Transcription of genes can be discontinuous, occurring in pulses or bursts. It is not clear how properties of transcriptional pulses vary between different genes. We compared the pulsing of five housekeeping and five developmentally induced genes by direct imaging of single gene transcriptional events in individual living Dictyostelium cells. Each gene displayed its own transcriptional signature, differing in probability of firing and pulse duration, frequency, and intensity. In contrast to the prevailing view from both prokaryotes and eukaryotes that transcription displays binary behavior, strongly expressed housekeeping genes altered the magnitude of their transcriptional pulses during development. These nonbinary “tunable” responses may be better suited than stochastic switch behavior for housekeeping functions. Analysis of RNA synthesis kinetics using fluorescence recovery after photobleaching implied modulation of housekeeping-gene pulse strength occurs at the level of transcription initiation rather than elongation. In addition, disparities between single cell and population measures of transcript production suggested differences in RNA stability between gene classes. Analysis of stability using RNAseq revealed no major global differences in stability between developmental and housekeeping transcripts, although strongly induced RNAs showed unusually rapid decay, indicating tight regulation of expression.

Oscillate to Synchronize: In the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum , periodic waves of the small-molecule cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) guide chemotactic migration and cell differentiation. Cai et al. ( 10.1126/science.1249531 ; see the Perspective by Wollman ) found that a GATA family transcription factor shuttles between the nucleus and the cytoplasm of the amoeba in response to oscillatory cAMP signals acting through G protein–coupled receptors. Each oscillation generates a transient burst of gene activation, such that gene expression is linked to the number rather than the level of stimulus, which then brings about transcriptional synchrony in populations of cells.

CRISPR/Cas9 has emerged in various organisms as a powerful technology for targeted gene knockout; however, no reports of editing the Dictyostelium genome efficiently using this system are available. We describe here the application of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene modification in Dictyostelium. The endogenous tRNA-processing system for expressing sgRNA was approximately 10 times more effective than the commonly used U6 promoter. The resulting sgRNA affected the sub-nuclear localisation of Cas9, indicating that the expression level of sgRNA was sufficiently high to form Cas9 and sgRNA complexes within the nucleus. The all-in-one vector containing Cas9 and sgRNA was transiently expressed to generate mutants in five PI3K genes. Mutation detective PCR revealed the mutagenesis frequency of the individual genes to be between 72.9% and 100%. We confirmed that all five targeting loci in the four independent clones had insertion/deletion mutations in their target sites. Thus, we show that the CRISPR/Cas9 system can be used in Dictyostelium cells to enable efficient genome editing of multiple genes. Since this system utilises transient expression of the all-in-one vector, it has the advantage that the drug resistance cassette is not integrated into the genome and simple vector construction, involving annealing two oligo-DNAs.

Background: Formins are multidomain proteins defined by a conserved FH2 (formin homology 2) domain with actin nucleation activity preceded by a proline-rich FH1 (formin homology 1) domain. Formins act as profilin-modulated processive actin nucleators conserved throughout a wide range of eukaryotes. Results: We present a detailed sequence analysis of the 10 formins (ForA to J) identified in the genome of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. With the exception of ForI and ForC all other formins conform to the domain structure GBD/FH3-FH1-FH2-DAD, where DAD is the Diaphanous autoinhibition domain and GBD/FH3 is the Rho GTPase-binding domain/formin homology 3 domain that we propose to represent a single domain. ForC lacks a FH1 domain, ForI lacks recognizable GBD/FH3 and DAD domains and ForA, E and J have additional unique domains. To establish the relationship between formins of Dictyostelium and other organisms we constructed a phylogenetic tree based on the alignment of FH2 domains. Real-time PCR was used to study the expression pattern of formin genes. Expression of forC, D, I and J increased during transition to multi-cellular stages, while the rest of genes displayed less marked developmental variations. During sexual development, expression of forH and forI displayed a significant increase in fusion competent cells. Conclusion: Our analysis allows some preliminary insight into the functionality of Dictyostelium formins: all isoforms might display actin nucleation activity and, with the exception of ForI, might also be susceptible to autoinhibition and to regulation by Rho GTPases. The architecture GBD/FH3-FH1-FH2-DAD appears common to almost all Dictyostelium, fungal and metazoan formins, for which we propose the denomination of conventional formins, and implies a common regulatory mechanism.

Stimulation of transcription by extracellular signals is a major component of a cell's decision making. Yet the quantitative relationship between signal and acute transcriptional response is unclear. One view is that transcription is directly graded with inducer concentration. In an alternative model, the response occurs only above a threshold inducer concentration. Standard methods for monitoring transcription lack continuous information from individual cells or mask immediate-early transcription by measuring downstream protein expression. We have therefore used a technique for directly monitoring nascent RNA in living cells, to quantify the direct transcriptional response to an extracellular signal in real time, in single cells. At increasing doses of inducer, increasing numbers of cells displayed a transcriptional response. However, over the same range of doses, the change in cell response strength, measured as the length, frequency and intensity of transcriptional pulses, was small, with considerable variation between cells. These data support a model in which cells have different sensitivities to developmental inducer and respond in a digital manner above individual stimulus thresholds. Biased digital responses may be necessary for certain forms of developmental specification. Limiting bias in responsiveness is required to reduce noise in positional signalling.