The Binding of Ku Antigen to Homeodomain Proteins Promotes Their Phosphorylation by DNA-dependent Protein Kinase*

Caroline Schild-PoulterDagger §, Louise PopeDagger , Ward GiffinDagger , Jeff C. KochanDagger , Johnny K. NgseeDagger , Maya Traykova-AndonovaDagger , and Robert J. G. HachéDagger ||**

From the Departments of Dagger  Medicine,  Cellular and Molecular Medicine, and || Biochemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, The Loeb Health Research Institute at the Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4E9, Canada

Received for publication, January 26, 2001, and in revised form, February 12, 2001


    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

The Ku antigen (70- and 80-kDa subunits) is a regulatory subunit of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) that promotes the recruitment of the catalytic subunit of DNA-PK (DNA-PKcs) to DNA ends and to specific DNA sequences from which the kinase is activated. Ku and DNA-PKcs plays essential roles in double-stranded DNA break repair and V(D)J recombination and have been implicated in the regulation of specific gene transcription. In a yeast two-hybrid screen of a Jurkat T cell cDNA library, we have identified a specific interaction between the 70-kDa subunit of Ku heterodimer and the homeodomain of HOXC4, a homeodomain protein expressed in the hematopoietic system. Unexpectedly, a similar interaction with Ku was observed for several additional homeodomain proteins including octamer transcription factors 1 and 2 and Dlx2, suggesting that specific binding to Ku may be a property shared by many homeodomain proteins. Ku-homeodomain binding was mediated through the extreme C terminus of Ku70 and was abrogated by amino acid substitutions at Lys595/Lys596. Ku binding allowed the recruitment of the homeodomain to DNA ends and dramatically enhanced the phosphorylation of homeodomain-containing proteins by DNA-PK. These results suggest that Ku functions as a substrate docking protein for signaling by DNA-PK to homeodomain proteins from DNA ends.


    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

The Ku antigen (Ku70/Ku80)1 plays important roles in multiple nuclear processes including DNA repair, V(D)J recombination, telomere maintenance, and the regulation of specific gene transcription (1-6). Ku is a prodigious DNA-binding protein that recognizes DNA ends, structural transitions in DNA, and specific DNA sequences (4, 5). Ku-deficient mice are proportional dwarfs that are immunodeficient and sensitive to DNA-damaging agents (7-10). They also suffer from genomic instability, undergo chromosome rearrangements, and develop T cell lymphoma (7, 11-14), while fibroblasts from Ku-/- mice undergo premature senescence in culture (8, 15).

Ku is an integral regulatory component of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), and many of its actions in the nucleus, including DNA repair, recombination, and transcriptional regulation, occur in concert with the catalytic subunit of DNA-PK (DNA-PKcs) (4, 16). DNA-PKcs is one of a family of large phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related nuclear kinases that also includes the ataxia telangiectasia gene product, ATM, and the TRAPP/PAF400 transcriptional cofactor (4, 17, 18).

DNA-PKcs binds nonspecifically to DNA and is activated from the ends of double-stranded DNA (19, 20). The interaction of DNA-PKcs with Ku promotes recruitment of the kinase to DNA ends, thereby enhancing its activation (4, 21). Ku also promotes the recruitment and activation of DNA-PKcs from specific DNA sequences (3, 4, 22). However, even when associated with Ku, DNA-PKcs is an inefficient kinase with a km for peptide substrates in excess of 200 µM (21, 23, 24). DNA-PK also displays only a modest specificity for substrates in vitro, with a preference for (S/T)Q motifs. How these in vitro properties of DNA-PK translate to what is presumed to be the specific and targeted phosphorylation of substrates in vivo, remains to be elucidated.

At least two mechanisms offer the potential for increasing the specificity and efficiency of substrate phosphorylation by DNA-PK. First, since the affinity of Ku/DNA-PKcs for DNA ends and sequences is several orders of magnitude higher than the km of DNA-PK for substrates, the colocalization of substrates with DNA-PK in cis on DNA can dramatically enhance their phosphorylation (3, 21, 22, 25). In one specific example, the glucocorticoid receptor is efficiently phosphorylated by DNA-PK in the presence of DNA molecules containing binding sites for both the receptor and Ku/DNA-PKcs. However, when the receptor binding sites are transferred to a second, covalently closed circular DNA molecule to which Ku and DNA-PKcs are not attracted, glucocorticoid receptor phosphorylation is strongly decreased (3, 22). Phosphorylation was also abrogated by introduction of a point mutation that disrupts the binding of glucocorticoid receptor to DNA (22). The consequence of this DNA sequence-specific phosphorylation is the specific regulation of promoters containing sequences from which the DNA-PK is activated (22, 26).

A second possibility is that substrates may be recruited to Ku/DNA-PKcs through specific protein-protein interactions with components of the DNA-PK complex. Recently, several proteins have been identified as interacting with Ku antigen. For the most part the functional consequences of these interactions remain to be established. At least some of these Ku binding factors (e.g. hGCN5, the progesterone receptor, XRCC4, and c-Abl) are phosphorylated by DNA-PK in vitro (27-32). However, the contribution of Ku binding to their phosphorylation has not been evaluated.

In the present study, we have identified a specific protein-protein interaction between the C terminus of the Ku antigen and the homeodomains of a series of homeodomain proteins that occurs in solution and leads to the recruitment of homeodomain proteins to DNA ends. This interaction contributed to a greater than 50-fold enhancement of the phosphorylation of homeodomain-containing proteins by DNA-PK. These results demonstrate that Ku serves a molecular scaffold for the recruitment of homeodomain proteins to DNA ends for phosphorylation by DNA-PK and suggests that DNA-PK-mediated phosphorylation regulates the function of at least some homeodomain proteins in response to DNA damage.

    EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

DNA Constructs-- Full-length human Ku70 cDNA and Ku80 cDNA were cloned in vector pAS1-Tet (CLONTECH). The two-hybrid Ku70 mutant clones Ku70mt595-600-pAS1 and Ku70mtK595,6N-pAS1 were obtained by cloning the mutated Ku70 cDNA generated by PCR into pAS1. The Jurkat T-cell cDNA library in pGAD-10 was purchased from CLONTECH. Plasmid HOXC4-pACT2 was generated by cloning HOXC4 cDNA (nt 600-1421) isolated from a lambda gt11 cDNA library (see below) into pACT2. The pGEX2T-HOXC4 HD construct was obtained by inserting the HOXC4 cDNA fragment 1048-1290 (aa 148-227) isolated from clone 18-27 into pGEX2T. Oct-2-pACT2 was constructed by inserting full-length human Oct-2 cDNA in pACT2. To obtain pGEX3X-Oct-1POU, a PCR fragment containing the Oct-1 POU domain (nt 860-1398, aa 268-446) was inserted in pGEX-3X. This construct was used to generate the GST-Oct-1 POU-specific domain mutant (POUsp, aa 268-369) by removing the POU homeodomain by EcoRI digestion and religating the vector. pGEX2T-HOXC4 HD-Oct-1 POUsp was generated by cloning the Oct-1 POU-specific domain (aa 268-369) in the SmaI site of plasmid PGEX2T-HOXC4 HD. pGSTOct-2 POU used in bandshift has been described (33).

Yeast Two-hybrid Screening-- Plasmids were transformed as described (34) by the lithium acetate method in yeast strain Y190 (MATa, ura3-52, his3-200, lys2-801, ade2-101, trp1-901, leu2-3, 112, gal4d, gal8d, cyh2, LYS2::GAL1UAS, -HIS3TATA-HIS3, URA3::GAL1UAS-GAL1TATA-lacZ) and selected on SD medium lacking Trp, Leu, and His and supplemented with 20 mM 3-aminotriazol (Sigma) to limit spurious activity from the His promoter. After 10-12 days of incubation at 30 °C, transformants were tested for beta -galactosidase expression by filter lift assay. About 2.5 × 106 transformants were screened. Positives were restreaked on plates lacking Trp, Leu, and His and retested for beta -galactosidase activity. pGAD-10 prey plasmids from positive colonies were then recovered and transformed in Escherichia coli DH5alpha ' by electroporation, selected on ampicillin plates, and amplified. Purified plasmid DNA was then retransformed in yeast in parallel with Ku70-pAS1 or control Rab3A plasmid (34).

Cloning of HOXC4 Full-length cDNA-- Human HOXC4 cDNA was obtained by screening a lambda gt11 T cell/Jurkat cDNA library (CLONTECH) with a HOXC4 oligonucleotide spanning nt 871-900. All procedures for screening, isolation, and preparation of phage DNA were performed as described in the CLONTECH protocol. After three rounds of screening, positive phages were grown, and the inserts were analyzed by PCR using primers designed to amplify the full-length cDNA (nt 600-1421) to determine full-length clones. Positive clones were then amplified by PCR using the same primers, cloned into vector pACT2, and sequenced entirely using a LICOR automated sequencer.

Protein Expression and in Vitro Translations-- Glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins were expressed according to standard protocols (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). For EMSA purposes, GST-Oct2 POU was eluted from the GST beads. Ku was expressed from recombinant baculovirus-infected insect cells and purified as described (26). All in vitro translated proteins were obtained by using the TnT rabbit reticulocyte lysate kit (Promega) according to the manufacturer's conditions. In vitro translated deletion mutants were obtained by restricting the plasmids by the appropriate restriction enzyme, or mutant cDNAs were produced by PCR with oligonucleotides containing a T7 promoter fused to the 5'-end of the forward primer. For in vitro translation of cDNAs cloned in pGAD-10 or pACTII, inserts were amplified by PCR using an oligonucleotide complementary to aa 116-124 of the Gal4 activation domain fused to the T7 promoter and an oligonucleotide complementary to the 3'-end of the multiple cloning site of both vectors. To generate C-terminal Ku70 truncation or point mutants from the Ku70-pACT2 plasmid, the T7-Met Gal4 AD primer described above was used as forward primer in combination with Ku70-specific primers.

Co-immunoprecipitations and Binding Assays-- Ku used in binding assays was immunoprecipitated from Jurkat T cell whole cell extracts prepared essentially as described (35). Immunoprecipitation of Ku was performed in WCE buffer (150 mM NaCl, 50 mM Hepes (pH 7.4), 1 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, and 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) with 0.5 µg/ml of Ku70 antibody (clone N3H10; NeoMarkers) followed by incubation with protein A-Sepharose. To release Ku80 from the complex, beads were incubated in 100 µl of BC0 buffer (20 mM Tris (pH 8.0), 0.5 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 µg/ml leupeptin) containing M KCl and 1% sodium deoxycholate for 20 min and washed extensively in binding buffer (25 mM Hepes (pH 7.9), 60 mM KCl, 0.5 mM EDTA, 0.2 mM dithiothreitol, 0.2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 12% glycerol). Binding of 35S-labeled in vitro translated proteins to Ku dimer or Ku70 immobilized on beads was performed in binding buffer for 2 h at 4 °C. Complexes were washed three times in WCE buffer with 0.1% Nonidet P-40, resuspended in SDS sample buffer, and resolved on SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.

For co-immunoprecipitation experiments, 35S-labeled in vitro translated proteins (typically 0.2-2 µl of TnT reactions) were added to 100 µg of Jurkat whole cell extract diluted to 60 mM NaCl, and 0.1% Nonidet P-40 and extracts were incubated at 4 °C for 2 h before the addition of the Ku70 antibody. Samples were then processed as above. To test Ku binding to the homeodomain, 0.5-1 µg of GST-Oct-1 POU or GST-HOXC4 HD (as indicated in the figure legends) was mixed with 35S-labeled in vitro translated Ku in binding buffer and processed as above.

HeLa cell nuclear extracts were prepared essentially as described (36). For co-immunoprecipitation, about 1 mg of nuclear extract was diluted down to 100 mM KCl with binding buffer and incubated with either Oct-1 antibody (YL15; Upstate Biotechnology, Inc., Lake Placid, NY) or nonspecific antibody (anti-glucocorticoid receptor (BuGR2)). Proteins were transferred on membrane and hybridized successively with antibodies to Ku70 (N3H10; NeoMarkers), Ku80 (clone 111; NeoMarkers) and Oct-1 (C-21; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA).

EMSA-- EMSA was performed as described (26) using 32P-labeled oligonucleotides corresponding to the H2B Oct-2 binding site (5'-AGCTTGCTTATGCAAATAAGGTGGATC-3') and a nonspecific oligonucleotide (39-mer NS (26)). The preparation of the recombinant Ku and GST-Oct2 POU peptide employed in these assays was as previously described (26, 33). Antibodies 111 (NeoMarkers) and YL123 (Upstate Biotechnology) were added at the beginning of the incubations. DNA-protein complexes were resolved on 4% polyacrylamide gels in 0.5× Tris borate buffer.

