Gene regulation by Sp1 and Sp3

2004 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 460-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Li ◽  
Shihua He ◽  
Jian-Min Sun ◽  
James R Davie
Keyword(s):  
Gene Regulation ◽  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Mammalian Cells ◽  
Cellular Localization ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
In Vivo Studies ◽  
Binding Domains

The Sp family of transcription factors is united by a particular combination of three conserved Cys2His2 zinc fingers that form the sequence-specific DNA-binding domain. Within the Sp family of transcription factors, Sp1 and Sp3 are ubiquitously expressed in mammalian cells. They can bind and act through GC boxes to regulate gene expression of multiple target genes. Although Sp1 and Sp3 have similar structures and high homology in their DNA binding domains, in vitro and in vivo studies reveal that these transcription factors have strikingly different functions. Sp1 and Sp3 are able to enhance or repress promoter activity. Regulation of the transcriptional activity of Sp1 and Sp3 occurs largely at the post-translational level. In this review, we focus on the roles of Sp1 and Sp3 in the regulation of gene expression.Key words: Sp1, Sp3, gene regulation, sub-cellular localization.

Enhanced xenobiotic transporter expression in normal teleost hepatocytes: response to environmental and chemotherapeutic toxins

2001 ◽  
Vol 204 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-227
Author(s):  
J.A. Albertus ◽  
R.O. Laine
Keyword(s):  
Mammalian Cells ◽  
Cellular Localization ◽  
Fundulus Heteroclitus ◽  
Environmental Pollutants ◽  
Human Tumor ◽  
Aquatic Organisms ◽  
In Vivo Studies ◽  
Multixenobiotic Resistance

Many aquatic organisms are resistant to environmental pollutants, probably because their inherent multi-drug-resistant protein extrusion pump (pgp) can be co-opted to handle man-made pollutants. This mechanism of multixenobiotic resistance is similar to the mechanism of multidrug resistance exhibited in chemotherapy-resistant human tumor cells. In the present study, a variety of techniques were used to characterize this toxin defense system in killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus) hepatocytes. The cellular localization and activity of the putative drug efflux system were evaluated. In addition, in vitro and in vivo studies were used to examine the range of expression of this putative drug transporter in the presence of environmental and chemotherapeutic toxins. The broad range of pgp expression generally observed in transformed mammalian cells was found in normal cells of our teleost model. Our findings suggest that the expression of the pgp gene in the killifish could be an excellent indicator of toxin levels or stressors in the environment.

scholarly journals Differential Contribution of N- and C-Terminal Regions of HIF1α and HIF2α to Their Target Gene Selectivity

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (24) ◽  
pp. 9401
Author(s):  
Antonio Bouthelier ◽  
Florinda Meléndez-Rodríguez ◽  
Andrés A. Urrutia ◽  
Julián Aragonés
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Target Gene ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Transactivation Domain ◽  
Transactivation Domains ◽  
Relative Contribution

Cellular response to hypoxia is controlled by the hypoxia-inducible transcription factors HIF1α and HIF2α. Some genes are preferentially induced by HIF1α or HIF2α, as has been explored in some cell models and for particular sets of genes. Here we have extended this analysis to other HIF-dependent genes using in vitro WT8 renal carcinoma cells and in vivo conditional Vhl-deficient mice models. Moreover, we generated chimeric HIF1/2 transcription factors to study the contribution of the HIF1α and HIF2α DNA binding/heterodimerization and transactivation domains to HIF target specificity. We show that the induction of HIF1α-dependent genes in WT8 cells, such as CAIX (CAR9) and BNIP3, requires both halves of HIF, whereas the HIF2α transactivation domain is more relevant for the induction of HIF2 target genes like the amino acid carrier SLC7A5. The HIF selectivity for some genes in WT8 cells is conserved in Vhl-deficient lung and liver tissue, whereas other genes like Glut1 (Slc2a1) behave distinctly in these tissues. Therefore the relative contribution of the DNA binding/heterodimerization and transactivation domains for HIF target selectivity can be different when comparing HIF1α or HIF2α isoforms, and that HIF target gene specificity is conserved in human and mouse cells for some of the genes analyzed.

scholarly journals Genome reading by the NF-κB transcription factors

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (19) ◽  
pp. 9967-9989 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Carmen Mulero ◽  
Vivien Ya-Fan Wang ◽  
Tom Huxford ◽  
Gourisankar Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Dna Sequences ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Target Selection ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
Response Elements ◽  
Target Binding

Abstract The NF-κB family of dimeric transcription factors regulates transcription by selectively binding to DNA response elements present within promoters or enhancers of target genes. The DNA response elements, collectively known as κB sites or κB DNA, share the consensus 5′-GGGRNNNYCC-3′ (where R, Y and N are purine, pyrimidine and any nucleotide base, respectively). In addition, several DNA sequences that deviate significantly from the consensus have been shown to accommodate binding by NF-κB dimers. X-ray crystal structures of NF-κB in complex with diverse κB DNA have helped elucidate the chemical principles that underlie target selection in vitro. However, NF-κB dimers encounter additional impediments to selective DNA binding in vivo. Work carried out during the past decades has identified some of the barriers to sequence selective DNA target binding within the context of chromatin and suggests possible mechanisms by which NF-κB might overcome these obstacles. In this review, we first highlight structural features of NF-κB:DNA complexes and how distinctive features of NF-κB proteins and DNA sequences contribute to specific complex formation. We then discuss how native NF-κB dimers identify DNA binding targets in the nucleus with support from additional factors and how post-translational modifications enable NF-κB to selectively bind κB sites in vivo.

Cooperative interactions between paired domain and homeodomain

Development ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 122 (9) ◽  
pp. 2639-2650 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Jun ◽  
C. Desplan
Keyword(s):  
Dna Binding ◽  
Dna Sequences ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Cooperative Interaction ◽  
Paired Domain ◽  
Cooperative Interactions ◽  
Dna Binding Domains ◽  
Binding Domains

The Pax proteins are a family of transcriptional regulators involved in many developmental processes in all higher eukaryotes. They are characterized by the presence of a paired domain (PD), a bipartite DNA binding domain composed of two helix-turn-helix (HTH) motifs, the PAI and RED domains. The PD is also often associated with a homeodomain (HD) which is itself able to form homo- and hetero-dimers on DNA. Many of these proteins therefore contain three HTH motifs each able to recognize DNA. However, all PDs recognize highly related DNA sequences, and most HDs also recognize almost identical sites. We show here that different Pax proteins use multiple combinations of their HTHs to recognize several types of target sites. For instance, the Drosophila Paired protein can bind, in vitro, exclusively through its PAI domain, or through a dimer of its HD, or through cooperative interaction between PAI domain and HD. However, prd function in vivo requires the synergistic action of both the PAI domain and the HD. Pax proteins with only a PD appear to require both PAI and RED domains, while a Pax-6 isoform and a new Pax protein, Lune, may rely on the RED domain and HD. We propose a model by which Pax proteins recognize different target genes in vivo through various combinations of their DNA binding domains, thus expanding their recognition repertoire.

scholarly journals Structure-based analyses of Salmonella RcsB variants unravel new features of the Rcs regulon

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juanjo Huesa ◽  
Joaquín Giner-Lamia ◽  
M Graciela Pucciarelli ◽  
Francisco Paredes-Martínez ◽  
Francisco García-del Portillo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Binding ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Structural Data ◽  
Enteric Bacteria ◽  
Target Sequence ◽  
Active Conformation ◽  
Functional Studies ◽  
Binding Domains

Abstract RcsB is a transcriptional regulator that controls expression of numerous genes in enteric bacteria. RcsB accomplishes this role alone or in combination with auxiliary transcriptional factors independently or dependently of phosphorylation. To understand the mechanisms by which RcsB regulates such large number of genes, we performed structural studies as well as in vitro and in vivo functional studies with different RcsB variants. Our structural data reveal that RcsB binds promoters of target genes such as rprA and flhDC in a dimeric active conformation. In this state, the RcsB homodimer docks the DNA-binding domains into the major groove of the DNA, facilitating an initial weak read-out of the target sequence. Interestingly, comparative structural analyses also show that DNA binding may stabilize an active conformation in unphosphorylated RcsB. Furthermore, RNAseq performed in strains expressing wild-type or several RcsB variants provided new insights into the contribution of phosphorylation to gene regulation and assign a potential role of RcsB in controlling iron metabolism. Finally, we delimited the RcsB box for homodimeric active binding to DNA as the sequence TN(G/A)GAN4TC(T/C)NA. This RcsB box was found in promoter, intergenic and intragenic regions, facilitating both increased or decreased gene transcription.

