Positive coactivator PC4 shows dynamic nucleolar distribution required for rDNA transcription and protein synthesis

Positive coactivator PC4 shows dynamic nucleolar distribution required for rDNA transcription and protein synthesis | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Positive coactivator PC4 shows dynamic nucleolar distribution required for rDNA transcription and protein synthesis Stephanie Kaypee, Kyoko Ochiai, Hiroki Shima, Mitsuyo Matsumoto, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 14 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Cell Communication and Signaling → Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The nucleolus is the site of rDNA transcription and ribosome biogenesis. Alterations in nucleolar function and architecture correlate with drastic heterochromatin rearrangement and global changes in gene expression. However, the precise mechanism that connects nucleolar function to heterochromatin organization and transcription is yet unknown. Here, we report that the RNA polymerase II (RNA pol II) transactivator and chromatin condenser, Positive Coactivator 4 (PC4), is a bona fide nucleolar protein. PC4 showed dynamic nucleolar accumulation, which is critical for rDNA transcription. The lysine acetyltransferase, KAT5 (Tip60) acetylates PC4 at K35, which facilitates nucleolar release of PC4 and concomitated inhibition of rDNA transcription. By employing PC4 mutant, which is defective in nucleolar accumulation, we found that nucleolar PC4 is crucial for RNA pol I-mediated rDNA transcription. To validate this significant novel role of PC4, in the context of nucleolus organization and function, at the organismal level, we looked into B cell-specific conditional knockout of Sub1 encoding PC4 in mice, which revealed that indeed the rDNA transcription and protein synthesis in B cells are severely repressed in the absence of PC4. Furthermore, PC4 CKO B cells were associated with the loss of H3K9me3-marked heterochromatin foci but not global H3K9me3 levels. LC-MS/MS analysis of the H3K9me3 chromatin complexes revealed that most non-histone heterochromatin proteins were reduced or absent in the constitutive heterochromatin of PC4 CKO B cells. These findings establish PC4 as a critical functional component of nucleolus for rDNA transcription. heterochromatin nucleolus ribosomal DNA ribosome B cells lysine acetyltransferase TIP60 KAT5 Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Introduction Chromatin is compartmentalized into different functional spatial domains such as the actively transcribed euchromatin and the condensed transcriptionally inactive heterochromatin. Heterochromatin drives the three-dimensional arrangement of chromatin in the cells namely the lamina-associated domains (LADs) and nucleolus associated domains (NADs), where the heterochromatin is positioned at the periphery of the nucleus or nucleolus, respectively [ 1 ]. The nucleolus is a membrane-less nuclear compartment formed around tandem ribosomal DNA (rDNA) repeats known as nucleolar organizer regions (NORs). It is the site of RNA polymerase (pol) I-mediated rDNA transcription and ribosome biogenesis, which are essential for cell viability. The heterochromatin and nucleolus, though appear to be distinct components of the nucleus, are intimately connected both structurally and functionally. Maintenance of heterochromatin is crucial for nucleolar architecture and function. Demethylation on histone H3 lysine 9 position (H3K9) resulted in R-loop formation at rDNA loci and nucleolar distortion [ 2 ]. Loss of H3K9 methylation in Drosophila due to Su(var)3–9 mutation led to nucleolar disorganization [ 3 ]. Deficiency of Suv39h1/2 and Hp1α/β, which are critical for heterochromatin formation driven by H3K9 methylation, resulted in nucleolar defects and reduction in ribosomal RNA biosynthesis in mammalian cells [ 4 ]. Conversely, the inhibition of RNA pol I transcription resulted in the 3D rearrangement of heterochromatin, culminating in altered gene expression networks [ 5 ]. Depletion of nucleolar protein NPM1 triggered the rearrangement of perinucleolar heterochromatin and nucleolar deformation [ 6 ]. Overall, the disturbance of either the heterochromatin or nucleolar function seems to cause distortion or disorganization in the other, leading to changes in gene expression networks. Positive Cofactor 4 (PC4) is a small, highly conserved, and abundant nuclear protein that has been implicated in multiple cellular processes, including transcription [ 7 – 11 ], DNA repair [ 12 , 13 ], chromatin compaction [ 14 – 16 ], neurogenesis [ 17 ], and autophagy [ 18 ]. These functional diversities of PC4 are achieved through post-translational modifications, such as acetylation and phosphorylation based on the cellular signals [ 15 , 19 – 21 ]. PC4 interacts directly with RNA pol II and III to promote their transcriptional activity and to enhance the recruitment of other transcription factors to the promoter region of target genes [ 10 , 19 , 22 , 23 ]. By generating B cell-specific knockout of Sub1 gene encoding PC4, we previously reported that PC4 is critical for regulating lineage-specific gene regulatory networks (GRN) during B cell differentiation and the B cells devoid of PC4 exhibited compromised plasma cell differentiation [ 23 ]. Despite its essential roles in the cell, not much is known about how the diverse nuclear functions of PC4 are regulated and linked. Here we report a previously unknown function of PC4 in increasing RNA pol I transcription in the nucleolus. Loss of PC4 resulted in attenuated protein synthesis. The absence of PC4 resulted in abrogation of H3K9me3-marked heterochromatin assembly and distortion of nuclear morphology. Collectively, our data revealed an unexpected role for PC4 in the nucleolus, the disruption of which leads to disorganizations of rDNA gene expression and constitutive heterochromatin. Results The transcription coactivator PC4 is a nucleolar protein. In our previous study, we explored how PC4 regulated gene expression networks in mature B cells. We isolated the PC4 complex from splenic B cell nuclei to identify the PC4 interactome by LC-MS/MS. By analyzing the PC4 interactome, we identified 128 proteins as PC4-interacting proteins [ 23 ] of which approximately 27% were related to nucleolar function (Fig. 1 A, Table S2), suggesting a function of PC4 at the nucleolus. Supporting this idea, a recent ATAC seq study suggested a role of PC4 at the rDNA loci [ 15 ]. Therefore, to further elucidate the connection between PC4 and nucleolus, we tagged PC4 with GFP to visualize the subcellular localization of PC4 in HeLa cells. We found that PC4-GFP was localized in the nucleolus in addition to nucleocytoplasm, colocalizing with the nucleolar protein NOP56 (Fig. 1 B). Many nucleolar proteins are known to be dislocated upon inhibition of rDNA transcription [ 24 ] or cellular stresses like DNA damage. We observed that PC4, similarly to NOP56, diffused out of the nucleolus upon treatment with Actinomycin D (ActD) at a lower concentration which preferentially inhibits RNA pol I [ 25 ] (Figs. 1 B, S1A). We also observed that upon treatment with the DNA damage agent, Bleocin, PC4 localization at the nucleolus was greatly reduced (Figure S1 B). These observations supported the idea that PC4 is a nucleolar protein and plays a role concerning nucleolar functions and agreed with previous nucleolar proteome studies that identified PC4 in the datasets as a potential nucleolar protein [ 24 ] . Tip60-mediated acetylation on lysine 35 is crucial for PC4 dynamics. The dynamics of many nucleolar proteins are regulated by post-translational modifications, including lysine acetylation [ 26 , 27 ]. A previously published acetylome study revealed that PC4 is acetylated on two lysine residues, lysine 35 (K35) and lysine 68 (K68) [ 28 ] (Fig. 2 A). To test whether lysine acetylation may be involved in the nuclear dynamics of PC4, HeLa cells were treated with the HDAC inhibitor, sodium butyrate (Na-butyrate). This led to the release of PC4 from the nucleolus (Figs. 2 B, C). Since the result suggested the control of PC4 nuclear dynamics by acetylation, we tried to locate the target site of the acetylation. Based on our hypothesis that acetylation within nucleolar localization signal (NoLS) might govern the PC4 nuclear dynamics, we predicted a putative NoLS in PC4 using the Nucleolar localization sequence Detector (NoD) prediction tool [ 29 , 30 ] and obtained the region spanning from residue 17 to 43 as the putative NoLS (Fig. 2 A). Since K35 was located within the putative nucleolus localization signal (NoLS), we speculated that the lysine acetylation on K35 may be responsible for the flux of PC4 from the nucleolus (Fig. 2 D). The lysine residue at the 35th position on PC4 was substituted by arginine to create an acetylation-defective mutant (K35R). We found that the PC4-K35R mutant appeared to exit the nucleolus slower than the WT counterpart upon ActD treatment (Figs. 2 D, E, S1) and was unaffected by Na-butyrate treatment (Fig. 2 C, E). These data indicated that K35 acetylation is crucial for the outward flux of PC4 from the nucleolus. After establishing the importance of lysine acetylation on PC4 dynamics, we wanted to identify the lysine acetyltransferase (KAT) responsible. To achieve this, Hela cells were treated with three kinds of small molecule inhibitors targeting the three major nuclear KAT family: p300/CBP family inhibitor, C646, PCAF inhibitor, Embelin, and Tip60/Moz inhibitor, NU9056. Cells were pre-treated with the KAT inhibitor followed by ActD treatment for 2 hours. Cells treated with C646 or Embelin showed a predominant nuclear PC4 localization and moved out of the nucleolus, similarly to the cells treated with ActD alone (Figures S2A, B), suggesting that p300/CBP or PCAF is not the enzyme acetylating PC4 on K35. In contrast, when treated with the Tip60 inhibitor Nu9056 and ActD, the cells exhibited prolonged retention in the nucleolus compared to the nucleolar protein NOP56 (Figure S2A). To further confirm the role of Tip60 in PC4 localization, a dominant negative catalytic mutant of Tip60 [ 31 ] was overexpressed in Hela cells. Compared to the cells expressing the WT Tip60, PC4 in the cells expressing the mutant Tip60 demonstrated longer nucleolar retention (Figs. 2 F, G). Cells expressing PC4 K35R mutant protein, also exhibited longer nucleolar retention upon co-expression with Tip60 and ActD treatment (Figure S2C). These results together suggest that the acetylation-dependent release of PC4 from nucleolus is regulated by Tip60. Nucleolar PC4 is important for RNA Pol I-mediated transcription. PC4 is a multifunctional protein; however, there are no known functions of PC4 in the nucleolus. Since PC4 is a known transcription coactivator, we hypothesized that PC4 may also be a coactivator for RNA pol I-mediated transcription. To dissect the functions of PC4 in the nucleolus, we created additional mutant derivatives of lysine residues, aiming to identify mutations that would inhibit its nucleolar accumulation. Among them, two double mutants of PC4 abolished nucleolar or nuclear accumulation. PC4 K23A and K24A (nucleolar localization defective mutant or NoLD) exhibited a predominant nuclear localization with clear nucleolar exclusion (Fig. 3 A). PC4 K26A, R27A mutant (nuclear localization defective mutant or NLD) was exclusively cytoplasmic (Figure S3A). To test the role of PC4 in rDNA transcription, we overexpressed PC4, NoLD, and NLD mutants, and quantified the levels of 47S pre-rRNA through qPCR. We used cells transfected with empty vector and those treated with ActD as controls (Fig. 3 B). As expected, ActD abolished rDNA transcription. The cells treated with Na-butyrate showed a significant reduction in 47S pre-rRNA transcription, suggesting that the presence of PC4 in the nucleolus was important for RNA pol I-mediated transcription. Corroborating this observation, we found that PC4 overexpression increased rDNA transcription whereas the NoLD mutant reduced rDNA transcription, suggesting that the NoLD mutant acted as a dominant negative mutant. The NLD mutant did not show any effect on the levels of 47S pre-rRNA (Fig. 3 B), suggesting that NoLD sequestered some PC4-interacting nucleolar proteins in nuclei. To further confirm the role of PC4 as an RNA pol I coactivator, chromatin IP was performed followed by qPCR using primers across distinct elements of the rDNA gene, namely the promoter, 18S, 5.8S, 28S, and the intergenic spacer (IGS) (Fig. 3 C). For this experiment, we established cells stably expressing FLAG-PC4. As expected, anti-FLA IP enriched the rDNA promoter, while the enrichment was greatly diminished upon RNA pol I inhibition using ActD. These results suggest that PC4 is required for efficient transcription of rDNA genes by RNA pol I. Corroborating these results, it was observed that PC4 knockdown in HeLa cells reduced global protein translation (Figure S3B) whereas cells overexpressing WT and PC4 K35R exhibited higher translation as judged by puromycin labeling of nascent peptides (Fig. 3 D), suggesting that PC4 can influence global translation through the increase of RNA pol I transcription. Unexpectedly, overexpression of PC4 NoLD mutant did not cause a clear reduction in translation. We next examined whether PC4 absence would lead to reduced protein synthesis. Because we reported previously that PC4 plays important role in B cells by generating conditional knockout (CKO) of Sub1 encoding PC4 in these cells [ 23 ], we isolated B cells were isolated from WT and PC4 CKO mice (Fig. 3 E). We found that the 47S pre-rRNA transcription was significantly reduced in the PC4 CKO B cells (Fig. 3 F). We performed a puromycin labeling assay to determine the levels of the nascent peptide being translated. Substantiating the qPCR data, we found that there was a drastic decrease in the levels of puromycin-labeled peptides in the PC4 CKO lanes versus the WT (Fig. 3 G). These results further support the notion that PC4 is direct or indirect facilitator of transcription by RNA pol I and the loss of PC4 culminates in the abrogation of protein synthesis. Prolonged loss of PC4 results in altered chromatin function. Recent studies have highlighted the crosstalk between the nucleolus and heterochromatin. Nucleolar stress interfering with RNA pol I transcription results in reorganization of heterochromatin and altered gene expression programs [ 5 ]. In our previous study, we observed a loss of H3K9me3-marked foci in PC4 CKO B cells [ 23 ]. Together this previous observation, the present results prompted us to further explore the potential role of PC4 in heterochromatin maintenance and nuclear function. Consistent with our previous study [ 23 ], we observed that H3K9me3 heterochromatin foci were absent in PC4 CKO B cells (Figure S4A); however, the global levels of H3K9me3 histone mark remained unaltered (Figure S4B). Intrigued by this, we set out to understand the fundamental differences in the H3K9me3 constitutive heterochromatin in the presence and absence of PC4. Since only the H3K9me3 foci were altered, we reasoned that the composition of the constitutive heterochromatin may be altered in the absence of PC4. To test this hypothesis, we immunoprecipitated H3K9me3-marked chromatin and subjected it to LC-MS/MS analysis (Figures S4C). The abundance of canonical histones and linker histones were comparable in both wild-type and the PC4 CKO H3K9me3 IP (Figs. 4 A), indicating successful immunoprecipitations of chromatin fragments from these cells. Strikingly however, histone variants, especially H2A variants known to be present in heterochromatin, such as H2A.Z, H2A.V, H2A.J, and macroH2A were reduced or absent in the H3K9me3 chromatin in PC4 CKO B cells (Figs. 4 A). Among linker histone H1, H1t was also reduced. Gene Ontology (GO) analysis was performed on the interactome of H3K9me3 chromatin. For the WT interactome, proteins present exclusively in the WT complexes (74 proteins) were considered for GO analysis (Figure S4D). As expected, chromatin silencing was the most enriched pathway. In addition, pathways associated with nucleolar function were also enriched such as “GO:0006412 ~ translation”, “GO:0000027 ~ ribosomal large subunit assembly”, “GO:0042254 ~ ribosome biogenesis”, and “GO:0000183 ~ chromatin silencing at rDNA” (Fig. 4 B). This result suggested that H3K9me3 chromatin was closely located with nucleoli in WT B cells. In contrast, however, the GO analysis of the common proteins present in the PC4 CKO complex (30 proteins) were devoid of heterochromatin and nucleolar function and are enriched in pathways that relate to RNA processing and gene expression (Fig. 4 C), suggesting a failure of proper gene silencing by the H3K9me3-deposited chromatin. To gain an in depth understanding of the difference between the interactome of WT and PC4 CKO H3K9me3 chromatin, we plotted the protein score and coverage of common non-histone chromatin-associated proteins. Reflecting the GO analyses it was observed that all chromatin-associated proteins or heterochromatin-associated proteins were greatly reduced or absent in the PC4 CKO H3K9me3 complex (Fig. 4 D); known regulators of heterochromatin, including Cbx5 and Suv39h1, were reduced in the pC4 CKO. We found an enrichment in nucleolar proteins involved in RNA Pol I transcription (such as UBF, TCOF1, NOLC1), and ribosomal biosynthesis in the WT complex over the PC4 CKO (Figure S4E). Heterochromatin maintains the rigidity and morphology of the nucleus [ 32 ]; therefore, we wondered if the loss of heterochromatin foci would exhibit phenotypic changes in the PC4 CKO B cell nucleus. Validating our GO analyses data, electron microscopy observation revealed that the loss of heterochromatin foci in PC4 CKO B cells resulted in the deformation of the nuclei, including invagination of the nuclear membrane and lobular structure (Fig. 4 E). Discussion In this manuscript, we demonstrate the interdependency between nucleolar function and heterochromatin. We show that the transcription coactivator PC4 is required for efficient transcription of rDNA genes by RNA pol I in addition to RNA pol II and III, and as an extension, is also crucial for ribosome biogenesis and protein synthesis. These observations would suggest that PC4 may play a pivotal role in deciding gene expression profiles under various internal and environmental cues, especially stress conditions like DNA damage where global protein synthesis is dampened [ 33 , 34 ]. Mechanistically, we have discovered that the subnuclear localization of PC4 is significantly influenced by Tip60-mediated acetylation. This finding, along with other studies, underscores the vital importance of post-translational modifications, particularly acetylation and phosphorylation, in determining the functional segregation of PC4. Previous investigations have indicated that these modifications are frequently mutually exclusive [ 21 ], possibly hinting at the functional finetuning of this important transcriptional coactivator (Fig. 4 F). The direct enzyme-substrate relationship of Tip60 and PC4 is yet to be established. Also remains unclear is how acetylated PC4 is excluded from the nucleolus. Considering that acetylation of lysine neutralizes the basic residue, PC4 acetylation may suppress the electrostatic interaction of PC4 with rDNA or other components of the nucleolus. Recently, dynamic localization of histone deacetylase SIRT1 has been suggested to regulate epigenetic modification [ 35 ]. Upon DNA damage, SIRT1 is mobilized from the nucleolus to DNA damage sites for DNA repair. However, this response is considered to abrogate the acetylation status of rDNA chromatin, leading to deregulation of nucleolar heterochromatin and hence accelerated aging. It is an interesting possibility that the dynamic regulation of nucleolar PC4 may reflect a new mode of nucleolar-nuclear signaling. Our results suggest that PC4 stimulates rDNA gene transcription by pol I by binding to the promoter region. Initially recognized as a coactivator for RNA Pol II, PC4 was found to engage with activators and components of the Pol II basal transcription apparatus[ 7 , 36 – 38 ]. It enhances activator-dependent transcription, inducing transcription initiation in a phosphorylation-dependent manner [ 38 ]. Moreover, PC4 facilitates RNA Pol III recycling and is enriched on RNA Pol III gene promoters [ 9 , 10 ]. As an extension, PC4 may activate rDNA transcription by Pol I through the interaction with RNA Pol I transcription machinery. We have found TCOF1, a protein important for RNA Pol I transcription initiation, present in the PC4 interactome analysis. In addition, we also observe an enrichment of RNA Pol I transcription coactivators such as TCOF1, UBF, and NOLC1, in the WT H3K9me3 complex from B cells over the PC4 CKO complex. However, it remains to be examined whether PC4 functions as a coactivator of RNA pol I by interacting with pol I itself or its basal transcription factors. Therefore, it will be important to test whether PC4 can regulate RNA Pol I-mediated transcription through the stabilization of the transcription initiation complex. The observed alteration in the composition of constitutive heterochromatin in PC4 CKO B cells is consistent with the well-established association between the nucleolus and heterochromatin functionality [ 4 – 6 ]. The extended absence of PC4 led to the disappearance of heterochromatin foci. Importantly, many of the proteins important for heterochromatin-mediated gene silencing were lost from chromatin regions with H3K9me3 in the absence of PC4. Considering its function in chromatin compaction [ 14 , 15 ], PC4 loss on heterochromatin may directly impact the protein interactions on chromatin and gene silencing. However, it may potentially be due to the disruption of nucleolar function. Proteins involved in RNA pol I-mediated transcription were reduced in the PC4 CKO complex, possibly indicative of the reduced and altered nucleolar function. While we cannot dismiss the direct impact of PC4 loss on heterochromatin, it is important to consider that the dysfunction of nucleoli in the absence of PC4 could also have an impact on the overall heterochromatin landscape. The phenotypic changes PC4-deficient B cells [ 23 ] may reflect not only altered heterochromatin but also the defective nucleolar function which leads to a severe reduction in the protein synthesis capacity. Materials and Methods Mice B1-8hi:Mb1-cre:Sub1f/f mice were generated as described previously [ 23 ] and maintained in pathogen-free conditions in accordance with guidelines approved by the Institute for Animal Experimentation Committee at Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine. The experiments were performed using age-matched mice between 8–16 weeks of age. Cell culture HeLa cells were cultured in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle’s Medium (D5796, DMEM-high glucose, Sigma-Aldrich) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) (172012, Sigma-Aldrich), and 100 U/ml penicillin-100 µg/ml streptomycin (15140-122, penicillin-streptomycin, Thermo Fisher Scientific). B cell isolation and in vitro activation Splenic B cells were isolated using a B cell isolation kit (130-090-862, Miltenyi Biotec) and LS columns (130-042-401, Miltenyi Biotec). For in vitro B cell activation, purified splenic B cells were cultured in RPMI-1640 (Sigma) media supplemented with 10% FBS, 10 mM HEPES, 1 mM Na-Pyruvate, 0.1 mM non-essential amino acids, 100 mg/mL penicillin, 10 U/mL streptomycin, 50 mM β-mercaptoethanol, and 20 ug/mL LPS. Plasmids MSCV-FLAG-PC4-IRES-GFP was described previously [ 23 ]. The PC4 construct was subcloned into the EGFP-N1 vector using the XhoI/EcoRI sites. The mutations were introduced into the PC4 sequence through the site-directed mutagenesis method by amplifying the plasmid with primers containing the desired mutagenized sequences, followed by DpnI restriction digestion and transformation into DH5⍺ competent E. coli cells. The incorporated mutations were confirmed by Sanger’s sequencing. Primers used are listed in Table S1 . Antibodies and chemicals The antibodies used in this study are: anti-PC4 (sc-166280, Santa Cruz), anti-actin (GTX-109639; GeneTex), anti-puromycin (clone 12D10, MABE343, Merck), anti-H3K9me3 (homemade), anti-H3K9me3 (EPR16601, Abcam), anti-NOP56 (GTX130973, GeneTex), anti-DDDDK-tag (M185-3L, MBL), HRP linked anti-mouse IgG (NA931, GE Healthcare) and HRP-linked anti-rabbit IgG (NA934, GE Healthcare) antibodies. The reagents and chemicals used in this study are as follows: puromycin (P8833, Puromycin dihydrochloride, Sigma-Aldrich), embelin (E1406, Sigma), NU9056 (ab255734, Abcam), C646 (382113, Merck) and Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from Escherichia coli O111:B4 (L2630, Sigma-Aldrich). RNA interference Knockdown was performed using Lipofectamine® RNAiMAX transfection reagent (13778150; Thermo Fisher Scientific) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. siRNA Stealth RNAi duplexes against SUB1 (PC4) or control were purchased from Thermo Fisher Scientific. siRNAs used in this study: siControl: 5’- AGGAGGAUAUUACCAUGAAGAAGAC-3’ siPC4-1: 5’-UGAGGUACGUUAGUGUUCGCGAUUU-3’ siPC4-2: 5’-GCUGAAGGAACAGAUUUCUGACAUU-3’ siPC4-3: 5’-GGUGAGACUUCGAGAGCCCUGUCAU-3’ RT-qPCR Total RNA was extracted using an RNeasy Plus Mini kit (74134, Qiagen) following the manufacturer’s instructions. cDNA was synthesized from 1 µg of total RNA using the High-Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription Kit (4374966, Thermo Fisher Scientific) with random primers. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) was performed using the hot start ‘FastStart Essential DNA Green Master (06924204001, Roche) in a LightCycler® 96 instrument (Roche). Primers used are listed in Table S1 . PC4 stable expression cell lines Hela cells were transfected with either the pEGP-N1, pEGFP-N1-PC4, or mutant PC4 plasmid using GeneJuice® Transfection Reagent (70967, Merck) following the manufacturer’s protocol. After 24 h, cells were selected in 400 µg/ml G418 (509290, Calbiochem). The surviving cell population was grown and maintained under selection. Puromycin assay HeLa cells stably expressing empty vector, WT PC4, or mutant PC4 proteins were grown to 70 to 80% confluency and pulse-labeled with 20 µg/ml puromycin for 30 min at 37°C. Isolated splenic B cells were activated for 24 h in 20 µg/ml LPS, as described earlier, and pulse-labeled with 20 µg/ml puromycin for 30 min at 37°C. Cells were lysed in lysis buffer composed of 50 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% NP-40, 0.5% Na-deoxycholate, 0.1% SDS, and protease inhibitor cocktail (04693132001, Roche). The lysates were separated on a 12% SDS-PAGE. The gel was cut at the 25 kDa marker, the upper part was transferred onto a 0.45-µm PVDF membrane as described elsewhere [ 39 ], and the lower portion of the gel was stained in Coomassie Brilliant Blue as the loading control. Intensity measurements were performed using the ImageJ software ( https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html ). Immunofluorescence microscopy HeLa cells were grown on a coverslip for 12–24 h before transfection with pEGFP-N1 empty vector, WT PC4, or mutant PC4 expressing plasmids using GeneJuice® Transfection Reagent (70967, Merck). After 24 hours, cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, permeabilized with 0.5% Triton X-100, and blocked with 5% FBS at 37°C. The samples were incubated with primary antibodies: anti-H3K9me3 (EPR16601, Abcam) or anti-NOP56 (GTX130973, GeneTex) antibody diluted in 1% FBS at 37°C for 1 hour, and then with a Goat anti-Rabbit IgG H&L (Alexa Fluor® 594) secondary antibody (ab150080, Abcam). Nuclei were counterstained with Hoechst. The coverslips were mounted on VECTASHIELD® Antifade Mounting Medium (H-1000-10, Vector Laboratories). The samples were visualized under the Zeiss LSM780, confocal microscope system. Data obtained were analyzed using the ImageJ software ( https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html ). Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-qPCR ChIP was performed as described previously [ 40 ]. Chromatin from splenic B cells was isolated and sonicated to obtain DNA fragments ranging from 100 to 500 base pairs. Chromatin fragments were immunoprecipitated with anti-DDDDK-tag mAb-Magnetic Beads (M185-11R, MBL). After crosslink reversal, the enriched DNA sequences were assessed by real-time quantitative PCR. Primers used are listed in Table S1 . H3K9me3 Complex purification and LC-MS/MS analysis B1-8hi splenic B cells were crosslinked with 1% formaldehyde. Nuclear extracts were prepared following the ChIP protocol. After pre-clearing with protein A/G beads (Invitrogen) at 4°C for 1 h, samples were incubated with anti-H3K9me3 conjugated with protein A/G beads overnight. Beads were washed three times and eluted with SDS sample buffer containing 120 mM Tris (pH 6.8), 4% SDS, and 0.2 M DTT. The complex was subjected to SDS-PAGE on 5–20% gradient gel (HOG-0520-13; Oriental Instruments Co, Ltd), and stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue. The immobilized samples were excised into gel pieces and subjected to in-gel reduction using 10 mM DTT in 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate. Alkylation of the cysteine residues was performed with 55 mM acrylamide in 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate, and digestion was carried out with trypsin (V5280, Trypsin Gold, Promega). The tryptic peptides were analyzed in an Orbitrap Fusion mass spectrometer connected with an Easy-nLC 1000 HPLC (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the MASCOT search engine (Matrix Science) as previously described [ 41 ]. Components of the H3K9me3 complex were determined with a ≥ 5-fold protein score of test IP over control IgG, and ≥ 2 unique peptides. Three independent biological repeats of the H3K9me3 complex IP were performed. Gene Ontology analysis GO and KEGG analysis were performed using DAVID v2021 online software ( https://david.ncifcrf.gov/home.jsp ). Enriched pathways with FDR ≤ 0.05 were plotted. Venn Diagram was plotted using Venny2.1.0 online software ( https://bioinfogp.cnb.csic.es/tools/venny/ ). Two biological repeats each, from WT and PC4 CKO B cell samples, of the H3K9me3 complex IP with the highest number of protein overlaps were used for plotting the Venn diagram and the subsequent analyses. Statistics and Data Reproducibility The statistical test performed between two samples is an unpaired t-test. For comparison between multiple samples, one-way or two-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test were used. Graphical representation and statistical analyses have been performed in GraphPad Prism 9.3.1. The number of independent biological repeats are mentioned in the figure legends. Declarations Funding Declaration This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22H00443, 20KK0176, and 18H04021 (to K. I.), 16H01295 and 23K27362 (K.O.), and a Research Grant in the Natural Sciences from the Mitsubishi Foundation (to K. I.). S. K. was supported by fellowship from Takeda Science Foundation. Author Contribution S.K. conceptualized the research, carried out the main experiments, analyzed and interpreted data, prepared figures and wrote the manuscript. K.O. conceptualized the research, generated, maintained and providePC4-deficient mice and guided and supported experiments. H.S. carried out proteomics analyses. M.M. carried out bioinformatics analyses of omics data. M.A. supported protein synthesis assay. T.I. provided Tip60 derivatives and experimental conditions related to them. T.K.K. generated PC4 floxed mice, conceptualized the research, provided unpublished findings on PC4 to tune the research, and edited the manuscript. K.I. conceptualized, guided and organized the research, and edited the manuscript and figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript. Acknowledgement We are grateful to the laboratory members at Tohoku University and JNCASR for constructive discussion and suggestions, the Biomedical Research Core and Institute for Animal Experimentation of Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine for technical supports and breeding mice. This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22H00443, 20KK0176, and 18H04021 (to K. I.), 16H01295 and 23K27362 (K.O.), and a Research Grant in the Natural Sciences from the Mitsubishi Foundation (to K. I.). S. K. was supported by fellowship from Takeda Science Foundation. Data Availability Data on proteomics measurement using LC-MS/MS is available from the corresponding author upon request. References Bizhanova A, Kaufman PD. Close to the edge: Heterochromatin at the nucleolar and nuclear peripheries. Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Regul Mech. 2021;1864. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BBAGRM.2020.194666 . Zhou H, Li L, Wang Q, et al. H3K9 Demethylation-Induced R-Loop Accumulation Is Linked to Disorganized Nucleoli. Front Genet. 2020;11. https://doi.org/10.3389/FGENE.2020.00043 . Peng JC, Karpen GH. H3K9 methylation and RNA interference regulate nucleolar organization and repeated DNA stability. Nat Cell Biol. 2007;9:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCB1514 . Ballmer D, Tardat M, Ortiz R, et al. HP1 proteins regulate nucleolar structure and function by secluding pericentromeric constitutive heterochromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51:117–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/NAR/GKAC1159 . Yu H, Sun Z, Tan T, et al. rRNA biogenesis regulates mouse 2C-like state by 3D structure reorganization of peri-nucleolar heterochromatin. Nat Commun. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41467-021-26576-2 . Holmberg Olausson K, Nistér M, Lindström MS. Loss of nucleolar histone chaperone NPM1 triggers rearrangement of heterochromatin and synergizes with a deficiency in DNA methyltransferase DNMT3A to drive ribosomal DNA transcription. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:34601–19. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M114.569244 . Ge H, Roeder RG. Purification, cloning, and characterization of a human coactivator, PC4, that mediates transcriptional activation of class II genes. Cell. 1994;78:513–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90428-6 . Kaiser K, Stelzer G, Meisterernst M. The coactivator p15 (PC4) initiates transcriptional activation during TFIIA-TFIID-promoter complex formation. EMBO J. 1995;14:3520–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07358.x . Tavenet A, Suleau A, Dubreuil G, et al. Genome-wide location analysis reveals a role for Sub1 in RNA polymerase III transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:14265–70. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.0900162106 . Wang Z, Roeder RG. DNA topoisomerase I and PC4 can interact with human TFIIIC to promote both accurate termination and transcription reinitiation by RNA polymerase III. Mol Cell. 1998;1:749–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80074-X . Kretzschmar M, Kaiser K, Lottspeich F, Meisterernst M. A novel mediator of class II gene transcription with homology to viral immediate-early transcriptional regulators. Cell. 1994;78:525–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90429-4 . Pan ZQ, Ge H, Amin AA, Hurwitz J. Transcription-positive cofactor 4 forms complexes with HSSB (RPA) on single-stranded DNA and influences HSSB-dependent enzymatic synthesis of simian virus 40 DNA. J Biol Chem. 1996;271:22111–6. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.271.36.22111 . Mortusewicz O, Roth W, Li N, et al. Recruitment of RNA polymerase II cofactor PC4 to DNA damage sites. J Cell Biol. 2008;183:769–76. https://doi.org/10.1083/JCB.200808097 . Das C, Hizume K, Batta K, et al. Transcriptional Coactivator PC4, a Chromatin-Associated Protein, Induces Chromatin Condensation. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26:8303–15. https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.00887-06 . Mustafi P, Hu M, Kumari S, et al. Phosphorylation-dependent association of human chromatin protein PC4 to linker histone H1 regulates genome organization and transcription. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50:6116–36. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac450 . Das C, Gadad SS, Kundu TK. Human Positive Coactivator 4 Controls Heterochromatinization and Silencing of Neural Gene Expression by Interacting with REST/NRSF and CoREST. J Mol Biol. 2010;397:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2009.12.058 . Swaminathan A, Delage H, Chatterjee S, et al. Transcriptional Coactivator and Chromatin Protein PC4 Is Involved in Hippocampal Neurogenesis and Spatial Memory Extinction. J Biol Chem. 2016;291:20303–14. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M116.744169 . Sikder S, Kumari S, Mustafi P, et al. Nonhistone human chromatin protein PC4 is critical for genomic integrity and negatively regulates autophagy. FEBS J. 2019;286:4422–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/FEBS.14952 . Batta K, Kundu TK. Activation of p53 Function by Human Transcriptional Coactivator PC4: Role of Protein-Protein Interaction, DNA Bending, and Posttranslational Modifications. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27. https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.01064-07 . Sikder S, Agrawal A, Singh S et al. (2024) KAT5 Acetylates Human Chromatin Protein PC4 to promote DNA Repair. bioRxiv 2024.01.12.575390. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.12.575390 Kumar BRP, Swaminathan V, Banerjee S, Kundu TK. p300-mediated acetylation of human transcriptional coactivator PC4 is inhibited by phosphorylation. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:16804–9. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M100934200 . Conesa C, Acker J. (2010) Sub1/PC4 a chromatin associated protein with multiple functions in transcription. RNA Biol 7. Ochiai K, Yamaoka M, Swaminathan A, et al. Chromatin Protein PC4 Orchestrates B Cell Differentiation by Collaborating with IKAROS and IRF4. Cell Rep. 2020;33. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CELREP.2020.108517 . Andersen JS, Lam YW, Leung AKL, et al. Nucleolar proteome dynamics. Nature. 2005;433:77–83. https://doi.org/10.1038/NATURE03207 . Perry RP, Kelley DE. Inhibition of RNA synthesis by actinomycin D: Characteristic dose-response of different RNA species. J Cell Physiol. 1970;76. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.1040760202 . Shandilya J, Swaminathan V, Gadad SS, et al. Acetylated NPM1 localizes in the nucleoplasm and regulates transcriptional activation of genes implicated in oral cancer manifestation. Mol Cell Biol. 2009;29:5115–27. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01969-08 . Chen S, Seiler J, Santiago-Reichelt M, et al. Repression of RNA polymerase I upon stress is caused by inhibition of RNA-dependent deacetylation of PAF53 by SIRT7. Mol Cell. 2013;52:303–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MOLCEL.2013.10.010 . Choudhary C, Kumar C, Gnad F, et al. Lysine acetylation targets protein complexes and co-regulates major cellular functions. Science. 2009;325:834–40. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.1175371 . Scott MS, Boisvert FM, McDowall MD, et al. Characterization and prediction of protein nucleolar localization sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq653 . Scott MS, Troshin PV, Barton GJ. NoD: A Nucleolar localization sequence detector for eukaryotic and viral proteins. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011;12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-317 . Ikura T, Ogryzko VV, Grigoriev M, et al. Involvement of the TIP60 histone acetylase complex in DNA repair and apoptosis. Cell. 2000;102:463–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)00051-9 . Nava MM, Miroshnikova YA, Biggs LC, et al. Heterochromatin-Driven Nuclear Softening Protects the Genome against Mechanical Stress-Induced Damage. Cell. 2020;181:800–e81722. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CELL.2020.03.052 . Larsen DH, Hari F, Clapperton JA, et al. The NBS1-Treacle complex controls ribosomal RNA transcription in response to DNA damage. Nat Cell Biol. 2014;16:792–803. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCB3007 . Riepe C, Zelin E, Frankino PA, et al. Double stranded DNA breaks and genome editing trigger loss of ribosomal protein RPS27A. FEBS J. 2022;289:3101–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/FEBS.16321 . Oberdoerffer P, Michan S, McVay M, et al. SIRT1 Redistribution on Chromatin Promotes Genomic Stability but Alters Gene Expression during Aging. Cell. 2008;135:907–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.025 . Wu SY, Chiang CM. Properties of PC4 and an RNA polymerase II complex in directing activated and basal transcription in vitro. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:12492–6. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.273.20.12492 . Fukuda A, Nakadai T, Shimada M, et al. Transcriptional coactivator PC4 stimulates promoter escape and facilitates transcriptional synergy by GAL4-VP16. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24:6525–35. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.24.14.6525-6535.2004 . Malik S, Guermah M, Roeder RG. A dynamic model for PC4 coactivator function in RNA polymerase II transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.5.2192 . Alam M, Shima H, Matsuo Y, et al. mTORC1-independent translation control in mammalian cells by methionine adenosyltransferase 2A and S-adenosylmethionine. J Biol Chem. 2022;298. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBC.2022.102084 . Ochiai K, Maienschein-Cline M, Simonetti G et al. (2013) Transcriptional Regulation of Germinal Center B and Plasma Cell Fates by Dynamical Control of IRF4. Immunity 38:. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2013.04.009 Ando R, Shima H, Tamahara T, et al. The Transcription Factor Bach2 Is Phosphorylated at Multiple Sites in Murine B Cells but a Single Site Prevents Its Nuclear Localization. J Biol Chem. 2016;291:1826–40. https://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M115.661702 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementalInformation1.pdf Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 14 Jun, 2025 Read the published version in Cell Communication and Signaling → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Accepted 09 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 06 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 01 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 28 Apr, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 28 Apr, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 23 Apr, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 22 Apr, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 22 Apr, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 22 Apr, 2025 First submitted to journal 18 Apr, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6077105","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":446404397,"identity":"3b7fede6-2b8b-4dff-af8a-7a5da3a76143","order_by":0,"name":"Stephanie Kaypee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Stephanie","middleName":"","lastName":"Kaypee","suffix":""},{"id":446404398,"identity":"b0804df5-aebf-432d-a332-5ad46ccdf0cd","order_by":1,"name":"Kyoko Ochiai","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kyoko","middleName":"","lastName":"Ochiai","suffix":""},{"id":446404399,"identity":"10f969b1-cceb-440a-82a6-f050be00a4c7","order_by":2,"name":"Hiroki Shima","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hiroki","middleName":"","lastName":"Shima","suffix":""},{"id":446404400,"identity":"3cab575b-8b83-438b-be74-186c54cafdfa","order_by":3,"name":"Mitsuyo Matsumoto","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mitsuyo","middleName":"","lastName":"Matsumoto","suffix":""},{"id":446404401,"identity":"f5ccab8a-425f-467f-8369-72e5ba9a1543","order_by":4,"name":"Mahabub Alam","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mahabub","middleName":"","lastName":"Alam","suffix":""},{"id":446404402,"identity":"9dcd5abe-6c3e-4092-bc1d-ad568526ce20","order_by":5,"name":"Tsuyoshi Ikura","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Kyoto University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tsuyoshi","middleName":"","lastName":"Ikura","suffix":""},{"id":446404403,"identity":"50b1fccc-1e2c-4cda-8e5f-074906b2e85f","order_by":6,"name":"Tapas K. Kundu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tapas","middleName":"K.","lastName":"Kundu","suffix":""},{"id":446404404,"identity":"10d0d688-4511-4989-97b3-7208dc7eb51b","order_by":7,"name":"Kazuhiko Igarashi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kazuhiko","middleName":"","lastName":"Igarashi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-21 07:38:04","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-025-02238-4","type":"published","date":"2025-06-14T15:57:59+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81170115,"identity":"74175261-190a-4f5e-8a07-e51e89d8f13a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:06:03","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":148848,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe RNA pol II coactivator, PC4 is a nucleolar protein.\u003c/strong\u003e A. A Venn Diagram depicting the proportion of nucleolar proteins present in the PC4 interactome identified previously [23]. B. Immunofluorescence microscopy to show the localization of PC4 at the nucleolus and its efflux from the nucleolus upon 0.05 mg/ml actinomycin D (ActD) treatment for 2 h in HeLa cells. PC4 tagged with GFP, NOP56, and DNA were stained in green, red, and blue, respectively in the merged images. Line plots across the yellow arrows were plotted to show the colocalization between PC4 and NOP56 nucleolar protein. The nucleolar regions are shaded in blue. Scale bar = 10 μm.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/7a7d6496fa21432d935b694a.png"},{"id":81170113,"identity":"14a9232f-ccf0-45aa-8722-5dddfba25896","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:06:03","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":580068,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePC4 sub-nuclear dynamics is controlled by lysine acetylation on K35.\u003c/strong\u003e A. Schematic of PC4 domain architecture with the position of the putative nucleolar localization and K35 indicated. B. Wildtype PC4 dynamics under 0.05 mg/ml ActD for 2 h or 5 μM sodium butyrate (Na-butyrate) treatment for 12 h. \u0026nbsp;C. Graphical representation of the comparison between the nucleolar fluorescence intensities of PC4 control cells (n=127 nucleoli in 70 cells), and ActD (n=69 nucleoli in 46 cells) and Na-butyrate (n=102 nucleoli in 58 cells) treatment respectively. D. PC4 K35R dynamics under 0.05 mg/ml ActD for 2 h and 5 μM Na-butyrate treatment for 12 h. E. Graphical representation of the comparison between the nucleolar fluorescence intensities of PC4 K35R control cells (n=112 nucleoli in 78 cells), and ActD (n=99 nucleoli in 53 cells) and Na-butyrate (n=95 nucleoli in 40 cells) treatment respectively. F. PC4 dynamics under ActD treatment and the overexpression of Tip60 and dominant-negative mutant Tip60 (mutTip60). G. Graphical representation of the comparison between the nucleolar fluorescence intensities of PC4-GFP cells under ActD treatment either expressing Tip60 (n=78 nucleoli in 44 cells), or mutTip60 (n=97 nucleoli in 76 cells). Representative images from N=3 independent biological repeats for B and D, and N=2 independent biological repeats for F. PC4 tagged with GFP, NOP56, and DNA were stained in green, red, and blue, respectively in the merged images. Scale bar = 10 μm. One-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test was performed for C and E. Unpaired t-test was performed for G. Significant P values are mentioned in the figures.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/a2c5bc0301f565658bbc44b0.png"},{"id":81170116,"identity":"a676ecee-27e5-467c-802c-fad7c2e22c29","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:06:03","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":325590,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNucleolar PC4 is important for RNA pol I transcription and protein synthesis.\u003c/strong\u003e A. Schematic of PC4 domain architecture with the position of the putative nucleolar localization and K23,K24 and K26,R27 indicated. B. Pre-rRNA qPCR results comparing WT PC4, ActD, Na-butyrate, and PC4 localization mutants. Statistical analysis performed was one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test. N=3. C. ChIP-qPCR results showing the enrichment of WT PC4 on the rDNA loci. Statistical analysis performed was two-way ANOVA with multiple comparisons test. **** , p\u0026lt;0.0001, N=2. D. Western blotting analysis of puromycin labelling assay on Hela cells overexpressing PC4, PC4 K35R, NoLD, and NLD PC4 mutants N=2. E. Schematic depicting the experimental procedure performed on mouse B cells. F. Pre-rRNA qPCR results comparing WT PC4 to PC4 CKO B cells. N=5 WT mice for and 6 PC4 CKO mice. G. Western blotting analysis of puromycin labelling assay on LPS-activated WT and PC4 CKO B cells. N=4 mice for each group. Unpaired t-test statistical test was performed.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/a6962e6794e73405ca114648.png"},{"id":81170119,"identity":"87b50e52-f4fe-4a07-be56-293bf2bb7864","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:06:03","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":349279,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProlonged loss of PC4 results in altered chromatin function.\u003c/strong\u003e A. Graphical representation of the mean protein score and protein coverage of core histones, histone variants, and linker histone proteins present in the H3K9me3 IP from WT and PC4 CKO B cells. Data from 3 independent biological repeats. B. Gene Ontology analysis of the protein hits found exclusively in the WT H3K9me3 IP. C. Gene Ontology analysis of the common protein hits found in the PC4 CKO H3K9me3 IP. D. Graphical representation of the mean protein score and protein coverage of non-histone heterochromatin proteins present in the H3K9me3 IP from WT and PC4 CKO B cells. Representative data from 2 independent biological repeats. E. Electron micrographs depicting the nuclear morphology in WT and PC4 CKO B cells. F. Illustration depicting the lysine acetylation-dependent subnuclear shuttling of PC4 protein which is important for RNA pol I-mediated transcription and subsequently heterochromatin maintenance.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/4c4bce76dde66a77bbb5ac75.png"},{"id":84726535,"identity":"1f5dfd02-9419-49bb-a09a-67b34bb65f56","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-16 16:06:37","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2222429,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/961053fc-1e57-44f3-902e-10d4ed4768e7.pdf"},{"id":81171876,"identity":"ebb6a879-5952-4b8c-a390-42c0fe37e805","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:32:35","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":3774077,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementalInformation1.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6077105/v1/9d95d381941f715499b97c8c.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Positive coactivator PC4 shows dynamic nucleolar distribution required for rDNA transcription and protein synthesis","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eChromatin is compartmentalized into different functional spatial domains such as the actively transcribed euchromatin and the condensed transcriptionally inactive heterochromatin. Heterochromatin drives the three-dimensional arrangement of chromatin in the cells namely the lamina-associated domains (LADs) and nucleolus associated domains (NADs), where the heterochromatin is positioned at the periphery of the nucleus or nucleolus, respectively [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. The nucleolus is a membrane-less nuclear compartment formed around tandem ribosomal DNA (rDNA) repeats known as nucleolar organizer regions (NORs). It is the site of RNA polymerase (pol) I-mediated rDNA transcription and ribosome biogenesis, which are essential for cell viability. The heterochromatin and nucleolus, though appear to be distinct components of the nucleus, are intimately connected both structurally and functionally. Maintenance of heterochromatin is crucial for nucleolar architecture and function. Demethylation on histone H3 lysine 9 position (H3K9) resulted in R-loop formation at rDNA loci and nucleolar distortion [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Loss of H3K9 methylation in \u003cem\u003eDrosophila\u003c/em\u003e due to Su(var)3\u0026ndash;9 mutation led to nucleolar disorganization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. Deficiency of Suv39h1/2 and Hp1α/β, which are critical for heterochromatin formation driven by H3K9 methylation, resulted in nucleolar defects and reduction in ribosomal RNA biosynthesis in mammalian cells [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Conversely, the inhibition of RNA pol I transcription resulted in the 3D rearrangement of heterochromatin, culminating in altered gene expression networks [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. Depletion of nucleolar protein NPM1 triggered the rearrangement of perinucleolar heterochromatin and nucleolar deformation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. Overall, the disturbance of either the heterochromatin or nucleolar function seems to cause distortion or disorganization in the other, leading to changes in gene expression networks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive Cofactor 4 (PC4) is a small, highly conserved, and abundant nuclear protein that has been implicated in multiple cellular processes, including transcription [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR8 CR9 CR10\" citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e], DNA repair [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e], chromatin compaction [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR15\" citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e], neurogenesis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e], and autophagy [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. These functional diversities of PC4 are achieved through post-translational modifications, such as acetylation and phosphorylation based on the cellular signals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR20\" citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. PC4 interacts directly with RNA pol II and III to promote their transcriptional activity and to enhance the recruitment of other transcription factors to the promoter region of target genes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. By generating B cell-specific knockout of \u003cem\u003eSub1\u003c/em\u003e gene encoding PC4, we previously reported that PC4 is critical for regulating lineage-specific gene regulatory networks (GRN) during B cell differentiation and the B cells devoid of PC4 exhibited compromised plasma cell differentiation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite its essential roles in the cell, not much is known about how the diverse nuclear functions of PC4 are regulated and linked. Here we report a previously unknown function of PC4 in increasing RNA pol I transcription in the nucleolus. Loss of PC4 resulted in attenuated protein synthesis. The absence of PC4 resulted in abrogation of H3K9me3-marked heterochromatin assembly and distortion of nuclear morphology. Collectively, our data revealed an unexpected role for PC4 in the nucleolus, the disruption of which leads to disorganizations of rDNA gene expression and constitutive heterochromatin.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eThe transcription coactivator PC4 is a nucleolar protein.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn our previous study, we explored how PC4 regulated gene expression networks in mature B cells. We isolated the PC4 complex from splenic B cell nuclei to identify the PC4 interactome by LC-MS/MS. By analyzing the PC4 interactome, we identified 128 proteins as PC4-interacting proteins [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] of which approximately 27% were related to nucleolar function (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eA, Table S2), suggesting a function of PC4 at the nucleolus. Supporting this idea, a recent ATAC seq study suggested a role of PC4 at the rDNA loci [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e]. Therefore, to further elucidate the connection between PC4 and nucleolus, we tagged PC4 with GFP to visualize the subcellular localization of PC4 in HeLa cells. We found that PC4-GFP was localized in the nucleolus in addition to nucleocytoplasm, colocalizing with the nucleolar protein NOP56 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eB). Many nucleolar proteins are known to be dislocated upon inhibition of rDNA transcription [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e] or cellular stresses like DNA damage. We observed that PC4, similarly to NOP56, diffused out of the nucleolus upon treatment with Actinomycin D (ActD) at a lower concentration which preferentially inhibits RNA pol I [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e] (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eB, S1A). We also observed that upon treatment with the DNA damage agent, Bleocin, PC4 localization at the nucleolus was greatly reduced (Figure \u003cspan refid=\"MOESM1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eS1\u003c/span\u003eB). These observations supported the idea that PC4 is a nucleolar protein and plays a role concerning nucleolar functions and agreed with previous nucleolar proteome studies that identified PC4 in the datasets as a potential nucleolar protein [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e] .\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eTip60-mediated acetylation on lysine 35 is crucial for PC4 dynamics.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe dynamics of many nucleolar proteins are regulated by post-translational modifications, including lysine acetylation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e]. A previously published acetylome study revealed that PC4 is acetylated on two lysine residues, lysine 35 (K35) and lysine 68 (K68) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e] (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eA). To test whether lysine acetylation may be involved in the nuclear dynamics of PC4, HeLa cells were treated with the HDAC inhibitor, sodium butyrate (Na-butyrate). This led to the release of PC4 from the nucleolus (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eB, C). Since the result suggested the control of PC4 nuclear dynamics by acetylation, we tried to locate the target site of the acetylation. Based on our hypothesis that acetylation within nucleolar localization signal (NoLS) might govern the PC4 nuclear dynamics, we predicted a putative NoLS in PC4 using the Nucleolar localization sequence Detector (NoD) prediction tool [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e] and obtained the region spanning from residue 17 to 43 as the putative NoLS (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eA). Since K35 was located within the putative nucleolus localization signal (NoLS), we speculated that the lysine acetylation on K35 may be responsible for the flux of PC4 from the nucleolus (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eD). The lysine residue at the 35th position on PC4 was substituted by arginine to create an acetylation-defective mutant (K35R). We found that the PC4-K35R mutant appeared to exit the nucleolus slower than the WT counterpart upon ActD treatment (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eD, E, S1) and was unaffected by Na-butyrate treatment (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eC, E). These data indicated that K35 acetylation is crucial for the outward flux of PC4 from the nucleolus.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter establishing the importance of lysine acetylation on PC4 dynamics, we wanted to identify the lysine acetyltransferase (KAT) responsible. To achieve this, Hela cells were treated with three kinds of small molecule inhibitors targeting the three major nuclear KAT family: p300/CBP family inhibitor, C646, PCAF inhibitor, Embelin, and Tip60/Moz inhibitor, NU9056. Cells were pre-treated with the KAT inhibitor followed by ActD treatment for 2 hours. Cells treated with C646 or Embelin showed a predominant nuclear PC4 localization and moved out of the nucleolus, similarly to the cells treated with ActD alone (Figures S2A, B), suggesting that p300/CBP or PCAF is not the enzyme acetylating PC4 on K35. In contrast, when treated with the Tip60 inhibitor Nu9056 and ActD, the cells exhibited prolonged retention in the nucleolus compared to the nucleolar protein NOP56 (Figure S2A). To further confirm the role of Tip60 in PC4 localization, a dominant negative catalytic mutant of Tip60 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e] was overexpressed in Hela cells. Compared to the cells expressing the WT Tip60, PC4 in the cells expressing the mutant Tip60 demonstrated longer nucleolar retention (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eF, G). Cells expressing PC4 K35R mutant protein, also exhibited longer nucleolar retention upon co-expression with Tip60 and ActD treatment (Figure S2C). These results together suggest that the acetylation-dependent release of PC4 from nucleolus is regulated by Tip60.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eNucleolar PC4 is important for RNA Pol I-mediated transcription.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePC4 is a multifunctional protein; however, there are no known functions of PC4 in the nucleolus. Since PC4 is a known transcription coactivator, we hypothesized that PC4 may also be a coactivator for RNA pol I-mediated transcription. To dissect the functions of PC4 in the nucleolus, we created additional mutant derivatives of lysine residues, aiming to identify mutations that would inhibit its nucleolar accumulation. Among them, two double mutants of PC4 abolished nucleolar or nuclear accumulation. PC4 K23A and K24A (nucleolar localization defective mutant or NoLD) exhibited a predominant nuclear localization with clear nucleolar exclusion (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eA). PC4 K26A, R27A mutant (nuclear localization defective mutant or NLD) was exclusively cytoplasmic (Figure S3A). To test the role of PC4 in rDNA transcription, we overexpressed PC4, NoLD, and NLD mutants, and quantified the levels of 47S pre-rRNA through qPCR. We used cells transfected with empty vector and those treated with ActD as controls (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eB). As expected, ActD abolished rDNA transcription. The cells treated with Na-butyrate showed a significant reduction in 47S pre-rRNA transcription, suggesting that the presence of PC4 in the nucleolus was important for RNA pol I-mediated transcription. Corroborating this observation, we found that PC4 overexpression increased rDNA transcription whereas the NoLD mutant reduced rDNA transcription, suggesting that the NoLD mutant acted as a dominant negative mutant. The NLD mutant did not show any effect on the levels of 47S pre-rRNA (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eB), suggesting that NoLD sequestered some PC4-interacting nucleolar proteins in nuclei. To further confirm the role of PC4 as an RNA pol I coactivator, chromatin IP was performed followed by qPCR using primers across distinct elements of the rDNA gene, namely the promoter, 18S, 5.8S, 28S, and the intergenic spacer (IGS) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eC). For this experiment, we established cells stably expressing FLAG-PC4. As expected, anti-FLA IP enriched the rDNA promoter, while the enrichment was greatly diminished upon RNA pol I inhibition using ActD. These results suggest that PC4 is required for efficient transcription of rDNA genes by RNA pol I. Corroborating these results, it was observed that PC4 knockdown in HeLa cells reduced global protein translation (Figure S3B) whereas cells overexpressing WT and PC4 K35R exhibited higher translation as judged by puromycin labeling of nascent peptides (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eD), suggesting that PC4 can influence global translation through the increase of RNA pol I transcription. Unexpectedly, overexpression of PC4 NoLD mutant did not cause a clear reduction in translation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe next examined whether PC4 absence would lead to reduced protein synthesis. Because we reported previously that PC4 plays important role in B cells by generating conditional knockout (CKO) of Sub1 encoding PC4 in these cells [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e], we isolated B cells were isolated from WT and PC4 CKO mice (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eE). We found that the 47S pre-rRNA transcription was significantly reduced in the PC4 CKO B cells (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eF). We performed a puromycin labeling assay to determine the levels of the nascent peptide being translated. Substantiating the qPCR data, we found that there was a drastic decrease in the levels of puromycin-labeled peptides in the PC4 CKO lanes versus the WT (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eG). These results further support the notion that PC4 is direct or indirect facilitator of transcription by RNA pol I and the loss of PC4 culminates in the abrogation of protein synthesis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eProlonged loss of PC4 results in altered chromatin function.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecent studies have highlighted the crosstalk between the nucleolus and heterochromatin. Nucleolar stress interfering with RNA pol I transcription results in reorganization of heterochromatin and altered gene expression programs [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. In our previous study, we observed a loss of H3K9me3-marked foci in PC4 CKO B cells [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. Together this previous observation, the present results prompted us to further explore the potential role of PC4 in heterochromatin maintenance and nuclear function. Consistent with our previous study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e], we observed that H3K9me3 heterochromatin foci were absent in PC4 CKO B cells (Figure S4A); however, the global levels of H3K9me3 histone mark remained unaltered (Figure S4B). Intrigued by this, we set out to understand the fundamental differences in the H3K9me3 constitutive heterochromatin in the presence and absence of PC4. Since only the H3K9me3 foci were altered, we reasoned that the composition of the constitutive heterochromatin may be altered in the absence of PC4. To test this hypothesis, we immunoprecipitated H3K9me3-marked chromatin and subjected it to LC-MS/MS analysis (Figures S4C). The abundance of canonical histones and linker histones were comparable in both wild-type and the PC4 CKO H3K9me3 IP (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eA), indicating successful immunoprecipitations of chromatin fragments from these cells. Strikingly however, histone variants, especially H2A variants known to be present in heterochromatin, such as H2A.Z, H2A.V, H2A.J, and macroH2A were reduced or absent in the H3K9me3 chromatin in PC4 CKO B cells (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eA). Among linker histone H1, H1t was also reduced.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGene Ontology (GO) analysis was performed on the interactome of H3K9me3 chromatin. For the WT interactome, proteins present exclusively in the WT complexes (74 proteins) were considered for GO analysis (Figure S4D). As expected, chromatin silencing was the most enriched pathway. In addition, pathways associated with nucleolar function were also enriched such as \u0026ldquo;GO:0006412\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;translation\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;GO:0000027\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;ribosomal large subunit assembly\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;GO:0042254\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;ribosome biogenesis\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;GO:0000183\u0026thinsp;~\u0026thinsp;chromatin silencing at rDNA\u0026rdquo; (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eB). This result suggested that H3K9me3 chromatin was closely located with nucleoli in WT B cells. In contrast, however, the GO analysis of the common proteins present in the PC4 CKO complex (30 proteins) were devoid of heterochromatin and nucleolar function and are enriched in pathways that relate to RNA processing and gene expression (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eC), suggesting a failure of proper gene silencing by the H3K9me3-deposited chromatin. To gain an in depth understanding of the difference between the interactome of WT and PC4 CKO H3K9me3 chromatin, we plotted the protein score and coverage of common non-histone chromatin-associated proteins. Reflecting the GO analyses it was observed that all chromatin-associated proteins or heterochromatin-associated proteins were greatly reduced or absent in the PC4 CKO H3K9me3 complex (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eD); known regulators of heterochromatin, including Cbx5 and Suv39h1, were reduced in the pC4 CKO. We found an enrichment in nucleolar proteins involved in RNA Pol I transcription (such as UBF, TCOF1, NOLC1), and ribosomal biosynthesis in the WT complex over the PC4 CKO (Figure S4E).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeterochromatin maintains the rigidity and morphology of the nucleus [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]; therefore, we wondered if the loss of heterochromatin foci would exhibit phenotypic changes in the PC4 CKO B cell nucleus. Validating our GO analyses data, electron microscopy observation revealed that the loss of heterochromatin foci in PC4 CKO B cells resulted in the deformation of the nuclei, including invagination of the nuclear membrane and lobular structure (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eE).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this manuscript, we demonstrate the interdependency between nucleolar function and heterochromatin. We show that the transcription coactivator PC4 is required for efficient transcription of rDNA genes by RNA pol I in addition to RNA pol II and III, and as an extension, is also crucial for ribosome biogenesis and protein synthesis. These observations would suggest that PC4 may play a pivotal role in deciding gene expression profiles under various internal and environmental cues, especially stress conditions like DNA damage where global protein synthesis is dampened [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Mechanistically, we have discovered that the subnuclear localization of PC4 is significantly influenced by Tip60-mediated acetylation. This finding, along with other studies, underscores the vital importance of post-translational modifications, particularly acetylation and phosphorylation, in determining the functional segregation of PC4. Previous investigations have indicated that these modifications are frequently mutually exclusive [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e], possibly hinting at the functional finetuning of this important transcriptional coactivator (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eF). The direct enzyme-substrate relationship of Tip60 and PC4 is yet to be established. Also remains unclear is how acetylated PC4 is excluded from the nucleolus. Considering that acetylation of lysine neutralizes the basic residue, PC4 acetylation may suppress the electrostatic interaction of PC4 with rDNA or other components of the nucleolus. Recently, dynamic localization of histone deacetylase SIRT1 has been suggested to regulate epigenetic modification [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. Upon DNA damage, SIRT1 is mobilized from the nucleolus to DNA damage sites for DNA repair. However, this response is considered to abrogate the acetylation status of rDNA chromatin, leading to deregulation of nucleolar heterochromatin and hence accelerated aging. It is an interesting possibility that the dynamic regulation of nucleolar PC4 may reflect a new mode of nucleolar-nuclear signaling.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur results suggest that PC4 stimulates rDNA gene transcription by pol I by binding to the promoter region. Initially recognized as a coactivator for RNA Pol II, PC4 was found to engage with activators and components of the Pol II basal transcription apparatus[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR37\" citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. It enhances activator-dependent transcription, inducing transcription initiation in a phosphorylation-dependent manner [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. Moreover, PC4 facilitates RNA Pol III recycling and is enriched on RNA Pol III gene promoters [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. As an extension, PC4 may activate rDNA transcription by Pol I through the interaction with RNA Pol I transcription machinery. We have found TCOF1, a protein important for RNA Pol I transcription initiation, present in the PC4 interactome analysis. In addition, we also observe an enrichment of RNA Pol I transcription coactivators such as TCOF1, UBF, and NOLC1, in the WT H3K9me3 complex from B cells over the PC4 CKO complex. However, it remains to be examined whether PC4 functions as a coactivator of RNA pol I by interacting with pol I itself or its basal transcription factors. Therefore, it will be important to test whether PC4 can regulate RNA Pol I-mediated transcription through the stabilization of the transcription initiation complex.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed alteration in the composition of constitutive heterochromatin in PC4 CKO B cells is consistent with the well-established association between the nucleolus and heterochromatin functionality [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR5\" citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. The extended absence of PC4 led to the disappearance of heterochromatin foci. Importantly, many of the proteins important for heterochromatin-mediated gene silencing were lost from chromatin regions with H3K9me3 in the absence of PC4. Considering its function in chromatin compaction [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e], PC4 loss on heterochromatin may directly impact the protein interactions on chromatin and gene silencing. However, it may potentially be due to the disruption of nucleolar function. Proteins involved in RNA pol I-mediated transcription were reduced in the PC4 CKO complex, possibly indicative of the reduced and altered nucleolar function. While we cannot dismiss the direct impact of PC4 loss on heterochromatin, it is important to consider that the dysfunction of nucleoli in the absence of PC4 could also have an impact on the overall heterochromatin landscape. The phenotypic changes PC4-deficient B cells [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] may reflect not only altered heterochromatin but also the defective nucleolar function which leads to a severe reduction in the protein synthesis capacity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMice\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eB1-8hi:Mb1-cre:Sub1f/f mice were generated as described previously [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e] and maintained in pathogen-free conditions in accordance with guidelines approved by the Institute for Animal Experimentation Committee at Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine. The experiments were performed using age-matched mice between 8\u0026ndash;16 weeks of age.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCell culture\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHeLa cells were cultured in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle\u0026rsquo;s Medium (D5796, DMEM-high glucose, Sigma-Aldrich) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) (172012, Sigma-Aldrich), and 100 U/ml penicillin-100 \u0026micro;g/ml streptomycin (15140-122, penicillin-streptomycin, Thermo Fisher Scientific).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eB cell isolation and\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003ein vitro\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eactivation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSplenic B cells were isolated using a B cell isolation kit (130-090-862, Miltenyi Biotec) and LS columns (130-042-401, Miltenyi Biotec). For \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e B cell activation, purified splenic B cells were cultured in RPMI-1640 (Sigma) media supplemented with 10% FBS, 10 mM HEPES, 1 mM Na-Pyruvate, 0.1 mM non-essential amino acids, 100 mg/mL penicillin, 10 U/mL streptomycin, 50 mM β-mercaptoethanol, and 20 ug/mL LPS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePlasmids\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMSCV-FLAG-PC4-IRES-GFP was described previously [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. The PC4 construct was subcloned into the EGFP-N1 vector using the XhoI/EcoRI sites. The mutations were introduced into the PC4 sequence through the site-directed mutagenesis method by amplifying the plasmid with primers containing the desired mutagenized sequences, followed by DpnI restriction digestion and transformation into DH5⍺ competent \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e cells. The incorporated mutations were confirmed by Sanger\u0026rsquo;s sequencing. Primers used are listed in Table \u003cspan refid=\"MOESM1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eS1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAntibodies and chemicals\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe antibodies used in this study are: anti-PC4 (sc-166280, Santa Cruz), anti-actin (GTX-109639; GeneTex), anti-puromycin (clone 12D10, MABE343, Merck), anti-H3K9me3 (homemade), anti-H3K9me3 (EPR16601, Abcam), anti-NOP56 (GTX130973, GeneTex), anti-DDDDK-tag (M185-3L, MBL), HRP linked anti-mouse IgG (NA931, GE Healthcare) and HRP-linked anti-rabbit IgG (NA934, GE Healthcare) antibodies. The reagents and chemicals used in this study are as follows: puromycin (P8833, Puromycin dihydrochloride, Sigma-Aldrich), embelin (E1406, Sigma), NU9056 (ab255734, Abcam), C646 (382113, Merck) and Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from Escherichia coli O111:B4 (L2630, Sigma-Aldrich).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eRNA interference\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKnockdown was performed using Lipofectamine\u0026reg; RNAiMAX transfection reagent (13778150; Thermo Fisher Scientific) according to the manufacturer\u0026rsquo;s instructions. siRNA Stealth RNAi duplexes against \u003cem\u003eSUB1\u003c/em\u003e (PC4) or control were purchased from Thermo Fisher Scientific.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esiRNAs used in this study:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esiControl: 5\u0026rsquo;- AGGAGGAUAUUACCAUGAAGAAGAC-3\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esiPC4-1: 5\u0026rsquo;-UGAGGUACGUUAGUGUUCGCGAUUU-3\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esiPC4-2: 5\u0026rsquo;-GCUGAAGGAACAGAUUUCUGACAUU-3\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003esiPC4-3: 5\u0026rsquo;-GGUGAGACUUCGAGAGCCCUGUCAU-3\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eRT-qPCR\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTotal RNA was extracted using an RNeasy Plus Mini kit (74134, Qiagen) following the manufacturer\u0026rsquo;s instructions. cDNA was synthesized from 1 \u0026micro;g of total RNA using the High-Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription Kit (4374966, Thermo Fisher Scientific) with random primers. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) was performed using the hot start \u0026lsquo;FastStart Essential DNA Green Master (06924204001, Roche) in a LightCycler\u0026reg; 96 instrument (Roche). Primers used are listed in Table \u003cspan refid=\"MOESM1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eS1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePC4 stable expression cell lines\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHela cells were transfected with either the pEGP-N1, pEGFP-N1-PC4, or mutant PC4 plasmid using GeneJuice\u0026reg; Transfection Reagent (70967, Merck) following the manufacturer\u0026rsquo;s protocol. After 24 h, cells were selected in 400 \u0026micro;g/ml G418 (509290, Calbiochem). The surviving cell population was grown and maintained under selection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePuromycin assay\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeLa cells stably expressing empty vector, WT PC4, or mutant PC4 proteins were grown to 70 to 80% confluency and pulse-labeled with 20 \u0026micro;g/ml puromycin for 30 min at 37\u0026deg;C. Isolated splenic B cells were activated for 24 h in 20 \u0026micro;g/ml LPS, as described earlier, and pulse-labeled with 20 \u0026micro;g/ml puromycin for 30 min at 37\u0026deg;C. Cells were lysed in lysis buffer composed of 50 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% NP-40, 0.5% Na-deoxycholate, 0.1% SDS, and protease inhibitor cocktail (04693132001, Roche). The lysates were separated on a 12% SDS-PAGE. The gel was cut at the 25 kDa marker, the upper part was transferred onto a 0.45-\u0026micro;m PVDF membrane as described elsewhere [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e], and the lower portion of the gel was stained in Coomassie Brilliant Blue as the loading control. Intensity measurements were performed using the ImageJ software (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eImmunofluorescence microscopy\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeLa cells were grown on a coverslip for 12\u0026ndash;24 h before transfection with pEGFP-N1 empty vector, WT PC4, or mutant PC4 expressing plasmids using GeneJuice\u0026reg; Transfection Reagent (70967, Merck). After 24 hours, cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, permeabilized with 0.5% Triton X-100, and blocked with 5% FBS at 37\u0026deg;C. The samples were incubated with primary antibodies: anti-H3K9me3 (EPR16601, Abcam) or anti-NOP56 (GTX130973, GeneTex) antibody diluted in 1% FBS at 37\u0026deg;C for 1 hour, and then with a Goat anti-Rabbit IgG H\u0026amp;L (Alexa Fluor\u0026reg; 594) secondary antibody (ab150080, Abcam). Nuclei were counterstained with Hoechst. The coverslips were mounted on VECTASHIELD\u0026reg; Antifade Mounting Medium (H-1000-10, Vector Laboratories). The samples were visualized under the Zeiss LSM780, confocal microscope system. Data obtained were analyzed using the ImageJ software (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eChromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-qPCR\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eChIP was performed as described previously [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. Chromatin from splenic B cells was isolated and sonicated to obtain DNA fragments ranging from 100 to 500 base pairs. Chromatin fragments were immunoprecipitated with anti-DDDDK-tag mAb-Magnetic Beads (M185-11R, MBL). After crosslink reversal, the enriched DNA sequences were assessed by real-time quantitative PCR. Primers used are listed in Table \u003cspan refid=\"MOESM1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eS1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eH3K9me3 Complex purification and LC-MS/MS analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eB1-8hi splenic B cells were crosslinked with 1% formaldehyde. Nuclear extracts were prepared following the ChIP protocol. After pre-clearing with protein A/G beads (Invitrogen) at 4\u0026deg;C for 1 h, samples were incubated with anti-H3K9me3 conjugated with protein A/G beads overnight. Beads were washed three times and eluted with SDS sample buffer containing 120 mM Tris (pH 6.8), 4% SDS, and 0.2 M DTT. The complex was subjected to SDS-PAGE on 5\u0026ndash;20% gradient gel (HOG-0520-13; Oriental Instruments Co, Ltd), and stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue. The immobilized samples were excised into gel pieces and subjected to in-gel reduction using 10 mM DTT in 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate. Alkylation of the cysteine residues was performed with 55 mM acrylamide in 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate, and digestion was carried out with trypsin (V5280, Trypsin Gold, Promega). The tryptic peptides were analyzed in an Orbitrap Fusion mass spectrometer connected with an Easy-nLC 1000 HPLC (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the MASCOT search engine (Matrix Science) as previously described [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e]. Components of the H3K9me3 complex were determined with a\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;5-fold protein score of test IP over control IgG, and \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;2 unique peptides. Three independent biological repeats of the H3K9me3 complex IP were performed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eGene Ontology analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGO and KEGG analysis were performed using DAVID v2021 online software (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://david.ncifcrf.gov/home.jsp\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://david.ncifcrf.gov/home.jsp\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e). Enriched pathways with FDR\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05 were plotted. Venn Diagram was plotted using Venny2.1.0 online software (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://bioinfogp.cnb.csic.es/tools/venny/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://bioinfogp.cnb.csic.es/tools/venny/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e). Two biological repeats each, from WT and PC4 CKO B cell samples, of the H3K9me3 complex IP with the highest number of protein overlaps were used for plotting the Venn diagram and the subsequent analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistics and Data Reproducibility\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe statistical test performed between two samples is an unpaired t-test. For comparison between multiple samples, one-way or two-way ANOVA with Dunnett\u0026rsquo;s multiple comparison test were used. Graphical representation and statistical analyses have been performed in GraphPad Prism 9.3.1. The number of independent biological repeats are mentioned in the figure legends.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding Declaration\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22H00443, 20KK0176, and 18H04021 (to K. I.), 16H01295 and 23K27362 (K.O.), and a Research Grant in the Natural Sciences from the Mitsubishi Foundation (to K. I.). S. K. was supported by fellowship from Takeda Science Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eS.K. conceptualized the research, carried out the main experiments, analyzed and interpreted data, prepared figures and wrote the manuscript. K.O. conceptualized the research, generated, maintained and providePC4-deficient mice and guided and supported experiments. H.S. carried out proteomics analyses. M.M. carried out bioinformatics analyses of omics data. M.A. supported protein synthesis assay. T.I. provided Tip60 derivatives and experimental conditions related to them. T.K.K. generated PC4 floxed mice, conceptualized the research, provided unpublished findings on PC4 to tune the research, and edited the manuscript. K.I. conceptualized, guided and organized the research, and edited the manuscript and figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe are grateful to the laboratory members at Tohoku University and JNCASR for constructive discussion and suggestions, the Biomedical Research Core and Institute for Animal Experimentation of Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine for technical supports and breeding mice. This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22H00443, 20KK0176, and 18H04021 (to K. I.), 16H01295 and 23K27362 (K.O.), and a Research Grant in the Natural Sciences from the Mitsubishi Foundation (to K. I.). S. K. was supported by fellowship from Takeda Science Foundation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData on proteomics measurement using LC-MS/MS is available from the corresponding author upon request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBizhanova A, Kaufman PD. Close to the edge: Heterochromatin at the nucleolar and nuclear peripheries. Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Regul Mech. 2021;1864. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.BBAGRM.2020.194666\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.BBAGRM.2020.194666\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhou H, Li L, Wang Q, et al. H3K9 Demethylation-Induced R-Loop Accumulation Is Linked to Disorganized Nucleoli. Front Genet. 2020;11. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/FGENE.2020.00043\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/FGENE.2020.00043\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeng JC, Karpen GH. H3K9 methylation and RNA interference regulate nucleolar organization and repeated DNA stability. Nat Cell Biol. 2007;9:25\u0026ndash;35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/NCB1514\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/NCB1514\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBallmer D, Tardat M, Ortiz R, et al. HP1 proteins regulate nucleolar structure and function by secluding pericentromeric constitutive heterochromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51:117\u0026ndash;43. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/NAR/GKAC1159\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/NAR/GKAC1159\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYu H, Sun Z, Tan T, et al. rRNA biogenesis regulates mouse 2C-like state by 3D structure reorganization of peri-nucleolar heterochromatin. Nat Commun. 2021;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/S41467-021-26576-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/S41467-021-26576-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolmberg Olausson K, Nist\u0026eacute;r M, Lindstr\u0026ouml;m MS. Loss of nucleolar histone chaperone NPM1 triggers rearrangement of heterochromatin and synergizes with a deficiency in DNA methyltransferase DNMT3A to drive ribosomal DNA transcription. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:34601\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M114.569244\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.M114.569244\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGe H, Roeder RG. Purification, cloning, and characterization of a human coactivator, PC4, that mediates transcriptional activation of class II genes. Cell. 1994;78:513\u0026ndash;23. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90428-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/0092-8674(94)90428-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKaiser K, Stelzer G, Meisterernst M. The coactivator p15 (PC4) initiates transcriptional activation during TFIIA-TFIID-promoter complex formation. EMBO J. 1995;14:3520\u0026ndash;7. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07358.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07358.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTavenet A, Suleau A, Dubreuil G, et al. Genome-wide location analysis reveals a role for Sub1 in RNA polymerase III transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:14265\u0026ndash;70. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.0900162106\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/PNAS.0900162106\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Z, Roeder RG. DNA topoisomerase I and PC4 can interact with human TFIIIC to promote both accurate termination and transcription reinitiation by RNA polymerase III. Mol Cell. 1998;1:749\u0026ndash;57. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80074-X\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80074-X\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKretzschmar M, Kaiser K, Lottspeich F, Meisterernst M. A novel mediator of class II gene transcription with homology to viral immediate-early transcriptional regulators. Cell. 1994;78:525\u0026ndash;34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90429-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/0092-8674(94)90429-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePan ZQ, Ge H, Amin AA, Hurwitz J. Transcription-positive cofactor 4 forms complexes with HSSB (RPA) on single-stranded DNA and influences HSSB-dependent enzymatic synthesis of simian virus 40 DNA. J Biol Chem. 1996;271:22111\u0026ndash;6. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.271.36.22111\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.271.36.22111\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMortusewicz O, Roth W, Li N, et al. Recruitment of RNA polymerase II cofactor PC4 to DNA damage sites. J Cell Biol. 2008;183:769\u0026ndash;76. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1083/JCB.200808097\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1083/JCB.200808097\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDas C, Hizume K, Batta K, et al. Transcriptional Coactivator PC4, a Chromatin-Associated Protein, Induces Chromatin Condensation. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26:8303\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.00887-06\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1128/mcb.00887-06\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMustafi P, Hu M, Kumari S, et al. Phosphorylation-dependent association of human chromatin protein PC4 to linker histone H1 regulates genome organization and transcription. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50:6116\u0026ndash;36. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac450\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/nar/gkac450\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDas C, Gadad SS, Kundu TK. Human Positive Coactivator 4 Controls Heterochromatinization and Silencing of Neural Gene Expression by Interacting with REST/NRSF and CoREST. J Mol Biol. 2010;397:1\u0026ndash;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2009.12.058\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jmb.2009.12.058\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSwaminathan A, Delage H, Chatterjee S, et al. Transcriptional Coactivator and Chromatin Protein PC4 Is Involved in Hippocampal Neurogenesis and Spatial Memory Extinction. J Biol Chem. 2016;291:20303\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M116.744169\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.M116.744169\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSikder S, Kumari S, Mustafi P, et al. Nonhistone human chromatin protein PC4 is critical for genomic integrity and negatively regulates autophagy. FEBS J. 2019;286:4422\u0026ndash;42. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/FEBS.14952\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/FEBS.14952\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBatta K, Kundu TK. Activation of p53 Function by Human Transcriptional Coactivator PC4: Role of Protein-Protein Interaction, DNA Bending, and Posttranslational Modifications. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.01064-07\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1128/mcb.01064-07\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSikder S, Agrawal A, Singh S et al. (2024) KAT5 Acetylates Human Chromatin Protein PC4 to promote DNA Repair. bioRxiv 2024.01.12.575390. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.12.575390\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1101/2024.01.12.575390\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar BRP, Swaminathan V, Banerjee S, Kundu TK. p300-mediated acetylation of human transcriptional coactivator PC4 is inhibited by phosphorylation. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:16804\u0026ndash;9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M100934200\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.M100934200\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConesa C, Acker J. (2010) Sub1/PC4 a chromatin associated protein with multiple functions in transcription. RNA Biol 7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOchiai K, Yamaoka M, Swaminathan A, et al. Chromatin Protein PC4 Orchestrates B Cell Differentiation by Collaborating with IKAROS and IRF4. Cell Rep. 2020;33. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.CELREP.2020.108517\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.CELREP.2020.108517\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAndersen JS, Lam YW, Leung AKL, et al. Nucleolar proteome dynamics. Nature. 2005;433:77\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/NATURE03207\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/NATURE03207\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerry RP, Kelley DE. Inhibition of RNA synthesis by actinomycin D: Characteristic dose-response of different RNA species. J Cell Physiol. 1970;76. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.1040760202\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/jcp.1040760202\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShandilya J, Swaminathan V, Gadad SS, et al. Acetylated NPM1 localizes in the nucleoplasm and regulates transcriptional activation of genes implicated in oral cancer manifestation. Mol Cell Biol. 2009;29:5115\u0026ndash;27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01969-08\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1128/MCB.01969-08\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen S, Seiler J, Santiago-Reichelt M, et al. Repression of RNA polymerase I upon stress is caused by inhibition of RNA-dependent deacetylation of PAF53 by SIRT7. Mol Cell. 2013;52:303\u0026ndash;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.MOLCEL.2013.10.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.MOLCEL.2013.10.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChoudhary C, Kumar C, Gnad F, et al. Lysine acetylation targets protein complexes and co-regulates major cellular functions. Science. 2009;325:834\u0026ndash;40. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.1175371\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/SCIENCE.1175371\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScott MS, Boisvert FM, McDowall MD, et al. Characterization and prediction of protein nucleolar localization sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkq653\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/nar/gkq653\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScott MS, Troshin PV, Barton GJ. NoD: A Nucleolar localization sequence detector for eukaryotic and viral proteins. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-317\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/1471-2105-12-317\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIkura T, Ogryzko VV, Grigoriev M, et al. Involvement of the TIP60 histone acetylase complex in DNA repair and apoptosis. Cell. 2000;102:463\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)00051-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/S0092-8674(00)00051-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNava MM, Miroshnikova YA, Biggs LC, et al. Heterochromatin-Driven Nuclear Softening Protects the Genome against Mechanical Stress-Induced Damage. Cell. 2020;181:800\u0026ndash;e81722. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.CELL.2020.03.052\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.CELL.2020.03.052\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLarsen DH, Hari F, Clapperton JA, et al. The NBS1-Treacle complex controls ribosomal RNA transcription in response to DNA damage. Nat Cell Biol. 2014;16:792\u0026ndash;803. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/NCB3007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/NCB3007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRiepe C, Zelin E, Frankino PA, et al. Double stranded DNA breaks and genome editing trigger loss of ribosomal protein RPS27A. FEBS J. 2022;289:3101\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/FEBS.16321\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/FEBS.16321\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOberdoerffer P, Michan S, McVay M, et al. SIRT1 Redistribution on Chromatin Promotes Genomic Stability but Alters Gene Expression during Aging. Cell. 2008;135:907\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.025\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.025\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu SY, Chiang CM. Properties of PC4 and an RNA polymerase II complex in directing activated and basal transcription in vitro. J Biol Chem. 1998;273:12492\u0026ndash;6. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.273.20.12492\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.273.20.12492\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFukuda A, Nakadai T, Shimada M, et al. Transcriptional coactivator PC4 stimulates promoter escape and facilitates transcriptional synergy by GAL4-VP16. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24:6525\u0026ndash;35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.24.14.6525-6535.2004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1128/MCB.24.14.6525-6535.2004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMalik S, Guermah M, Roeder RG. A dynamic model for PC4 coactivator function in RNA polymerase II transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.5.2192\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/pnas.95.5.2192\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlam M, Shima H, Matsuo Y, et al. mTORC1-independent translation control in mammalian cells by methionine adenosyltransferase 2A and S-adenosylmethionine. J Biol Chem. 2022;298. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBC.2022.102084\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.JBC.2022.102084\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOchiai K, Maienschein-Cline M, Simonetti G et al. (2013) Transcriptional Regulation of Germinal Center B and Plasma Cell Fates by Dynamical Control of IRF4. Immunity 38:. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2013.04.009\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.immuni.2013.04.009\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAndo R, Shima H, Tamahara T, et al. The Transcription Factor Bach2 Is Phosphorylated at Multiple Sites in Murine B Cells but a Single Site Prevents Its Nuclear Localization. J Biol Chem. 2016;291:1826\u0026ndash;40. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1074/JBC.M115.661702\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1074/JBC.M115.661702\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"cell-communication-and-signaling","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ccas","sideBox":"Learn more about [Cell Communication and Signaling](http://biosignaling.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"12964","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/12964/3","title":"Cell Communication and Signaling","twitterHandle":"@bmc","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"heterochromatin, nucleolus, ribosomal DNA, ribosome, B cells, lysine acetyltransferase, TIP60, KAT5","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe nucleolus is the site of rDNA transcription and ribosome biogenesis. Alterations in nucleolar function and architecture correlate with drastic heterochromatin rearrangement and global changes in gene expression. However, the precise mechanism that connects nucleolar function to heterochromatin organization and transcription is yet unknown. Here, we report that the RNA polymerase II (RNA pol II) transactivator and chromatin condenser, Positive Coactivator 4 (PC4), is a bona fide nucleolar protein. PC4 showed dynamic nucleolar accumulation, which is critical for rDNA transcription. The lysine acetyltransferase, KAT5 (Tip60) acetylates PC4 at K35, which facilitates nucleolar release of PC4 and concomitated inhibition of rDNA transcription. By employing PC4 mutant, which is defective in nucleolar accumulation, we found that nucleolar PC4 is crucial for RNA pol I-mediated rDNA transcription. To validate this significant novel role of PC4, in the context of nucleolus organization and function, at the organismal level, we looked into B cell-specific conditional knockout of Sub1 encoding PC4 in mice, which revealed that indeed the rDNA transcription and protein synthesis in B cells are severely repressed in the absence of PC4. Furthermore, PC4 CKO B cells were associated with the loss of H3K9me3-marked heterochromatin foci but not global H3K9me3 levels. LC-MS/MS analysis of the H3K9me3 chromatin complexes revealed that most non-histone heterochromatin proteins were reduced or absent in the constitutive heterochromatin of PC4 CKO B cells. These findings establish PC4 as a critical functional component of nucleolus for rDNA transcription.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Positive coactivator PC4 shows dynamic nucleolar distribution required for rDNA transcription and protein synthesis","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-23 05:05:56","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6077105/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Accepted","date":"2025-05-09T18:46:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-05-06T16:46:55+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-05-01T05:37:47+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-04-28T17:06:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"273855112381162291920300391295133983645","date":"2025-04-28T16:36:41+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"286980184138340050343542073971188213583","date":"2025-04-23T14:30:43+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"49230510900842924167660464355317346150","date":"2025-04-22T13:52:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-04-22T12:46:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-04-22T05:26:06+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Cell Communication and Signaling","date":"2025-04-18T10:38:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"cell-communication-and-signaling","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ccas","sideBox":"Learn more about [Cell Communication and Signaling](http://biosignaling.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"12964","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/12964/3","title":"Cell Communication and Signaling","twitterHandle":"@bmc","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"574b3f18-efa3-41fe-a46d-36044b69bfc8","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 23rd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-16T16:02:29+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-6077105","link":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-025-02238-4","journal":{"identity":"cell-communication-and-signaling","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Cell Communication and Signaling"},"publishedOn":"2025-06-14 15:57:59","publishedOnDateReadable":"June 14th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-23 05:05:56","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1186/s12964-025-02238-4","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-025-02238-4","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6077105","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6077105","identity":"rs-6077105","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}