DNA-PK Phosphorylation Assay-- Phosphorylation of recombinant proteins by purified DNA-PK (Promega) was performed essentially as previously described (26). 0.05-2 µg of protein substrate was incubated for 20 min at 30 °C in kinase buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 100 mM KCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM Na2EGTA) in the presence of 20 ng of HaeIII-restricted calf thymus DNA, 5 µCi of [gamma -32P]ATP (6000 Ci/mmol; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), and 8 units of DNA-PK (Promega).

    RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Ku Antigen Interacts Physically with Several Homeodomain Proteins through Determinants within the 70-kDa Subunit-- To identify proteins that interact with the Ku70, we screened a Jurkat T cell cDNA library using full-length Ku70 fused to the Gal4 DNA-binding domain as the bait for interacting peptides. Expression of the GalDBDKu70 construct alone or together with Gal4 activation domain was able to activate transcription sufficiently to induce detectable beta -galactosidase activity upon overnight incubation (Fig. 1B). This low level of transcriptional activity was consistent with previous reports of a weak acidic activation domain within the N terminus of Ku70 and was abrogated by deletion of the first 57 amino acids.2 However, this low level of activation did not prevent the detection of interactions with peptides expressed from the Jurkat cDNA library that led to a strong induction of beta -galactosidase activity through a specific interaction with Ku70.


View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   Identification of HOXC4 as a Ku70-binding protein by yeast two-hybrid screening. A, schematic presentation of HOXC4 and the HOXC4 peptide (18-27) identified in the two-hybrid screen. B, yeast two-hybrid assay testing the interaction of clone 18-27 containing a partial cDNA of HOXC4 and full-length HOXC4 (fl) with Ku70, Ku80, and Rab3A. beta -Galactosidase expression was tested by filter lift assay, and blue colonies were scored as follows: +++, over 90% blue by 3 h; +, 50% blue by 6 h; (+), light blue by 24 h; -, white after 24 h.

Approximately 300 strongly positive clones were isolated in the original library screen. 80% of these induced beta -galactosidase activity in the absence of the Ku70 bait, while a further 15% were completely negative. DNA sequence analysis of one of the remaining positive clones identified it as encoding a 94-amino acid peptide encompassing the homeodomain of HOXC4 (Fig. 1A). Interestingly, this HOXC4 peptide also displayed a significant ability to activate beta -galactosidase expression in the absence of Ku70, with blue color being detectable after 6-7 h (Fig. 1B). Thus, this clone was almost missed in the secondary screen. Nevertheless, co-expression of this HOXC4 peptide with GalDBDKu70 led to a strongly enhanced activity, with the blue color detectable within 3 h, suggesting the existence of a significant interaction between the two proteins. By contrast, the HOXC4 peptide did not interact with the Rab GTPase expressed from the same vector as a GalDBD fusion protein.

Expression of full-length HOXC4 with the Gal activation domain did not induce appreciable beta -galactosidase expression, indicating that the nonspecific effect of the homeodomain was suppressed within the full-length protein (Fig. 1B). Nonetheless, HOXC4GalAct interacted strongly with GalDBDKu70 to induce beta -galactosidase activity. This result confirmed the observation of a specific interaction between Ku70 and HOXC4 in yeast. Further, the interaction was specific for Ku70 alone, since no interaction was observed with the Rab or with the Ku80 subunit in the same assay.

To begin to probe the interaction between Ku70 and the homeodomain of HOXC4 in greater detail, we examined the specific binding between Ku70 and the homeodomain of HOXC4 in an immunoprecipitation binding assay (Fig. 2A). For these assays, Ku immunoprecipitates were prepared from whole cell extracts from Jurkat T cells with a Ku70-specific antibody, N3H10 (lanes 1 and 2). Ku80 was subsequently stripped from Ku70 monomer by extraction of the immunoprecipitate with a buffer including 1% deoxycholate and 1 M KCl (lane 3). The HOXC4 homeodomain peptide from clone 18-27 produced by in vitro translation interacted efficiently with the immunoprecipitated Ku70 monomer (lane 5) and also with the Ku heterodimer (lane 6), illustrating that Ku70 binding was not impeded by Ku dimerization. By contrast, the in vitro translated HOXC4 peptide did not interact with precipitates prepared from Jurkat cell extracts by incubation with protein A-Sepharose alone (lane 7).


View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Ku interacts with homeodomain proteins. A (left), Western blot analysis showing the preparation of Ku70 and Ku70/80 dimer used in binding assays. Lane 1, 25 µg of Jurkat T cell whole cell extract. Lane 2, the Ku dimer immunoprecipitated from Jurkat T cell extracts with Ku70 antibody N3H10. Lane 3, removal of Ku80 subunit following KCl/deoxycholate treatment of the immunoprecipitate. A (right), 35S-labeled in vitro translated HOXC4 homeodomain (clone 18-27) was tested for binding to immunoprecipitated Ku70 (lanes 5), the immunoprecipitated Ku dimer (lane 6), or protein-Sepharose beads alone (lane 7) and compared with 10% of input proteins (lane 4). B, 35S-labeled in vitro translated proteins HoxD4 (lanes 1-3), Dlx2 (lanes 4-6), Oct-2 (lanes 7-9), Oct-60 (lanes 10-12), and CREB (lanes 13-15) were tested for binding to protein A-Sepharose-bound Ku70 (Ku70) or protein-Sepharose alone (-). I, 10% of input proteins. C, 35S-labeled in vitro translated proteins (HoxD4, Dlx2, Oct-2, Oct-60, and CREB) were incubated in whole cell extract prepared from Jurkat T cells and immunoprecipitated with Ku70 N3H10 antibody (Ku) or with protein A-Sepharose alone (-). Lanes I show 5% of input proteins.

Homeodomain proteins comprise a large superfamily of transcription factors that regulate multiple aspects of development and are also key regulators of cell homeostasis (37, 38). The 60-amino acid homeodomain DNA binding motif exhibits an extremely high degree of conservation and serves as a platform for many protein-protein interactions that are crucial to homeodomain protein function (39, 40). Since the Ku70-HOXC4 interaction mapped to the HOXC4 homeodomain, we sought to determine whether Ku70 could interact with other homeodomain proteins.

Strikingly, immunoprecipitated Ku70 was bound specifically by all four of the additional homeodomain proteins tested (Fig. 2B): HOXD4 (41), a close orthologue to HOXC4 (lanes 1-3); zebrafish Dlx2 (42), a more distant family member (lanes 3-6); the POU homeodomain factor Oct-2 (43) (lanes 7-9); and the divergent homeodomain factor Oct-60 (44) (lanes 10-12). By contrast, CREB (45), a basic region/leucine zipper (bZip) transcription factor, did not interact with Ku70 (lanes 13-15). These homeodomain proteins interacted similarly with the Ku heterodimer, while CREB and a regulatory subunit of protein phosphatase 2A (PP2AA) did not interact with Ku dimer (data not shown). Last, the stringency of the washes employed in preparing the Ku70 for binding, which was sufficient to strip away Ku80 from Ku70, suggested that the interaction between Ku and the homeodomain proteins was likely to be direct.

To test the specificity of binding of Ku to these homeodomain proteins under conditions that more closely resembled the cellular milieu, we mixed the in vitro translated homeodomain proteins with the Jurkat whole cell extract prior to immunoprecipitation with the Ku70 antibody (Fig. 2C). Under these more stringent conditions, Oct-60 binding to Ku was no longer detected, demonstrating that at least some degree of specificity existed for Ku binding within the homeodomain protein family (lanes 10-12). However, HOXD4, Dlx2, and Oct-2 binding remained (lanes 1-9). Further, Ku-homeodomain binding occurred independently from the binding of either factor to DNA, since ethidium bromide treatments sufficient to disrupt protein-DNA interactions had no discernible effect on the Ku-homeodomain interaction (data not shown).

Last, to confirm directly that Ku could interact with homeodomain proteins in vivo, we tested whether Ku could be co-immunoprecipitated from HeLa cell extracts with the endogenous octamer transcription factor 1 (Oct-1) (Fig. 3). Oct-1 is a ubiquitous POU homeodomain protein that is highly homologous to Oct-2 within the POU-specific domain and homeodomain but unrelated to Oct-2 outside these domains (46). Endogenous Ku heterodimer was efficiently co-immunoprecipitated with Oct-1 (lane 2) but was not observed in immunoprecipitates prepared with an unrelated antibody (lane 3). Thus, these results indicate that several homeodomain proteins may be expected to interact with the 70-kDa subunit of the Ku antigen heterodimer in vivo.


View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   Co-immunoprecipitation of Ku and Oct-1 in HeLa cells. Proteins from HeLa nuclear extracts were incubated with an Oct-1 antibody (lane 2) or a nonspecific antibody (lane 3), precipitated with protein A-Sepharose and resolved on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel. Proteins were transferred on membrane and hybridized with a Ku70 antibody (top). The blot was successively stripped and rehybridized with antibodies to Ku80 (middle) and Oct-1 (bottom). Immunoprecipitates are compared with Ku and Oct-1 found in 15 µg of HeLa nuclear extract (lane 1).

To begin to examine the requirements within Oct-1 for Ku binding, we tested the ability of in vitro translated C-terminally truncated Oct-1 peptides (Fig. 4A) to bind the immunoprecipitated Ku heterodimer. Full-length in vitro translated Oct-1 and an N-terminal Oct-1 peptide truncated to the edge of the homeodomain bound specifically to immunoprecipitated Ku (Fig. 4B, lanes 1-6). However, truncation of the Oct-1 by a further 28 amino acids into the homeodomain abrogated binding (lanes 7-9), demonstrating the requirement of the homeodomain for Ku binding by Oct-1.


View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   The integrity of the homeodomain is required for Ku interaction. A, schematic representation of human Oct-1 indicating the position of the restriction sites used to prepare the Oct-1 homeodomain deletion mutants. B, binding of full-length 35S-labeled in vitro translated Oct-1 (lanes 1-3) or Oct-1 deletion mutants (lanes 4-9) to immunoprecipitated Ku dimer from Jurkat T cell extracts (Ku) or to protein A-Sepharose (-) is compared with 10% of input (I).

Ku-Homeodomain Binding Is Abrogated by Site-directed Mutations in the Extreme C Terminus of Ku70-- To delimit the determinants of Ku required for homeodomain binding, we examined the binding of in vitro translated Ku to a GST-HOXC4 homeodomain fusion protein in pull-down assays (Fig. 5A). Full-length Ku70, but not Ku80, bound efficiently to the immobilized GST-HOXC4 homeodomain (lanes 2 and 5), while neither peptide bound to GST alone (lanes 3 and 6). Truncation of only 26 amino acids from the C terminus of Ku70 eliminated HOXC4 binding (lanes 7-9 and 13-15). By contrast, binding was unaffected by truncation of Ku70 from the N terminus as far as amino acid 538 (lanes 10-12 and 16-21).


View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   Ku70 determinants for homeodomain interaction. A, 35S-labeled in vitro translated Ku70 (lanes 1-3), Ku80 (lanes 4-6), and deletion mutants of Ku70 (lanes 7-21) were tested for binding to GST-HOXC4 homeodomain (GST-HD) or to GST alone (GST) by a pull-down assay. 10% of input was loaded on the gel to compare the levels of binding. The arrows indicate the position of the complete in vitro translated proteins. B, alignment of the C-terminal amino acid sequence of Ku70 from several species. Amino acids displayed in capital letters are conserved with respect to the human sequence. Amino acids in boldface letters outline the highly conserved motif targeted for mutation. C, 35S-labeled in vitro translated Ku70 C-terminal peptides with C-terminal deletions of six amino acids (301-603; lanes 1-3) or 15 amino acids (301-594; lanes 4-6) were tested for binding to GST-HOXC4 HD as described for A. D, point mutations in the C-terminal domain of Ku70 abrogate homeodomain binding. GST pull-down assay using GST-HOXC4 HD was performed to test the binding of 35S-labeled in vitro translated full-length wild-type Ku70 (lanes 1-3) compared with Ku70 containing mutations of amino acids 595-600 (KKQELL to NNMAHH; lanes 4-6). Binding of the C-terminal Ku70 peptide (301-609, lanes 7-9) was compared with Ku70 peptides bearing a double point mutation of aa 595 and 596 (KK to NN, lanes 10-12) or a single point mutation of aa 598 (E to Q, lanes 13-15). In vitro translated products bound to GST-HOXC4 HD (GST-HD) or to GST alone (GST) were compared with 10% of input proteins (Input). Proteins were run on a 10% polyacrylamide gel.

Alignment of the Ku70 C-terminal peptide sequence from several species revealed a six-amino acid motif, KKQELL, that was highly conserved between vertebrate Ku70s (Fig. 5B). Further, although deletion of Ku70 C-terminal peptide to amino acid 603 had no effect on binding to GST-HOXC4, truncation to amino acid 594 eliminated Ku70 binding (Fig. 5C). Replacement of the KKQELL motif with NNMAHH abrogated the binding of full-length Ku70 to GST-HOXC4 (Fig. 5D, lanes 1-6). Substitution of Lys595 and Lys596 with Asn also eliminated binding of the C terminus of Ku70 to GST-HOXC4 (lanes 7-12), whereas E598Q had no effect on binding (lanes 13-15).

To confirm that Lys595 and Lys596 were required for the binding of Ku70 to homeodomain proteins, we compared the interaction of WTKu70 and Ku70595N/596N with full-length HOXC4 and Oct-2 in a yeast two-hybrid assay (Fig. 6). Both full-length Oct-2 and HOXC4 when expressed as fusion proteins with the Gal4 activation domain interacted strongly with the Gal4DBDKu70 construct to induce beta -galactosidase activity, while Gal4DBDRab was again negative. In contrast to WTKu70, however, both the mt595-600 and the K595N/K596N substituted Ku70 Gal-DBD construct failed to interact with either HOXC4 or Oct-2. Thus, the interaction of Ku70 with homeodomain proteins is mediated through a conserved element and can be disrupted by a substitution of only two amino acids.


View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6.   A two-amino acid substitution in Ku70 C-terminal domain disrupts Ku-homeodomain interaction in yeast. Rab3A, Ku70, Ku70mt595-600, and Ku70mtK595,596N expressed in yeast as Gal4 DBD fusion proteins (bait) were tested for binding to the Gal4 activation domain alone (pACTII) or expressed as a fusion protein with full-length Oct-2 or HOXC4 (prey). The strength of the interaction between two proteins, which is reflected by the beta -galactosidase activity, was analyzed by filter lift assay and was scored as follows: +++, over 90% colonies blue by 3 h; -, all white by 8 h. The expression of the proteins was verified by Western blot (data not shown).

Ku Binding Promotes the Phosphorylation of Homeodomain Proteins by DNA-PK from DNA Ends-- To begin to examine the influence of DNA binding on the interaction between the homeodomain proteins, we compared the association of recombinant Ku with a GST-Oct-2 peptide containing the complete DNA binding domain of Oct-2 in EMSA (Fig. 7). GST-Oct-2 bound specifically to the octamer motif of the histone H2B gene but did not associate with a nonspecific oligonucleotide (lanes 2 and 10). By contrast, recombinant Ku bound to both oligonucleotides in the presence of 1 µg of calf thymus competitor DNA but did not bind when the competitor DNA was increased to 2.5 µg (lanes 3, 8, 11, and 16-18). Co-incubation of GST-Oct-2 with Ku resulted in the appearance of an additional complex on the nonspecific DNA that was specifically competed by an Oct-2 antibody (lanes 4-7), demonstrating that Oct-2 could associate with DNA end-bound Ku. Similarly, on the octamer motif, a Ku-Oct-2 complex was detected under conditions where Ku also bound to DNA ends (lanes 12-15). However, at 2.5 µg of competitor DNA, the Oct-2-octamer motif complex remained, but no additional Ku-containing complex was detected (lanes 16-18), indicating that Ku did not associate with the DNA-bound Oct-2 fusion protein under these conditions. Last, the inclusion of 10 mM Mg2+, which has previously been shown to induce changes in the interaction between Ku and DNA (26), had no further influence the effect of DNA on the Ku-Oct-2 interaction (lanes 5, 13, and 17). These results were consistent with our subsequent observation that the presence of Ku did not significantly affect the activation of transcription by Oct-1 or Oct-2 from octamer motifs in transient transfection experiments (data not shown).


View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7.   Ku-homeodomain complexes form on DNA ends. The formation of Ku-homeodomain complexes was analyzed by EMSA using a nonspecific oligonucleotide (lanes 1-8) or an oligonucleotide containing an octamer motif (lanes 9-18). The 32P-labeled oligonucleotides were incubated with purified recombinant Ku (about 10 ng), GST-Oct-2 POU (about 50 ng), or with GST alone (about 50 ng) as indicated at the top, in the presence of 1 or 2.5 µg of competitor calf thymus DNA (CT) as indicated at the bottom. The specificity of the complexes was assessed by including an Oct-2 antibody (Oct-2Ab) or a nonspecific antibody (NS Ab). 10 mM of MgCl2 was included as indicated. The arrows indicate the composition of the complexes.

These results suggested that the basis for the functional consequence of Ku-homeodomain binding was likely to lie in the recruitment of homeodomain proteins to DNA ends. One possibility was that Ku-homeodomain binding could promote the phosphorylation of homeodomain proteins by DNA-PK. Full-length Oct-1 and Oct-2 are phosphorylated by DNA-PK in vitro, and Oct-1 contains at least two phosphorylation sites for DNA-PK, one of which is in the POU-specific domain (data not shown). To assess whether the interaction of Oct-1 to Ku bound to DNA ends could promote its phosphorylation by DNA-PK, we evaluated the contribution of the Oct-1 homeodomain for phosphorylation within the POU-specific domain. This was first tested by comparing the phosphorylation of GST-Oct-1 POU wild-type protein and a mutant lacking the POU homeodomain that can no longer interact with Ku (Fig. 8A). At a 1:1 molar ratio, inclusion of the homeodomain increased phosphorylation within the POU-specific domain by 55-fold (Fig. 8B, lanes 1 and 2). Increasing the concentration of the POU-specific domain peptide resulted in a proportional increase in phosphorylation (lanes 3-7). However, even at a 40-fold higher concentration, phosphorylation of this peptide remained 2.3-fold lower than obtained when the homeodomain was included.


View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 8.   Phosphorylation within the POU-specific domain of Oct-1 is strongly enhanced by interaction of Ku with the homeodomain. A, representation of the GST fusion constructs used as substrate for DNA-PK in the phosphorylation assays. B, DNA-PK-mediated phosphorylation of a GST fusion protein containing the Oct-1 POU-specific domain and homeodomain (Oct-1 POUsp + HD, lanes 1) is compared with phosphorylation of increasing amounts of a GST fusion protein with the Oct-1 POU-specific domain alone (Oct-1 POUsp, lanes 2-7). After completion of the reactions, the products were separated on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel and stained with Coomassie Blue (top panel). Then the gels were dried, and 32P-incorporation was quantified by a Typhoon 8600 (Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale, CA) (bottom panel). Protein concentration was confirmed by quantification of the Coomassie-stained gel on a Bio-Rad Gel Doc system. The arrowhead shows the position of the full-length GST Oct-1POUsp + HD peptide. C, DNA-PK phosphorylation of GST fusion proteins containing the homeodomain of HOXC4 (HOXC4 HD, lane 1), Oct-1 POUsp (lanes 2-4), a HOXC4 HD-Oct-1 POUsp fusion peptide (lanes 5 and 6), and Oct-1POUsp + HD (lanes 7 and 8). Lanes 1, 2, 6, and 8 contain similar amounts of proteins. Resolution and quantification were as in A.

To provide additional evidence that this difference in phosphorylation was due to recruitment of the POU-specific domain of Oct-1 to Ku by the homeodomain, we repeated the in vitro phosphorylation experiment with chimeric proteins in which we substituted the homeodomain of HOXC4 into Oct-1 (Fig. 8A). The HOXC4 homeodomain peptide was not appreciably phosphorylated by DNA-PK (Fig. 8C, lane 1), while the POU-specific peptide of Oct-1 was weakly phosphorylated (lanes 2-4). However, fusion of the homeodomain of HOXC4 to the N terminus of the POU-specific domain of Oct-1 resulted in a strong induction of phosphorylation within the POU-specific domain to a level equivalent to that observed with the WT Oct-1 peptide (lanes 5-8). Thus, Ku-homeodomain binding appears to strongly potentiate protein phosphorylation by DNA-PK.

    DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

In this study, we provide insight into two aspects of the mechanism of action of DNA-dependent protein kinase. First, our results demonstrate that the Ku antigen may serve as a scaffold or adapter protein for the attraction of DNA-PK substrates. Second, our results suggest that Ku binding may be a property of many homeodomain proteins. Together these results highlight the potential for the regulation of homeodomain protein function by DNA-PK in vivo.

We have determined in immunoprecipitation and two-hybrid experiments that several homeodomain proteins interact through their homeodomains to Ku antigen through a motif contained within the extreme C terminus of Ku70. Binding was unaffected by dimerization of Ku70 with Ku80 and the binding of Ku to DNA ends but appeared to be exclusive of the sequence-specific DNA binding of the homeodomain protein.

Docking proteins that function as scaffolds to promote the assembly of protein complexes for phosphorylation are a common feature of phosphorylation signaling cascades. For example, SH2 and SH3 domains and specific adapter proteins determine the phosphorylation of downstream effector proteins by signal-dependent tyrosine kinases (47). Similar types of interactions have also been shown to be important for signaling through Ser/Thr phosphorylation (48). Our results indicate that substrate phosphorylation by DNA-PK may also be regulated through related protein-protein interactions employing Ku as the attractant or adapter protein for DNA-PK substrates.

The affinity and specificity of DNA-PK for its substrates described to date is modest. While a large number of proteins have been shown to have the potential to be phosphorylated by DNA-PK in vitro when incubated at high concentration with the kinase (21), the search for in vivo phosphorylation targets for DNA-PK continues unsatisfied. Previously it has been demonstrated that colocalization of DNA-PK and potential substrates to the same double-stranded DNA molecule as a result of high affinity DNA binding can dramatically enhance their phosphorylation (3, 22, 25). We have recently extended these results to demonstrate that DNA-PK can also efficiently phosphorylate substrates from single-stranded DNA structures when these proteins are co-localized to the same DNA molecules.3 Our results here demonstrate that specific binding to Ku can also dramatically promote substrate phosphorylation by DNA-PK. This mechanism of promoting substrate phosphorylation alleviates the requirement for adjacent substrate DNA-binding sites and broadens the potential for DNA-PK phosphorylation to non-DNA-binding proteins.

The homeodomain is a 60-amino acid helix-turn-helix DNA binding domain whose primary sequence and secondary structure is highly conserved within the extended homeodomain gene family (37, 39, 40). In addition to participating in DNA binding, homeodomains have also been reported to participate extensively in protein-protein interactions with transcriptional modifiers and other factors (49-51). However, there is enough variation within the homeodomain to allow for discrimination in protein-protein interactions between even closely related family members. For example, although the homeodomains of Oct-1 and Oct-2 differ by only seven amino acids, including four conservative substitutions, only Oct-1 is targeted by the herpes simplex virus protein 16 and host cell factor (52). Nonetheless, there are also at least two precedents for the broadly based specific interactions between nuclear factors and the homeodomain. It has been reported that the transcriptional repressor N-CoR can interact with a diverse series of homeodomain proteins (53, 54). Second, a motif within the glucocorticoid hormone receptor has also been reported to interact with a series of homeodomain proteins in transfected cells, and ectopic expression of this motif in one-cell stage embryos dramatically affected embryonic development (55).

On the basis of the results reported here, it would be premature to extrapolate Ku70 binding and DNA-PK phosphorylation throughout the homeodomain protein family, particularly since Oct-60 binding was lost under stringent conditions. However, our results have demonstrated specific interactions between full-length HOXC4, Oct-1, Oct-2, and either the Ku heterodimer or the Ku70 monomer in vivo and have shown that the homeodomain is sufficient for this interaction in vitro. The apparent conservation of the ability to interact with Ku that was observed between representatives of the HOX, Dlx, and POU subfamilies of homeodomain proteins highlights the need for a more extensive investigation of Ku-homeodomain protein interactions.

