|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 273, Issue 50, 33708-33713, December 11, 1998
The Dystrophin Promoter Is Negatively Regulated by YY1 in
Undifferentiated Muscle Cells*
Federico
Galvagni,
Elena
Cartocci, and
Salvatore
Oliviero
From the Dipartimento di Biologia Molecolare, Università di
Siena, via Fiorentina 1, 53100 Siena, Italy
 |
ABSTRACT |
The dystrophin gene transcription is up-regulated
during muscle cell differentiation. Its expression in muscle cells is
induced by the binding of the positive regulators serum response factor and dystrophin promoter bending factor (DPBF) on a regulatory CArG
element present on the promoter. Here we show that the dystrophin CArG
box is also recognized by the zinc finger nuclear factor YY1. Transient
transfection experiments show that YY1 negatively regulates dystrophin
transcription in C2C12 muscle cells. On the dystrophin CArG element YY1
competes with the structural factor DPBF. We further show that YY1 and
DPBF binding to the CArG element induce opposite DNA bends suggesting
that their binding induces alternative promoter structures. Along with
C2C12 myotube formation YY1 is reduced and we observed that YY1, but
not DPBF, is a substrate of m-calpain, a protease that is
up-regulated in muscle cell differentiation. Thus, high levels of YY1
in non-differentiated muscle cells down-regulate the dystrophin
promoter, at least in part, by interfering with the spatial
organization of the promoter.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The dystrophin gene, which is altered in Duchenne and Becker
muscular dystrophies, is transcribed in skeletal and cardiac muscle
cells from a muscle-specific promoter (1-3). The minimal dystrophin
promoter ( 96 to +30) drives the transcription of the CAT reporter
gene preferentially in muscle cells, and it is induced by muscle cell
differentiation from myoblasts to myotubes (4, 5). The main regulatory
element of the dystrophin promoter is a CArG box that is recognized by
the serum response factor (SRF),1 which requires the
activity of the dystrophin promoter bending factor (DPBF). The latter
acts as an architectural component that alters the promoter structure
and enhances dystrophin transcription probably facilitating
interactions between SRF and the other components of the
transcriptional complex (5).
A CArG element was first found in the c-fos promoter where
it has been named serum response element (SRE) because of its ability to respond to serum stimulation signaling (6). CArG elements are also
present in several muscle-specific promoters (7-10). Both SRE and
muscle-specific CArG elements are recognized by SRF (11-15).
Indication of SRF involvement in muscle-specific transcription is also
suggested by its pattern of expression since SRF is mainly expressed in
myogenic tissues (16, 17). Moreover, SRF interacts with muscle-specific
factors including myogenin, MyoD, and Nkx-2.5 (18-20).
CArG elements can also be recognized by the nuclear factor YY1.
YY1 is a zinc finger protein that binds the DNA with a high degree of
flexibility in its DNA recognition (21). It can act as a
transcriptional repressor or activator and, when binding at the
initiator element, it becomes a component of the basal transcription
complex (22-25). YY1 interacts with several transcription factors
including Sp1, c-Myc, p300, TAFII55, ATF/CREB, and TFIIB and with the
histone deacetylase HDA2/mRPD3, suggesting that YY1 activation or
repression might be mediated by these interactions (26-33). Moreover,
YY1 has been found associated with the matrix suggesting that it may
mediate gene-matrix interactions by linking the promoter with nuclear
matrix-associated proteins (34). On the c-fos promoter YY1
binds to three different sites (31, 35, 36). Because the activity of at
least one of these sites was dependent on the orientation of its
binding site, it was proposed that the different effects of YY1 on
transcription could be due to its ability to bend DNA (36). On the
muscle-specific CArG element YY1 acts as a repressor and it was
proposed that YY1-dependent repression was due to its
competitive binding with SRF (35, 37, 38).
Here we analyzed the developmentally regulated muscle-specific
dystrophin promoter. We present evidence that the dystrophin CArG box
is recognized by YY1, which acts as a negative regulator of the
dystrophin promoter. We further show that YY1 competes for binding with
the structural factor DPBF. Moreover, YY1 and DPBF bend DNA in opposite
orientations with respect to a fixed bend. These results suggest that
YY1 and DPBF regulate the dystrophin promoter transcription negatively
or positively by competing with each other, at least in part, by
alternatively organizing the DNA structure.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Plasmid Construction--
To generate the DMD-CAT constructs the
dystrophin core promoter was amplified as described previously
(5), using the oligonucleotide primers (1)
CAGGTCTAGAACACTGAGTGAGTCAACAC and (2)
GGATAAGCTTACTCATGTCCTATTATGGGAAACCAACTTGAG for the 93 DMD-CAT and (1)
and (3) GGATAAGCTTGAGAGAGAAGGCGGGTC for 72 DMD-CAT. The
polymerase chain reaction product was cloned between HindIII
and XbaI sites of the plasmid pUC-CAT (39).
The YY1 expression vectors (CMV-YY1 and CMV-ReY) were obtained by
cloning the full-length coding sequence of the human YY1 in the
pcDNA3 vector (Invitrogen) under control of the cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter. The GST vector for YY1 expression in Escherichia coli was made by cloning the full-length coding sequence of the human protein downstream from the coding region for the thrombin cleavage site in the pGEX-2T vector (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
The set of six phasing vectors (FG 277-282) was made by cloning the
annealed oligonucleotides (4) AATTCTCATCTCCTATTATGGGAAACCGAGCT and (5)
CGGTTTCCCATAATAGGAGATGAG between the SacI and the
EcoRI sites of the plasmids pSB-10, -12, -14, -16, -18, and
-20 (40), kindly provided by A. D. Sharrocks. All the plasmid
structures were verified by sequencing.
Cell Culture, Transfection, and CAT Assays--
C2C12 myoblasts
were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented
with 10% fetal calf serum. Transfection of the promoter CAT constructs
was performed by the standard calcium phosphate method. Typically, a
transfection experiment included 2 µg of reporter plasmid and 0.75 µg of RSV-LacZ plasmid as transfection efficiency control (41). Where
indicated increasing amounts of expression plasmids (1, 2, and 4 µg)
were added. The amount of transfected plasmids was held constant by the
addition of pcDNA3. After transfection, the differentiation of
C2C12 cells into myotubes was allowed by changing growth medium to
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 2% horse serum. CAT
activity was determined as described previously (42). Acetylated forms
of chloramphenicol were quantified by scanning the thin-layer
chromatography plates using the Molecular Dynamics Image Quant
radioanalytic system. A minimum of four independent transfection
experiments were performed with independent DNA preparations.
The activity of the wild type dystrophin promoter ( 93 DMD-CAT) was
about 120% in C2C12 cells with respect to the pSV40-CAT used as
positive control.
Protein Preparation--
Preparation of nuclear extracts was
performed as described previously (43). Cold in vitro
translated proteins were prepared using the
TNTTM Coupled Reticulocyte Lysate System
(Promega) according to the manufacturer's description. The construct
FG236 (5) was used for the synthesis of YY1 and the plasmid pCITE-2a
(Novagen) for the mock reaction.
YY1 was expressed in E. coli as glutathione
S-transferase (GST) fusion protein, purified by glutathione
affinity chromatography and eluted from the column by adding 10 mM reduced glutathione in 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH
8.0), and the GST domain was removed by thrombin digestion (0.01 unit/µl for 45 min at room temperature). The amount of protein
recovered was determined by SDS-PAGE followed by staining with
Coomassie Blue and comparison with protein standards. DPBF was obtained
from C2C12 nuclear extracts and purified as described previously
(5).
Gel Mobility Shift Assay--
The probe and competitors for gel
mobility assays were obtained by annealing of the following
oligonucleotides: (2) and (6)
ATGGATCCTCAAGTTGGTTTCCCATAATAGGAGATGAGTAAGCTT; for the probe (CArG),
(7) GGATAAGCTTACACAGGATGTCCATATTAGGACAT and (8) ATGGATCATGTCCTAATATGGACATCCATGTGTAGCTT; for SRE, (9)
AGCTGGAGGAAAAACTGTTTCATATACAGAAGGCGT and (10)
GATCACGCCTTCTGTATGAAACAGTTTTTCCTCC for nonspecific competitor
(non-sp.). The probe utilized was obtained by terminal labeling of
annealed oligonucleotides.
Binding reactions (20 µl) contained 10 µg of nuclear extracts and 2 µg of poly(dI-dC) in 10 mM Tris (pH 7.9), 5 mM MgCl2, 60 mM KCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol. For assays containing proteins produced
by in vitro translation, 1 µl of reticulocyte lysate was
used for a standard binding reaction with 200 ng of calf thymus DNA.
Complexes were allowed to form for 10 min on ice, and 5 µl of Ficoll
20% were added before being resolved on 6% 39:1
acrylamide-bisacrylamide gels in 0.5% Tris borate-EDTA. Where
indicated, 1 µl of anti-YY1 polyclonal antibody (Santa Cruz) was
added in the reaction mixture.
The gel mobility shift reactions of Fig. 4 contained 10 mM
Tris (pH 7.9), 5 mM MgCl2, 60 mM
KCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 20% glycerol, 0.05% Nonidet
P-40, 1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin and the amount of recombinant
proteins indicated in the legend. The calpain cleavage assay was
performed by adding 1 µl of purified m-calpain
(Calbiochem) and incubating the reaction at 37 °C for 1 h in
the presence of CaCl2 (2 mM final).
Phasing Analysis--
DNA probes for phasing analysis were
prepared by polymerase chain reaction amplifications, using the
external primers (11) TATGTATCATACACATAC and (12) GAAATTAATACGACTCAC
labeled with [ -32P]dATP and purified by acrylamide gel
electrophoresis. The binding reactions were performed as described for
the gel mobility shift assays, and the complexes were resolved on 8%
polyacrylamide gels in 0.5% Tris borate-EDTA. The mobilities of free
DNA and protein-DNA complexes were determined by measuring the
distances traveled from the origin of the gel, and the ratios were
plotted as a function of the spacer length. Curve fitting was carried
out using the program CA-Cricket Graph III.
 |
RESULTS |
YY1 Binds to the CArG Element of the Dystrophin Promoter--
The
minimal dystrophin promoter transcriptional activation in muscle cells
depends on a CArG box, which is in part similar to the c-fos
SRE. Both SRE and dystrophin CArG boxes are recognized by SRF while the
ternary complex factor TCF and the bending factor DPBF are specific for
the SRE and for the dystrophin CArG element, respectively (5). To test
whether in addition to SRF other proteins bind to both elements we
performed competition experiments with the c-fos SRE on the
dystrophin CArG. Using electrophoretic mobility retardation assays with
nuclear extracts of C2C12 cells and a probe spanning positions 93 to
68 of the dystrophin promoter (CArG) we identified three distinct
retarded complexes. The slower and the faster migrating complexes
contained SRF and DPBF nuclear factors, respectively (5). Competition
with 100-fold molar excess of a cold double-stranded oligonucleotide
carrying the c-fos SRE, which is recognized by both SRF and
YY1 (35), abolished both the slower and intermediate migrating bands
(Fig. 1A, lane 3)
suggesting that the band with intermediate mobility contained YY1. The
addition of polyclonal anti-YY1 antibodies specifically inhibited the
formation of the intermediate complex (Fig. 1B, lane
2). To verify further that YY1 binds to the dystrophin CArG box we
performed band shift experiments with in vitro synthesized YY1. YY1 synthesized in vitro recognized both the SRE and
the dystrophin CArG element (Fig. 1C). Taken together, these
data demonstrate that YY1 specifically recognizes the dystrophin CArG element.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
YY1 recognizes the dystrophin CArG box.
A, nuclear extracts of C2C12 muscle cells were incubated
with the probe CArG. Competition experiments were performed with
100-fold molar excess of the indicated oligonucleotides containing the
dystrophin CArG box (CArG), the c-fos SRE element
(SRE), or an unrelated sequence (non-sp.).
B, nuclear extracts were preincubated with anti-YY1
polyclonal antibody (Ab). In the presence of anti-YY1
antibodies in the binding reaction (+), the formation of the putative
DNA-YY1 complex was inhibited. C, in vitro synthesized YY1
binds to both SRE and the dystrophin CArG element. D,
graphical representation of the dystrophin CArG box. SRF, YY1, and DPBF
binding sites are indicated.
|
|
YY1 Binding to the CArG Box Represses Dystrophin Promoter
Transcription--
In C2C12 muscle cells the dystrophin promoter
containing the CArG element is induced by cell differentiation in
vitro by about 4-fold. This induction is mediated by the CArG
element since a deleted promoter lacking the CArG box shows a reduced
transcriptional activity and is no longer induced by cell
differentiation (Fig. 2A). The
promoter activation correlates with a down modulation of YY1 in cells
treated in the same way (Fig. 2B).

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
The minimal muscle-specific dystrophin
promoter containing a CArG element is up-regulated in differentiated
cells in culture. A, transient transfection in C2C12
muscle cells of the minimal promoter ( 93 DMD CAT) or a promoter
deletion construct that does not contain the CArG element ( 72 DMD)
before (dashed box) or after (shaded
box) muscle differentiation obtained by cell growth in horse
serum. B, Western blotting with polyclonal anti-YY1
antibodies in nuclear extracts from undifferentiated and differentiated
C2C12 cells. Coomassie Blue staining as a control for equal loading was
used as shown in the lower panel.
|
|
We therefore tested whether the overexpression of YY1 in differentiated
cells would play a negative role on promoter transcription. We
cotransfected, in C2C12 muscle cells, an expression vector in which the
YY1 cDNA was cloned under the control of the viral CMV promoter
(CMV-YY1) with the minimal dystrophin promoter fused to the
chloramphenicol acetyltransferase gene ( 93 DMD-CAT). Increasing amounts of CMV-YY1 negatively regulated the expression of the DMD-CAT
construct, but not the promoter lacking the CArG element 72 DMD-CAT
(Fig. 3). Moreover, increasing amounts of
the plasmid carrying the YY1 in the antisense orientation (CMV-ReY) did
not affect the activity of the 93 DMD-CAT construct thereby excluding the possibility that cryptical plasmid sequences affected dystrophin promoter activity. Thus, YY1 has a negative effect on the dystrophin transcription, and its repression is mediated by the CArG
element.

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Exogenous YY1 expression down-regulates the
minimal dystrophin promoter carrying the dystrophin CArG box in muscle
cells. The relative CAT activities of the reporter plasmids
transfected alone or together with increasing amounts of the plamids
carrying the human YY1 cDNA in the sense (CMV-YY1) or in the
antisense orientation CMV-ReY are shown. The data shown are the means
with the standard error derived from four independent
experiments.
|
|
YY1 Competes with DPBF for Binding to the Dystrophin CArG Box
Changing the Architectural Conformation of the Promoter--
The
partial overlap of the proteins binding to the dystrophin CArG element
suggested that these proteins might influence their binding.
Competitive binding between YY1 and SRF was described previously for
other muscle-specific CArG elements (35, 37, 38). As on the dystrophin
promoter, the YY1 binding site partially overlaps with the DPBF binding
site, we investigated whether YY1 could interfere with the binding of
DPBF. In band shift experiments the binding of DPBF to the dystrophin
promoter was negatively influenced by the addition of YY1 to the
binding mixture (Fig. 4, compare
lanes 4-6 with 1-3). Thus, YY1
competes with DPBF for the binding on the dystrophin CArG box
suggesting that their binding on the promoter is mutually
exclusive.

View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
YY1 and DPBF compete for binding to the
dystrophin CArG. Results of mobility shift assays of YY1 and DPBF
proteins either alone or in combination are shown. YY1 inhibits DPBF
binding. Lanes 1-3 and 4-6 contain the same
increasing amounts of DPBF. Lanes 4-7 contain 50 ng of YY1.
The arrow indicates the DPBF complex.
|
|
Since both YY1 and DPBF induce bending of the DNA we investigated the
structural changes induced by these proteins. YY1 bends the DNA
approximately 80°, and it was suggested that its binding could
influence the interactions between proteins bound to the two flanking
elements (36). The binding of DPBF to the dystrophin promoter induces a
bend of approximately 60° in the double helix axis with a bend center
in the stretch of three A nucleotides between positions 79 and 78
just downstream of the CArG box, and its binding acts positively on
dystrophin transcription (Fig. 1D) (5). As the YY1 center of
bending is between the C and A nucleotides of the CCAT core on the
dystrophin promoter this position would be between 84 and 83 at
about 4 bases upstream with respect to the DPBF-induced bending (Fig.
1D). To test the hypothesis that these proteins induce a
definite bending and to measure the angle induced by each protein with
respect to a fixed bend, we performed phasing analysis with each
protein on the same DNA probe. The probes used for the phasing analysis
contain an intrinsic bend induced by an AT-rich track at different
distances from the binding site of interest and thereby vary the
helical phasing of the two sequences. If the DNA-protein complex under investigation contains a bend, its relative mobility will vary such
that it is lowest when the two bends have the same orientation (in-phase) and highest when the two bends have an opposite orientation (out-of-phase) (40, 44). We prepared six probes carrying the AT-rich
sequence separated by a set of spacers (10 to 20 base pairs) from the
CArG box. The complexes formed independently with YY1 or DPBF were
resolved by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Fig.
5, A and B, shows
the results of the phasing analysis of YY1 and DPBF, respectively. To
determine the relative orientations of the protein-induced DNA bend,
the relative mobilities of the complexes were plotted as a function of
the spacer length (Fig. 5, C and D). The minima
of the curves, corresponding to the minimal relative mobilities of the
complexes, were obtained with a spacer of 12 bp and of 16 bp for the
complexes containing YY1 and DPBF, respectively. Since the difference
between these two spacers is 4 bp and the turn of the DNA helix is on
average 10.5 bp, YY1 and DPBF proved to bend the promoter DNA in almost
opposite orientations.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
YY1 and DPBF change the architectural
conformation of the promoter differently. Results of phasing
analyses of YY1-DNA complexes (A) and DPBF-DNA complexes
(B) are shown. An intrinsic bend is separated by a linker
from the dystrophin CArG box. The length of the linkers (10-20 bp) is
indicated. C, phasing plot of the relative mobilities of
complexes obtained with YY1 and with DPBF (D). The minima of
the curves are shown by an arrow.
|
|
Unlike YY1, DPBF Is Not Proteolytically Degraded by m-Calpain in
Vitro--
Previous studies demonstrated that YY1, but not SRF,
decreases during muscle-cell development and argue that YY1 reduction is due to its proteolytic degradation in differentiated muscle cells by
the calcium-activated protease m-calpain, which is supported by the fact that m-calpain selectively cleaved YY1 but not
SRF (37, 45). Moreover, the activity of m-calpain is
up-regulated during myogenic differentiation and correlates with
myoblast fusion (46-48). We reasoned that if the degradation of YY1 is
involved in the mechanisms associated with the release of
transcriptional repression of muscle-specific genes during myogenic
differentiation, and that DPBF plays an antagonistic role with respect
to YY1, DPBF, like SRF, should be insensitive to proteolytical
degradation by m-calpain. In band shift experiments the
incubation of YY1 with m-calpain in the reaction mixture
reduced the intensity of the retarded complex (Fig.
6, lane 2). Under the same
conditions, the complex containing DPBF was not affected (lane
5). To establish that the effect observed was due to the
proteolytic activity of m-calpain and not, for example, due
to a nonspecific inhibition of the binding capacity, we reproduced the
reaction in the presence of leupeptin, an inhibitor of
m-calpain activity (49). The addition of leupeptin in the
reaction is sufficient to prevent the loss of YY1 binding. Thus, unlike
YY1, DPBF is not proteolytically degraded by m-calpain.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Calpain digests YY1 but not DPBF.
Purified proteins were incubated with m-calpain prior to
incubation with the specific probes. Retarded bands containing either
YY1 or DPBF are indicated.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The dystrophin muscle-specific promoter drives transcription in a
developmental specific manner. Up-regulation of the promoter correlates
with down-regulation of the nuclear factor YY1. We provide evidence
that increased transcription of dystrophin is mediated by the release
of YY1 repression during muscle cell differentiation in
vitro. We show that the structural factors YY1 and DPBF bind competitively to the promoter and induce different bends of the DNA.
Thus, the substitution of YY1 with DPBF, during muscle cell development, induces a change in the DNA structure. We propose that
this structural change contributes to transcriptional activation of the
dystrophin promoter.
The nuclear factor YY1 is developmentally down-regulated during
muscle differentiation, and it was proposed that YY1 reduction in
differentiated myotubes is due to its proteolytic degradation (37, 45).
This is consistent with the idea that high levels of YY1 in
non-differentiated myoblasts keep several muscle-specific genes at a
low level of transcription, and upon differentiation, YY1-specific
degradation allows the expression of genes at late stages. We observed
that YY1 binds directly to the dystrophin CArG element. This binding
was shown both with nuclear extracts and also with in vitro
synthesized YY1 suggesting that recognition of the dystrophin CArG box
by YY1 does not need accessory factors. Binding of YY1 to the
dystrophin promoter may have a functional role since promoter
activation correlates with a reduction in YY1 levels in C2C12
differentiated to form myotubes. In fact, cotransfection experiments
demonstrated a negative effect of YY1 on the dystrophin promoter
suggesting that the binding of YY1 to the CArG element is responsible
for promoter repression. This was corroborated by the observation that
deletion of the CArG element abolished both promoter activation during
myogenic differentiation and YY1 repression. CArG elements are present
in the promoters of many genes including serum-responsive genes and
several muscle-specific genes. The muscle-specific dystrophin CArG
element is recognized by SRF and by the structural factor DPBF, which
works as a SRF accessory factor. Thus, unlike the c-fos SRE,
in which full activation of the promoter is obtained following binding
of the TCF accessory factor, transcriptional activation of the
dystrophin promoter requires DPBF (5). We observed that, on the
dystrophin promoter, YY1 competes with DPBF. In support of the
hypothesis that during myogenic differentiation
calpain-dependent reduction of YY1 may release the promoter
repression we observed that YY1, but not DPBF, is selectively
degraded by calcium-activated m-calpain.
Both YY1 and DPBF are bending factors and exert an opposite effect on
promoter transcription. This led us to explore the possibility that
bending could be relevant for promoter activity. Phasing analysis
revealed that both these proteins induce a detectable bend when they
recognize the dystrophin CArG element. However, when binding on the
dystrophin CArG element, these factors bend the DNA in opposite
directions suggesting that the alternative bending induced by YY1 or
DPBF has opposite effects on promoter structure. Thus, it is likely
that the alternative binding of YY1 and DPBF to the promoter
contributes to promoter regulation by the induction of structural
changes. Indirect evidence that the promoter structure is crucial for
its proper activity was also observed by base insertions of different
lengths between the CArG element and the TATA box: all insertions
tested resulted in promoter
down-regulation,2 suggesting
that the distance between elements of the promoter is crucial for the
proper assembly of the various components of the transcription machinery.
It is possible that, as cellular DNA is organized in chromatin, the
differential bending induced by these factors plays a role in promoter
accessibility. Thus, the alternative binding of YY1 or DPBF as
structural factors may lead to the formation of highly specific
alternative complexes by recruiting specific proteins on the promoter.
Several nuclear factors as well as histone deacetylase and matrix
components are known to interact with YY1 (22, 26-34). From this
perspective, only a subset of these factors would be selected on the
dystrophin promoter by YY1 because of structural constraints. The
reduction of YY1 during myogenic differentiation would lead to DPBF
binding to the dystrophin CArG element. The alternative bending induced
by DPBF on the promoter and its specific protein-protein interactions
would lead to the formation of a specific transcriptionally active
assembly complex. It is conceivable that some components are in common
between these alternative complexes on the CArG element, and a simple
change in the helical phasing is sufficient to determine the proper
stereochemical organization for either repression or activation. Future
experiments will address this model. For example it will be interesting
to test whether both YY1 and DPBF are able to recognize the DNA
organized in nucleosomal structures and facilitate the access of
different regulatory factors by exposing the DNA on the nucleosome.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Andrew Sharrok for providing
plasmids for the phasing analysis, Anna La Rocca and Franco Tatò
for C2C12 muscle cells and precious advice on cell growth and
differentiation in culture, Nick Valiante for the critical reading of
the manuscript, Rino Rappuoli for hospitality in IRIS laboratories,
Aldo Muzzi for oligonucleotide synthesis, and Beatrice Grandi for her
excellent technical help.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Thelethon Project No. 970.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. Tel.: 390-577-243080;
Fax: 390-577-243383; E-mail: oliviero{at}unisi.it.
The abbreviations used are:
SRF, serum response
factor; SRE, serum response element; DPBF, dystrophin promoter bending
factor; CMV, cytomegalovirus; GST, glutathione
S-transferase; CAT, chloramphenicol acetyltransferase; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis; bp, base pair(s).
2
F. Galvagni, unpublished observations.
 |
REFERENCES |
-
Nudel, U.,
Robzik, K.,
and Yaffe, D.
(1988)
Nature
331,
635-638[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Nudel, U.,
Zuk, D.,
Zelom, E.,
Levy, Z.,
Neuman, S.,
and Yaffe, D.
(1989)
Nature
337,
76-78[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Klamut, J. H.,
Gangopad, S. B.,
Worton, R. G.,
and Ray, P. N.
(1990)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10,
193-205[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gilgenkrantz, H.,
Hugnot, J. P.,
Lambert, M.,
Chafey, P.,
Kaplan, J. C.,
and Kahn, A.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
10823-10830[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Galvagni, F.,
Lestingi, M.,
Cartocci, E.,
and Oliviero, S.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1731-1743[Abstract]
-
Treisman, R.
(1986)
Cell
46,
567-574[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Boxer, L. M.,
Prywes, R.,
Roeder, R.,
and Kedes, L.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
515-522[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Sartorelli, V.,
Webster, K.,
and Kedes, L.
(1990)
Genes Dev.
4,
1811-1822[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Moss, J. B.,
McQuinn, T. C.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
12731-12740[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Bushel, P.,
Kim, J. H.,
Chang, W.,
Catino, J. J.,
Ruley, H. E.,
and Kumar, C. C.
(1995)
Oncogene
10,
1361-1370[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Norman, C.,
Runswick, M.,
Pollock, R.,
and Treisman, R.
(1988)
Cell
55,
989-1003[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Vincent, C. K.,
Gualberto, A.,
Patel, C. V.,
and Walsh, K.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
1264-1272[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Tuil, D.,
Clergue, N.,
Montarras, D.,
Pinset, C.,
Kahn, A.,
and Phan-Dinh-Tuy, F.
(1990)
J. Mol. Biol.
213,
677-686[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Papadopoulos, N.,
and Crow, M. T.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6907-6918[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Treisman, R.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
4905-4913[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Croissant, J. D.,
Kim, J. H.,
Eichele, G.,
Goering, L.,
Lough, J.,
Prywes, R.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1996)
Dev. Biol.
177,
250-264[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Belaguli, N. S.,
Schildmeyer, L. A.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
18222-18231[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Groisman, R.,
Masutani, H.,
Leibovitch, M.-P.,
Robin, P.,
Soudant, I.,
Trouche, D.,
and Harel-Bellan, A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
5258-5264[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chen, C. Y.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
6372-6384[Abstract]
-
Chen, C. Y.,
Croissant, J.,
Majesky, M.,
Topozius, S.,
McQuinn, T.,
Frankovky, M. J.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1996)
Dev. Genet.
19,
119-130[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Hyde-DeRuyscher, R. P.,
Jennings, E.,
and Shenk, T.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
4457-4465[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Shi, Y.,
Lee, J. S.,
and Galvin, K. M.
(1997)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1332,
49-66
-
Shi, Y.,
Seto, E.,
Chang, L.-S.,
and Shenk, T.
(1991)
Cell
67,
377-388[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Usheva, A.,
and Shenk, T.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
13571-13576[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Park, K.,
and Atchison, M. L.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
9804-9808[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Seto, E.,
Lewis, B.,
and Shenk, T.
(1993)
Nature
365,
462-464[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Lee, J. S.,
Galvin, K. M.,
See, R. H.,
Eckner, R.,
Livingston, D.,
Moran, E.,
and Shi, Y.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
1188-1198[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Usheva, A.,
and Shenk, T.
(1994)
Cell
76,
1115-1121[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Chiang, C. M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1995)
Science
267,
531-536[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Zhou, Q.,
Gedric, R. W.,
and Engel, D. A.
(1995)
J. Virol.
69,
4323-4330[Abstract]
-
Lee, J.-K.,
Galvin, k. M.,
and Shi, Y.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
6145-6149[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Shrivastava, A.,
Saleque, S.,
Kalpana, G. V.,
Artandi, S.,
Goff, S. P.,
and Calame, K.
(1993)
Science
262,
1889-1892[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Yang, W.-M.,
Inouye, C.,
Zeng, Y.,
Bearss, D.,
and Seto, E.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
12845-12850[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Guo, B.,
Odgren, P. R.,
van Wijnen, A. J.,
Last, T. J.,
Nickerson, J.,
Penman, S.,
Lian, J. B.,
Stein, J. L.,
and Stein, G. S.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
10526-10530[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gualberto, A.,
Le Page, D.,
Pons, G.,
Mader, S. L.,
Park, K.,
Atchison, M. L.,
and Walsh, K.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
4209-4214[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Natesan, S.,
and Gilman, M. Z.
(1993)
Genes Dev.
7,
2497-2509[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lee, T. C.,
Shi, Y.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
9814-9818[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chen, C. Y.,
and Schwartz, R. J.
(1997)
Mol. Endocrinol.
11,
812-822[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Oliviero, S.,
Robinson, G.,
Struhl, K.,
and Spiegelman, B. M.
(1992)
Genes Dev.
6,
1799-1809[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Drak, J.,
and Crothers, D. M.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
3074-3078[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Cherrington, J. M.,
and Mocarski, E. S.
(1989)
J. Virol.
63,
1435-1440[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gorman, C. M.,
Moffat, L. F.,
and Howard, B. H.
(1982)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
2,
1044-1051[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Schreiber, E.,
Matthias, P.,
Müller, M. M.,
and Shaffner, W.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
6419[Free Full Text]
-
Zinkel, S. S.,
and Crothers, D. M.
(1987)
Nature
328,
178-181[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Kalenik, J. L.,
Chen, D.,
Bradley, M. E.,
Chen, S. J.,
and Lee, T. C.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
843-849[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kwak, K. B.,
Chung, S. S.,
Kim, O. M.,
Kang, M. S.,
Ha, D. B.,
and Chung, C. H.
(1993)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1175,
243-249[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Brustis, J. J.,
Elamrani, N.,
Balcerzak, D.,
Safwate, A.,
Soriano, M.,
Poussard, S.,
Cottin, P.,
and Ducastaing, A.
(1994)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
64,
320-327[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Balcerzak, D.,
Poussard, S.,
Brustis, J. J.,
Elamrani, N.,
Soriano, M.,
Cottin, P.,
and Ducastaing, A.
(1995)
J. Cell Sci.
108,
2077-2082[Abstract]
-
Kumar, A.,
Shafiq, S.,
Wadgaonkar, A.,
and Stracher, A.
(1992)
Cell. Mol. Biol.
38,
477-483[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
Copyright © 1998 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. B. de Leon, C. Montanez, P. Gomez, S. L. Morales-Lazaro, V. Tapia-Ramirez, V. Valadez-Graham, F. Recillas-Targa, D. Yaffe, U. Nudel, and B. Cisneros
Dystrophin Dp71 Expression Is Down-regulated during Myogenesis: ROLE OF Sp1 AND Sp3 ON THE Dp71 PROMOTER ACTIVITY
J. Biol. Chem.,
February 18, 2005;
280(7):
5290 - 5299.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. De Repentigny, P. Marshall, R. G. Worton, and R. Kothary
The mouse dystrophin muscle enhancer-1 imparts skeletal muscle, but not cardiac muscle, expression onto the dystrophin Purkinje promoter in transgenic mice
Hum. Mol. Genet.,
November 15, 2004;
13(22):
2853 - 2862.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Caretti, M. Di Padova, B. Micales, G. E. Lyons, and V. Sartorelli
The Polycomb Ezh2 methyltransferase regulates muscle gene expression and skeletal muscle differentiation
Genes & Dev.,
November 1, 2004;
18(21):
2627 - 2638.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Bain, M. Mendelson, and J. Sinclair
Ets-2 Repressor Factor (ERF) mediates repression of the human cytomegalovirus major immediate-early promoter in undifferentiated non-permissive cells
J. Gen. Virol.,
January 1, 2003;
84(1):
41 - 49.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. J. Spencer and R. L. Mellgren
Overexpression of a calpastatin transgene in mdx muscle reduces dystrophic pathology
Hum. Mol. Genet.,
October 2, 2002;
11(21):
2645 - 2655.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. Galvagni, M. Cantini, and S. Oliviero
The Utrophin Gene Is Transcriptionally Up-regulated in Regenerating Muscle
J. Biol. Chem.,
May 17, 2002;
277(21):
19106 - 19113.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. M. Mikheev, S. A. Mikheev, Y. Zhang, R. Aebersold, and H. Zarbl
CArG binding factor A (CBF-A) is involved in transcriptional regulation of the rat Ha-ras promoter
Nucleic Acids Res.,
October 1, 2000;
28(19):
3762 - 3770.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. Galvagni and S. Oliviero
Utrophin Transcription Is Activated by an Intronic Enhancer
J. Biol. Chem.,
February 4, 2000;
275(5):
3168 - 3172.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Plyte, M. Boncristiano, E. Fattori, F. Galvagni, S. R. Paccani, M. B. Majolini, S. Oliviero, G. Ciliberto, J. L. Telford, and C. T. Baldari
Identification and Characterization of a Novel Nuclear Factor of Activated T-cells-1 Isoform Expressed in Mouse Brain
J. Biol. Chem.,
April 20, 2001;
276(17):
14350 - 14358.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Ficzycz, C. Eskiw, D. Meyer, K. E. Marley, M. Hurt, and N. Ovsenek
Expression, Activity, and Subcellular Localization of the Yin Yang 1 Transcription Factor in Xenopus Oocytes and Embryos
J. Biol. Chem.,
June 15, 2001;
276(25):
22819 - 22825.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Marshall, N. Chartrand, and R. G. Worton
The Mouse Dystrophin Enhancer Is Regulated by MyoD, E-box-binding Factors, and by the Serum Response Factor
J. Biol. Chem.,
June 1, 2001;
276(23):
20719 - 20726.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|