From the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana 71130
Received for publication, November 18, 2002, and in revised form, December 19, 2002
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The activation domains (ADs) of transcription
activators recruit a multiplicity of enzymatic activities to gene
promoters. The mechanisms by which such recruitment takes place are not
well understood. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation, we demonstrate dynamic alterations in the abundance of histones H2A, H3, and H4 at
promoters of genes regulated by the HSF and Gal4 activators of
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Transcriptional activation of
these genes, particularly those regulated by HSF, is accompanied by a
significant reduction in both acetylated and unacetylated histones at
promoters and may involve the transient displacement of histone octamers. To gain insight into the function of ADs, we conducted a
genetic screen to identify polypeptides that could substitute for the
340-residue C-terminal activator of HSF and rescue the temperature sensitivity caused by its deletion. We found that the
ts Despite major advances in characterizing components of the
eukaryotic transcription machinery, the mechanisms by which these components are recruited to gene promoters are poorly understood. Activation domains (ADs)1 of
gene-specific transcription factors are critical for these recruitment
steps. ADs are believed to work by directly contacting coactivators,
components of the mediator complex and basal transcriptional machinery,
and polymerase II holoenzyme itself (reviewed in Refs. 1-6)).
These interactions have been previously shown to occur in
vitro or in whole cell lysates. In certain cases, the biochemical data have been buttressed by mutational analyses showing a correlation between the change in the affinity of these contacts and
transcriptional activity in vivo (7-12). Recent studies
indicate that recruitment of coactivators is often sequential and
gene-specific (13-15). Despite these advances, there is little clarity
of how multiple factors are recruited to a given promoter or what
determines their order of recruitment.
An important quality of ADs is that they can substitute for one another
not only between transcription factors of a given species, but also
between transcription factors from such diverse eukaryotes as human,
fungi, and plants. This suggests some uniformity in the mechanism(s) by
which ADs work and implies that ADs share sequence or structural
homology. In fact, although most ADs fall into one of three categories,
acidic, glutamine-rich, or proline-rich, there is no consensus sequence
or clear homology, even within a particular class. Moreover, ADs often
lack any discernable secondary structure (1, 16-18). The conservation
of mechanism in the absence of any sequence or structural homology is
paradoxical and reflects a gap in our understanding of transcriptional
regulatory mechanisms.
Recruitment of ATP-dependent nucleosome remodeling and
histone modifying enzymes to gene promoters is especially important since chromatin remodeling is a fundamental prerequisite to
transcriptional activation. It has been shown that yeast Swi/Snf and
histone acetyltransferase-containing complexes interact in
vitro with a variety of transcription activators, including Gal4,
Gcn4, Swi5, and Gal4-VP16 (7-10). Recruitment of the SAGA complex by
ADs of Gal4 and Gal4-VP16 has also been demonstrated in vivo
(19, 20). Recent investigations employing photo-cross-linking label
transfer methodology identified the Tra1 subunit of SAGA and three
subunits of the Swi/Snf complex (Snf5, Swi1, and Swi2/Snf2) as
primary targets of a number of ADs (11, 12). In these studies a strong
correlation was observed between the level of transcription and
strength of AD-target interactions for mutated ADs. Yet the
multiplicity of targets capable of interacting with the same AD
suggests the existence of a hierarchy of recruitment steps in
vivo, and how such a hierarchy might be established is unknown.
Heat shock factor (HSF) is a key transcriptional activator of
stress-responsive genes in yeast. It is also responsible for establishing the constitutive DNase I hypersensitive chromatin structures within the promoter regions of at least two genes, HSP82 and HSC82 (21, 22). As such, it is likely
that HSF recruits nucleosome-remodeling and histone-modifying
activities to target promoters using its ADs. Yeast HSF is comprised of
a highly conserved core, consisting of DNA-binding and trimerization
domains, and two activation domains, one located at the N terminus and
the other at the C terminus (Fig. 1). The
N-terminal activator (NTA) has been shown to be critical for the
transient heat shock response of the cell, while the C-terminal
activator (CTA) is important for sustained stimuli, and its deletion
results in lethality at elevated temperatures (23, 24). As HSF has been
shown to bypass the requirement for a number of key PIC components,
including TFIIA, TAF17, Srb4, Srb6, Kin28, and the C-terminal domain of the large subunit of polymerase II (25-30), the targets of its ADs may
extend beyond the typical repertoire of most yeast activators (27).
phenotype of HSF(1-493) could be
complemented by peptides as short as 11 amino acids. Such peptides are
enriched in acidic and hydrophobic residues, and exhibit both
trans-activating and chromatin-modifying activities when
fused to the Gal4 DNA-binding domain. We also demonstrate that a
previously identified 14-amino acid histone H3-binding module of human
CTF1/NF1, which is similar to synthetic ADs, can substitute for the HSF
C-terminal activator in conferring temperature resistance and can
mediate the modification of promoter chromatin structure. Possible
mechanisms of AD function, including one involving direct interactions
with histones, are discussed.
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
View larger version (13K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Map of yeast HSF functional domains
(compilation from Refs. 23, 24, 65-68). CE2, implicated in
repression of CTA.
In this work, we use chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) to provide
evidence for dynamic alterations of chromatin structure at heat shock
promoters upon induction. Similar changes in histone content are
observed at two promoters regulated by the Gal4 activator, GAL1 and GAL7. For both sets of genes, chromatin
remodeling depends on the presence of an AD in the corresponding
gene-specific activator. Using a genetic screen, we found that the
temperature sensitivity associated with deletion of the HSF CTA can be
alleviated by substituting short synthetic peptides enriched in
hydrophobic and acidic residues for the large, native C-terminal
domain. These peptides also function as ADs when tethered to the
heterologous Gal4 DNA-binding domain. At least some of them can trigger
histone modifications at Gal4-regulated promoters. The nature of these
peptides suggests that their interacting targets likely are hydrophobic
and basic, pointing toward histones as possible targets. Consistent
with this notion, we found that the ts
phenotype resulting from a CTA deletion can be rescued by fusing short
histone-binding modules, derived from either human CTF1/NF1 or the
mouse liver-specific activator HNF3, to HSF(1-493).
![]() |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Strains--
Two yeast strains were used in the experiments
described here: PS128 (MATa ade2-1 trp1-1 can1-100
leu2,3-112 his3-11 ura3
hsf12::LEU2 carrying HSF1 on a
YCp50-based plasmid) (23); and PJ69-4A (MATa
trp1-901 leu2-3,112 ura3-52 his3-200 gal4
gal80
LYS2::GAL1-HIS3 GAL2-ADE2
met2::GAL7-lacZ) (31).
Cultivation Conditions-- Saccharromyces cerevisiae strains were cultivated at 30 °C to early log phase (1-2 × 107 cells/ml) in rich YPD broth supplemented with 0.04 mg/ml adenine. Heat shock induction was achieved by transferring 110 ml of cultures to a vigorously shaking 39 °C waterbath; once the temperature had risen to 39 °C, incubation was allowed to continue for an additional 15 min or 4 h. For GAL gene induction, cells were cultivated in rich medium as above, except containing 2% galactose rather than 2% glucose.
ChIP-- In vivo cross-linking/chromatin immunoprecipitation was conducted essentially as described (32), except that PCR amplification was for 23 cycles, not 25. Our procedure differs from other yeast histone ChIP protocols (14, 38) in that the wash steps following incubation with antibodies included (i) 1% Triton rather than 0.1% SDS and (ii) either 500 mM NaCl or 250 mM LiCl instead of 150 mM NaCl. Linearity of the PCR was confirmed through use of 3-fold serial dilutions of template DNA. Polyclonal anti-histone H4 (tetra-acetylated isoform), anti-histone H3 (unacetylated isoform), anti-histone H3 (Lys-14 mono-acetylated isoform), and anti-histone H2A (residues 88-97) antibodies were obtained from Upstate Biotechnology (Lake Placid, NY). Promoter-specific primers used in this study were as follows: HSP12, ATACGCAAGCATTAATACAACCCACA, AGAGAGAGATTAAATAAGATCAAACGCA; HSP26, CGGAATAGTAACCGTCTTTACATGAACA, AACAGATCTCTAACTAATGGAGGTCCTA; HSP82, GGACTCTATTTTCTATCAGGTATGATTTCTTGAACTC, CACCCCCCCTCTCTCAACACAGTAATCC; HSP104, GAATCTACCTATTCACTTATTTATTCATTTACT, GCTGATTCGATTCAAGGGTAAAAAGGAAC; GAL1, CCTTTGCGCTAGAATTGAACTCAGGTA, AATTGGCAGTAACCTGGCCCCACAAAC; GAL7, TCCCCTTTATTTTGTTCATACATTCTT, TTTCCGACCTGCTTTTATATCTTTGCT.
Band intensities were quantified on a Storm 860 PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics) utilizing ImageQuant 1.11 software. To calculate the relative abundance of a given promoter DNA present in an immunoprecipitate (IP), we used the following formula: Qpromoter X = IPpromoter X/Inputpromoter X. Abundance of each test promoter is expressed relative to that of PHO5, which served as a normalization control (32).
Library Construction and Screening--
The library cloning
vector pAME3000 (Fig. 4A) was constructed by insertion of a
truncated version of HSF1 (positions 1018 to +1479,
encompassing the HSF1 promoter and amino acids 1-493 of the
coding region) into the polylinker of pRS314. To facilitate cloning,
KpnI and ClaI linkers were appended during PCR
amplification of HSF1. In addition, a unique
BglII site was engineered just 5' of the truncation site
followed by several stop codons in different reading frames. The
plasmid construction was confirmed by restriction digestion analysis
and by sequencing of junction points. The BglII site was
used to insert fragments (mean size ~2 kb) generated by
Sau3AI digestion of yeast genomic DNA. The library contained 7000 independent clones with at least 70% clones containing inserts. The plasmid library was isolated from bacteria and transformed into
PS128, selecting for Trp+ prototrophs. The transformation
plate, containing ~10,000 individual clones, was replica-plated onto
two 5-fluoroorotic acid-containing plates, one of which was incubated
at 30 °C and the other at 37 °C.
Plasmid Constructions-- Gal4 fusions were constructed as follows. Fragments of yeast genomic DNA from pAME3000 derivatives were PCR-amplified using primers flanking the BglII cloning site and containing synthetic BamHI and SalI and, using this sites, were recloned into the pGBD C-1 vector (31) maintaining the reading frame and stop codons. Resulting constructs were sequenced to confirm the intact reading frame and stop codon position. The CTF1/NF1 histone-binding module fusion was constructed by insertion of a synthetic oligonucleotide (complemented by opposite strand oligonucleotide) bearing the CTF1/NF1 DNA sequence with the natural Sau3AI site at the 5'-end and a synthetic NotI site after the stop codon at the 3'-end into pAME3000 using the corresponding sites. The resulting construct was sequenced to confirm the intact reading frame and position of the stop codon. Fusion of the HNF3 histone-binding module to HSF(1-493) was constructed similarly by in-frame fusion of a PCR-amplified HNF3 DNA fragment encoding amino acids 421-468.
