scholarly journals DamIP: A novel method to identify DNA binding sites in vivo

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. nrs.08003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Xiao ◽  
Ramon Roman-Sanchez ◽  
David D. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Protein Function ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Estrogen Receptor Α ◽  
Cross Linking ◽  
Mutant Form ◽  
Dna Binding Sites

Identifying binding sites and target genes of transcription factors is a major biologic problem. The most commonly used current technique, chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), is dependent on a high quality antibody for each protein of interest, which is not always available, and is also cumbersome, involving sequential cross-linking and reversal of cross-linking. We have developed a novel strategy to study protein DNA binding sites in vivo, which we term DamIP. By tethering a mutant form of E. coli DNA adenine methyltransferase to the target protein, the fusion protein introduces N-6-adenosine methylation to sequences proximal to the protein binding sites. DNA fragments with this modification, which is absent in eukaryotes, are detected using an antibody directed against methylated adenosine. For an initial test of the method we used human estrogen receptor α (hERα), one of the best studied transcription factors. We found that expression of Dam-hERα fusion proteins in MCF-7 cells introduces adenosine methylation near a series of known direct hERα binding sites. Specific methylation tags are also found at indirect hERα binding sites, including both primary binding sites for the ER interactors AP-1 and SP1, and promoters that are activated by upstream ER bound enhancers. DamIP provides a new tool for the study of DNA interacting protein function in vivo.

scholarly journals The Phosphorylated Estrogen Receptor α (ER) Cistrome Identifies a Subset of Active Enhancers Enriched for Direct ER-DNA Binding and the Transcription Factor GRHL2

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle T. Helzer ◽  
Mary Szatkowski Ozers ◽  
Mark B. Meyer ◽  
Nancy A. Benkusky ◽  
Natalia Solodin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Transcription Factor ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Protein Interactions ◽  
Posttranslational Modifications ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Protein Function ◽  
Estrogen Receptor Α ◽  
Binding Activity

ABSTRACT Posttranslational modifications are key regulators of protein function, providing cues that can alter protein interactions and cellular location. Phosphorylation of estrogen receptor α (ER) at serine 118 (pS118-ER) occurs in response to multiple stimuli and is involved in modulating ER-dependent gene transcription. While the cistrome of ER is well established, surprisingly little is understood about how phosphorylation impacts ER-DNA binding activity. To define the pS118-ER cistrome, chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing was performed on pS118-ER and ER in MCF-7 cells treated with estrogen. pS118-ER occupied a subset of ER binding sites which were associated with an active enhancer mark, acetylated H3K27. Unlike ER, pS118-ER sites were enriched in GRHL2 DNA binding motifs, and estrogen treatment increased GRHL2 recruitment to sites occupied by pS118-ER. Additionally, pS118-ER occupancy sites showed greater enrichment of full-length estrogen response elements relative to ER sites. In an in vitro DNA binding array of genomic binding sites, pS118-ER was more commonly associated with direct DNA binding events than indirect binding events. These results indicate that phosphorylation of ER at serine 118 promotes direct DNA binding at active enhancers and is a distinguishing mark for associated transcription factor complexes on chromatin.

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 Binding of disparate transcriptional activators to nucleosomal DNA is inherently cooperative.

1995 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1405-1421 ◽  
Author(s):  
C C Adams ◽  
J L Workman
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Specific Binding ◽  
General Mechanism ◽  
Nf Kappa B ◽  
Nucleosomal Dna ◽  
Nucleosome Binding

To investigate mechanisms by which multiple transcription factors access complex promoters and enhancers within cellular chromatin, we have analyzed the binding of disparate factors to nucleosome cores. We used a purified in vitro system to analyze binding of four activator proteins, two GAL4 derivatives, USF, and NF-kappa B (KBF1), to reconstituted nucleosome cores containing different combinations of binding sites. Here we show that binding of any two or all three of these factors to nucleosomal DNA is inherently cooperative. Thus, the binuclear Zn clusters of GAL4, the helix-loop-helix/basic domains of USF, and the rel domain of NF-kappa B all participated in cooperative nucleosome binding, illustrating that this effect is not restricted to a particular DNA-binding domain. Simultaneous binding by two factors increased the affinity of individual factors for nucleosomal DNA by up to 2 orders of magnitude. Importantly, cooperative binding resulted in efficient nucleosome binding by factors (USF and NF-kappa B) which independently possess little nucleosome-binding ability. The participation of GAL4 derivatives in cooperative nucleosome binding required only DNA-binding and dimerization domains, indicating that disruption of histone-DNA contacts by factor binding was responsible for the increased affinity of additional factors. Cooperative nucleosome binding required sequence-specific binding of all transcription factors, appeared to have spatial constraints, and was independent of the orientation of the binding sites on the nucleosome. These results indicate that cooperative nucleosome binding is a general mechanism that may play a significant role in loading complex enhancer and promoter elements with multiple diverse factors in chromatin and contribute to the generation of threshold responses and transcriptional synergy by multiple activator sites in vivo.

scholarly journals Groups of p53 target genes involved in specific p53 downstream effects cluster into different classes of DNA binding sites

Oncogene ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (51) ◽  
pp. 7901-7911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Qian ◽  
Ting Wang ◽  
Louie Naumovski ◽  
Charles D Lopez ◽  
Rainer K Brachmann
Keyword(s):  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Downstream Effects ◽  
Dna Binding Sites ◽  
P53 Target Genes

scholarly journals An effective approach for identification of in vivo protein-DNA binding sites from paired-end ChIP-Seq data

