HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 15, 12937-12945, April 12, 2002

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 277/15/12937    most recent M108815200v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nicholls, C. D. Articles by Lee, P. W. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nicholls, C. D. Articles by Lee, P. W. K. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Biogenesis of p53 Involves Cotranslational Dimerization of Monomers and Posttranslational Dimerization of Dimers
IMPLICATIONS ON THE DOMINANT NEGATIVE EFFECT^*

Chris D. Nicholls, Kevin G. McLure^§, Michael A. Shields, and Patrick W. K. Lee^¶

From the Cancer Biology Research Group and Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, University of Calgary Health Sciences Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2N 4N1

Precisely how mutant p53 exerts a dominant negative effect over wild type p53 has been an enigma. To understand how wild type and mutant p53 form hetero-oligomers, we studied p53 biogenesis in vitro. We show here that p53 dimers are formed cotranslationally (on the polysome), whereas tetramers are formed posttranslationally (by the dimerization of dimers in solution). Coexpression of wild type and mutant p53 therefore results in 50% of the p53 generated being heterotetramers comprised of a single species: wild type dimer/mutant dimer. Using hot spot mutants of p53 and a variety of natural target sites, we show that all wild type/mutant heterotetramers manifest impaired DNA binding activity. This impairment is not due to the mutant dimeric subunit inhibiting association of the complex with DNA but rather due to the lack of significant contribution (positive cooperativity) from the mutant partner. For all heterotetramers, bias in binding is particularly pronounced against those sequences in genes responsible for apoptosis rather than cell growth arrest. These results explain the molecular basis of p53 dominant negative effect and suggest a functional role in the regulation of p53 tetramerization.

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Lokshin, Y. Li, C. Gaiddon, and C. Prives p53 and p73 display common and distinct requirements for sequence specific binding to DNA Nucleic Acids Res., January 12, 2007; 35(1): 340 - 352. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Kulikov, M. Winter, and C. Blattner Binding of p53 to the Central Domain of Mdm2 Is Regulated by Phosphorylation J. Biol. Chem., September 29, 2006; 281(39): 28575 - 28583. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Demma, S. Wong, E. Maxwell, and B. Dasmahapatra CP-31398 Restores DNA-binding Activity to Mutant p53 in Vitro but Does Not Affect p53 Homologs p63 and p73 J. Biol. Chem., October 29, 2004; 279(44): 45887 - 45896. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. M. Chan, W. Y. Siu, A. Lau, and R. Y. C. Poon How Many Mutant p53 Molecules Are Needed To Inactivate a Tetramer? Mol. Cell. Biol., April 15, 2004; 24(8): 3536 - 3551. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-H. Yoon, C.-S. Lee, and G. P. Pfeifer Simulated sunlight and benzo[a]pyrene diol epoxide induced mutagenesis in the human p53 gene evaluated by the yeast functional assay: lack of correspondence to tumor mutation spectra Carcinogenesis, January 1, 2003; 24(1): 113 - 119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]