scholarly journals Protein Interactions of the MLL PHD Fingers Modulate MLL Target Gene Regulation in Human Cells

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 3589-3597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keri Fair ◽  
Melanie Anderson ◽  
Elena Bulanova ◽  
Huaifeng Mi ◽  
Maximilian Tropschug ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Regulation ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Mammalian Cells ◽  
Target Gene ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Leukemia Cells ◽  
Altered Expression ◽  
Amino Acid Sequence Conservation

ABSTRACT The PHD fingers of the human MLL and Drosophila trx proteins have strong amino acid sequence conservation but their function is unknown. We have determined that these fingers mediate homodimerization and binding of MLL to Cyp33, a nuclear cyclophilin. These two proteins interact in vitro and in vivo in mammalian cells and colocalize at specific nuclear subdomains. Overexpression of the Cyp33 protein in leukemia cells results in altered expression ofHOX genes that are targets for regulation by MLL. These alterations are suppressed by cyclosporine and are not observed in cell lines that express a mutant MLL protein without PHD fingers. These results suggest that binding of Cyp33 to MLL modulates its effects on the expression of target genes.

scholarly journals Binding of the Vestigial co-factor switches the DNA-target selectivity of the Scalloped selector protein

Development ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 128 (17) ◽  
pp. 3295-3305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Halder ◽  
Sean B. Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Dna Binding ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Binding Specificity ◽  
General Mechanism ◽  
Binding Selectivity ◽  
Binding Domains ◽  
Dna Binding Specificity ◽  
Selector Protein

The formation and identity of organs and appendages are regulated by specific selector genes that encode transcription factors that regulate potentially large sets of target genes. The DNA-binding domains of selector proteins often exhibit relatively low DNA-binding specificity in vitro. It is not understood how the target selectivity of most selector proteins is determined in vivo. The Scalloped selector protein controls wing development in Drosophila by regulating the expression of numerous target genes and forming a complex with the Vestigial protein. We show that binding of Vestigial to Scalloped switches the DNA-binding selectivity of Scalloped. Two conserved domains of the Vestigial protein that are not required for Scalloped binding in solution are required for the formation of the heterotetrameric Vestigial-Scalloped complex on DNA. We suggest that Vestigial affects the conformation of Scalloped to create a wing cell-specific DNA-binding selectivity. The modification of selector protein DNA-binding specificity by co-factors appears to be a general mechanism for regulating their target selectivity in vivo.

scholarly journals Cysteine 64 of Ref-1 Is Not Essential for Redox Regulation of AP-1 DNA Binding

2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 4257-4266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared M. Ordway ◽  
Derek Eberhart ◽  
Tom Curran
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Redox Regulation ◽  
Binding Activity ◽  
Regulation Of Transcription ◽  
Binding Domains ◽  
Dna Binding Activity ◽  
Reducing Activity

ABSTRACT Ref-1 participates in DNA repair as well as in redox regulation of transcription factor function. The redox function of Ref-1 involves reduction of oxidized cysteine residues within the DNA binding domains of several transcription factors, including Fos and Jun. Reduction of these residues is required for DNA binding, providing a redox-dependent mechanism for regulation of target gene expression. Previous in vitro studies implicated cysteine 65 of human Ref-1 (cysteine 64 of mouse Ref-1) as the redox catalytic site. We analyzed the in vivo role of cysteine 64 in redox regulation of AP-1 activity by introducing a cysteine-to-alanine point mutation into the endogenous mouse Ref-1 gene (ref-1 C64A). Unlike Ref-1 null mice, which die very early in embryonic development, homozygous ref-1 C64A mice are viable, they survive to normal life expectancy, and they display no overt abnormal phenotype. Although Ref-1 provides the major AP-1-reducing activity in murine cells, ref-1 C64A cells retain normal levels of endogenous AP-1 DNA binding activity in vivo as well as normal Fos- and Jun-reducing activity in vitro. These results demonstrate that Ref-1 cysteine 64/65 is not required for redox regulation of AP-1 DNA binding in vivo, and they challenge previous hypotheses regarding the mechanism by which Ref-1 regulates the redox-dependent activity of specific transcription factors.