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congmao Wang ◽  
Jie Xu ◽  
Dasheng Zhang ◽  
Zoe A Wilson ◽  
Dabing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Dna Binding Sites

scholarly journals The Proneural Proteins Atonal and Scute Regulate Neural Target Genes through Different E-Box Binding Sites

2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (21) ◽  
pp. 9517-9526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn M. Powell ◽  
Petra I. zur Lage ◽  
David R. A. Prentice ◽  
Biruntha Senthinathan ◽  
Andrew P. Jarman
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Tandem Repeats ◽  
Target Genes ◽  
Expression Patterns ◽  
Sense Organ ◽  
Ample Evidence ◽  
E Box ◽  
Bhlh Transcription Factors

ABSTRACT For a particular functional family of basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factors, there is ample evidence that different factors regulate different target genes but little idea of how these different target genes are distinguished. We investigated the contribution of DNA binding site differences to the specificities of two functionally related proneural bHLH transcription factors required for the genesis of Drosophila sense organ precursors (Atonal and Scute). We show that the proneural target gene, Bearded, is regulated by both Scute and Atonal via distinct E-box consensus binding sites. By comparing with other Ato-dependent enhancer sequences, we define an Ato-specific binding consensus that differs from the previously defined Scute-specific E-box consensus, thereby defining distinct EAto and ESc sites. These E-box variants are crucial for function. First, tandem repeats of 20-bp sequences containing EAto and ESc sites are sufficient to confer Atonal- and Scute-specific expression patterns, respectively, on a reporter gene in vivo. Second, interchanging EAto and ESc sites within enhancers almost abolishes enhancer activity. While the latter finding shows that enhancer context is also important in defining how proneural proteins interact with these sites, it is clear that differential utilization of DNA binding sites underlies proneural protein specificity.

scholarly journals Accurate and sensitive quantification of protein-DNA binding affinity

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (16) ◽  
pp. E3692-E3701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaitanya Rastogi ◽  
H. Tomas Rube ◽  
Judith F. Kribelbauer ◽  
Justin Crocker ◽  
Ryan E. Loker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Biophysical Model ◽  
Regulatory Sequences ◽  
Binding Modes ◽  
Perfect Agreement ◽  
Dna Binding Sites

Transcription factors (TFs) control gene expression by binding to genomic DNA in a sequence-specific manner. Mutations in TF binding sites are increasingly found to be associated with human disease, yet we currently lack robust methods to predict these sites. Here, we developed a versatile maximum likelihood framework named No Read Left Behind (NRLB) that infers a biophysical model of protein-DNA recognition across the full affinity range from a library of in vitro selected DNA binding sites. NRLB predicts human Max homodimer binding in near-perfect agreement with existing low-throughput measurements. It can capture the specificity of the p53 tetramer and distinguish multiple binding modes within a single sample. Additionally, we confirm that newly identified low-affinity enhancer binding sites are functional in vivo, and that their contribution to gene expression matches their predicted affinity. Our results establish a powerful paradigm for identifying protein binding sites and interpreting gene regulatory sequences in eukaryotic genomes.

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.

Selection of new HSF1 and HSF2 DNA-binding sites reveals difference in trimer cooperativity

1994 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 7592-7603
Author(s):  
P E Kroeger ◽  
R I Morimoto
Keyword(s):  
Transcription Factors ◽  
Heat Shock ◽  
Dna Binding ◽  
Binding Site ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Cellular Stress Response ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
Heat Shock Element ◽  
Cooperative Interactions ◽  
Dna Binding Sites

Multiple heat shock transcription factors (HSFs) have been discovered in several higher eukaryotes, raising questions about their respective functions in the cellular stress response. Previously, we had demonstrated that the two mouse HSFs (mHSF1 and mHSF2) interacted differently with the HSP70 heat shock element (HSE). To further address the issues of cooperativity and the interaction of multiple HSFs with the HSE, we selected new mHSF1 and mHSF2 DNA-binding sites through protein binding and PCR amplification. The selected sequences, isolated from a random population, were composed primarily of alternating inverted arrays of the pentameric consensus 5'-nGAAn-3', and the nucleotides flanking the core GAA motif were nonrandom. The average number of pentamers selected in each binding site was four to five for mHSF1 and two to three for mHSF2, suggesting differences in the potential for cooperative interactions between adjacent trimers. Our comparison of mHSF1 and mHSF2 binding to selected sequences further substantiated these differences in cooperativity as mHSF1, unlike mHSF2, was able to bind to extended HSE sequences, confirming previous observations on the HSP70 HSE. Certain selected sequences that exhibited preferential binding of mHSF1 or mHSF2 were mutagenized, and these studies demonstrated that the affinity of an HSE for a particular HSF and the extent of HSF interaction could be altered by single base substitutions. The domain of mHSF1 utilized for cooperative interactions was transferable, as chimeric mHSF1/mHSF2 proteins demonstrated that sequences within or adjacent to the mHSF1 DNA-binding domain were responsible. We have demonstrated that HSEs can have a greater affinity for a specific HSF and that in mice, mHSF1 utilizes a higher degree of cooperativity in DNA binding. This suggests two ways in which cells have developed to regulate the activity of closely related transcription factors: developing the ability to fully occupy the target binding site and alteration of the target site to favor interaction with a specific factor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document