1. Dekker, J. & Mirny, L. The 3D genome as moderator of chromosomal communication. Cell 164, 1110–1121 (2016).

2. Hara, K. et al. Structure of cohesin subcomplex pinpoints direct shugoshin–Wapl antagonism in centromeric cohesion. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 21, 864–870 (2014).

3. Shintomi, K. & Hirano, T. Releasing cohesin from chromosome arms in early mitosis: opposing actions of Wapl–Pds5 and Sgo1. Genes Dev. 23, 2224–2236 (2009).

4. Merkenschlager, M. & Nora, E. P. CTCF and cohesin in genome folding and transcriptional gene regulation. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 17, 17–43 (2016).

5. Rowley, M. J. & Corces, V. G. Organizational principles of 3D genome architecture. Nat. Rev. Genet. 19, 789–800 (2018).

6. Yatskevich, S., Rhodes, J. & Nasmyth, K. Organization of chromosomal DNA by SMC complexes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 53, 445–482 (2019).

7. Alipour, E. & Marko, J. F. Self-organization of domain structures by DNA-loop-extruding enzymes. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 11202–11212 (2012).

8. Fudenberg, G. et al. Formation of chromosomal domains by loop extrusion. Cell Rep. 15, 2038–2049 (2016).

9. Sanborn, A. L. et al. Chromatin extrusion explains key features of loop and domain formation in wild-type and engineered genomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E6456–E6465 (2015).

10. Haarhuis, J. H. I. et al. The cohesin release factor WAPL restricts chromatin loop extension. Cell 169, 693–707 (2017).

11. Nora, E. P. et al. Targeted degradation of CTCF decouples local insulation of chromosome domains from genomic compartmentalization. Cell 169, 930–944 (2017).

12. Wutz, G. et al. Topologically associating domains and chromatin loops depend on cohesin and are regulated by CTCF, WAPL, and PDS5 proteins. EMBO J. 36, 3573–3599 (2017).

13. Guo, Y. et al. CRISPR inversion of CTCF sites alters genome topology and enhancer/promoter function. Cell 162, 900–910 (2015).

14. de Wit, E. et al. CTCF binding polarity determines chromatin looping. Mol. Cell 60, 676–684 (2015).

15. Rao, S. S. et al. A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. Cell 159, 1665–1680 (2014).

16. Vietri Rudan, M. et al. Comparative Hi-C reveals that CTCF underlies evolution of chromosomal domain architecture. Cell Rep. 10, 1297–1309 (2015).

17. Rao, S. S. P. et al. Cohesin loss eliminates all loop domains. Cell 171, 305–320 (2017).

18. Gassler, J. et al. A mechanism of cohesin-dependent loop extrusion organizes zygotic genome architecture. EMBO J. 36, 3600–3618 (2017).

19. Rubio, E. D. et al. CTCF physically links cohesin to chromatin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 8309–8314 (2008).

20. Xiao, T., Wallace, J. & Felsenfeld, G. Specific sites in the C terminus of CTCF interact with the SA2 subunit of the cohesin complex and are required for cohesin-dependent insulation activity. Mol. Cell. Biol. 31, 2174–2183 (2011).

21. Pezzi, N. et al. STAG3, a novel gene encoding a protein involved in meiotic chromosome pairing and location of STAG3-related genes flanking the Williams-Beuren syndrome deletion. FASEB J. 14, 581–592 (2000).

22. Orgil, O. et al. A conserved domain in the Scc3 subunit of cohesin mediates the interaction with both Mcd1 and the cohesin loader complex. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005036 (2015).

23. Roig, M. B. et al. Structure and function of cohesin’s Scc3/SA regulatory subunit. FEBS Lett. 588, 3692–3702 (2014).

24. Forbes, S. A. et al. COSMIC: somatic cancer genetics at high-resolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D777–D783 (2017).

25. Beckouët, F. et al. Releasing activity disengages cohesin’s Smc3/Scc1 interface in a process blocked by acetylation. Mol. Cell 61, 563–574 (2016).

26. Gandhi, R., Gillespie, P. J. & Hirano, T. Human Wapl is a cohesin-binding protein that promotes sister-chromatid resolution in mitotic prophase. Curr. Biol. 16, 2406–2417 (2006).

27. Kueng, S. et al. Wapl controls the dynamic association of cohesin with chromatin. Cell 127, 955–967 (2006).

28. Liu, H., Rankin, S. & Yu, H. Phosphorylation-enabled binding of SGO1–PP2A to cohesin protects sororin and centromeric cohesion during mitosis. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 40–49 (2013).

29. Ouyang, Z. et al. Structure of the human cohesin inhibitor Wapl. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 11355–11360 (2013).

30. Krystkowiak, I. & Davey, N. E. SLiMSearch: a framework for proteome-wide discovery and annotation of functional modules in intrinsically disordered regions. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, W464–W469 (2017).

31. Lawrence, M. S et al. Discovery and saturation analysis of cancer genes across 21 tumour types. Nature 505, 495–501 (2014).

32. Flavahan, W. A. et al. Insulator dysfunction and oncogene activation in IDH mutant gliomas. Nature 529, 110–114 (2016).

33. Hnisz, D. et al. Activation of proto-oncogenes by disruption of chromosome neighborhoods. Science 351, 1454–1458 (2016).

34. Ouyang, Z., Zheng, G., Tomchick, D. R., Luo, X. & Yu, H. Structural basis and IP6 requirement for Pds5-dependent cohesin dynamics. Mol. Cell 62, 248–259 (2016).