How might Ku binding and DNA-PK phosphorylation affect homeodomain protein function? Homeodomain proteins are transcriptional regulators that direct specific gene expression programs (38, 40, 56, 57), whereas DNA-PK is activated from DNA ends in response to DNA damage (4). DNA damage induces multiple changes in cellular regulation including many changes in specific gene transcription. These changes contribute to arresting cell growth until the DNA damage is repaired or to directing irretrievably damaged cells into apoptosis (58, 59). Thus, our results suggest that one way in which DNA-PK may act from DNA ends subsequent to DNA damage is to modify the transcriptional regulatory potential of at least some homeodomain proteins.

Continuing experiments suggest that this may be the case at least for Oct-1. Oct-1 is a ubiquitous homeodomain protein that is required for the expression of histone H2B and other constitutively expressed genes. Recent reports have indicated that Oct-1 protein levels and binding activity are modified following DNA damage (60, 61).2 In normal cells, Oct-1 is dispersed within the nucleus and is also localized to the nuclear periphery (62-64). We have determined that following exposure of cells to ionizing radiation, Oct-1 redistributes to the cytoplasm over a period of hours. Intriguingly, this redistribution was not observed in cells lacking Ku70.2 Whether this alteration in the response of Oct-1 to radiation is sensitive to the Asn595/Asn596 substitutions that abrogate Oct-1-Ku binding and whether it is mediated through phosphorylation of Oct-1 by DNA-PK remains to be determined. It will be interesting to determine whether the relocalization of Oct-1 to the cytoplasm occurs upon DNA damage in the presence of the K595N/K596N-substituted Ku70 and whether the relocalization reflects Oct-1 phosphorylation by DNA-PK at one of the sites that we have identified.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Marc Ekker, Marie-Andrée Akimenko, Marc Mumby, Paolo Sassone-Corsi, and Madeleine Lemieux for materials used in this work.

    FOOTNOTES

* This work was supported by an operating grant from the Arthritis Society of Canada (to R. J. G. H.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

§ Recipient of a Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Arthritis Society of Canada.

** An investigator of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. To whom correspondence should be addressed: The Loeb Health Research Institute at the Ottawa Hospital, 725 Parkdale Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 4K9. Tel.: 613-798-5555 (ext. 16283); Fax: 613-761-5036; E-mail: rhache@lri.ca.

Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 20, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M100768200

2 C. Schild-Poulter and R. J. G. Haché, unpublished observation.

3 S. Soubeyrand, H. Torrance, W. Giffin, W. Gong, C. Schild-Poulter, and R. J. G. Haché, submitted for publication.

    ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations used are: Ku70, Ku antigen 70-kDa subunit; Ku80, Ku antigen 80-kDa subunit; DNA-PK, DNA-dependent protein kinase, DNA-PKcs; DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit, Oct-1 and -2, octamer transcription factor 1 and 2, respectively; DBD, DNA binding domain. GST, glutathione S-transferase; HD, homeodomain; EMSA, electromobility shift assay; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; aa, amino acid; nt, nucleotide; CREB, cAMP-response element-binding protein.

    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

1. Critchlow, S. E., and Jackson, S. P. (1998) Trends Biochem. Sci. 23, 394-398[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Haber, J. E. (1999) Cell 97, 829-832[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Giffin, W., Torrance, H., Rodda, D. J., Prefontaine, G. G., Pope, L., and Haché, R. J. (1996) Nature 380, 265-268[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Smith, G. C., and Jackson, S. P. (1999) Genes Dev. 13, 916-934[Free Full Text]
5. Tuteja, R., and Tuteja, N. (2000) Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 35, 1-33[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Weaver, D. T. (1998) Curr. Biol. 8, R492-R494[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7. Gu, Y., Seidl, K. J., Rathbun, G. A., Zhu, C., Manis, J. P., van der Stoep, N., Davidson, L., Cheng, H. L., Sekiguchi, J. M., Frank, K., Stanhope-Baker, P., Schlissel, M. S., Roth, D. B., and Alt, F. W. (1997) Immunity 7, 653-665[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Nussenzweig, A., Chen, C., da Costa Soares, V., Sanchez, M., Sokol, K., Nussenzweig, M. C., and Li, G. C. (1996) Nature 382, 551-555[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Ouyang, H., Nussenzweig, A., Kurimasa, A., Soares, V. C., Li, X., Cordon-Cardo, C., Li, W., Cheong, N., Nussenzweig, M., Iliakis, G., Chen, D. J., and Li, G. C. (1997) J. Exp. Med. 186, 921-929[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Zhu, C., Bogue, M. A., Lim, D. S., Hasty, P., and Roth, D. B. (1996) Cell 86, 379-389[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Difilippantonio, M. J., Zhu, J., Chen, H. T., Meffre, E., Nussenzweig, M. C., Max, E. E., Ried, T., and Nussenzweig, A. (2000) Nature 404, 510-514[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12. Ferguson, D. O., Sekiguchi, J. M., Chang, S., Frank, K. M., Gao, Y., DePinho, R. A., and Alt, F. W. (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 97, 6630-6633[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Hsu, H. L., Gilley, D., Galande, S. A., Hande, M. P., Allen, B., Kim, S. H., Li, G. C., Campisi, J., Kohwi-Shigematsu, T., and Chen, D. J. (2000) Genes Dev. 14, 2807-2812[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Li, G. C., Ouyang, H., Li, X., Nagasawa, H., Little, J. B., Chen, D. J., Ling, C. C., Fuks, Z., and Cordon-Cardo, C. (1998) Mol. Cell 2, 1-8[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Vogel, H., Lim, D. S., Karsenty, G., Finegold, M., and Hasty, P. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 10770-10775[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Jin, S., Inoue, S., and Weaver, D. T. (1997) Cancer Surv. 29, 221-261[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Hartley, K. O., Gell, D., Smith, G. C., Zhang, H., Divecha, N., Connelly, M. A., Admon, A., Lees-Miller, S. P., Anderson, C. W., and Jackson, S. P. (1995) Cell 82, 849-856[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Zakian, V. A. (1995) Cell 82, 685-687[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19. Hammarsten, O., and Chu, G. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 525-530[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Yaneva, M., Kowalewski, T., and Lieber, M. R. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 5098-5112[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Lees-Miller, S. P. (1996) Biochem. Cell Biol. 74, 503-512[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22. Giffin, W., Kwast-Welfeld, J., Rodda, D. J., Prefontaine, G. G., Traykova-Andonova, M., Zhang, Y., Weigel, N. L., Lefebvre, Y. A., and Haché, R. J. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 5647-5658[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Anderson, C. W., and Lees-Miller, S. P. (1992) Crit. Rev. Eukaryot. Gene Exp. 2, 283-314[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24. Anderson, C. W., Connelly, M. A., Lees-Miller, S. P., Lintott, L. G., Zhang, H., Sipley, J. A., Sakagushi, K., and Appella, P. (1995) in Methods in Protein Structure and Analysis (Atassi, M. Z. , and Appella, E., eds) , pp. 395-406, Plenum Press, New York
25. Jackson, S. P., MacDonald, J. J., Lees-Miller, S., and Tjian, R. (1990) Cell 63, 155-165[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Giffin, W., Gong, W., Schild-Poulter, C., and Haché, R. J. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 4065-4078[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Barlev, N. A., Poltoratsky, V., Owen-Hughes, T., Ying, C., Liu, L., Workman, J. L., and Berger, S. L. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 1349-1358[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Leber, R., Wise, T. W., Mizuta, R., and Meek, K. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 1794-1801[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Kharbanda, S., Pandey, P., Jin, S., Inoue, S., Bharti, A., Yuan, Z. M., Weichselbaum, R., Weaver, D., and Kufe, D. (1997) Nature 386, 732-735[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
30. Jin, S., Kharbanda, S., Mayer, B., Kufe, D., and Weaver, D. T. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 24763-24766[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Modesti, M., Hesse, J. E., and Gellert, M. (1999) EMBO J. 18, 2008-2018[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Sartorius, C. A., Takimoto, G. S., Richer, J. K., Tung, L., and Horwitz, K. B. (2000) J. Mol. Endocrinol. 24, 165-182[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Préfontaine, G. G., Lemieux, M. E., Giffin, W., Schild-Poulter, C., Pope, L., LaCasse, E., Walker, P., and Haché, R. J. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 3416-3430[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Martincic, I., Peralta, M. E., and Ngsee, J. K. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 26991-26998[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Romero, F., Dargemont, C., Pozo, F., Reeves, W. H., Camonis, J., Gisselbrecht, S., and Fischer, S. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 37-44[Abstract]
36. Andrews, N. C., and Faller, D. V. (1991) Nucleic Acids Res. 19, 2499[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
37. Kornberg, T. B. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 26813-26816[Free Full Text]
38. Manak, J. R., and Scott, M. P. (1994) Dev. Suppl. 1994, 61-71
39. Gehring, W. J., Qian, Y. Q., Billeter, M., Furukubo-Tokunaga, K., Schier, A. F., Resendez-Perez, D., Affolter, M., Otting, G., and Wuthrich, K. (1994) Cell 78, 211-223[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
40. Gehring, W. J., Affolter, M., and Burglin, T. (1994) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 63, 487-526[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
41. Phelan, M. L., and Featherstone, M. S. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 8635-8643[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42. Akimenko, M. A., Ekker, M., Wegner, J., Lin, W., and Westerfield, M. (1994) J. Neurosci. 14, 3475-3486[Abstract]
43. Clerc, R. G., Corcoran, L. M., LeBowitz, J. H., Baltimore, D., and Sharp, P. A. (1988) Genes Dev. 2, 1570-1581[Abstract]
44. Hinkley, C. S., Martin, J. F., Leibham, D., and Perry, M. (1992) Mol. Cell. Biol. 12, 638-649[Abstract]
45. Hoeffler, J. P., Meyer, T. E., Yun, Y., Jameson, J. L., and Habener, J. F. (1988) Science 242, 1430-1433[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
46. Tanaka, M., and Herr, W. (1990) Cell 60, 375-386[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
47. Pawson, T. (1995) Nature 373, 573-580[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
48. Faux, M. C., and Scott, J. D. (1996) Cell 85, 9-12[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
49. Chariot, A., Gielen, J., Merville, M. P., and Bours, V. (1999) Biochem. Pharmacol. 58, 1851-1857[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
50. Scott, M. P. (1999) Nature 397, 649-651[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
51. Vershon, A. K. (1996) Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 7, 392-396[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
52. Lai, J. S., Cleary, M. A., and Herr, W. (1992) Genes Dev. 6, 2058-2065[Abstract]
53. Laherty, C. D., Billin, A. N., Lavinsky, R. M., Yochum, G. S., Bush, A. C., Sun, J. M., Mullen, T. M., Davie, J. R., Rose, D. W., Glass, C. K., Rosenfeld, M. G., Ayer, D. E., and Eisenman, R. N. (1998) Mol. Cell 2, 33-42[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
54. Xu, L., Lavinsky, R. M., Dasen, J. S., Flynn, S. E., McInerney, E. M., Mullen, T. M., Heinzel, T., Szeto, D., Korzus, E., Kurokawa, R., Aggarwal, A. K., Rose, D. W., Glass, C. K., and Rosenfeld, M. G. (1998) Nature 395, 301-306[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
55. Wang, J. M., Prefontaine, G. G., Lemieux, M. E., Pope, L., Akimenko, M. A., and Haché, R. J. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 7106-7122[Abstract/Free Full Text]
56. Edelman, G. M., and Jones, F. S. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 20683-20686[Free Full Text]
57. Ryan, A. K., and Rosenfeld, M. G. (1997) Genes Dev. 11, 1207-1225[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
58. Lowndes, N. F., and Murguia, J. R. (2000) Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 10, 17-25[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
59. Weinert, T. (1998) Cell 94, 555-558[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
60. Meighan-Mantha, R. L., Riegel, A. T., Suy, S., Harris, V., Wang, F. H., Lozano, C., Whiteside, T. L., and Kasid, U. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biochem. 199, 209-215[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
61. Zhao, H., Jin, S., Fan, F., Fan, W., Tong, T., and Zhan, Q. (2000) Cancer Res. 60, 6276-6280[Abstract/Free Full Text]
62. Grande, M. A., van der Kraan, I., de Jong, L., and van Driel, R. (1997) J. Cell Sci. 110, 1781-1791[Abstract/Free Full Text]
63. Imai, S., Nishibayashi, S., Takao, K., Tomifuji, M., Fujino, T., Hasegawa, M., and Takano, T. (1997) Mol. Biol. Cell 8, 2407-2419[Abstract/Free Full Text]
64. Kim, M. K., Lesoon-Wood, L. A., Weintraub, B. D., and Chung, J. H. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 4366-4377[Abstract]


Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.