RNA-binding proteins are key regulators of gene expression, yet only a small fraction have been functionally characterized. Here we report a systematic analysis of the RNA motifs recognized by RNA-binding proteins, encompassing 205 distinct genes from 24 diverse eukaryotes. The sequence specificities of RNA-binding proteins display deep evolutionary conservation, and the recognition preferences for a large fraction of metazoan RNA-binding proteins can thus be inferred from their RNA-binding domain sequence. The motifs that we identify in vitro correlate well with in vivo RNA-binding data. Moreover, we can associate them with distinct functional roles in diverse types of post-transcriptional regulation, enabling new insights into the functions of RNA-binding proteins both in normal physiology and in human disease. These data provide an unprecedented overview of RNA-binding proteins and their targets, and constitute an invaluable resource for determining post-transcriptional regulatory mechanisms in eukaryotes.

SUMMARY Chromosomes of metazoan organisms are partitioned in the interphase nucleus into discrete topologically associating domains (TADs). Borders between TADs are formed in regions containing active genes and clusters of architectural protein binding sites. Transcription of most genes is repressed after temperature stress in Drosophila. Here we show that temperature stress induces relocalization of architectural proteins from TAD borders to inside TADs, and this is accompanied by a dramatic rearrangement in the 3D organization of the nucleus. TAD border strength declines, allowing for an increase in long-distance inter-TAD interactions. Similar but quantitatively weaker effects are observed upon inhibition of transcription or depletion of individual architectural proteins. Heat shock-induced inter-TAD interactions result in increased contacts among enhancers and promoters of silenced genes, which recruit Pc and form Pc bodies in the nucleolus. These results suggest that the TAD organization of metazoan genomes is plastic and can be quickly reconfigured.

Chromatin insulators, or boundary elements, affect promoter-enhancer interactions and buffer transgenes from position effects. The gypsy insulator of Drosophila is bound by a protein complex with two characterized components, the zinc finger protein Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] and Mod(mdg4)2.2, which is one of the multiple spliced variants encoded by the modifier of mdg4 [mod(mdg4)] gene. A genetic screen for dominant enhancers of the mod(mdg4) phenotype identified the Centrosomal Protein 190 (CP190) as an essential constituent of the gypsy insulator. The function of the centrosome is not affected in CP190 mutants whereas gypsy insulator activity is impaired. CP190 associates physically with both Su(Hw) and Mod(mdg4)2.2 and colocalizes with both proteins on polytene chromosomes. CP190 does not interact directly with insulator sequences present in the gypsy retrotransposon but binds to a previously characterized endogenous insulator, and it is necessary for the formation of insulator bodies. The results suggest that endogenous gypsy insulators contain binding sites for CP190, which is essential for insulator function, and may or may not contain binding sites for Su(Hw) and Mod(mdg4)2.2.

Eukaryotic gene expression is regulated by enhancer–promoter interactions but the molecular mechanisms that govern specificity have remained elusive. Genome-wide studies utilizing STARR-seq identified two enhancer classes in Drosophila that interact with different core promoters: housekeeping enhancers (hkCP) and developmental enhancers (dCP). We hypothesized that the two enhancer classes are occupied by distinct architectural proteins, affecting their enhancer–promoter contacts. By evaluating ChIP-seq occupancy of architectural proteins, typical enhancer-associated proteins, and histone modifications, we determine that both enhancer classes are enriched for RNA Polymerase II, CBP, and architectural proteins but there are also distinctions. hkCP enhancers contain H3K4me3 and exclusively bind Cap-H2, Chromator, DREF and Z4, whereas dCP enhancers contain H3K4me1 and are more enriched for Rad21 and Fs(1)h-L. Additionally, we map the interactions of each enhancer class utilizing a Hi-C dataset with <1 kb resolution. Results suggest that hkCP enhancers are more likely to form multi-TSS interaction networks and be associated with topologically associating domain (TAD) borders, while dCP enhancers are more often bound to one or two TSSs and are enriched at chromatin loop anchors. The data support a model suggesting that the unique architectural protein occupancy within enhancers is one contributor to enhancer–promoter interaction specificity.