphorylation of linker histones regulates ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling enzymes. Nat Struct Biol 2002; 9:263–267.
Guo CY, Mizzen C, Wang Y, Larner JM . Histone H1 and H3 dephosphorylation are differentially regulated by radiation-induced signal transduction pathways. Cancer Res 2000; 60:5667–5672.
Phram AD, Sauer F . Ubiquitin-activating/conjugating activity of TAFII250, a mediator of activation of gene expression in Drosophila [see comment]. Science 2000; 289:2357–2360.
Wisniewski JR, Zougman A, Kruger S, Mann M . Mass spectrometric mapping of linker histone H1 variants reveals multiple acetylations, methylations, and phosphorylation as well as differences between cell culture and tissue. Mol Cell Proteomics 2007; 6:72–87.
Wood C, Snijders A, Williamson J, Reynolds C, Baldwin J, Dickman M . Post-translational modifications of the linker histone variants and their association with cell mechanisms. FEBS J 2009; 276:3685–3697.
Vaquero A, Scher M, Lee D, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Reinberg D . Human SirT1 interacts with histone H1 and promotes formation of facultative heterochromatin. Mol Cell 2004; 16:93–105.
Papamarcaki T, Tsolas O . Prothymosin alpha binds to histone H1 in vitro. FEBS Lett 1994; 345:71–75.
Gasser R, Koller T, Sogo JM . The stability of nucleosomes at the replication fork. J Mol Biol 1996; 258:224–239.
Swindle CS, Engler JA . Association of the human papillomavirus type 11 E1 protein with histone H1. J Virol 1998; 72:1994–2001.
Giampuzzi M, Oleggini R, Di Donato A . Demonstration of in vitro interaction between tumor suppressor lysyl oxidase and histones H1 and H2: definition of the regions involved. Biochim Biophys Acta 2003; 1647:245–251.
Rasmussen C, Garen C . Activation of calmodulin-dependent enzymes can be selectively inhibited by histone H1. J Biol Chem 1993; 268:23788–23791.
Erard MS, Belenguer P, Caizergues-Ferrer M, Pantaloni A, Amalric F . A major nucleolar protein, nucleolin, induces chromatin decondensation by binding to histone H1. Eur J Biochem 1988; 175:525–530.
Erard M, Lakhdar-Ghazal F, Amalric F . Repeat peptide motifs which contain beta-turns and modulate DNA condensation in chromatin. Eur J Biochem 1990; 191:19–26.
Zhao M, Sutherland C, Wilson DP, Deng J, Macdonald JA, Walsh MP . Identification of the linker histone H1 as a protein kinase Cepsilon-binding protein in vascular smooth muscle. Biochem Cell Biol 2004; 82:538–546.
Kohlstaedt LA, Cole RD . Specific interaction between H1 histone and high mobility protein HMG1. Biochemistry 1994; 33:570–575.
Finn RM, Browne K, Hodgson KC, Ausio J . sNASP, a histone H1-specific eukaryotic chaperone dimer that facilitates chromatin assembly. Biophys J 2008; 95:1314–1325.
Wang H, Walsh ST, Parthun MR . Expanded binding specificity of the human histone chaperone NASP. Nucleic Acids Res 2008; 36:5763–5772.
Cerf C, Lippens G, Ramakrishnan V, et al. Homo- and heteronuclear two-dimensional NMR studies of the globular domain of histone H1: full assignment, tertiary structure, and comparison with the globular domain of histone H5. Biochemistry 1994; 33:11079–11086.
Emsley P, Cowtan K . Coot: model-building tools for molecular graphics. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2004; 60:2126–2132.
Humphrey W, Dalke A, Schulten K . VMD: Visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graphics 1996; 14:33–38, 27–28.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grant GM45916 to JCH.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McBryant, S., Lu, X. & Hansen, J. Multifunctionality of the linker histones: an emerging role for protein-protein interactions. Cell Res 20, 519–528 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2010.35
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/cr.2010.35
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Epithelial cells-enriched lncRNA SNHG8 regulates chromatin condensation by binding to Histone H1s
Cell Death & Differentiation (2022)
-
Emerging roles of linker histones in regulating chromatin structure and function
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2018)
-
Brown Hare’s (Lepus europaeus) Histone H1 Variant H1.2 as an Indicator of Anthropogenic Stress
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology (2018)
-
Histone profiling reveals the H1.3 histone variant as a prognostic biomarker for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
BMC Cancer (2017)
-
Nuclear and nucleolar activity of linker histone variant H1.0
Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters (2016)