The relevance of three-dimensional (3D) genome organization for transcriptional regulation and thereby for cellular fate at large is now widely accepted. Our understanding of the fascinating architecture underlying this function is based on microscopy studies as well as the chromosome conformation capture (3C) methods, which entered the stage at the beginning of the millennium. The first decade of 3C methods rendered unprecedented insights into genome topology. Here, we provide an update of developments and discoveries made over the more recent years. As we discuss, established and newly developed experimental and computational methods enabled identification of novel, functionally important chromosome structures. Regulatory and architectural chromatin loops throughout the genome are being cataloged and compared between cell types, revealing tissue invariant and developmentally dynamic loops. Architectural proteins shaping the genome were disclosed, and their mode of action is being uncovered. We explain how more detailed insights into the 3D genome increase our understanding of transcriptional regulation in development and misregulation in disease. Finally, to help researchers in choosing the approach best tailored for their specific research question, we explain the differences and commonalities between the various 3C-derived methods.

Aged proteins can become hazardous to cellular function, by accumulating molecular damage. This implies that cells should preferentially rely on newly produced ones. We tested this hypothesis in cultured hippocampal neurons, focusing on synaptic transmission. We found that newly synthesized vesicle proteins were incorporated in the actively recycling pool of vesicles responsible for all neurotransmitter release during physiological activity. We observed this for the calcium sensor Synaptotagmin 1, for the neurotransmitter transporter VGAT, and for the fusion protein VAMP2 (Synaptobrevin 2). Metabolic labeling of proteins and visualization by secondary ion mass spectrometry enabled us to query the entire protein makeup of the actively recycling vesicles, which we found to be younger than that of non‐recycling vesicles. The young vesicle proteins remained in use for up to ~ 24 h, during which they participated in recycling a few hundred times. They were afterward reluctant to release and were degraded after an additional ~ 24–48 h. We suggest that the recycling pool of synaptic vesicles relies on newly synthesized proteins, while the inactive reserve pool contains older proteins.

During the last few decades synaptic vesicles have been assigned to a variety of functional and morphological classes or “pools”. We have argued in the past (Rizzoli and Betz, 2005) that synaptic activity in several preparations is accounted for by the function of three vesicle pools: the readily releasable pool (docked at active zones and ready to go upon stimulation), the recycling pool (scattered throughout the nerve terminals and recycling upon moderate stimulation), and finally the reserve pool (occupying most of the vesicle clusters and only recycling upon strong stimulation). We discuss here the advancements in the vesicle pool field which took place in the ensuing years, focusing on the behavior of different pools under both strong stimulation and physiological activity. Several new findings have enhanced the three-pool model, with, for example, the disparity between recycling and reserve vesicles being underlined by the observation that the former are mobile, while the latter are “fixed”. Finally, a number of altogether new concepts have also evolved such as the current controversy on the identity of the spontaneously recycling vesicle pool.