Review Article | Published:

The effects of chromatin organization on variation in mutation rates in the genome

Nature Reviews Genetics volume 16, pages 213223 (2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

The variation in local rates of mutations can affect both the evolution of genes and their function in normal and cancer cells. Deciphering the molecular determinants of this variation will be aided by the elucidation of distinct types of mutations, as they differ in regional preferences and in associations with genomic features. Chromatin organization contributes to regional variation in mutation rates, but its contribution differs among mutation types. In both germline and somatic mutations, base substitutions are more abundant in regions of closed chromatin, perhaps reflecting error accumulation late in replication. By contrast, a distinctive mutational state with very high levels of insertions and deletions (indels) and substitutions is enriched in regions of open chromatin. These associations indicate an intricate interplay between the nucleotide sequence of DNA and its dynamic packaging into chromatin, and have important implications for current biomedical research. This Review focuses on recent studies showing associations between chromatin state and mutation rates, including pairwise and multivariate investigations of germline and somatic (particularly cancer) mutations.

Key points

  • Regional variation in mutation rates is an important phenomenon that affects genome evolution. It is determined by features of genomic landscape, with chromatin having an important influence.

  • Pairwise studies have revealed the complexity of correlation between chromatin and mutation rates. Some studies support a link between open chromatin and repressed mutations, whereas some argue for a link between closed chromatin and decreased mutation rates. Other studies highlight patterns that are base-specific, depend on epigenomic modifications in a genomic region, or are shaped by selection.

  • As features characterizing chromatin states are correlated with each other and with other genomic landscape features, multivariate segmentation analyses (using hidden Markov models) are providing a more nuanced depiction of the relationship between chromatin and germline mutation rates. Specifically, a prevalent genomic state with moderately high substitution and deletion rates is located in regions with closed chromatin, whereas a less abundant state with very high substitution, insertion and deletion rates is located in regions with open chromatin.

  • Several recent studies indicate a positive association between increased somatic mutation rates and closed chromatin in cancer genomes.

  • In several types of cancer, driver mutations are located in genes that regulate chromatin, leading to the hypothesis that consequent global or local chromatin remodelling results in malignancy.

  • Transcription of genes is influenced by chromatin state and leads to a biased substitution pattern that is probably due to transcription-coupled repair.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , & Mutation rates differ among regions of the mammalian genome. Nature 337, 283–285 (1989).

  2. 2.

    & Synonymous and nonsynonymous substitution distances are correlated in mouse and rat genes. J. Mol. Evol. 47, 119–121 (1998).

  3. 3.

    et al. Covariation in frequencies of substitution, deletion, transposition, and recombination during eutherian evolution. Genome Res. 13, 13–26 (2003). This early genome-wide study illustrates not only regional variation but also regional co-variation among mutation rates of different types.

  4. 4.

    & Variation in the mutation rate across mammalian genomes. Nature Rev. Genet. 12, 756–766 (2011). This is an excellent review on regional variation in mutation rates.

  5. 5.

    et al. Association between divergence and interspersed repeats in mammalian noncoding genomic DNA. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 14503–14508 (2001).

  6. 6.

    , , & A macaque's-eye view of human insertions and deletions: differences in mechanisms. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3, e176 (2007).

  7. 7.

    et al. Patterns of insertions and their covariation with substitutions in the rat, mouse, and human genomes. Genome Res. 14, 517–527 (2004).

  8. 8.

    & The (r)evolution of SINE versus LINE distributions in primate genomes: sex chromosomes are important. Genome Res. 20, 600–613 (2010).

  9. 9.

    , & A genome-wide view of mutation rate co-variation using multivariate analyses. Genome Biol. 12, R27 (2011).

  10. 10.

    & Genome analyses substantiate male mutation bias in many species. Bioessays 33, 938–945 (2011).

  11. 11.

    , , , & Genomic landscape of human, bat, and ex vivo DNA transposon integrations. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 7 (2014).

  12. 12.

    Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature 217, 624–626 (1968).

  13. 13.

    & Functional bias and spatial organization of genes in mutational hot and cold regions in the human genome. PLoS Biol. 2, e29 (2004).

  14. 14.

    & Significance of interspecies matches when evolutionary rate varies. J. Comp. Biol. 10, 537–554 (2003).

  15. 15.

    & Chromatin organization is a major influence on regional mutation rates in human cancer cells. Nature 488, 504–507 (2012). This comprehensive analysis links chromatin states with base substitution mutations in cancer genomes.

  16. 16.

    , & The large-scale distribution of somatic mutations in cancer genomes. Hum. Mutat. 33, 136–143 (2012).

  17. 17.

    et al. Cell-of-origin chromatin organization shapes the mutational landscape of cancer. Nature 518, 360–364 (2015). This is a large-scale analysis of the association between mutation rates and chromatin states in several cancers and cell types.

  18. 18.

    & Extensive sequence-influenced DNA methylation polymorphism in the human genome. Epigenet. Chromatin 3, 11 (2010).

  19. 19.

    The ENCODE Project Consortium. An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489, 57–74 (2012).

  20. 20.

    et al. Systematic localization of common disease-associated variation in regulatory DNA. Science 337, 1190–1195 (2012).

  21. 21.

    et al. Human mutation rate associated with DNA replication timing. Nature Genet. 41, 393–395 (2009).

  22. 22.

    et al. Human–macaque comparisons illuminate variation in neutral substitution rates. Genome Biol. 9, R76 (2008).

  23. 23.

    et al. Why do human diversity levels vary at a megabase scale? Genome Res. 15, 1222–1231 (2005).

  24. 24.

    et al. The influence of genomic context on mutation patterns in the human genome inferred from rare variants. Genome Res. 23, 1974–1984 (2013).

  25. 25.

    et al. Human subtelomeres are hot spots of interchromosomal recombination and segmental duplication. Nature 437, 94–100 (2005).

  26. 26.

    et al. Rescuing Alu: recovery of new inserts shows LINE-1 preserves Alu activity through A-tail expansion. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002842 (2012).

  27. 27.

    & 5-Methylcytosine in eukaryotic DNA. Science 212, 1350–1357 (1981).

  28. 28.

    & The scale of mutational variation in the murid genome. Genome Res. 15, 1086–1094 (2005).

  29. 29.

    et al. Dynamic changes in the human methylome during differentiation. Genome Res. 20, 320–331 (2010).

  30. 30.

    Chromatin remodeling: insights and intrigue from single-molecule studies. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 989–996 (2007).

  31. 31.

    , & Charting histone modifications and the functional organization of mammalian genomes. Nature Rev. Genet. 12, 7–18 (2011).

  32. 32.

    & Silencing chromatin: comparing modes and mechanisms. Nature Rev. Genet. 12, 123–135 (2011).

  33. 33.

    & Nuclear organization of the genome and the potential for gene regulation. Nature 447, 413–417 (2007).

  34. 34.

    , , , & Unexpected relationships between four large deletions in the human β-globin gene cluster. Cell 35, 701–709 (1983).

  35. 35.

    , , & Capturing chromosome conformation. Science 295, 1306–1311 (2002).

  36. 36.

    et al. Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science 326, 289–293 (2009). This paper presents genome-wide mapping of DNA interaction frequencies.

  37. 37.

    et al. Interactome maps of mouse gene regulatory domains reveal basic principles of transcriptional regulation. Cell 155, 1507–1520 (2013).

  38. 38.

    et al. Systematic protein location mapping reveals five principal chromatin types in Drosophila cells. Cell 143, 212–224 (2010).

  39. 39.

    et al. Chromatin structure and evolution in the human genome. BMC Evol. Biol. 7, 72 (2007).

  40. 40.

    et al. Nucleosomes suppress spontaneous mutations base-specifically in eukaryotes. Science 335, 1235–1238 (2012).

  41. 41.

    et al. Chromatin-associated periodicity in genetic variation downstream of transcriptional start sites. Science 323, 401–404 (2009).

  42. 42.

    et al. Whole-genome sequencing in autism identifies hot spots for de novo germline mutation. Cell 151, 1431–1442 (2012).

  43. 43.

    , , , & Strong and weak male mutation bias at different sites in the primate genomes: insights from the human–chimpanzee comparison. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 565–573 (2006).