Regulation of segmentation and segmental identity by Drosophila homeoproteins: the role of DNA binding in functional activity and specificity

Development ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 124 (22) ◽  
pp. 4425-4433 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.D. Biggin ◽  
W. McGinnis
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Current Model ◽  
Binding Studies ◽  
Binding Model ◽  
Selective Binding ◽  
Recognition Sites

Recent advances have shed new light on how the Q50 homeoproteins act in Drosophila. These transcription factors have remarkably similar and promiscuous DNA-binding specificities in vitro; yet they each specify distinct developmental fates in vivo. One current model suggests that, because the Q50 homeoproteins have distinct biological functions, they must each regulate different target genes. According to this ‘co-selective binding’ model, significant binding of Q50 homeoproteins to functional DNA elements in vivo would be dependent upon cooperative interactions with other transcription factors (cofactors). If the Q50 homeoproteins each interact differently with cofactors, they could be selectively targeted to unique, limited subsets of their in vitro recognition sites and thus control different genes. However, a variety of experiments question this model. Molecular and genetic experiments suggest that the Q50 homeoproteins do not regulate very distinct sets of genes. Instead, they mostly control the expression of a large number of shared targets. The distinct morphogenic properties of the various Q50 homeoproteins may principally result from the different manners in which they either activate or repress these common targets. Further, in vivo binding studies indicate that at least two Q50 homeoproteins have very broad and similar DNA-binding specificities in embryos, a result that is inconsistent with the ‘co-selective binding’ model. Based on these and other data, we suggest that Q50 homeoproteins bind many of their recognition sites without the aid of cofactors. In this ‘widespread binding’ model, cofactors act mainly by helping to distinguish the way in which homeoproteins regulate targets to which they are already bound.

scholarly journals An eh1-Like Motif in Odd-skipped Mediates Recruitment of Groucho and Repression In Vivo

2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (24) ◽  
pp. 10711-10720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Goldstein ◽  
Orna Cook ◽  
Tama Dinur ◽  
Anne Pisanté ◽  
Umesh Chintaman Karandikar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Zinc Finger Protein ◽  
Mutational Analysis ◽  
Dna Binding Domains ◽  
Binding Domains ◽  
Physical Interactions ◽  
Target Promoters

ABSTRACT Drosophila Groucho, like its vertebrate Transducin-like Enhancer-of-split homologues, is a corepressor that silences gene expression in numerous developmental settings. Groucho itself does not bind DNA but is recruited to target promoters by associating with a large number of DNA-binding negative transcriptional regulators. These repressors tether Groucho via short conserved polypeptide sequences, of which two have been defined. First, WRPW and related tetrapeptide motifs have been well characterized in several repressors. Second, a motif termed Engrailed homology 1 (eh1) has been found predominantly in homeodomain-containing transcription factors. Here we describe a yeast two-hybrid screen that uncovered physical interactions between Groucho and transcription factors, containing eh1 motifs, with different types of DNA-binding domains. We show that one of these, the zinc finger protein Odd-skipped, requires its eh1-like sequence for repressing specific target genes in segmentation. Comparison between diverse eh1 motifs reveals a bias for the phosphoacceptor amino acids serine and threonine at a fixed position, and a mutational analysis of Odd-skipped indicates that these residues are critical for efficient interactions with Groucho and for repression in vivo. Our data suggest that phosphorylation of these phosphomeric residues, if it occurs, will down-regulate Groucho binding and therefore repression, providing a mechanism for posttranslational control of Groucho-mediated repression.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document