35. Chan, K. L. et al. Cohesin’s DNA exit gate is distinct from its entrance gate and is regulated by acetylation. Cell 150, 961–974 (2012).

36. Buheitel, J. & Stemmann, O. Prophase pathway-dependent removal of cohesin from human chromosomes requires opening of the Smc3–Scc1 gate. EMBO J. 32, 666–676 (2013).

37. Eichinger, C. S., Kurze, A., Oliveira, R. A. & Nasmyth, K. Disengaging the Smc3/kleisin interface releases cohesin from Drosophila chromosomes during interphase and mitosis. EMBO J. 32, 656–665 (2013).

38. Sedeño Cacciatore, Á. & Rowland, B. D. Loop formation by SMC complexes: turning heads, bending elbows, and fixed anchors. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 55, 11–18 (2019).

39. Tang, Z. et al. CTCF-mediated human 3D genome architecture reveals chromatin topology for transcription. Cell 163, 1611–1627 (2015).

40. Nagy, G. et al. Motif oriented high-resolution analysis of ChIP-seq data reveals the topological order of CTCF and cohesin proteins on DNA. BMC Genomics 17, 637 (2016).

41. Kschonsak, M. et al. Structural basis for a safety-belt mechanism that anchors condensin to chromosomes. Cell 171, 588–600 (2017).

42. Ganji, M. et al. Real-time imaging of DNA loop extrusion by condensin. Science 360, 102–105 (2018).

43. Li, Y. et al. Structural basis for Scc3-dependent cohesin recruitment to chromatin. eLife 7, e38356 (2018).

44. Studier, F. W. Protein production by auto-induction in high density shaking cultures. Protein Expr. Purif. 41, 207–234 (2005).

45. Bowler, M. W. et al. MASSIF-1: a beamline dedicated to the fully automatic characterization and data collection from crystals of biological macromolecules. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 22, 1540–1547 (2015).

46. Svensson, O., Malbet-Monaco, S., Popov, A., Nurizzo, D. & Bowler, M. W. Fully automatic characterization and data collection from crystals of biological macromolecules. Acta Crystallogr. D 71, 1757–1767 (2015).

47. Svensson, O., Gilski, M., Nurizzo, D. & Bowler, M. W. Multi-position data collection and dynamic beam sizing: recent improvements to the automatic data-collection algorithms on MASSIF-1. Acta Crystallogr. D 74, 433–440 (2018).

48. Kabsch, W. Integration, scaling, space-group assignment and post-refinement. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 133–144 (2010).

49. Winn, M. D. et al. Overview of the CCP4 suite and current developments. Acta Crystallogr. D 67, 235–242 (2011).

50. McCoy, A. J. et al. Phaser crystallographic software. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 40, 658–674 (2007).

51. Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W. G. & Cowtan, K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 486–501 (2010).

52. Adams, P. D. et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 213–221 (2010).

53. Chen, V. B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 12–21 (2010).

54. Yin, M. et al. Molecular mechanism of directional CTCF recognition of a diverse range of genomic sites. Cell Res. 27, 1365–1377 (2017).

55. Rhodes, J. D. P. et al. Cohesin can remain associated with chromosomes during DNA replication. Cell Rep. 20, 2749–2755 (2017).

56. Servant, N. et al. HiC-Pro: an optimized and flexible pipeline for Hi-C data processing. Genome Biol. 16, 259 (2015).

57. Yang, T. et al. HiCRep: assessing the reproducibility of Hi-C data using a stratum-adjusted correlation coefficient. Genome Res. 27, 1939–1949 (2017).

58. Durand, N. C. et al. Juicer provides a one-click system for analyzing loop-resolution Hi-C experiments. Cell Syst. 3, 95–98 (2016).

59. Imakaev, M. et al. Iterative correction of Hi-C data reveals hallmarks of chromosome organization. Nat. Methods 9, 999–1003 (2012).

60. Lévy-Leduc, C., Delattre, M., Mary-Huard, T. & Robin, S. Two-dimensional segmentation for analyzing Hi-C data. Bioinformatics 30, i386–i392 (2014).

61. Crane, E. et al. Condensin-driven remodelling of X chromosome topology during dosage compensation. Nature 523, 240–244 (2015).

62. Flyamer, I. M. et al. Single-nucleus Hi-C reveals unique chromatin reorganization at oocyte-to-zygote transition. Nature 544, 110–114 (2017).

63. Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 17, 10 (2011).

64. Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357–359 (2012).

65. Ramírez, F., Dündar, F., Diehl, S., Grüning, B. A. & Manke, T. deepTools: a flexible platform for exploring deep-sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, W187–W191 (2014).

66. Feng, J., Liu, T., Qin, B., Zhang, Y. & Liu, X. S. Identifying ChIP–seq enrichment using MACS. Nat. Protoc. 7, 1728–1740 (2012).

67. Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010).

68. Amemiya, H.M., Kundaje, A., & Boyle, A.P. The ENCODE blacklist: identification of problematic regions of the genome. Sci Rep. 9, 9354 (2019).

69. Mathelier, A. et al. JASPAR 2014: an extensively expanded and updated open-access database of transcription factor binding profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D142–D147 (2014).

70. Grant, C. E., Bailey, T. L. & Noble, W. S. FIMO: scanning for occurrences of a given motif. Bioinformatics 27, 1017–1018 (2011).

71. Kim, D. et al. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 14, R36 (2013).

72. Anders, S., Pyl, P. T. & Huber, W. HTSeq—a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166–169 (2015).

73. Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).