  44. 44.

    , & Primate CpG islands are maintained by heterogeneous evolutionary regimes involving minimal selection. Cell 145, 773–786 (2011).

  45. 45.

    & Watching DNA breath one molecule at a time. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 17173–17174 (2013).

  46. 46.

    & Widespread signatures of recent selection linked to nucleosome positioning in the human lineage. Genome Res. 21, 1777–1787 (2011).

  47. 47.

    , , & Impact of chromatin structure on sequence variability in the human genome. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 18, 510–515 (2011).

  48. 48.

    et al. H2A.Z nucleosome positioning has no impact on genetic variation in Drosophila genome. PLoS ONE 8, e58295 (2013).

  49. 49.

    , & The impact of the nucleosome code on protein-coding sequence evolution in yeast. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000250 (2008).

  50. 50.

    , & Evolutionary footprints of nucleosome positions in yeast. Trends Genet. 24, 583–587 (2008).

  51. 51.

    , , & Evidence that localized variation in primate sequence divergence arises from an influence of nucleosome placement on DNA repair. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27, 637–649 (2010).

  52. 52.

    & Exploiting CpG hypermutability to identify phenotypically significant variation within human protein-coding genes. Genome Biol. Evol. 3, 938–949 (2011).

  53. 53.

    et al. The accessible chromatin landscape of the human genome. Nature 489, 75–82 (2012).

  54. 54.

    et al. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409, 860–921 (2001).

  55. 55.

    et al. A reversible histone H3 acetylation cooperates with mismatch repair and replicative polymerases in maintaining genome stability. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003899 (2013).

  56. 56.

    An R and S-Plus Companion to Multivariate Analysis (Springer, 2005).

  57. 57.

    , & Multivariate Analysis (Academic Press, 1979).

  58. 58.

    , , & Integrative analysis of gene expression and copy number alterations using canonical correlation analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 191 (2010).

  59. 59.

    , & TATES: efficient multivariate genotype–phenotype analysis for genome-wide association studies. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003235 (2013).

  60. 60.

    , , & Visualising associations between paired 'omics' data sets. BioData Min. 5, 19 (2012).

  61. 61.

    , , & Segmenting the human genome based on states of neutral genetic divergence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 14699–14704 (2013). This study presents segmentation of the human genome based on states of neutral genomic divergence used as a proxy for germline mutation rate.

  62. 62.

    What is a hidden Markov model? Nature Biotech. 22, 1315–1316 (2004).

  63. 63.

    , , & GlimmerM, Exonomy and Unveil: three ab initio eukaryotic genefinders. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 3601–3604 (2003).

  64. 64.

    et al. Mapping and analysis of chromatin state dynamics in nine human cell types. Nature 473, 43–49 (2011).

  65. 65.

    et al. Mutational heterogeneity in cancer and the search for new cancer-associated genes. Nature 499, 214–218 (2013).

  66. 66.

    , & DNA replication timing and higher-order nuclear organization determine single-nucleotide substitution patterns in cancer genomes. Nature Commun. 4, 1502 (2013).

  67. 67.

    , & Epigenetic inheritance of cell fates during embryonic development. Front. Genet. 5, 19 (2014).

  68. 68.

    , , & Do variations in substitution rates and male mutation bias correlate with life-history traits? A study of 32 mammalian genomes. Evolution 65, 2800–2815 (2011).

  69. 69.

    et al. Cumulative haploinsufficiency and triplosensitivity drive aneuploidy patterns and shape the cancer genome. Cell 155, 948–962 (2013).

  70. 70.

    et al. The mutational landscape of adenoid cystic carcinoma. Nature Genet. 45, 791–798 (2013).

  71. 71.

    et al. Dissecting the genomic complexity underlying medulloblastoma. Nature 488, 100–105 (2012).

  72. 72.

    et al. Integrative genome analyses identify key somatic driver mutations of small-cell lung cancer. Nature Genet. 44, 1104–1110 (2012).

  73. 73.

    et al. Driver mutations in histone H3.3 and chromatin remodelling genes in paediatric glioblastoma. Nature 482, 226–231 (2012).

  74. 74.

    & Histone H3.3 and cancer: a potential reader connection. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (2014).

  75. 75.

    et al. DNMT3A and IDH mutations in acute myeloid leukemia and other myeloid malignancies: associations with prognosis and potential treatment strategies. Leukemia 28, 1774–1783 (2014).

  76. 76.

    et al. Identification of pre-leukaemic haematopoietic stem cells in acute leukaemia. Nature 506, 328–333 (2014).

  77. 77.

    , & DNMT3B prefers germ line genes and centromeric regions: lessons from the ICF syndrome and cancer and implications for diseases. Biology 3, 578–605 (2014).

  78. 78.

    & Rhabdoid tumors: an initial clue to the role of chromatin remodeling in cancer. Brain Pathol. 23, 200–205 (2013).

  79. 79.

    et al. A remarkably simple genome underlies highly malignant pediatric rhabdoid cancers. J. Clin. Invest. 122, 2983–2988 (2012).

  80. 80.

    , , , & Transcription-associated mutational asymmetry in mammalian evolution. Nature Genet. 33, 514–517 (2003).

  81. 81.

    , & Nucleotide frequency variation across human genes. Genome Res. 13, 2594–2601 (2003).

  82. 82.

    & Transcription induces strand-specific mutations at the 5′ end of human genes. Genome Res. 18, 1216–1223 (2008).

  83. 83.

    , & Transcription-induced mutational strand bias and its effect on substitution rates in human genes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 26, 131–142 (2009).

  84. 84.

    et al. Recent segmental duplications in the human genome. Science 297, 1003–1007 (2002).

  85. 85.

    & Segmental duplications and the evolution of the primate genome. Nature Rev. Genet. 3, 65–72 (2002).

  86. 86.

    , , & The genome-wide determinants of microsatellite evolution. Genome Res. 18, 30–38 (2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

K.D.M. is supported by the US National Science Foundation grant DBI-0965596, and R.C.H. is supported by the US National Institutes of Health grants R01DK065806, RC2HG005573 and U54HG006998. The authors are grateful to P. Kuruppumullage Don and R. Campos-Sanchez for help with Figure 1.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Huck Institute for Genome Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, State College, Pennsylvania 16802, USA.

    • Kateryna D. Makova
  2. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Huck Institute for Genome Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, State College, Pennsylvania 16802, USA.

    • Ross C. Hardison

Authors

  1. Search for Kateryna D. Makova in:

  2. Search for Ross C. Hardison in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kateryna D. Makova.

Glossary

Regional variation in mutation rates

(RViMR). The phenomenon whereby the rate of mutation changes along individual chromosomes.

Nucleosome occupancy

A measure of the degree to which a certain DNA region is packaged into a nucleosome, with the DNA wrapped tightly around a core of eight histone proteins.

Epigenomic features

Biochemical features that are associated with genomic DNA sequences but that are not the sequences themselves; examples include DNA methylation, histone modifications in chromatin, nuclease accessibility and transcription factor binding.

Genomic landscape features

Features that characterize the genome at levels beyond the primary DNA sequence. These include GC content, recombination rates, proximity to the closest telomere and replication timing.

CpG dinucleotides

Positions in the DNA sequence in which a cytosine is followed by a guanine.

Open chromatin

Chromatin in which the DNA is readily accessible to enzymes in the nucleus; it can be interpreted as regions with less compaction than bulk nucleosomes, depleted of nucleosomes or having highly remodelled nucleosomes.

Chromosome conformation capture

A method to quantitatively estimate the frequency of interaction between two different genomic regions using a crosslinking and intermolecular ligation assay to identify interacting sites.

Chromatin acetylation

Covalent modification of specific lysine residues in the amino-terminal tails of histones by the addition of an acetyl group.

Canonical correlation analysis

(CCA). A statistical analysis that considers two groups of variables simultaneously and finds significant linear combinations between them that have maximum correlations with each other.

Hidden Markov model

(HMM). A statistical model that analyses a sequence of observations defined by underlying states that are not observable ('hidden') but that can be inferred from the data. These states alternate along the sequence following a Markovian structure; that is, the state defining a given observation depends on the state governing the preceding observation.

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3890

Further reading