Northern Analysis--
Northerns were performed as previously
described (33) using the following gene-specific probes:
HSP12, PCR product spanning positions +3 to +296;
HSP26, PCR product spanning positions +67 to +251;
HSP82, synthetic oligonucleotide spanning positions +2071 to
+2270; HSP104, PCR product spanning positions +2528 to
+2726; ACT1, PCR product spanning positions +984 to +1125.
Coordinates listed are relative to the ATG start codon. All
hybridization probes were constructed by 20 rounds of primer extension
with the appropriate antisense oligonucleotide: HSP12,
GGGTCTTCTTCACCGTGGACACGACCG; HSP26, GGAAACCGAAACCGAATGG;
HSP82, TCCATGCAGATGCCCTATTTACATA; HSP104,
TAATCTAGGTCATCATCAATTTCCA; and ACT1,
GAAACACTTGTGGTGAACGATAGATGG in the presence 5 mM
MgCl2, 300 µM dCTP, dGTP, dTTP, 3 µM dATP, 10 µCi of [-32P]dATP and 1 unit of Taq polymerase. Blots were hybridized overnight at
55 °C.
-Galactosidase Assay--
The activity of
-galactosidase
in liquid cell cultures (grown in synthetic complete 2%
glucose-containing medium lacking tryptophan) was measured as described
elsewhere (34).
Computer Analysis of DNA and Protein Sequences--
DNA sequence
analysis and calculation of the isoelectric point of synthetic peptides
was conducted using Vector NTI software. The calculation of
protein secondary structure was done using the nnPredict algorithm
of Vector NTI.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Histone Displacement Takes Place at Promoters of Inducible Heat
Shock Genes--
The expression of yeast heat shock genes is
principally under the control of HSF. However, the extent to which
their promoter chromatin structure is remodeled upon transcriptional
induction is unclear. On the one hand, DNA footprinting has
demonstrated the presence of constitutive, promoter-associated DNase I
hypersensitivity at HSF target genes that is unaffected by heat shock
(35-37). Yet on the other, chemical cross-linking experiments suggest
that substantial histone displacement may occur upon heat shock at these same promoters (32, 38). To help resolve this discrepancy, we
performed ChIP experiments using antibodies to both acetylated and
unacetylated histone isoforms. To ensure quantitative, reproducible results the PHO5 promoter was co-amplified in each PCR to
serve as a loading and amplification control. The promoter chromatin structure of PHO5 is well characterized; under
phosphate-rich conditions it consists of an array of four stable,
sequence-positioned nucleosomes (39, 40). As shown in Fig.
2, A-H, the abundance of
tetra-acetylated H4 and both unacetylated and mono-acetylated H3 is
drastically reduced at each heat shock promoter following a 15-min heat
shock. These histone rearrangements are dynamic, since during a chronic
heat shock (4 h), when transcriptional attenuation is seen (Fig. 2,
I-L, striped bars), histones are once again
detected (Fig. 2, A-H). Indeed, there is a striking inverse
relationship between promoter histone content and transcriptional activity.
|
To extend the analysis to H2A, we performed ChIP with an antibody
raised against its globular domain (residues 88-97), and thus
theoretically insensitive to either N- or C-terminal tail modification.
As shown in Fig. 3, the 15-min heat
impulse induced a significant reduction of H2A content within the
promoters of HSP12, HSP26, and HSP82;
following a 15-min return to non-stressful conditions (recovery), the
pre-heat-shock abundance of H2A was restored. Taken together with the
H3 and H4 ChIP data, we conclude that dynamic alterations occur in
HSP promoter chromatin as a function of transcription and
that such alterations may involve the displacement and reinstatement of
histone octamers in response to activating and attenuating conditions,
respectively.
|
Short Synthetic Peptides Can Functionally Substitute for the Large
CTA of HSF--
The dramatic chromatin modifications seen at HSF
target promoters are a likely consequence of the activity of the ADs of
HSF. It was shown previously that deletion of the HSF CTA causes a ts phenotype and diminishes expression of heat
shock genes (23, 41, 42). The mechanism by which the CTA enhances
transcription and participates in chromatin remodeling at target
promoters is unknown. To gain insight into its function, we substituted
the sequence encoding the 340-amino acid CTA with random yeast genomic DNA fragments. Our goal was to select those protein domains whose in-frame fusion with HSF(1-493) suppresses the
ts
phenotype, thereby complementing the loss
of the CTA. A library of plasmids bearing the 3'-truncated
hsf1(1-493) gene fused to Sau3AI-generated
genomic DNA fragments (mean size ~2 kb) was constructed (Fig.
4A). This was transformed into
an hsf1
::LEU2 strain (PS128) whose
viability is maintained by an episomal HSF1+
gene harbored on a URA3-CEN vector. Using the technique of
plasmid shuffling, the original HSF1-containing plasmid was
substituted with those from the library and transformants were screened
for growth at the elevated temperature.
|
It was anticipated that this approach would lead to the isolation of
the natural targets of the CTA (coactivators and components of the
basic transcription machinery), thereby bypassing the requirement for
the CTA (in analogy to the "artificial recruitment" model (1)), or
to the isolation of ADs derived from other activators (e.g.
see Ref. 43). Either way, we anticipated that productive fusions would
be rare events. Instead, complementation of the ts phenotype was readily obtained. One percent
of library transformants survived at the elevated temperature (data not
shown). In contrast, there were no survivors at 37 °C when PS128 was
transformed with the episomal hsf1(1-493) gene, ruling out
homologous recombination between hsf1 alleles as
contributing to the revertant phenotype. To confirm plasmid-borne
complementation of the ts
phenotype, plasmids
were isolated from randomly selected clones. Each one was retransformed
into the original PS128 strain, and the HSF1-containing
plasmid counterselected as above. As assessed by a spot dilution assay,
all transformants were able to grow at elevated temperature, although
at different rates (Fig. 4B).
Identification and Characterization of Fragments Complementing the
ts Phenotype of HSF(1--
493)
The inserts
of the complementing plasmids were sequenced and their sequences
searched against the S. cerevisiae genome data base.
Remarkably, the isolated fragments have little if any relationship to
transcription. Moreover, some of the cloned fragments were fused
out of frame (Table I, clones 3024 and
3021), i.e. encode fortuitous peptides. The amino acid
sequences specified by these DNA fragments underlined yet another
remarkable observation, namely the short length of the encoded
peptides. Some as short as 11 or 12 residues (Table I, clones 3021, 3022, 3024) successfully complemented the 340-amino acid deletion of
HSF.
|
While amino acid sequence analysis failed to identify any consensus, it did reveal a tendency for negatively charged residues alternating with hydrophobic residues. Although all cloned fragments encode peptides with a strong total negative charge, the complementation is weaker for those fragments containing fewer hydrophobic and more positively charged residues (clones 3085 and 3096). Another interesting feature of the isolated peptides is the absence of any predicted secondary structure (see "Experimental Procedures"). These findings are highly reminiscent of those of Ptashne and co-workers (44, 45), who previously identified synthetic ADs encoded by E. coli genomic DNA fragments or synthetic oligonucleotides (see "Discussion").
Synthetic Activators Have trans-Activation Potential Irrespective
of Promoter or Transcription Factor Context--
Even though the
polypeptides described in Table I complemented the loss of the CTA, it
is possible that the presence of these short fragments unmasked a
cryptic activation domain in HSF(1-493). To address whether these
polypeptides possess intrinsic activation potential, DNA molecules
encoding them were ligated in-frame to Gal4(1-147), and these new
constructs were transformed into the strain PJ69-4A. This strain
originally was constructed for yeast two-hybrid screens (31) and
contains three reporter genes, each under the control of a different
Gal4-regulated promoter (Fig. 5A). The resultant PJ694A
transformants were assayed for GAL reporter gene expression.
As shown in Fig. 5, B and C, polypeptides that complemented the HSF(1-493) ts phenotype also
acted as activators of the GAL7-lacZ and
GAL1-HIS3 reporters. Moreover, the activation potential of
each fragment is similar in the context of either Gal4(1-147) or
HSF(1-493), indicating that these polypeptides can act as activation
domains independent of the DNA-binding domain to which they are
tethered. For the GAL2-ADE2 reporter, which confers the most
stringent test of transcription (31), only clones 3002 and 3024 supported viability (Fig. 5D), underscoring their strength
as activators.
|
GAL Gene Promoters Undergo Chromatin Modification Dependent on
Native or Synthetic Activation Domains--
In the context of HSF, the
function of the synthetic ADs is obscured by the presence of the NTA
(Fig. 1), which is capable of trans-activation, particularly
in response to acute heat shock (23). Gal4(1-147), which has little or
no intrinsic activation potential (44) (Fig. 5B, strain
3000), permits a more straightforward test of remodeling activity. To
examine the activity of Gal4(1-147) fused to the potent 3002 synthetic
AD, ChIP analysis was employed as above. At the GAL1 and
GAL7 promoters in a Gal4+ strain, there is a
significant decrease in the relative abundance of both unacetylated and
acetylated isoforms of H3 following galactose induction (Fig.
6, A and B). These
results indicate that Gal4 catalyzes the alteration of
promoter-associated nucleosomes, although to a lesser degree than HSF
(Fig. 2). Strikingly, the synthetic AD 3002, derived from a gene whose
product is not related to transcription regulation, shows a similar
capability at both promoters (Fig. 6, C and D).
Thus, depletion of both acetylated and unacetylated H3 isoforms
accompanying transcriptional induction can be induced by simple
polypeptide modules that are normally not part of either transcription
factors or their coactivators.
|
Histones Are Potential Targets of Activation Domains--
The
above data are consistent with a model in which chromatin modifications
are central to the function of HSF and that its CTA plays a role in
such modifications. Furthermore, short acidic/hydrophobic polypeptides
bypass the requirement for the CTA in conferring temperature
resistance. The acidic/hydrophobic nature of these peptides implies
that their interacting partners could be basic and hydrophobic, raising
the possibility that histones at gene promoters are among the targets
of ADs. Indeed, the human CTF1/NF1 transcription factor bears a histone
H3-binding module within its transactivation region (46). Analogous
histone-interacting activity has been suggested for the yeast activator
Hap1 (47) and was recently demonstrated for the mouse liver-specific
activator, HNF3 (48). The CTF1/NF1 histone-binding module has the
sequence DPAGIYQAQSWYLG and bears a striking resemblance to the
synthetic activators isolated in our genetic screen: (i) it is short
(14 amino acid residues); (ii) it has an acidic pI (3.0); (iii) it has
six hydrophobic residues; and (iv) it lacks any predicted secondary
structure. To determine whether the CTF1/NF1
histone-binding module could complement the ts
phenotype of HSF(1-493), we fused it to the C-terminally truncated HSF
in place of the natural CTA. The strain expressing this new fusion
protein grows at 37 °C (Fig. 7),
demonstrating that a natural AD of HSF can be functionally substituted
by a histone-binding module. Similar complementation of temperature
sensitivity, although to a lesser degree, was detected with the HNF3
histone-binding module (Fig. 7). The growth rate of CTF1(486-499) and
HNF3(421-468) fusions at 37 °C is less robust than that of WT and
resembles the 3022 and 3085 fusions, respectively (Fig.
4B).
|
To test the ability of the CTF1/NF1 module to remodel chromatin, it was
fused to the Gal4 DNA binding domain, and the histone composition of
GAL1 and GAL7 promoters in yeast strains bearing either this fusion construct or Gal4(1-147) alone was analyzed. Remarkably, the 14-residue CTF1/NF1 module has the ability to initiate
chromatin changes as indicated by a reduction in both unacetylated and
diacetylated isoforms of H3 at GAL7 and a reduced level of
unacetylated H3 at GAL1 (Fig.
8, B and C). The
extent of histone alteration is modest yet reproducible for two
different promoters and is consistent with the low level of
trans-activation of GAL7/lacZ (Fig.
8A; compare with Gal4(1-147)-3002 in Fig. 5B). The changes in histone composition nonetheless parallel those mediated
by Gal4(1-147)-3002 (Fig. 6, C and D). These results, coupled with the
ability of HSF(1-493)-CTF1/NF1 to rescue the ts phenotype of HSF(1-493), demonstrate that
the histone-H3-binding module can participate in transcription
induction and trigger chromatin changes at disparate yeast gene
promoters. They suggest that histone binding activity can be an
important characteristic of AD function in vivo and imply
the existence of a transcription activation mechanism involving
AD-histone interactions.
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Promoter-specific Transcription Factors Catalyze Dramatic Chromatin Modifications of Target Gene Promoters-- The results of our study indicate that upon transcription induction, there is significant chromatin alteration in the promoters of heat shock- and galactose-responsive genes. For heat shock genes the effect is particularly striking as the abundance of both acetylated and unacetylated histone isoforms is dramatically reduced. Quite significantly, abundance of H2A, monitored using an antibody insensitive to either N- or C-tail modifications, drops markedly as well. These data are consistent with recent ChIP analyses demonstrating that HSF-targeted promoters are uniquely associated with gross chromatin alterations, possibly including octamer displacement upon heat shock induction (32, 38). Another explanation for these findings is that upon induction, heat shock gene promoters are uniquely occluded by components of the transcription initiation complex, rendering them inaccessible to antibodies. This interpretation seems unlikely since it invokes a fundamental difference in PIC assembly and/or structure at activated heat shock versus non-heat shock gene promoters (38). Moreover, we have previously shown that the abundance of promoter-associated histones is essentially unaffected by heat shock at a heterochromatic (SIR-silenced) version of the HSP82 promoter where heat shock-induced transcription is still very robust (32).
Our data for the GAL1 and GAL7 promoters, indicating a reduction in both hypo- and hyperacetylated histones upon transcriptional activation by wild type Gal4, are at variance with previous studies that revealed an increase in the abundance of either acetylated H3 (14) or unacetylated H4 (38). It is possible that the discrepancy lies in methodology. Here we have used multiplex PCR with an internal loading control in each reaction, obviating possibility of sample to sample variation. Moreover, the normalization control (PHO5) is transcriptionally inert under all conditions employed and thus ensures that differences that we detect are real and not a consequence of the vagaries of sample recovery. Moreover, our wash steps following incubation with antibodies are more stringent than those done in either of the previous two studies (14, 38) and thus are more likely to remove chromatin fragments that are less avidly bound to antibodies. Finally, there may be intrinsic differences in the extent of chromatin remodeling at GAL1 and GAL7 stemming from differences in strain background.
It seems reasonable to suggest that chromatin remodeling, at least at HSF- and Gal4-regulated promoters, may be the product of two consecutive steps: (i) transition of histones from a hypo- to a hyperacetylated state and (ii) actual octamer displacement. We suggest that less robust chromatin remodeling occurs at Gal4-regulated promoters, reflecting differences in the potency of Gal4 and HSF ADs (see the introduction). Synthetic ADs are probably deficient in one or both steps, leading to partial chromatin remodeling (Fig. 6, C and D; Fig. 8, B and C).
The 340-amino Acid C-terminal Domain of HSF Can Be Functionally Substituted by Synthetic Polypeptides as Short as 11 Amino Acids-- To address the basis for HSF-catalyzed chromatin modifications, a genetic screen was designed for polypeptides that could complement the loss of the HSF CTA. The results of this screen showed that such peptides are encoded at an extremely high frequency (1% of the genomic library). These peptides are characterized by their short size, by the fact that they are not derived from transcription-related factors, and by the fact that they do not have any clear consensus sequence. Yet they are invariably enriched in acidic and hydrophobic amino acid residues. These qualities are highly reminiscent of synthetic ADs isolated from an E. coli genomic library or synthetic oligonucleotides fused to the Gal4 DNA binding domain (44, 45, 49). Thus, in different transcription factor and promoter contexts, short unstructured polypeptides enriched in acidic and hydrophobic residues are able to activate gene expression. The excess of hydrophobic and acidic amino acid residues suggests that interacting targets of such ADs are hydrophobic and basic. The histones are the most abundant nuclear proteins with such properties. As they are invariably present on gene promoters, they represent potential targets of ADs.
Transcriptional Activation in Yeast Can Be Stimulated by the
Histone-binding Module of Human CTF1/NF1--
Using the
yeast two-hybrid assay, histone H3 has been previously identified as a
target of the human CTF1/NF1 transcriptional activator (46). Using a
similar methodological approach, histone H3 has also been implicated as
a potential target of yeast Hap1 (47). A recent study likewise
identified a histone-binding domain of mouse HNF3 as important for its
function in remodeling chromatin (48). For CTF1/NF1, interactions with
histone H3 were characterized both in vivo and in
vitro, and the regions of strongest contact were mapped to a
14-amino acid module at the C terminus of CTF1/NF1 and the central core
of H3 (amino acids 30-136) containing the histone-fold domain. Here we
demonstrate that both the CTF1/NF1 and HNF3 histone-binding modules at
least partially complement the HSF(1-493) ts
phenotype. Moreover, we show that the CTF1/NF1 module exhibits transcriptional and chromatin-modifying activities when fused to
Gal4-(1-147). Consistent with histone binding being a critical activity of CTF1/NF1 is the observation that transactivation in yeast
by naturally occurring splice variants of CTF1 occurs only with those
variants retaining the H3-binding module at the C terminus (50,
51).
The Targets of Activation Domains in Context of Direct and Indirect
Recruitment--
Our data indicate that substantial chromatin
modifications occur at a number of gene promoters and that such
alterations are mediated by both natural and synthetic ADs. Our
observations certainly can be explained in terms of direct recruitment
of nucleosome-remodeling and histone-modifying activities by these ADs.
Nevertheless, we would like to suggest an alternative mechanism, which
may apply in certain activator and/or promoter contexts. The idea is
that at least some ADs have low affinity for histones and that this affinity is sufficient to epigenetically "mark" promoter
nucleosomes and prime them for subsequent remodeling by
histone-modifying and nucleosome-remodeling complexes, which are
thereby recruited indirectly (see Fig.
9). The low affinity of AD-target
interactions follows from the results of our and previous genetic
screens for synthetic ADs. Indeed, natural ADs can be readily
substituted with short synthetic ADs (this study and Refs. 44, 45). The notion that these synthetic domains are (i) represented in 1% of
random DNA sequences (this study and Ref. 44) and (ii) lack common
consensus sequence and predictable secondary structure tends to argue
against the high specificity of their interactions with targets. In
fact, even homopolymeric glutamine or proline stretches can function as
ADs (52), and the strong VP16 AD retains its functionality when
chemically synthesized from non-natural D amino acids
(53).
|
Chromatin remodeling at gene promoters appears to be a necessary prerequisite for the initiation of eukaryotic gene transcription. Most suggested mechanisms of this chromatin remodeling imply direct recruitment of coactivators by ADs. Recent reports indicate that the primary target of certain acidic ADs is the SAGA complex (19, 20) with its largest subunit Tra1 directly interacting with ADs (12). Yet another study suggests that the Snf5, Swi1, and Swi2/Snf2 subunits of the Swi/Snf complex are the primary targets of VP16 and other acidic activators (11). Previously the VP16 AD and other acidic ADs were shown to interact with multiple components of the transcription initiation complex. The multiplicity of suggested AD targets makes it difficult to imagine a discriminatory mechanism for AD-target interactions. Consistent with the idea of indirect recruitment of nucleosome-remodeling and histone-modifying activities is the demonstration of non-targeted, global chromatin remodeling dependent on Gcn5-, Esa1- or Rpd3-containing complexes (54-56) and non-targeted catalytic nucleosome remodeling by SWI/SNF (57). The recent demonstration that binding of Swi/Snf complex is stabilized by hyperacetylated nucleosomes (58) suggests a mechanism by which an epigenetic mark per se may be sufficient to recruit chromatin-modifying activities. Sequence-specific factors could focus these global activities by causing local distortion of chromatin structure.
A low specificity of interaction between ADs and their targets fits well with our model because distortion of the nucleosome, unlike the creation of new specific bonds implicit in the direct recruitment model, is likely to be achieved by interference with different histone-DNA and histone-histone bonds forming the nucleosome (59). Thus, nucleosome distortion does not presume a specific AD sequence but rather a general motif (acidic and hydrophobic) based on the nature of histones as the nucleosome components. These low-specificity interactions could readily occur in an indirect recruitment model since AD and histones are brought into close proximity by the DNA-binding domain critical for activator function. In contrast, in the direct recruitment model, the AD targets, which are often scarcely represented in the cell, must be physically brought to the promoter by selective interactions with ADs. These targets compete not only with each other but also with nucleoplasmic components that often have no relation to transcription. An appealing aspect of our model is that it helps to resolve the paradox of interchangeability of ADs and preservation of AD function among different biological kingdoms. Indeed, histones are among the most highly conserved proteins in eukaryotes. Direct AD-histone interactions may underlie, in part, the conservation of AD function among eukaryotic phyla and the ease with which they can be exchanged.
The indirect and direct recruitment mechanisms are not necessarily
mutually exclusive. Many DNA-binding proteins, including TBP and TFIIB,
are basic and have hydrophobic regions. ADs have been shown to interact
and stabilize these PIC components at gene promoters increasing the
frequency of transcription initiation. Importantly, CTF1/NF1 interacts
with histone H3 within its histone-fold domain (46). This motif is
widely represented in transcription-related factors including the
histone-like TAFs, subunits of the SAGA and P/CAF histone
acetyltransferases, and components of the ISWI and CHRAC
ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes (60-63). Such
broad representation of histone-fold motifs in PIC components and
nucleosome-modifying complexes on the one hand and the implication that
promoter-specific activators may interact with the histone fold motif
of H3 on the other suggests the possibility that direct recruitment of
these complexes by ADs and interactions with histones could have a
similar basis. Indeed, the VP16 AD has been shown to directly interact
with the histone-like TAFs (64). It seems reasonable to suggest that
the indirect and direct recruitment mechanisms coexist and complement
each other in vivo and that the degree to which one or the
other plays a role in remodeling is specified by features of a given
promoter. This and other aspects of the indirect recruitment model are
conjectural and require experimental verification. Such experiments are
currently in progress.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We thank Michael Hampsey, Brett Keiper, Neal Mathias, Lucy Robinson, Sergey Slepenkov, and Kelly Tatchell for helpful discussions, and Yves Dusserre, Philip James, Nicolas Mermod, Peter Sorger, Robert Tjian, and Kenneth Zaret for gifts of strains and plasmids.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
* This work was supported by National Institute of General Medical Sciences Grant GM45842 and the Center for Excellence in Cancer Research at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA (to D. S. G.) and by National Science Foundation Grant MCB-0215758 (to A. M. E.).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.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Department of
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA 71130-3932. Tel.: 318-675-8204; Fax:
318-675-5180; E-mail: aerkin@lsuhsc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, December 23, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M211703200
![]() |
ABBREVIATIONS |
---|
The abbreviations used are: AD, activation domain; HSF, heat shock factor; NTA, N-terminal activator; CTA, C-terminal activator; PIC, preinitiation complex; ChIP, chromatin immunoprecipitation; YPD, yeast extract/peptone/dextrose; WT, wild type; ORF, open reading frame.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. | Ptashne, M., and Gann, A. (1997) Nature 386, 569-577[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
2. | Struhl, K. (1999) Cell 98, 1-4[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
3. |
Kingston, R. E.,
and Narlikar, G. J.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
2339-2352 |
4. | Strahl, B. D., and Allis, C. D. (2000) Nature 403, 41-45[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
5. | Brown, C. E., Lechner, T., Howe, L., and Workman, J. L. (2000) Trends Biochem. Sci. 25, 15-19[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
6. | Naar, A. M., Lemon, B. D., and Tjian, R. (2001) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 70, 475-501[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
7. | Koh, S. S., Ansari, A. Z., Ptashne, M., and Young, R. A. (1998) Mol. Cell 1, 895-904[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
8. | Neely, K. E., Hassan, A. H., Wallberg, A. E., Steger, D. J., Cairns, B. R., Wright, A. P., and Workman, J. L. (1999) Mol. Cell 4, 649-655[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
9. | Natarajan, K., Jackson, B. M., Zhou, H., Winston, F., and Hinnebusch, A. G. (1999) Mol. Cell 4, 657-664[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
10. | Utley, R. T., Ikeda, K., Grant, P. A., Cote, J., Steger, D. J., Eberharter, A., John, S., and Workman, J. L. (1998) Nature 394, 498-502[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
11. |
Neely, K. E.,
Hassan, A. H.,
Brown, C. E.,
Howe, L.,
and Workman, J. L.
(2002)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
22,
1615-1625 |
12. |
Brown, C. E.,
Howe, L.,
Sousa, K.,
Alley, S. C.,
Carrozza, M. J.,
Tan, S.,
and Workman, J. L.
(2001)
Science
292,
2333-2337 |
13. | Cosma, M. P., Tanaka, T., and Nasmyth, K. (1999) Cell 97, 299-311[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
14. | Krebs, J. E., Fry, C. J., Samuels, M. L., and Peterson, C. L. (2000) Cell 102, 587-598[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
15. | Agalioti, T., Lomvardas, S., Parekh, B., Yie, J., Maniatis, T., and Thanos, D. (2000) Cell 103, 667-678[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
16. | Triezenberg, S. J. (1995) Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 5, 190-196[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
17. |
Uesugi, M.,
Nyanguile, O.,
Lu, H.,
Levine, A. J.,
and Verdine, G. L.
(1997)
Science
277,
1310-1313 |
18. |
Cho, H. S.,
Liu, C. W.,
Damberger, F. F.,
Pelton, J. G.,
Nelson, H. C.,
and Wemmer, D. E.
(1996)
Protein Sci.
5,
262-269 |
19. |
Bhaumik, S. R.,
and Green, M. R.
(2001)
Genes Dev.
15,
1935-1945 |
20. |
Larschan, E.,
and Winston, F.
(2001)
Genes Dev.
15,
1946-1956 |
21. | Gross, D. S., Adams, C. C., Lee, S., and Stentz, B. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 3931-3945[Abstract] |
22. | Erkine, A. M., Adams, C. C., Diken, T., and Gross, D. S. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 7004-7017[Abstract] |
23. | Sorger, P. K. (1990) Cell 62, 793-805[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
24. | Nieto-Sotelo, J., Wiederrecht, G., Okuda, A., and Parker, C. S. (1990) Cell 62, 807-817[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
25. | Apone, L. M., Virbasius, C. A., Holstege, F. C., Wang, J., Young, R. A., and Green, M. R. (1998) Mol. Cell 2, 653-661[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
26. | Lee, D., and Lis, J. T. (1998) Nature 393, 389-392[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
27. |
Lee, D. K.,
Kim, S.,
and Lis, J. T.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
2934-2939 |
28. |
McNeil, J. B.,
Agah, H.,
and Bentley, D.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2510-2521 |
29. | Moqtaderi, Z., Keaveney, M., and Struhl, K. (1998) Mol. Cell 2, 675-682[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
30. |
Chou, S.,
Chatterjee, S.,
Lee, M.,
and Struhl, K.
(1999)
Genetics
153,
1573-1581 |
31. |
James, P.,
Halladay, J.,
and Craig, E. A.
(1996)
Genetics
144,
1425-1436 |
32. | Sekinger, E. A., and Gross, D. S. (2001) Cell 105, 403-414[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
33. |
Erkine, A. M.,
Magrogan, S. F.,
Sekinger, E. A.,
and Gross, D. S.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
1627-1639 |
34. | Ausubel, F. M., Brent, R., Kingston, R. E., Moore, D. D., Seidman, J. G., Smith, J. A., and Struhl, K. (1995) Current Protocols in Molecular Biology , pp. 13.6.2-13.6.4, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York |
35. | Szent-Gyorgyi, C., Finkelstein, D. B., and Garrard, W. T. (1987) J. Mol. Biol. 193, 71-80[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
36. | Erkine, A. M., Adams, C. C., Gao, M., and Gross, D. S. (1995) Nucleic Acids Res. 23, 1822-1829[Abstract] |
37. |
Chen, J.,
and Pederson, D. S.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
7442-7448 |
38. |
Deckert, J.,
and Struhl, K.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
2726-2735 |
39. | Almer, A., Rudolph, H., Hinnen, A., and Horz, W. (1986) EMBO J. 5, 2689-2696[Abstract] |
40. | Svaren, J., and Horz, W. (1997) Trends Biochem. Sci. 22, 93-97[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
41. | Young, M. R., and Craig, E. A. (1993) Mol. Cell. Biol. 13, 5637-5646[Abstract] |
42. |
Morano, K. A.,
Santoro, N.,
Koch, K. A.,
and Thiele, D. J.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
402-411 |
43. | Bonner, J. J., Heyward, S., and Fackenthal, D. L. (1992) Mol. Cell. Biol. 12, 1021-1030[Abstract] |
44. | Ma, J., and Ptashne, M. (1987) Cell 51, 113-119[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
45. |
Lu, X.,
Ansari, A. Z.,
and Ptashne, M.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
1988-1992 |
46. | Alevizopoulos, A., Dusserre, Y., Tsai-Pflugfelder, M., von der Weid, T., Wahli, W., and Mermod, N. (1995) Genes Dev. 9, 3051-3066[Abstract] |
47. |
Ha, N.,
Hellauer, K.,
and Turcotte, B.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
1026-1035 |
48. | Cirillo, L. A., Lin, F. R., Cuesta, I., Friedman, D., Jarnik, M., and Zaret, K. S. (2002) Mol. Cell 9, 279-289[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
49. | Ruden, D. M., Ma, J., Li, Y., Wood, K., and Ptashne, M. (1991) Nature 350, 250-252[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
50. | Altmann, H., Wendler, W., and Winnacker, E. L. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 3901-3905[Abstract] |
51. |
Wenzelides, S.,
Altmann, H.,
Wendler, W.,
and Winnacker, E. L.
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
2416-2421 |
52. | Gerber, H. P., Seipel, K., Georgiev, O., Hofferer, M., Hug, M., Rusconi, S., and Schaffner, W. (1994) Science 263, 808-811[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
53. |
Nyanguile, O.,
Uesugi, M.,
Austin, D. J.,
and Verdine, G. L.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
13402-13406 |
54. | Vogelauer, M., Wu, J., Suka, N., and Grunstein, M. (2000) Nature 408, 495-498[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
55. | Reid, J. L., Iyer, V. R., Brown, P. O., and Struhl, K. (2000) Mol. Cell 6, 1297-1307[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
56. |
Katan-Khaykovich, Y.,
and Struhl, K.
(2002)
Genes Dev.
16,
743-752 |
57. |
Logie, C.,
and Peterson, C. L.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
6772-6782 |
58. | Hassan, A. H., Neely, K. E., and Workman, J. L. (2001) Cell 104, 817-827[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
59. | Luger, K., Mader, A. W., Richmond, R. K., Sargent, D. F., and Richmond, T. J. (1997) Nature 389, 251-260[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
60. | Birck, C., Poch, O., Romier, C., Ruff, M., Mengus, G., Lavigne, A. C., Davidson, I., and Moras, D. (1998) Cell 94, 239-249[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
61. | Ogryzko, V. V., Kotani, T., Zhang, X., Schlitz, R. L., Howard, T., Yang, X. J., Howard, B. H., Qin, J., and Nakatani, Y. (1998) Cell 94, 35-44[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
62. |
Poot, R. A.,
Dellaire, G.,
Hulsmann, B. B.,
Grimaldi, M. A.,
Corona, D. F.,
Becker, P. B.,
Bickmore, W. A.,
and Varga-Weisz, P. D.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
3377-3387 |
63. |
Corona, D. F.,
Eberharter, A.,
Budde, A.,
Deuring, R.,
Ferrari, S.,
Varga-Weisz, P.,
Wilm, M.,
Tamkun, J.,
and Becker, P. B.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
3049-3059 |
64. |
Klemm, R. D.,
Goodrich, J. A.,
Zhou, S.,
and Tjian, R.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
5788-5792 |
65. |
Flick, K. E.,
Gonzalez, L., Jr.,
Harrison, C. J.,
and Nelson, H. C.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
12475-12481 |
66. | Hoj, A., and Jakobsen, B. K. (1994) EMBO J. 13, 2617-2624[Abstract] |
67. | Harrison, C. J., Bohm, A. A., and Nelson, H. C. (1994) Science 263, 224-227[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
68. | Sorger, P. K., and Nelson, H. C. (1989) Cell 59, 807-813[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
69. | Johnston, M. (1999) Trends Genet. 15, 29-33[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |