![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 40, 28590-28597, October 1, 1999
§,
,

From the
Institute of Biosciences and Technology,
Center for Genome Research, Texas A&M University System Health
Sciences Center, Houston, Texas 77030-3303 and ¶ Laboratory of
Receptor Biology and Gene Expression, NCI, National Institutes of
Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20896-5055
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Unrestrained DNA supercoiling and the number of
topological domains were measured within a 1.8 megabase pair
chromosomal region consisting of about 200 tandem repeats of a mouse
mammary tumor virus promoter-driven ha-v-ras
gene. When uninduced, unrestrained negative supercoiling was organized
into 32-kilobase pair (kb) topological domains. Upon induction, DNA
supercoiling throughout the region was completely relaxed. Supercoiling
was detected, however, when elongation was blocked before or following
induction. The formation of transcription initiation complexes upon
addition of dexamethasone decreased the domain size to 16 kb. During
transcription the domain size was 9 kb, the length of one repeat. These
results suggest that topological domain boundaries can be
"functional" in nature, being established by the formation of
activated and elongating transcription complexes.
Topological domains, often referred to as chromosomal loops, have
been detected in many organisms including Escherichia coli (1), Drosophila (2), and humans (3) (for review see Ref. 4).
The formation of a topological domain requires restraint of the DNA
helix such that rotation of one strand of the DNA double helix around
the other is prevented. Consequently, DNA within a topological domain
can contain a linking number deficit that is manifest as unrestrained
superhelical energy (for review see Ref. 5). Domain boundaries may
result from the attachment of the DNA at specialized sites
(i.e. MARs1 or
SARs) (6, 7) onto the nuclear matrix. Recently a bipartite sequence
element has been identified within matrix attachment regions that may
be important in chromosome organization or function via these sites
(8). Alternatively, topological domain boundaries may be functional in
nature resulting from the attachment of functional proteins such as RNA
or DNA polymerase complexes to the nuclear membrane (9). For example,
in Salmonella typhimurium membrane attachment of TetA leads
to the formation of a topological domain boundary defined by the
transcriptional complex where the RNA is being translated (10). In
addition, in yeast, telomeric sequences can act as functional anchor
points for chromosome organization to provide blocks to the
transmission of supercoils across the block (11). Other DNA·enzyme
complexes in bacteria, such as that created by UvrAB can also act as a
boundary to supercoiling (12).
DNA in living bacterial cells is organized with a linking number
deficit leading to a state of unrestrained negative supercoiling (1,
13). Although, DNA is negatively supercoiled in bacterial cells, not
all supercoiling is unrestrained. About half the supercoils in DNA in
Escherichia coli are restrained, possibly by the wrapping of
DNA around histone-like proteins (14-18). Consequently, in
vivo measurements of levels of supercoiling are about half that
measured for the purified chromosome (19-22). Initial studies of
supercoiling in eukaryotic cells failed to detect unrestrained
supercoiling averaged over the entire chromosome (13), presumably due
to the restraint of supercoils through the organization of DNA into nucleosomes. However, analyses of individual genes in
Drosophila, mouse, and human cells have revealed the
presence of unrestrained supercoiling associated with gene regions (2,
23-26), whereas DNA outside the functional hsp70 domain at locus 87A
Drosophila was completely relaxed (2). However, a
relationship between transcription or transcriptional activation and
unrestrained supercoiling remains to be clearly established. For
example, the level of supercoiling within a transcriptionally active
hygromycin resistance gene introduced into different regions of the
human genome can vary from highly supercoiled to relaxed (26).
The mouse mammary tumor virus promoter provides a model system in which
the nucleosomal organization and nucleosomal reorganization upon
transcription activation are extremely well characterized (27).
Transcription rapidly follows the addition of the glucocorticoid hormone dexamethasone, allowing analysis of the chromatin under conditions of gene repression or activation. When stably introduced into the genome, the mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV) promoter acquires
six positioned nucleosome families (28), positioned over the binding
sites for the glucocorticoid receptor and associated factors involved
in promoter activation. Steroid hormone induction of the MMTV promoter
with dexamethasone renders the DNA sequences associated with the B
nucleosome family accessible to restriction endonuclease
digestion (28). The hormone-dependent increased nucleosome accessibility is believed to be mechanistically responsible for the loading of transcription factors and the subsequent induction of transcriptional activation (29, 30). The increase in enzyme accessibility of nucleosome B in a stably integrated MMTV promoter is
15-20% in one mouse cell line, suggesting that transcriptional activation of the promoter occurs at similar levels (31).
The well characterized MMTV promoter and the availability of a cell
line containing multiple tandem copies of this promoter afford an
excellent system in which to study the effects of gene activation and
transcriptional elongation on the level of DNA supercoiling and the
number of topological domains. We have studied the change in
supercoiling and topological domain size in a DNA region containing
approximately 200 copies of the MMTV promoter 5' of the
ha-v-ras gene to understand the role of chromatin
organization and supercoiling on gene expression. The transcriptional
state of the gene influences the topological domain size and the level of unrestrained supercoiling. The average domain size within the tandem
array of MMTV promoter-driven genes changes upon transcriptional activation and elongation suggesting that transcription complexes are
functional topological domain boundaries.
Cells, Cell Growth, and DNA Purification--
Cell line 3134 contains approximately 200 copies of the 9-kb fragment (pM18D) of the
plasmid pM18 (28) in a tandem array in a single chromosomal location.
Cells were maintained as a monolayer in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's
medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum at 37 °C in a 5%
CO2 atmosphere. To incorporate BrdUrd into the DNA, cells
were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium + 10% fetal bovine
serum containing 10 mM bromo-2-deoxyuridine. At this
concentration, 45% of the thymidines were substituted with
bromo-2-deoxyuridine in hamster cells (32). 24 h before use, cells
were incubated in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium lacking phenol
red and containing 10% charcoal-stripped serum (Hyclone). For
transcriptional activation, cells were treated with dexamethasone
at a concentration of 0.5 µM for 1 h, either before
or after a 60-min treatment with 50 µg/ml of Genomic DNA Analysis--
Genomic DNA from approximately
1.2 × 106 3134 cells, lysed in agarose blocks, was
digested overnight at 37 °C with various restriction enzymes. For
clamped homogeneous electric field (CHEF) gel analysis, the digested
DNAs were separated for 83 h in a 0.8% agarose gel equilibrated
with 1X TAE buffer (0.04 M Tris base, 0.04 M
glacial acetic acid, 0.001 M EDTA) in a Bio-Rad CHEF Mapper XA pulsed field electrophoresis system with the auto algorithm supplied
by the manufacturer for optimal separation of 1 to 3 mega base pair
DNAs. Following electrophoresis, location of the Hansenula
wingei chromosomal marker was determined by ethidium bromide
staining. Genomic DNA was transferred to a nylon membrane (Amersham
Hybond-N+) by capillary action under alkali conditions. This blot was
hybridized for 48 h under moderate stringency (2× SSC (0.3 M NaCl, 0.03 M sodium citrate, pH 7.0); 5×
Denhardt's solution (0.1% Ficoll (Mr 400,000),
0.1% polyvinyl pyrrolidone (Mr 400,000), and
0.1% bovine serum albumin); 50% deionized formamide; 1% SDS; 100 µg/ml denatured sheared salmon sperm; 55 °C) with a radioactive
RNA probe derived from the 69% transforming portion of bovine
papilloma virus (BPV; sense strand position 1234-3224 of BPV-1 DNA
(GenBankTM accession number X02346)). The blot was washed
at 42 °C in 0.2× SSC, 0.1% SDS following treatment with RNase A
(25 µg/ml) and RNase T1 (10 µg/ml) at room temperature in 2× SSC.
Subsequently, the blot was placed on a PhosphorImager plate to collect
the radioactive signal. For field inversion gel electrophoresis, the
genomic DNAs digested in plugs as described above were separated in a
1% agarose gel in 0.5× TBE buffer (0.045 M Tris base,
0.045 M boric acid, 0.001 M EDTA) using the
auto algorithm feature optimal for separation of 2- to 50-kilobase pair
DNA. Reference marker DNA in this case was HindIII-digested
lambda DNA (range of fragments, 8.3 to 48.5 kb). The separated genomic
DNA was analyzed by hybridizing to the BPV RNA probe.
S1 Analysis--
The S1 analyses were performed as described
previously (33). Briefly, total cellular RNA was extracted by
phenol-chloroform, precipitated with ethanol, and dissolved in
H2O. Single-stranded MMTV probes were synthesized by primer
extension in the presence of [ Isolation and Restriction of Nuclei--
Preparation of nuclei,
restriction enzyme treatment, and analysis by primer extension was
performed as described previously (31). Briefly, treated or untreated
cells were scraped into cold phosphate-buffered saline and homogenized
with a dounce ("A" pestle) in 0.3 M sucrose, 3 mM CaCl2, 2 mM magnesium acetate, 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.8, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1% Triton X-100. The
homogenate was diluted 1:1 with digestion buffer (25% glycerol, 5 mM magnesium acetate, 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.8, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, 0.1 mM EDTA), and
centrifuged through a pad containing dilution buffer for 15 min at
1,000 × g and 4 °C. Nuclear pellets were
resuspended in 25% glycerol, 5 mM HEPES, pH 7.8, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol. 10 µg of DNA
equivalents of nuclei was restricted with 100 units of SacI,
for 15 min at 37 °C in 50 mM NaCl, 50 mM
Tris-Cl, pH 8, 0.5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM
Nicking, Psoralen Cross-linking, and Southern
Protocols--
Following growth in the presence of
bromo-2-deoxyuridine, the DNA nicking was accomplished by exposure of
the cells to 313-nm light using a mercury vapor lamp with a
K2CrO4/NaOH filter as described
previously (26, 36-39). Subsequent treatment with psoralen and 360-nm
light, and DNA purification protocols were described previously
(26).
For Southern analysis, 7 µg of chromosomal DNA were digested to
completion at 37 °C with 100 units of SpeI in 60 µl of
restriction buffer. After digestion, DNA was purified and treated with
glyoxal aldehyde and dimethyl sulfoxide (Me2SO) as
described previously (26). DNA samples were separated on a 1% agarose
gel in 10 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.0) as described (40),
the gel was denatured, and the DNA was transferred to a nylon membrane
(26). For hybridization analysis of the MMTV promoter, a 3.0-kb
SpeI fragment was isolated from plasmid pM18 (28) and
labeled with [ Measurement of Single Strand Breaks--
The frequency of single
strand breaks introduced by BrdUrd photolysis was determined as
described previously (26) with the following modifications: 5 ml of
5-20% alkaline sucrose gradients were centrifuged at 35,000 rpm in a
Beckman SW55Ti rotor for 4 h. Thirty equal volume fractions were
collected from the bottom of the tube onto 3-cm square sections of a
nylon membrane. After baking at 80 °C for 2 h, the membrane was
hybridized with the 3.0-kb SpeI fragment
32P-labeled probe of pM18D containing the MMTV promoter and
v-ras gene (Fig. 1). The membrane was washed twice with 2×
SSC at 65 °C for 60 min. The membrane was dried then the 3-cm
sections were placed into vials with scintillation fluid and counted
for radioactivity. Molecular weights of the single strand DNA fragments
(Z) were calculated (41), and the number of single strand
breaks per tandem array was calculated using a molecular weight of 338 g/mol bp and 8 × 106 bp per tandem array.
Characterization of Cell Line 3134--
Cell line 904.13 was
originally established by transformation of C127 cells with a bovine
papilloma virus vector containing the MMTV promoter driving expression
of the ha-v-ras gene (Fig. 1C). Cell line 3134 was
derived from the 904.13 line after a spontaneous event resulted in the
integration and amplification of the episome. CHEF gel analysis (Fig.
1A) of DNA from this cell line with three different
restriction enzymes, which do not cut the circular DNA construct,
resulted in fragments ranging in size from 1.8 to 2.2 × 106 base pairs. Partial digestion with a single-cut enzyme
produced a ladder of fragments with a repeat size of 9 kb (Fig.
1B). These data indicate that the cell contains a large
tandem array with approximately 200 head to tail copies of the original
9-kb fragment (Fig. 1C). Details of the 9-kb repeat unit are
diagrammed in Fig. 1D.
A 3,026-bp SpeI fragment encompassing the MMTV promoter was
used to assess the level of unrestrained supercoiling within the inserts of the tandem array (Fig. 1D). This fragment
contains the entire MMTV LTR, and most of the transcribed region of the ras sequence. The percentage of MMTV templates activated by
dexamethasone in this cell line was assessed by hypersensitivity to
SacI cleavage, which cuts in the nucleosome B region of the
promoter (Fig. 1D) (29, 31, 42). In a representative
experiment, about 7-8% of the SacI sites were accessible
in control cells or in cells treated with
Psoralen Accessibility and Unrestrained Supercoiling at the MMTV
Promoter--
The rate of Me3-psoralen cross-linking to
DNA depends on two parameters: the accessibility of the DNA and the
level of unrestrained supercoiling in the DNA. Accessibility is
dependent upon the extent of association of DNA with nucleosomes or
other proteins that prevent Me3-psoralen binding (37).
Psoralen accessibility of the MMTV promoter in this mouse cell was
analyzed in four sets of cells: untreated (control) cells where the
ha-v-ras gene was inactive; dexamethasone-treated
cells that were transcriptionally active; cells treated with
dexamethasone followed by
Unrestrained supercoiling was determined by comparing the Xl/kb at a
constant dose of psoralen and light within the SpeI fragment before and after the chromosomal DNA was nicked by BrdUrd photolysis. In Fig. 5A the intensity of
both the Xl and non-Xl species decreased at higher doses of nicking but
proportionally the Xl band decreases faster (determined by
PhosphorImager analysis). Thus, the rate of cross-linking (or Xl/kb
versus dose) decreased at higher doses of 313-nm light
indicating the presence of unrestrained supercoiling. The measurement
of supercoiling is presented as RI/N as described previously (24, 26)). A value of RI/N = 1 indicates that no unrestrained supercoiling was detected, whereas an
RI/N > 1 indicates the presence of negative
supercoiling. All RI/N values in Fig. 5B represent the average from at least six independent
determinations from three separate experiments. A moderately high level
of unrestrained superhelical tension (RI/N = 1.55) was present in the promoter region in cells with an uninduced
basal level of transcription of the MMTV promoter (Fig. 5B,
Control). This level of supercoiling was lower than that
observed in the Drosophila hsp70 or rRNA genes (24), but
higher than that seen in a hygromycin gene in human cells (26). After
dexamethasone treatment for 1 h, the overall level of negative
superhelical energy dropped significantly (about 80%), to
RI/N = 1.11 (Fig. 5B,
Dex). The level of supercoiling in the MMTV promoter in
cells treated with dexamethasone and then Measurement of Topological Domains in 3134 Cells--
Different
times of irradiation with 313-nm light that introduced nicks into the
DNA were required to relax all supercoils in cells following the
different treatments shown in Fig. 5B. In untreated cells,
the relaxation of most supercoiling (>95%) within the SpeI
fragment occurred after 5 min of nicking (Fig. 5B,
Control), but relaxation required greater than 15-18 min of nicking in cells treated with dexamethasone and then
The psoralen assay for measurement of a topological domain size
requires that the DNA contain unrestrained negative supercoils, and the
assay measures the loss of superhelical tension as a function of the
number of nicks introduced into DNA (37-39). The number of nicks
introduced into the DNA by photolysis of BrdUrd-labeled DNA was
measured by alkaline sucrose gradient sedimentation analysis. Alkaline
sucrose gradient fractions were collected onto a nylon membrane and
probed using Southern hybridization to determine the average molecular
weight of the DNA containing the MMTV inserts within the tandem array.
From this analysis, the number of strand breaks introduced into the
MMTV tandem array as a function of the 313-nm light dose could be calculated.
The nicking rates were not significantly different statistically
between the nontreated cells and cells treated with
To estimate the number of topological domains, it is assumed that the
nicks are introduced in a Poisson distribution (1, 38, 39). Using the
Poisson formula, theoretical curves are calculated to determine the
best fit with the experimental data points (described in the legend to
Fig. 6). In Fig. 6, three sets of experimental data are plotted against
five theoretical curves each representing a different topological
domain size. The theoretical curve that best fits the experimental data
represents the domain size. The average number of topological
domains/tandem array for untreated cells was 55/tandem array, or 32,000 bp/domain. For cells treated with
Treatment with dexamethasone or In this study the effect of transcriptional activation/elongation
on unrestrained supercoiling and its relation to topological domain
size was examined. Studies were performed on the MMTV promoter-driven ha-v-ras gene inserted in the chromosome of a
mouse cell line. Analysis was completed using a psoralen-based assay
for unrestrained negative supercoiling in combination with measuring
the rate of loss of supercoils following the introduction of nicks into
DNA by BrdUrd photolysis. Our results demonstrate that this MMTV
promoter-driven ha-v-ras gene is maintained with
a moderate level of unrestrained torsional tension in the uninduced
state. Transcription elongation decreased negative supercoiling. This
is the first example of a gene that becomes torsionally relaxed upon
transcription. Transcriptional activation had little or no effect on
supercoiling, and blocked elongating complexes also had little or no
effect on negative unrestrained supercoiling. However, the activation
of transcriptional complexes and the presence of elongating
transcriptional complexes increased the number of topological domains
within the MMTV promoter-gene region.
Unrestrained negative supercoiling in the tandem ha-v-ras
genes was relaxed following the activation of transcription by addition of dexamethasone. This result is in contrast with certain models in
which supercoiling has been thought to be a prerequisite for transcription and possibly a consequence of RNA polymerase movement during elongation (for example, see Ref. 4). In fact, transcription in
the Drosophila hsp70 locus results in a slight increase in an already high level of unrestrained supercoiling (24). In the case of
the ha-v-ras gene, the release of unrestrained supercoiling during active transcription may be due to the active recruitment or
activation of topoisomerases within the locus.
Unrestrained supercoiling was maintained in cells treated with any
combination of dexamethasone and Changes in Topological Domain Organization Occur during
Transcription of the ha-v-ras Gene--
The topological domain size
changed dramatically upon transcription. In the mouse cell line 3134 there are approximately 200 tandem inserts containing the MMTV
promoter, each insert is 9,000 bp in length, and the entire region
consists of 1.8 × 106 bp. In cells in which the
ha-v-ras gene was inactive approximately 55 topological
domains existed, such that each domain was, on average, 32,000 bp in
length. This is similar to the size found in the rDNA genes in humans
fibrosarcoma cells (26). These domain boundaries may be defined by some
structural attachment to a nuclear structure. Cells treated with
Cells treated with dexamethasone and then
These domain measurements represent approximate values, because it is
uncertain if there are damaged sites from BruUrd photolysis that are
alkali labile but do not represent breaks in vivo, as discussed previously (26). This may influence domain sizes by as much
as 10-20%. Moreover, it is formally possible that not all torsional
tension would be relaxed at a nick if DNA repair proteins bound to the
site and prevented rotation about the nick. However, experiments are
performed in phosphate-buffered saline buffer at 0-4 °C to prevent
any such repair activity. In small bacterial chromosomes most
supercoils appear to be lost, and only restrained supercoils remain
following nicking in vivo (14, 22).
The observations that transcription can influence a topological domain
size suggests several mechanisms for domain organization. In Fig.
7, top panel, the polymerase
complex could establish a topological domain by simply preventing
rotation of the DNA double helix. Polymerase complexes bound to the
promoter sequence and polymerase complexes transcribing the gene can
establish a topological domain. In this case rotation is prevented by
restraints to rotational diffusion. Alternatively, in Fig. 7,
bottom panel, the polymerase complex is recruited to a
nuclear structure upon gene activation. Alternatively, the
transcriptional machinery is localized at a nuclear structure and
activation involves the association of the DNA with the localized,
transcription complexes. In this case the DNA template feeds through
the attached complex during elongation, as suggested for the
tetA gene in E. coli (53). Attachment to a
nuclear structure would clearly prevent rotation of the DNA and
establish a topological domain.
In conclusion, our results establish that unrestrained supercoiling is
present in the tandem array of MMTV inserts within a mouse cell. Active
transcription decreases the level of unrestrained supercoiling within
this gene. Remarkably, the topological domain size decreases when the
MMTV promoter is activated by dexamethasone, and a further reduction is
observed if an actively transcribed ha-v-ras gene is
inhibited by
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-amanitin (Roche
Molecular Biochemicals).
-32P]ATP, using an
oligonucleotide priming from +85 in the long terminal repeat (LTR)
(5'-TCTGGAAAGTGAAGGATAAGTGACGA), and SacI-cut pM18 as a
template (end point at
105) (34). The probes were purified by
electrophoresis in denaturing gels, recovered by the
"crush-and-soak" method, and 105 cpm were hybridized to
10 µg of RNA in 80% formamide, 0.2 M NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 40 mM PIPES, pH 6.4, for 6-12 h at
37 °C. Hybrids were treated with 100 units of S1 nuclease for 1 h at room temperature, in 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM zinc
acetate, 30 mM sodium acetate, pH 4.6, and then extracted
with phenol-chloroform and precipitated with ethanol. Digestion
products were resolved in denaturing 8% acrylamide sequencing gels.
Visualization of the separated fragment was achieved with a
PhosphorImager, and quantitation performed with the ImageQuant program
(Molecular Dynamics).
-mercaptoethanol (35) extracted with phenol-chloroform, and
precipitated with ethanol. The extracted DNA was cut to completion with
DpnII before primer extension to determine the fractional cleavage. To obtain a linear amplification of the signal, primer extensions with Taq polymerase were thermally cycled in 50 mM KCl, 50 mM Tris-Cl, pH 8.8, 200 µM dNTP, 3.5 mM MgCl2, 0.1%
Triton X-100, using an oligonucleotide priming from +27 in the LTR
(5'-ACAAGAGGTGAATGTTAGGACTGTTGC). Extension products were extracted
with phenol-chloroform and precipitated with ethanol before
electrophoresis in sequencing gels and analysis in the PhosphorImager.
-32P]CTP using the random priming method
(Roche Molecular Biochemicals). The membrane was hybridized at 65 °C
for 12 h, washed twice with 2× SSC (300 mM NaCl, 30 mM sodium citrate, pH 7.0) containing 0.1% SDS at 65 °C
for 60 min. Quantitation was completed using a Molecular Dynamics
PhosphorImager using ImageQuant software. The fraction of DNA
cross-linked (Fx) was calculated by dividing the area of the
cross-linked peak by the sum of the area for the cross-linked and
noncross-linked peaks. The cross-links per kilobase (Xl/kb) were
calculated using the formula Xl/kb =
ln(1
Fx)/S, as described (24), where S is
the size of the restriction fragment (S = 3.0 kb for
the SpeI fragment of pM18). RI/N
values represent an average of two Southern blots each from a minimum
of three separate experiments. The ratio of the mean cross-linking rate in intact verses relaxed domains (RI/N = Xl/kbI/Xl/kbN) reflects the level of
unrestrained supercoiling (24). An unpaired, two-tailed, t
test was performed with these RI/N values, and a
significant difference is indicated if p
0.05.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (37K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Genomic DNA analysis of cell line 3134. Plasmid pM18, containing both the MMTV LTR driving
ha-v-ras and the 69% transforming fragment of
the BPV, was used to transform C127 mouse mammary cells to produce the
904.13 cell line with a replicating BPV-MMTV episome (28). The reporter
sequence also includes viral-like 30 S sequences upstream and
downstream of ras (28). The 3134 cell line was derived from
904.13 and resulted from spontaneous integration and amplification of
the episome in the genome. A, CHEF gel analysis. Agarose
plugs of 3134 genomic DNA, digested with restriction enzymes
EcoRV (lane 1), NdeI (lane
2), EcoRV and NdeI (lane 3), and
NotI (lane 4) along with H. wingei
chromosomal markers, were separated in a 0.8% agarose gel by CHEF
electrophoresis. Following electrophoresis, the location of the
H. wingei DNA were noted, and the separated genomic
fragments transferred to a nylon membrane and probed with radioactive
BPV sequences. Location of the H. wingei chromosomal marker
is indicated on the left, whereas the adjacent panel shows a plot of
the distance migrated versus the size of the marker DNAs.
B, field inversion gel electrophoresis gel analysis. The
same as in panel A except 3134 genomic DNA in agarose plugs
were undigested (lane 2), fully digested with
BamHI (lane 3) and EcoRI (lane
5), or partially with BglII (lane 4), and
separated on a 1% agarose gel by FIGE to separate fragments in the
2-50 kilobase pair range optimally. Marker DNA are HindIII
fragments (lane 1), and a range of fragments from 8.3- to
48.5-kb of lambda DNA (not shown). Size of the genomic DNA fragments
hybridized to the probe is indicated on the right in
kilobase pairs. C, genomic organization of
BPV-MMTV-ras in the 3134 cell line. The data in panels
A and B indicate that this cell line carries 200 copies
of the integrated construct in a tandem array. D, details of
the repeat unit. The low resolution positions of nucleosome families in
the LTR are illustrated by multiple brackets (28). The sites recognized
by SpeI in the BPV backbone and the ras gene, as
well as the DpnII and SacI sites in the
nucleosome B region, are indicated by arrows.
-amanitin (Fig.
2; Control and
Amanitin). Treatment with dexamethasone resulted in an
increase in the accessibility of this region, approximately 23% of the
promoters were cut (Fig. 2; Dex). This represents an
increase of 0.15-0.16 in the fractional cleavage, in agreement with
previous studies (31, 42) and suggesting that 15-20% of the promoters
are active at the time of the assay. In addition, treatment with
dexamethasone following a 1-h pretreatment of the cells with
-amanitin resulted in a similar increase in fractional cleavage
(Fig. 2; Dex + Amanitin), indicating that
remodeling of the Nuc-B region occurs independently of transcription,
as suggested by others (43).

View larger version (36K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Steroid-dependent
hypersensitivity of the MMTV promoter is refractory to
-amanitin treatment. Nuclei were prepared from
treated or untreated 3134 cells, digested with SacI, and the
extracted DNA cut to completion with DpnII. Analysis of the
cleavage by primer extension was conducted with an oligonucleotide
priming from +27 in Nucleosome A toward the Nucleosome B region. The
chart shows the fractional cleavage by SacI in cells treated
as follows: untreated (control);
-amanitin for 1 h
(amanitin); dexamethasone for 1 h (Dex);
-amanitin for 1 h followed by dexamethasone and additional
incubation for 1 h (Dex + amanitin). Results
are for a representative experiment. Results from duplicate experiments
were similar.
-Amanitin inhibits MMTV-driven transcription under our incubation
conditions as illustrated by a representative experiment in Fig.
3. Specific transcription, or more
properly RNA accumulation, was examined with an S1 protection assay.
3134 cells treated with dexamethasone for 1 h displayed a
7-8-fold increase in RNA detected relative to uninduced cells (Fig. 3;
Control and Dex), comparable with previous
determinations in the parental 904.13 cell line (44). Incubation of the
cells with 50 µg/ml
-amanitin for 1 h before dexamethasone
treatment resulted in approximately a 1.5-1.7-fold increase in
transcript levels relative to control cells (Fig. 3;
Amanitin + Dex). This represents a substantial
90-95% decrease in the steady state RNA level induced by
dexamethasone after 1 h. A 50-70% decrease in the basal
transcription of uninduced templates was also observed in cells treated
with
-amanitin without dexamethasone (Fig. 3;
Amanitin); however, the quantitation in this case is not as
accurate because of the low RNA levels.

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Incubation of 3134 cells with
-amanitin inhibits MMTV-driven RNA synthesis.
Total RNA was extracted from treated or untreated 3134 cells, and MMTV
LTR reporter-specific RNA assayed by S1 hybrid protection. The
single-stranded probe spanned from +85 to
105. The signal from the
protected hybrid was quantitated and normalized to the signal in
untreated cells. The chart shows the fold-induction of cells treated as
follows: untreated (control);
-amanitin for 1 h
(amanitin); dexamethasone for 1 h (Dex);
-amanitin for 1 h followed by dexamethasone and additional
incubation for 1 h (Dex + amanitin). Results
are for a representative experiment. Results from duplicate experiments
were similar.
-amanitin, in which transcription
elongation was allowed to proceed and then was blocked; and cells
treated with
-amanitin followed by dexamethasone, in which the
promoter was activated but transcription elongation was prevented. Each
set of cells was treated with psoralen and exposed to increasing doses
of 360-nm light. The DNA was irreversibly denatured as described under
"Experimental Procedures," and the cross-linked and noncross-linked
molecules were separated on a native agarose gel (Fig.
4A). The cross-links per
kilobase (Xl/kb), calculated from the intensities of the cross-linked
(Xl) and noncross-linked (non-Xl) SpeI fragments (Fig.
4A), showed a linear relationship as a function of light
exposure for each set of cells (Fig. 4B). As shown in Fig.
4B, the cross-linking rates for the cell lines were linear
to at least 12 kJ/m2. The molecular bases for the slight
decrease in rate of binding in cells treated with dexamethasone
(permeability or accessibility changes) was not investigated. In the
experiments to determine the level of unrestrained negative
superhelical energy, a dose of 6 kJ/m2 of 360-nm light was
chosen because it is within the linear range of the cross-linking
reaction.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Rate of psoralen cross-linking within the
1.8-megabase pair array. A, Southern
analysis on DNA from dexamethasone-treated cells cross-linked for
various times after exposure to psoralen. B, a plot of the
Xl/kb as a function of light dose. Cells were treated with 360-nm light
at an incident intensity of 1.2 kJ/m2/min. Samples were
removed after various times and analyzed by Southern hybridization to
determine the Xl/kb as described under "Experimental Procedures."
, untreated;
, dexamethasone followed by
-amanitin treatment;
, dexamethasone; 224 ,
-amanitin followed by dexamethasone
treatment. Lines represent the linear regression, best fit to the data.
Lines for the dexamethasone and the
-amanitin followed by
dexamethasone treatment data are identical.
-amanitin (for 1 h),
RI/N = 1.43, was significantly higher than in
the dexamethasone-treated cells (RI/N = 1.11). However, the level of supercoiling in these cells was 15-20%
lower than in control (uninduced) cells with a basal level of
expression (Fig. 5B, Dex +
-amanitin). Furthermore, cells treated with
-amanitin for 1 h and then dexamethasone for 1 h had a level of
supercoiling of RI/N = 1.48, which is
significantly higher than in the dexamethasone-treated cells
(RI/N = 1.11) and about a 10-15% lower than in
control cells (Fig. 5B,
-amanitin + Dex).

View larger version (36K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Unrestrained supercoiling within the
ras gene of the 1.8-megabase pair array.
A, Southern analysis on intact and nicked chromosomal DNA
from cells treated with
-amanitin and dexamethasone. Southern blot
analysis was performed on DNA isolated from cells before and after
exposure to 313-nm light. Cells were exposed to 0, 3, 5, 10, 15, and in
some cases 18 and 20 min of 313-nm light, treated with
Me3-psoralen, and then exposed to 0 or 6.0 kJ/m2 360-nm light. Xl indicates the cross-linked species
and non-Xl indicates the non-cross-linked species of the
SpeI fragment. B, bar graph showing the
RI/N values for cells before and after 313-nm
light exposure for untreated cells (Control), cells treated
with dexamethasone alone (Dex), cells treated with
dexamethasone followed by
-amanitin (Dex +
-amanitin), and cells treated with
-amanitin followed
by dexamethasone (
-amanitin + Dex).
RI/N values are average values calculated from
multiple analyses of at least three separate experiments
(n > 6). A solid line is drawn at the
RI/N = 1 representing no unrestrained
supercoiling. RI/N > 1 indicates the presence
of unrestrained negative superhelical tension. The standard error of
the mean values are shown as error bars.
-amanitin or in
cells treated with
-amanitin and then dexamethasone (Fig. 5B, Dex +
-amanitin,
-amanitin + Dex). The different doses of 313-nm light required for nicking suggest that the domain size in the
tandem array may be different in the nontreated and treated mouse cells.
-amanitin, dexamethasone, or any combination of the two. However a statistically significant 2-fold difference was observed between the cells that were
treated with dexamethasone then
-amanitin and the cells that were
treated with
-amanitin then dexamethasone (Fig.
6, insert, top and
bottom lines). Treatment with dexamethasone followed by
-amanitin yielded the highest number of strand breaks, and this
treatment may have resulted in the most open chromatin configuration. Treatment with
-amanitin would be expected to keep the chromosome more organized into nucleosomes and thus more protected from free radical attack during BrdUrd photolysis.

View larger version (31K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Estimation of domain size within the
1.8-megabase pair array. Insert, the single strand
breaks per tandem array were determined by alkaline sucrose
sedimentation analysis (see "Experimental Procedures") and are
plotted against the time of exposure to 313-nm light.
, untreated;
,
-amanitin followed by dexamethasone treatment;
, dexamethasone followed by
-amanitin treatment. Alkaline sucrose
gradient analysis generated the molecular weight of the single-stranded
DNA fragments (Z). The number of bases/fragment = (Z) molecular weight of a single strand fragment/molecular
weight per base (described under "Experimental Procedures").
Nicks/tandem array = (1.8 × 106 bp/tandem
array)/(Y) × 2, where Y = the size of
the single strand DNA (bp) (see Ref. 38). Lines represent
the linear regression, best fit to the data. Main figure,
experimental data are plotted as FR, the fraction of
total supercoils remaining after various times of nicking verses the
number of breaks introduced into the tandem array insert.
FR values are calculated from the
RI/N values determined at different nicking
times FRx = (RI/N, 15 or 20 min
RI/N, X min)
(RI/N, 15 or 20 min
RI/N, 0 min) (note that 15- or 20-min nicking
was required to obtain the fully relaxed state), where
RI/N, 0 min = 1.
, untreated;
,
-amanitin followed by dexamethasone;
= dexamethasone followed
by
-amanitin treatment. Theoretical curves were calculated using the
formula FR = e
(x/m) using
different values of m (domains/tandem array equivalent) and
breaks/tandem array equivalent (x). The curves correspond to
20, 55, 110, 215, and 400 domains/tandem array, with the
m = 20 curve decreasing to FR < 0.02 at about 100 breaks, and the m = 400 curve
decreasing to FR = 0.2 at about 650 breaks.
-amanitin and then dexamethasone,
the number of domains was approximately 110/tandem array, or 16,000 bp/domain. For cells treated with dexamethasone and then
-amanitin
approximately 215 domains/tandem array were present, with 8,000-9,000
bp/domain.
-amanitin should not introduce major
changes in chromosome structure that would influence the results
obtained. The effects of dexamethasone have been extensively studied in
the MMTV promoter (28, 45) and the TAT promoter (46). In both of these
genes, dexamethasone is known to have very local effects on chromatin
structure. Therefore, treatment with dexamethasone would not be
expected to have global chromatin effects. In addition, no significant
effect of dexamethasone treatment on the rate of nicking was observed
when looking at the DNA size averaged over the entire chromosome (data
not shown). In a previous analysis of a hyg gene in five
random chromosomal locations in human cells, no unexpected differences
in the rate of cross-linking were observed following
-amanitin
treatment, other than those expected for a loss of supercoiling (26).
Moreover, in two cell lines, no supercoiling was observed, and
-amanitin had no effect of cross-linking rates. In
Drosophila experiments, using heat shock to induce the HSP70
genes, very little change was observed in the rRNA gene response to
nicking or heat shock. In addition, differential changes were observed
throughout locus 87A7, which were specific for the hsp70 transcription
units, the flanking nontranscribed regions, and scs and scs' sequences
(2). These total experiments argue against any global genome wide
effects of induction of specific genes or
-amanitin treatment that
would complicate the interpretation of the results.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-amanitin; i.e. cells induced for transcription but in which active transcriptional elongation was inhibited. The level of unrestrained supercoiling in
these cells (RI/N = 1.43, 1.48) was similar to
that in uninduced cells (RI/N = 1.55). The
slight decrease in supercoiling in cells treated with
-amanitin may
be due to residual active transcription (90-95% of transcriptional
elongation has been blocked, Fig. 3). Supercoiling was reestablished in
cells treated with dexamethasone and then
-amanitin upon the
inhibition of transcription elongation. The reestablishment of
supercoiling occurred within the 1 h between
-amanitin
treatment and the psoralen photobinding. If active transcriptional
elongation is tightly coupled with the active topoisomerase(s) it is
understandable that negative supercoiling could be rapidly relaxed. It
is known that topoisomerase I is associated with regions of active
transcription (47-49), and that it is also recruited to promoters by
transcription factor IID (50, 51). That the inhibition of elongation
leads to reestablishment of unrestrained supercoiling implies a
mechanism exists for the regeneration, or loss of restraint, of
supercoils. This mechanism does not appear to be dependent upon
tracking by RNA polymerase. Furthermore, current evidence indicates
that no loss of nucleosomes occurs from the LTR during activation (31,
52).
-amanitin and then dexamethasone had 110 topological domain
boundaries resulting in 16,000 bp/domain. The change in the number of
boundaries from the untreated to treated cells is about 50, which is
25% of the 200 inserts present. This is similar to the 15-20%
increase in enzyme accessibility observed at various MMTV promoter
sites upon dexamethasone treatment, which is likely due to
transcriptional activation (28, 31) (for discussion see Ref. 27). These
data are consistent with the hypothesis that transcriptional activation
of the MMTV promoter creates a topological domain boundary in living
mouse cells. (A topological domain size cannot be determined in cells
induced for transcription because the domain assay required the
presence of unrestrained supercoiling.)
-amanitin had 9,000 bp/domain, a smaller domain size than in cells with simply activated
transcription complexes (16,000 bp/domain). Under these conditions, the
maximum number of transcription complexes are presumably formed before
elongation is inhibited by
-amanitin. The number of domain
boundaries created under these conditions of maximal gene induction is
similar to the suggested number of MMTV promoters activated by
dexamethasone treatment. These results strongly suggest that
transcription complexes constitute transient (and mobile) topological
domain boundaries and, thus, support the hypothesis that domain
boundaries can be "functional" in nature (9).

View larger version (48K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Models for the generation of new domain
boundaries. A, loading a large initiation complex,
including RNA polymerase II, on the promoter provides a constraint to
DNA rotation that effectively creates a new topological domain.
B, receptor activation recruits the active promoter units to
a nuclear structure that serves as an active center for transcription.
These centers represent the domain boundaries.
-amanitin. These results demonstrate that the
transcriptional state of a gene can influence both the level of
unrestrained supercoiling and the topological domain size. Although
certain topological domains may be defined by the interaction of MARs
with a nuclear structure, clearly some topological domains in
eukaryotic cells appear to be defined, in some way, by active
transcription complexes.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Norene O'Sullivan (NCI-Frederick) for expertise with pulsed field gel electrophoresis.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by Public Health Service Grant P01 ES05652 from the NIEHS, National Institutes of Health.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: Institute of
Biosciences and Technology, Texas A&M University, 2121 W. Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030-3303. Tel.: 713-677-7664; Fax: 713-677-7689; E-mail: Rsinden@ibt.tamu.edu.
Present address: Zeneca Laboratories, CTL H1.2 Alderley Park,
Macclesfield, Cheshire SK10 4TJ, United Kingdom.
§ Present address: NINDS, NIH, Bldg. 36 4D-10, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.
** Present address: Depts. of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, 27-139 CHS UCLA School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90095-1740.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: MAR, matrix attachment region; SAR, scaffold attachment region; MMTV, mouse mammary tumor virus; Me2SO, dimethyl sulfoxide; CHEF, clamped homogeneous electric field; BPV, bovine papilloma virus; LTR, long terminal repeat; kb, kilobase pair(s); bp, base pair(s); Xl, cross-links; PIPES, 1,4-piperazinediethanesulfonic acid.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Sinden, R. R.,
and Pettijohn, D. E.
(1981)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
78,
224-228 |
| 2. | Jupe, E. R., Sinden, R. R., and Cartwright, I. L. (1995) Biochemistry 34, 2628-2633[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. | Jackson, D. A., Dickinson, P., and Cook, P. R. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 567-571[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. | Freeman, L. A., and Garrard, W. T. (1992) Crit. Rev. Eukaryotic Gene Expression 2, 165-209[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. | Sinden, R. R. (1994) DNA Structure and Function , Academic Press, San Diego |
| 6. | Cockerill, P. N., and Garrard, W. T. (1986) Cell 44, 273-282[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 7. | Gasser, S. M., and Laemmli, U. K. (1986) Cell 46, 521-530[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. |
van Drunen, C. N.,
Sewalt, R. G. A. B.,
Oosterling, R. W.,
Weisbeek, P. J.,
Smeekens, S. C. M.,
and van Driel, R.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
2924-2930 |
| 9. | Jackson, D. A., Dolle, A., Robertson, G., and Cook, P. R. (1992) Cell Biol. Int. Rep. 16, 687-696[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 10. |
Chen, D.,
Bowater, R.,
Dorman, C. J.,
and Lilley, D. M. J.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
8784-8788 |
| 11. | Mirabella, A., and Gartenberg, M. R. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 523-533[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 12. |
Koo, H. S.,
Claassen, L.,
Grossman, L.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
1212-1216 |
| 13. | Sinden, R. R., Carlson, J. O., and Pettijohn, D. E. (1980) Cell 21, 773-783[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 14. |
Pettijohn, D. E.,
and Pfenninger, O.
(1980)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
77,
1331-1335 |
| 15. | Broyles, S., and Pettijohn, D. E. (1986) J. Mol. Biol. 187, 47-60[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. |
Drlica, K.,
and Rouviere-Yaniv, J.
(1987)
Microbiol. Rev.
51,
301-319 |
| 17. | Drlica, K. (1990) Trends Genet. 6, 433-437[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. | Drlica, K. (1992) Mol. Microbiol. 6, 425-433[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 19. | Bliska, J. R., and Cozzarelli, N. R. (1987) J. Mol. Biol. 194, 205-218[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. |
McClellan, J. A.,
Boublikova, P.,
Palecek, E.,
and Lilley, D. M.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
8373-8377 |
| 21. |
Rahmouni, A. R.,
and Wells, R. D.
(1989)
Science
246,
358-363 |
| 22. | Zheng, G., Kochel, T., Hoepfner, R. W., Timmons, S. E., and Sinden, R. R. (1991) J. Mol. Biol. 221, 107-129[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. |
Ljungman, M.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
6055-6059 |
| 24. | Jupe, E. R., Sinden, R. R., and Cartwright, I. L. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 1067-1075[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 25. |
Ljungman, M.,
and Hanawalt, P. C.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
1782-1789 |
| 26. | Kramer, P. R., and Sinden, R. R. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 3151-3158[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 27. | Hager, G. L., Archer, T. K., Fragoso, G., Bresnick, E. H., Tsukagoshi, Y., John, S., and Smith, C. L. (1993) Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 58, 63-71[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 28. | Richard-Foy, H., and Hager, G. L. (1987) EMBO J. 6, 2321-2328[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. |
Archer, T. K.,
Cordingley, M. G.,
Wolford, R. G.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
688-698 |
| 30. |
Archer, T. K.,
LeFebvre, P.,
Wolford, R. G.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1992)
Science
255,
1573-1576 |
| 31. |
Fragoso, G.,
John, S.,
Roberts, M. S.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
1933-1947 |
| 32. |
Kaufman, E. R.,
and Davidson, R. L.
(1978)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
75,
4982-4986 |
| 33. | Pennie, W. D., Hager, G. L., and Smith, C. L. (1995) Mol. Cell. Biol. 15, 2125-2134[Abstract] |
| 34. |
Ostrowski, M. C.,
Richard-Foy, H.,
Wolford, R. G.,
Berard, D. S.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1983)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
3,
2045-2057 |
| 35. | Workman, J. L., and Langmore, J. P. (1985) Biochemistry 24, 4731-4738[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. | Sinden, R. R., and Pettijohn, D. E. (1982) J. Mol. Biol. 162, 659-677[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 37. | Sinden, R. R., and Ussery, D. W. (1992) Methods Enzymol. 212, 319-335[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 38. | Kramer, P. R., Bat, O., and Sinden, R. R. (1999) Methods Enzymol. 304, 639-650[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 39. | Sinden, R. R., Bat, O., and Kramer, P. R. (1999) Methods Companion Methods Enzymol. 17, 112-124[CrossRef] |
| 40. |
McMaster, G. K.,
and Carmichael, G. G.
(1977)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
74,
4835-4838 |
| 41. | Rupp, W. D., and Howard-Flanders, P. (1968) J. Mol. Biol. 31, 291-304[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 42. |
Bresnick, E. H.,
Bustin, M.,
Marsaud, V.,
Richard-Foy, H.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
273-278 |
| 43. | Truss, M., Bartsch, J., Schelbert, A., Hache, R. J., and Beato, M. (1995) EMBO J. 14, 1737-1751[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 44. | Archer, T. K., Lee, H. L., Cordingley, M. G., Mymryk, J. S., Fragoso, G., Berard, D. S., and Hager, G. L. (1994) Mol. Endocrinol. 8, 568-576[Abstract] |
| 45. | Richard-Foy, H., Sistare, F. D., Riegel, A. T., Simons, S. S., Jr., and Hager, G. L. (1987) Mol. Endocrinol. 1, 659-665[Abstract] |
| 46. | Becker, P. B., Gloss, B., Schmid, W., Strahle, U., and Schutz, G. (1986) Nature 324, 686-688[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 47. |
Weisbrod, S. T.
(1982)
Nucleic Acids Res.
10,
2017-2042 |
| 48. |
Fleischmann, G.,
Pflugfelder, G.,
Steiner, E. K.,
Javaherian, K.,
Howard, G. C.,
Wang, J. C.,
and Elgin, S. C. R.
(1984)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
81,
6958-6962 |
| 49. | Gilmour, D. S., Pflugfelder, G., Wang, J. C., and Lis, J. T. (1986) Cell 44, 401-407[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 50. | Merino, A., Madden, K. R., Lane, W. S., Champoux, J. J., and Reinberg, D. (1993) Nature 365, 227-232[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 51. |
Shykind, B. M.,
Kim, J.,
Stewart, L.,
Champoux, J. J.,
and Sharp, P. A.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
397-407 |
| 52. |
Fragoso, G.,
Pennie, W. D.,
John, S.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
3633-3644 |
| 53. | Bowater, R. P., Chen, D., and Lilley, D. M. J. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 9266-9275[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |