![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 33, 23203-23209, August 13, 1999
From the Department of Biochemistry and the Center for Advanced
Molecular Biology and Immunology, School of Medicine and Biomedical
Sciences, State University of New York, Buffalo, New
York 14214-3000
The general transcription factor IIB (TFIIB)
plays an essential role in transcription of protein-coding genes by
eukaryotic RNA polymerase II. We previously identified a yeast TFIIB
mutant (R64E) that exhibited increased activity in the formation of
stable TATA-binding protein-TFIIB-DNA (DB) complexes in
vitro. We report here that the homologous human TFIIB mutant
(R53E) also displayed increased activity in DB complex formation
in vitro. Biochemical analyses revealed that the increased
activity of the R64E mutant in DB complex formation was associated with
an altered protease sensitivity of the protein and an enhanced
interaction between the N-terminal region and the C-terminal core
domain. These results suggest that the intramolecular interaction in
yeast TFIIB stabilizes a productive conformation of the protein for the
association with promoter-bound TATA-binding protein.
The synthesis of messenger RNA (mRNA) from eukaryotic
protein-coding genes is catalyzed by RNA polymerase II
(RNAPII).1 To achieve
accurate and efficient transcription from class II promoters, RNAPII
requires the action of numerous auxiliary proteins. Among these
proteins are the six general transcription factors, TFIIA, TFIIB,
TFIID, TFIIE, TFIIF, and TFIIH (reviewed in Ref. 1). These factors are
the subject of much investigation toward the goal of determining their
respective functions in transcription initiation, elongation, and
regulation. The association of the general transcription factors and
RNAPII to form a functional preinitiation complex (PIC) on a class II
promoter is proposed to occur by one of two mechanisms (reviewed in
Refs. 1-3). In the stepwise assembly model, initially put forth by
Buratowski et al. (4), PIC formation is initiated by the
binding of TFIID to the TATA element via the TATA-binding protein (TBP)
subunit. For some promoters, the binding of TFIID is stabilized by the association of TFIIA. This "DA" complex is recognized by TFIIB, which binds and promotes the recruitment of TFIIF and RNAPII. The
subsequent association of TFIIE and TFIIH completes PIC assembly, which
is followed by ATP hydrolysis, promoter melting, and the initiation of
mRNA synthesis. An alternative model for PIC formation was based
upon the identification of an RNAPII holoenzyme from yeast and
mammalian cell extracts (5-7). In the holoenzyme recruitment model,
the holoenzyme, consisting of RNAPII, Srb and Med factors, most of the
general transcription factors, and additional factors, is directly
recruited to promoter-bound TFIID in vivo (reviewed in Ref.
1).
In both the stepwise assembly and holoenzyme recruitment models, TFIIB
is viewed as playing an essential role by binding promoter-bound TFIID
and acting as a molecular bridge to RNAPII and the rest of the
transcription machinery. The TFIIB polypeptide is composed of a
protease-sensitive N-terminal region that is highly conserved, followed
by a protease-resistant C-terminal core domain containing two imperfect
direct repeats (Fig. 1) (8, 9).
Structural studies have shown that the N-terminal region of
Pyrococcus furiosus TFIIB contains a zinc ribbon fold,
whereas each repeat in the core domain of human TFIIB is comprised of
five Although much has been elucidated regarding the general functions of
TFIIB and the factors to which it binds, the precise mechanisms
involved in the potential regulation of TFIIB activity or the role of
TFIIB in transcriptional activation remain to be determined. A possible
mechanism for the regulation of TFIIB activity and its role in
activation were suggested by the finding of an interaction between the
N-terminal region and the core domain of human TFIIB that is altered by
the VP16 activator protein (34). Recent NMR analyses have confirmed
this interaction in human TFIIB and have demonstrated that the
conformation of the core domain can be altered by interaction with
either an N-terminal TFIIB peptide or with VP16 (35).
We previously identified a yeast TFIIB mutant (R64E) that exhibited
increased activity in the formation of stable TBP-TFIIB-DNA (DB)
complexes in vitro (16). To investigate the molecular basis for this increased activity, we have used a partial proteolysis assay
to probe the structure of the R64E mutant protein and affinity chromatography to investigate the potential interaction between the
yeast TFIIB N-terminal region and the core domain. We report here that,
as observed for human TFIIB, the N-terminal region and the core domain
of yeast TFIIB physically interact. Importantly, the increased activity
of the R64E mutant protein in DB complex formation was associated with
an altered protease sensitivity of the protein and an enhanced
interaction between the N-terminal region and the core domain. We
discuss these results in light of previous work regarding the potential
role(s) of the TFIIB intramolecular interaction in modulating PIC formation.
Plasmids--
The human TFIIB R53E mutant was constructed by the
megaprimer method of PCR site-directed mutagenesis using Vent
polymerase (New England Biolabs) and plasmid pSP72/hIIB as template
(16). For the production of recombinant protein, the entire coding
region of the R53E mutant was cloned into plasmid p314/yIIBN (16) using NdeI and PstI and then transferred into plasmid
pQE32* (16) using NdeI and PstI to generate
plasmid pQE/hR53E. Plasmid pQE/hIIB was constructed by inserting the
entire coding region of human TFIIB from pSP72/hIIB into pQE32* using
NdeI and PstI. For the production of recombinant
glutathione S-transferase (GST)-yeast TFIIB core domain
fusion proteins, the coding region corresponding to yeast TFIIB
residues 120-345 was amplified by PCR using Vent polymerase with the
introduction of a unique NdeI site at the ATG corresponding
to residue 120. The amplified DNA fragment was cloned into plasmid
pQE32* using NdeI and PstI and then excised from
this construct and cloned into plasmid pGEX* using NdeI and EcoRI to generate pGEX/CoreIIB. Plasmid pGEX* is a
derivative of pGEX-2TK (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) that contains an
NdeI, NotI, XhoI, BamHI,
and EcoRI site for cloning. For the production of
polyhistidine-tagged N-terminal 89-residue (N89) yeast TFIIB proteins,
plasmids p314/yIIBN and p314/R64E (16) were used as templates to PCR
amplify the coding region corresponding to residues 1-89 with the
introduction of a stop codon at residue 90 followed by an
EcoRI site. The amplified DNA fragments were cloned into pQE32* using NdeI and EcoRI to generate plasmids
pQE/N89-WT and pQE/N89-R64E. For the production of wild-type and R64E
mutant TFIIB proteins containing a c-Myc epitope tag at the C terminus, PCR amplification was performed using pQE/yIIB as template, an upstream
primer in the TFIIB coding region (YIIB-4), and a downstream primer
(YIIB-myc) that encodes the c-Myc epitope (EQKLISEEDL) fused in frame
to the C terminus. The resulting PCR product was digested with
HindIII to obtain a 130-base pair fragment, which was
substituted for the HindIII-HindIII fragment of
pQE/yIIB and pQE/R64E to obtain pQE/yIIB-myc and pQE/R64E-myc, respectively.
Purification of Recombinant Proteins--
Polyhistidine-tagged
TFIIB proteins were expressed under control of the phage T5 promoter in
plasmid pQE32* in Escherichia coli strain JM109. Cultures
(500 ml) were grown at 37 °C in 2× YT medium with 100 µg of
ampicillin/ml to an A600 of 0.6-0.8, and
expression was induced with
isopropyl-1-thio- Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay of DB Complexes--
The
TATA-containing DNA probe was a 45-base pair internally labeled
fragment containing the adenovirus early 1B TATA box (36). Reactions
(20 µl) contained 20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 5% glycerol, 50 mM KCl, 10 mM potassium acetate, 7.5 mM MgCl2, 2 mM DTT, 200 µg of
bovine serum albumin/ml, 200 ng of poly(dG·dC), 20 fmol of labeled
probe, 10 ng of yeast TBP, and the amount of TFIIB as indicated in the
legends to Figs. 2 and 3. Reaction components were mixed at 4 °C,
and the reactions were incubated at room temperature for 30 min
(standard) or for the amount of time indicated in Fig. 2C. Reaction products (10µl)
were immediately loaded onto a native polyacrylamide gel (5%
polyacrylamide, 30:1) with the gels run at 4 °C in 25 mM
Tris, 190 mM glycine, pH 8.3, at 200 V for 2 h.
Partial Proteolysis Assay--
C-terminal Myc epitope-tagged
wild-type or R64E mutant TFIIB proteins (2 µg) were incubated with 4 ng of Staphylococcus aureus V8 protease (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals) in 40 µl of buffer containing 12.5 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 3% glycerol, 30 mM KCl, 3 mM
magnesium chloride, and 1 mM DTT. Reactions were incubated at 30 °C, and 10-µl aliquots were removed at the indicated time points and mixed with 2 µl of 6× SDS-PAGE sample buffer. The
reaction products were boiled for 5 min, resolved by SDS-PAGE, and
visualized by staining with Coomassie Blue. For immunoblotting,
reactions (100 µl) contained 200 ng of TFIIB, 20 µg of bovine serum
albumin, and 5 ng of V8 protease, and 20-µl aliquots were removed at
each time point. Immunoblotting was performed using a mouse monoclonal antibody specific for the c-Myc epitope tag (1:1000 dilution) (Babco)
followed by goat anti-mouse IgG horseradish peroxidase (1:40,000
dilution) (The Jackson Laboratory). The membrane was incubated with
Pierce SuperSignal ULTRA chemiluminescent substrate and exposed to
Hyperfilm-MP (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
GST Affinity Chromatography--
Glutathione-Sepharose beads (20 µl) containing 50 pmol of bound GST or GST-yeast TFIIB core domain
fusion protein were incubated with polyhistidine-tagged N89 wild-type
or R64E mutant TFIIB proteins at 4 °C in 500 µl of binding buffer
(20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 10% glycerol, 50 mM
KCl, 10 mM magnesium chloride, 1 mM DTT, 500 µg of bovine serum albumin/ml, and 0.1 mM PMSF) in
MicroSpin columns (Bio-Rad) for 2 h. The beads were washed once
with 500 µl of binding buffer and four times with 500 µl of wash
buffer (40 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 100 mM
potassium acetate, 5 mM magnesium chloride, 1 mM DTT, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, and 0.5 mM PMSF).
The bound proteins were eluted with 40 µl of SDS-PAGE sample buffer,
and 10 µl were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting using a mouse
monoclonal antibody specific for the N-terminal polyhistidine tag
derived from plasmid pQE32* (1:2000 dilution) (RGS-His, QIAGEN)
followed by goat anti-mouse IgG horseradish peroxidase (1:40,000
dilution) (The Jackson Laboratory). The membrane was incubated with
Pierce SuperSignal ULTRA chemiluminescent substrate and exposed to
Hyperfilm-MP.
The Yeast R64E and Human R53E TFIIB Mutants Exhibit Increased
Activity in DB Complex Formation--
We reported previously that the
yeast TFIIB R64E mutant was more active than wild-type yeast TFIIB in
the formation of stable DB complexes in vitro (16). To
extend the biochemical characterization of the R64E protein and to
determine the functional significance of this elevated activity, we
initially sought to determine 1) whether the R64E substitution confers
an altered conformation to the mutant protein and 2) whether a
homologous substitution in human TFIIB (R53E) also confers increased
activity for DB complex formation. To facilitate the probing of protein
conformation by immunoblotting (described under "The Yeast R64E TFIIB
Protein Exhibits an Altered Sensitivity to V8 Protease"), we
constructed variants of wild-type and R64E yeast TFIIB that contained a
c-Myc epitope fused to the C terminus of the protein. To verify that the C-terminal Myc tag did not affect DB complex formation, the wild-type and R64E Myc-tagged recombinant proteins were purified and
analyzed for their activities in DB complex formation using a gel
mobility shift assay. Consistent with the results obtained previously
with the non-tagged counterparts, comparable amounts of stable DB
complexes were formed in reactions containing 2 pmol of Myc-tagged
wild-type or R64E protein, whereas at lower TFIIB concentrations,
reactions containing the R64E mutant yielded approximately 5 times more
DB complex than wild-type TFIIB (Fig. 2, A and
B). As seen previously, the DB complexes containing the R64E
protein exhibited a slightly altered mobility in the native gel
compared with DB complexes containing wild-type TFIIB. This alteration is likely to be due solely to the change in the charge of the protein,
as a similar alteration in mobility is observed for DB complexes
containing other yeast TFIIB mutants with a basic to acidic amino acid
substitution (data not shown).
The elevated levels of DB complexes formed with the R64E protein could
be due to the mutant protein altering the kinetics and/or the
equilibrium of the DB complex reaction. To distinguish between these
possibilities, a time course for DB complex formation was performed
where the amounts of DB complexes formed between 5 and 40 min of
incubation with wild-type or R64E protein were compared. The results
revealed that the DB reactions reached equilibrium within 5 min of
incubation and that the reactions containing the R64E protein yielded
elevated levels of DB complex at all time points (Fig. 2C).
These results suggest that the R64E substitution affects the
equilibrium but apparently not the kinetics of the DB complex reaction.
The arginine residue at position 64 in yeast TFIIB is invariant among
seven eukaryotic species and resides within a highly conserved homology
block in the N-terminal region of the protein (17). To determine
whether a homologous substitution in human TFIIB also confers increased
activity for DB complex formation, we constructed plasmids for the
production of recombinant human wild-type and R53E mutant TFIIB
proteins and compared the activities of the purified proteins in DB
complex formation. Comparable amounts of stable DB complexes were
formed in reactions containing 1 pmol of wild-type or R53E human TFIIB
protein, whereas at lower TFIIB concentrations, reactions containing
the R53E mutant yielded approximately 2-3 times more DB complex than
wild-type TFIIB (Fig. 3). These results
demonstrate that the R53E substitution in human TFIIB also increases DB
complex formation although the effect is less pronounced than that
observed with the R64E substitution in yeast TFIIB.
The Yeast R64E TFIIB Protein Exhibits an Altered Sensitivity to V8
Protease--
Having demonstrated that the introduction of a
C-terminal Myc tag did not alter DB complex formation (Fig. 2), we
utilized a partial proteolysis assay to probe the structure of the
wild-type and R64E yeast TFIIB proteins. The Myc-tagged proteins were
subjected to a time course of limited proteolytic digestion using
S. aureus V8 protease, and the proteolytic cleavage products
were resolved by SDS-PAGE and visualized by either Coomassie Blue
staining or immunoblotting using a monoclonal antibody directed against
the Myc epitope. The results revealed that the R64E substitution did not alter the position of the major cleavage site but rather the substitution conferred a significant effect on the kinetics of cleavage. Coomassie Blue staining of the reaction products from wild-type protein revealed major V8 cleavage products of approximately 28 and 18 kDa that were readily observed within 5 min of digestion (Fig. 4A). In contrast, these
reaction products were only weakly detected after 10-20 min of
digestion with the R64E protein (Fig. 4A). Immunoblotting
revealed that the approximately 28-kDa cleavage product was detected
with the antibody that recognizes the Myc epitope at the C terminus of
the proteins and confirmed that the production of this fragment was
significantly reduced with the R64E protein (Fig. 4B). To
further map the approximate position of the major V8 cleavage site, the
cleavage products were immunoblotted alongside a C-terminal Myc-tagged
core domain that contains yeast residues 119-345 fused to a 13-residue
N-terminal polyhistidine tag and the 10-residue C-terminal Myc tag. The
results revealed that the 28-kDa cleavage product nearly comigrated
with the doubly tagged core domain (Fig. 4C), suggesting
that the major V8 cleavage site corresponds to either Glu-100 or
Glu-109, which reside in the hinge region between the highly conserved
N-terminal region and the core domain (Fig. 4D). Taken
together, these findings suggest that the R64E substitution induces or
stabilizes a conformation of the yeast TFIIB protein that diminishes
the susceptibility of the hinge region to proteolytic attack.
The R64E Substitution in Yeast TFIIB Enhances an Interaction
between the N-terminal Region and the Core Domain--
Arg-53 of human
TFIIB, homologous to yeast TFIIB Arg-64, resides within a 42-amino acid
segment of the human N-terminal region that interacts with the core
domain (34). To determine whether the N-terminal region and the core
domain of yeast TFIIB also physically interact and whether the R64E
substitution alters this interaction, we tested the ability of purified
recombinant proteins containing the N-terminal 89 residues of wild-type
or R64E yeast TFIIB to bind to a GST-yeast core domain fusion protein.
The wild-type N-terminal region bound the core domain, demonstrating a
conservation of the interaction that was reported for human TFIIB (Fig.
5A). Importantly, the R64E
N-terminal region exhibited enhanced binding to the core domain
compared with wild-type TFIIB (Fig. 5A). At the lowest
concentration of input N-terminal fragments (2.5 pmol), the degree of
enhanced binding with the R64E N-terminal fragment could not be
quantitated because there was no detectable binding of the wild-type
N-terminal fragment. In reactions containing 5 or 10 pmol of input
N-terminal fragments, the degree of enhanced binding with the R64E
N-terminal fragment was approximately 7- and 3-fold, respectively (Fig.
5, A and B). These results demonstrate that the
increased activity of the R64E protein in DB complex formation is
associated with an enhanced interaction between the N-terminal region
and the core domain.
In this study, we have investigated the molecular basis for the
increased activity of the yeast TFIIB R64E mutant in DB complex formation. At limiting TFIIB concentrations, the R64E protein yielded
approximately 5 times more DB complex than wild-type yeast TFIIB (Fig.
2). Similarly, the homologous human R53E mutant yielded approximately
2-3 times more DB complex than wild-type human TFIIB (Fig. 3). These
results suggest that a conserved function of TFIIB is altered by the
yeast R64E and human R53E substitutions to increase DB complex
formation. As an initial step in extending the biochemical characterization of the R64E protein, we sought to determine whether the R64E substitution conferred an altered conformation to the protein.
Using a partial proteolysis assay, we determined that the R64E mutant
protein was significantly more resistant than wild-type yeast TFIIB to
protease cleavage in the hinge region between the N-terminal region and
the core domain (Fig. 4). These results suggest that the R64E
substitution in yeast TFIIB induces or stabilizes a conformation of the
protein that diminishes the accessibility of the hinge region to
protease action.
Previous biochemical studies demonstrated an interaction between the
N-terminal region and the core domain of human TFIIB (34, 35). Because
the core domain directly interacts with TBP and the DNA near the TATA
element (22, 23), an interaction involving the N-terminal region and
the core domain of TFIIB could play a role in modulating the stable
association of TFIIB with promoter-bound TBP. The region of the human
N-terminal domain involved in the interaction was localized to residues
24-65, which includes Arg-53, homologous to yeast Arg-64 (34). We
speculated that the human R53E and yeast R64E substitutions might alter
this interaction to expose the core domain or alter its conformation, resulting in an increased number of molecules in a productive conformation for stable DB complex formation. Affinity chromatography utilizing wild-type or R64E N-terminal protein fragments and GST-core domain fusion protein demonstrated that the N-terminal region and the
core domain of yeast TFIIB physically interacted and that the R64E
substitution enhanced this interaction (Fig. 5). Compared with the
wild-type N-terminal region, the R64E N-terminal region exhibited
3-7-fold enhanced binding to the core domain, which correlates well
with the 5-fold increased activity of the R64E protein in DB complex
formation. Taken together, our results suggest that the R64E
substitution in yeast TFIIB enhances an interaction between the
N-terminal region and the core domain and that this enhancement
stabilizes a conformation of the protein that is both more protease
resistant in the hinge region and more efficient in stable DB complex formation.
Although the intramolecular interaction in yeast and human TFIIB is
likely to be of functional importance, the precise role(s) of this
interaction in the potential modulation of TFIIB activity remains to be
determined. It was previously proposed that the intramolecular
interaction in human TFIIB regulates the stepwise assembly of PICs at
the level of TFIIF and RNAPII entry (34). In this model, the majority
of native TFIIB was proposed as being in a "closed" conformation
because of the interaction between the N-terminal region and the core
domain. This conformation of TFIIB was viewed as being inactive for PIC
assembly because of the potential inaccessibility of the binding sites
for TFIIF and RNAPII in the N-terminal region. Interaction with the
VP16 activator was proposed to disrupt the intramolecular interaction
to expose the TFIIF and RNAPII binding sites and drive PIC assembly
forward. Our results reported here are consistent with the possibility that the intramolecular interaction in TFIIB plays a role in modulating TFIIF and RNAPII association in stepwise PIC assembly but suggest that
an additional function of the intramolecular interaction is to promote
the association of TFIIB with promoter-bound TBP.
If the intramolecular interaction in TFIIB promotes the association of
TFIIB with promoter-bound TBP, what is the underlying mechanism?
Previous structural studies revealed that the relative positions of the
direct repeats in the core domain of human TFIIB are rotated in the DB
complex compared with their orientation in core domain that is free in
solution (11, 12). This observation suggests that the core domain may
exist in either a productive or a non-productive conformation for
efficient DB complex formation that is defined by the orientation of
the direct repeats. Recent NMR studies by Ikura and colleagues (35)
have demonstrated that the free core domain exhibits a fair degree of
conformational fluctuation and that similar chemical shifts are induced
in the core domain upon interaction with either an N-terminal TFIIB
peptide or with the VP16 activation domain. Moreover, it was shown that the NMR spectrum of full-length human TFIIB exhibits large line widths
and chemical shift overlap but that binding of the VP16 activation
domain results in a significant improvement in the spectrum. As stated
by the authors, these observations suggest that TFIIB exists in
multiple conformations in solution and that the equilibrium between
these forms can be altered by the interaction of either VP16 or the
TFIIB N-terminal region with the core domain. In light of these NMR
studies and our results reported here, we propose that the interaction
between the N-terminal region and the core domain of TFIIB stabilizes a
productive conformation of the core domain for efficient association
with promoter-bound TBP (Fig. 6). In this
model, the strengthening of this interaction in the yeast R64E mutant
would shift the equilibrium toward the productive conformation,
resulting in a greater number of TFIIB molecules that are both more
protease-resistant in the hinge region and more efficient in stable DB
complex formation. In this regard, the results from Fig. 2C
support the view that the R64E substitution affects the equilibrium for
stable DB complex formation and not the rate at which equilibrium is
achieved. It is also interesting to note that the yeast R64E
substitution increased DB complex formation to a greater degree than
the human R53E substitution and that yeast TFIIB appeared to be less
efficient than human TFIIB in DB complex formation (Figs. 2 and 3). The
apparent lower intrinsic activity of yeast TFIIB in DB complex
formation, as well as the more pronounced effect of the R64E
substitution, could be attributable to yeast TFIIB having additional
residues in the linker region between the direct repeats in the core
domain. The longer interrepeat linker in yeast TFIIB could confer
greater flexibility and conformational variability to the core domain, resulting in a smaller fraction of the molecules at equilibrium being
in the productive conformation for DB complex formation. Continued
studies of the intramolecular interaction in TFIIB should provide
important information regarding the modulation of TFIIB function and
the regulation of PIC formation.
We thank Lynne Pajak for technical
assistance; Mitsuhiko Ikura, Ed Niles, Kevin Struhl, and Michael Green
for helpful discussions; and Tim Pardee for helpful discussions and
critical reading of the manuscript.
*
This work was supported by Public Health Service Grant
GM51124 from the National Institutes of Health (to A. S. P.).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: Dept. of Biochemistry
and the Center for Advanced Molecular Biology and Immunology, School of
Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York, 3435 Main St., 140 Faber Hall, Buffalo, NY 14214-3000. Tel.: 716-829-2473;
Fax: 716-829-2725; E-mail: asp@acsu.buffalo.edu.
The abbreviations used are:
RNAPII, RNA
polymerase II;
TFIIB, transcription factor IIB;
PIC, preinitiation
complex;
TBP, TATA-binding protein;
DB, TATA-binding protein-TFIIB-DNA;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
GST, glutathione
S-transferase;
PMSF, phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride;
DTT, dithiothreitol;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
An Interaction between the N-terminal Region and the Core Domain
of Yeast TFIIB Promotes the Formation of TATA-binding Protein-TFIIB-DNA
Complexes*
,
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helices that pack into a globular structure (10-12). The
N-terminal region is important for TFIIF and RNAPII binding (13-17),
and mutations in this region of Saccharomyces cerevisiae
TFIIB can confer downstream shifts in transcription initiation both
in vivo and in vitro (16-18). The core domain
binds TBP (4, 13, 19) and the TBP-associated factor TAF40 (20, 21) and
directly interacts with DNA both upstream and downstream of the TATA
element (22, 23). In addition to its central role in the architecture
of the PIC, TFIIB may also play a role in the regulation of
transcription by gene-specific regulatory factors. Genetic and
molecular studies of yeast TFIIB have identified a species-specific
region in the core domain that is reportedly important for
transcriptional activation in vivo (24, 25). Moreover,
numerous promoter-specific regulatory factors directly bind TFIIB
(26-33).

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
TFIIB structure and functional domains.
Depicted at the top of the figure is the general structure
of S. cerevisiae TFIIB. The 345-residue
polypeptide is composed of a highly conserved N-terminal region
(residues 22-99) containing a putative zinc ribbon motif followed by a
C-terminal core domain containing two imperfect direct repeats
(indicated by the arrows). The boxed areas shown
below the general structure correspond to functional domains
involved in the binding of RNAPII, TFIIF, TBP, and DNA in the immediate
vicinity of the TATA element.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-D-galactopyranoside (1 mM
final concentration) for 3 h. Cells were harvested, suspended in 5 ml of Buffer L (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 500 mM
NaCl, 10% glycerol, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 1 mM imidazole,
and protease inhibitors (0.5 µg of pepstatin A/ml, 0.5 µg of
leupeptin/ml, 2 µg of chymostatin/ml, 1 µg of bestatin/ml, 2.5 µg
of antipain/ml, 0.5 µg of aprotinin/ml, 1 mM PMSF, 2 mM benzamidine)), and lysed by two passages in a French
press at 900 p.s.i. at 4 °C. All subsequent steps were performed at 4 °C. DNase I (10 µg/ml final concentration) and RNase A (20 µg/ml final concentration) were added, and the lysate was
incubated for 30 min. EDTA was added to a final concentration of 0.2 mM, and the lysate was centrifuged for 20 min at
15,000 × g. The supernatant was loaded in batch onto 1 ml of Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid resin (QIAGEN) for 60 min, and the resin
was subsequently packed into a column. The column was washed with 15 ml
of Buffer W (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 1 M NaCl,
10% glycerol, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 10 mM imidazole, 0.2 mM EDTA, protease inhibitors), and protein was eluted with
10 ml of Buffer W containing 250 mM imidazole, collecting
1-ml fractions. Peak fractions of yeast TFIIB were pooled (2-3 ml
final volume) and dialyzed versus Buffer B (20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 100 mM potassium acetate,
20% glycerol, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, protease
inhibitors). Peak fractions of human TFIIB were dialyzed
versus 20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 20% glycerol, 250 mM KCl, 10 mM magnesium sulfate, 10 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, and 0.1 mM PMSF.
Purified TFIIB proteins were quantitated by Bio-Rad protein assays and
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and judged to be >90% pure.
Dilutions of TFIIB proteins were made in Buffer B containing 500 µg
of bovine serum albumin/ml. Polyhistidine-tagged N89 TFIIB proteins
were expressed and purified essentially as described for the
full-length TFIIB proteins except that the peptides were further
purified by fast protein liquid chromatography using a Superdex75 HR
10/30 (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) sizing column. The separation was
carried out at a flow rate of 0.5 ml/min using 20 mM
HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 500 mM KCl, 1 mM DTT, and
0.1 mM PMSF as the running buffer. Peak fractions were
pooled and concentrated using a BIOMAX-5 (Millipore) spin column, and
purity was judged to be >99% by Coomassie Blue staining. GST and
GST-CoreIIB fusion proteins were expressed under control of the phage
T7 promoter in plasmid pGEX* in E. coli strain BL21.
Cultures (500 ml) were grown at 37 °C in 2× YT medium with 100 µg
of ampicillin/ml to an A600 of 0.6-0.8, and
expression was induced with
isopropyl-1-thio-
-D-galactopyranoside (0.4 mM final concentration) for 4 h. Cells were harvested,
suspended in 5 ml of Buffer L, and lysed by two passages in a French
press at 900 p.s.i. at 4 °C. All subsequent steps were
performed at 4 °C. DNase I (10 µg/ml final concentration) and
RNase A (20 µg/ml final) were added, and the lysate was incubated for
30 min. EDTA was added to a final concentration of 0.2 mM,
and the lysate was centrifuged for 20 min at 15,000 × g. The supernatant was loaded in batch onto 1 ml of
glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 60 min,
and the resin was subsequently packed into a column. The column was
washed with 20 ml of buffer containing 20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH
7.6, 500 mM NaCl, 20% glycerol, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM DTT, and protease inhibitors followed by 10 ml of Buffer S (20 mM HEPES-KOH, pH 7.6, 200 mM KCl, 20%
glycerol, 1 mM DTT, protease inhibitors, and 0.03% sodium
azide). The beads with bound proteins were resuspended in Buffer S and
stored at 4 °C as a 50% suspension.

View larger version (33K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Increased DB complex formation with the yeast
TFIIB R64E mutant protein. A, electrophoretic mobility
shift assays are shown. Reactions contained 20 fmol of a
32P-labeled 45-base pair DNA fragment containing the
adenovirus early 1B TATA element, 10 ng of purified yeast TBP
(lanes 2-12), and the indicated amount of purified Myc
epitope-tagged wild-type (WT) or R64E yeast TFIIB protein.
The position of the DB complexes is indicated. The relative amount of
stable DB complex formed in each reaction was quantitated by scanning
densitometry (B) using Molecular Analyst software.
C, time course for DB complex formation is shown. Reactions
were performed as described for A using 0.25 pmol of TFIIB
protein/reaction.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (43K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Increased DB complex formation with the human
TFIIB R53E mutant protein. A, electrophoretic mobility
shift assays are shown. Reactions contained 20 fmol of a
32P-labeled 45-base pair DNA fragment containing the
adenovirus early 1B TATA element, 10 ng of purified yeast TBP
(lanes 2-12), and the indicated amount of purified
wild-type (hWT) or R53E human TFIIB protein. The position of
the DB complexes is indicated. The relative amount of stable DB complex
formed in each reaction was quantitated by scanning densitometry
(B) using Molecular Analyst software. WT,
wild-type.

View larger version (35K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Altered protease sensitivity exhibited by the
yeast TFIIB R64E mutant protein. Purified wild-type
(WT) and R64E yeast TFIIB proteins (Myc epitope-tagged at
the C terminus) were incubated with S. aureus V8 protease
for the indicated amount of time as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Reactions were terminated with SDS sample buffer, and
the proteolytic products were resolved by SDS-PAGE and detected by
Coomassie Blue staining (A) or by immunoblotting using a
monoclonal antibody directed against the Myc epitope (B).
The numbers on the left correspond to the
position of molecular mass standards (in kilodaltons). The position of
full-length TFIIB and the major proteolytic cleavage products are
indicated. C, comparison of the mobility of the major V8
cleavage product to that of core domain. V8 cleavage products from
C-terminal Myc-tagged wild-type TFIIB were resolved alongside doubly
tagged yeast TFIIB core domain (yeast residues 119-345 fused to a
13-residue N-terminal polyhistidine tag and the 10-residue C-terminal
Myc tag) and analyzed by immunoblotting using a monoclonal antibody
directed against the Myc epitope. D, a schematic indicating
the approximate position of the major V8 protease cleavage site is
shown.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Enhanced interaction between the yeast TFIIB
R64E N-terminal region and the core domain. A, affinity
chromatography of yeast TFIIB N-terminal proteins and core domain is
shown. Binding reactions contained the indicated amount of purified
wild-type (WT) or R64E N-terminal proteins and 50 pmol of
immobilized GST or GST-core domain fusion protein. Bound N-terminal
proteins were eluted with SDS sample buffer, and one-fourth of each
eluant was analyzed by immunoblotting using a monoclonal antibody
directed against the polyhistidine tag. For each polyacrylamide gel, 1 pmol of input N-terminal protein was directly loaded to serve as an
internal control for the immunoblot procedure and as a standard for
quantitation. B, quantitation of bound N-terminal proteins
is shown. Scanning densitometry and Molecular Analyst software were
used to determine the relative amounts of the N-terminal proteins in
each sample. The molar amount of N-terminal protein bound in each
reaction was calculated by multiplying the densitometry units
(corresponding to one-fourth of the eluant) by four and dividing the
product by the densitometry units for the 1-pmol input control analyzed
on the same blot.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Model for the role of the TFIIB
intramolecular interaction in modulating core domain structure and
association with promoter-bound TBP. TFIIB is presented in two
forms that are defined by the relative orientation of the direct
repeats in the core domain. In Form I, the core domain is in the
non-productive conformation for efficient association with
promoter-bound TBP. The N-terminal region and the core domain are not
engaged in the intramolecular interaction, and the hinge region between
them exhibits enhanced protease sensitivity. In Form II, the N-terminal
region and the core domain are engaged in the intramolecular
interaction, diminishing the protease sensitivity of the hinge region
and stabilizing the productive conformation of the core domain for
efficient association with promoter-bound TBP.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
Present address: Corixa Corp., 1124 Columbia St.,
Seattle, WA 98104.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Orphanides, G.,
Lagrange, T.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1996)
Genes Dev.
10,
2657-2683 2.
Conaway, R. C.,
and Conaway, J. W.
(1993)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
62,
161-190[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
3.
Zawel, L.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1993)
Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol.
44,
67-108[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Buratowski, S.,
Hahn, S.,
Guarente, L.,
and Sharp, P. A.
(1989)
Cell
56,
549-561[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Koleske, A. J.,
and Young, R. A.
(1994)
Nature
368,
466-469[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Kim, Y. J.,
Bjorklund, S.,
Li, Y.,
Sayre, H. M.,
and Kornberg, R. D.
(1994)
Cell
77,
599-608[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
7.
Ossipow, V.,
Tassan, J. P.,
Nigg, E. A.,
and Schibler, U.
(1995)
Cell
83,
137-146[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
8.
Barberis, A.,
Muller, C. W.,
Harrison, S. C.,
and Ptashne, M.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
5628-5632 9.
Malik, S.,
Lee, D. K.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6253-6259 10.
Zhu, W.,
Zeng, Q.,
Colangelo, C. M.,
Lewis, M.,
Summers, M. F.,
and Scott, R. A.
(1996)
Nat. Struct. Biol.
3,
122-124[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
11.
Bagby, S.,
Kim, S.,
Maldonado, E.,
Tong, K. I.,
Reinberg, D.,
and Ikura, M.
(1995)
Cell
82,
857-867[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
12.
Nikolov, D. B.,
Chen, H.,
Halay, E. D.,
Usheva, A. A.,
Hisatake, K.,
Lee, D. K.,
Roeder, R. G.,
and Burley, S. K.
(1995)
Nature
377,
119-128[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
13.
Ha, I.,
Roberts, S.,
Maldonado, E.,
Sun, X.,
Kim, L. U.,
Green, M.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1993)
Genes Dev.
7,
1021-1032 14.
Fang, S. M.,
and Burton, Z. F.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11703-11709 15.
Bushnell, D. A.,
Bamdad, C.,
and Kornberg, R. D.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
20170-20174 16.
Bangur, C. S.,
Pardee, T. S.,
and Ponticelli, A. S.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
6784-6793[Abstract]
17.
Pardee, T. S.,
Bangur, C. S.,
and Ponticelli, A. S.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17859-17864 18.
Pinto, I.,
Wu, W. H.,
Na, J. G.,
and Hampsey, M.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
30569-30573 19.
Maldonado, E.,
Ha, I.,
Cortes, P.,
Weis, L.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1990)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10,
6335-6347 20.
Goodrich, J. A.,
Hoey, T.,
Thut, C. J.,
Admon, A.,
and Tjian, R.
(1993)
Cell
75,
519-530[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Hori, R.,
Pyo, S.,
and Carey, M.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
6047-6051 22.
Lee, S.,
and Hahn, S.
(1995)
Nature
376,
609-612[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
23.
Lagrange, T.,
Kapanidis, A. N.,
Tang, H.,
Reinberg, D.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
34-44 24.
Shaw, S. P.,
Wingfield, J.,
Dorsey, M. J.,
and Ma, J.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
3651-3657[Abstract]
25.
Shaw, S. P.,
Carson, D. J.,
Dorsey, M. J.,
and Ma, J.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
2427-2432 26.
Chiang, Y.-C.,
Komarnitsky, P.,
Chase, D.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
32359-32365 27.
Colgan, J.,
and Manley, J. L.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
1955-1959 28.
Franklin, C. C.,
McCulloch, A. V.,
and Kraft, A. S.
(1995)
Biochem. J.
305,
967-974
29.
Hadzic, E.,
Desai-Yajnik, V.,
Helmer, E.,
Guo, S.,
Wu, S.,
Koudinova, N.,
Casanova, J.,
Raaka, B. M.,
and Samuels, H. H.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
4507-4517[Abstract]
30.
Lin, Y. S.,
Ha, I.,
Maldonado, E.,
Reinberg, D.,
and Green, M. R.
(1991)
Nature
353,
569-571[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
31.
MacDonald, P. N.,
Sherman, D. R.,
Dowd, D. R.,
Jefcoat, S. C., Jr.,
and DeLisle, R. K.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
4748-4752 32.
Sauer, F.,
Fondell, J. D.,
Ohkuma, Y.,
Roeder, R. G.,
and Jackle, H.
(1995)
Nature
375,
162-164[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
33.
Xing, L.,
Gopal, V. K.,
and Quinn, P. G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
17488-17493 34.
Roberts, S. G.,
and Green, M. R.
(1994)
Nature
371,
717-720[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
35.
Hayashi, F.,
Ishima, R.,
Liu, D.,
Tong, K. I.,
Kim, S.,
Reinberg, D.,
Bagby, S.,
and Ikura, M.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
7941-7951[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
36.
Kao, C. C.,
Lieberman, P. M.,
Schmidt, M. C.,
Zhou, Q.,
Pei, R.,
and Berk, A. J.
(1990)
Science
248,
1646-1650
Copyright © 1999 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:
![]() |
J. A. Glossop, T. R. Dafforn, and S. G. E. Roberts A conformational change in TFIIB is required for activator-mediated assembly of the preinitiation complex Nucleic Acids Res., March 22, 2004; 32(5): 1829 - 1835. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. M. Ziegler, D. A. Khaperskyy, M. L. Ammerman, and A. S. Ponticelli Yeast RNA Polymerase II Lacking the Rpb9 Subunit Is Impaired for Interaction with Transcription Factor IIF J. Biol. Chem., December 5, 2003; 278(49): 48950 - 48956. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D.-Y. Zhang, D. J. Carson, and J. Ma The role of TFIIB-RNA polymerase II interaction in start site selection in yeast cells Nucleic Acids Res., July 15, 2002; 30(14): 3078 - 3085. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D.-Y. Zhang, M. J. Dorsey, W. P. Voth, D. J. Carson, X. Zeng, D. J. Stillman, and J. Ma Intramolecular interaction of yeast TFIIB in transcription control Nucleic Acids Res., May 1, 2000; 28(9): 1913 - 1920. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK |