J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 41, 29366-29375, October 8, 1999
Identification of Nuclear Orphan Receptors as Regulators of
Expression of a Neurotransmitter Receptor Gene*
Li-Jin
Chew
,
Fei
Huang
§,
Jean-Marie
Boutin¶, and
Vittorio
Gallo
From the
Laboratory of Cellular and
Molecular Neurophysiology, NICHD, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Maryland 20892 and the ¶ Division of Endocrinology and
Department of Medicine, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de
Montreal, Hotel-Dieu Campus, Montreal, Quebec H2W 1T8, Canada
 |
ABSTRACT |
Nuclear orphan receptors are known to be
important mediators of neurogenesis, but the target genes of these
transcription factors in the vertebrate nervous system remain largely
undefined. We have previously shown that a 500-base pair fragment in
the first intron of the GRIK5 gene, which encodes the
kainate-preferring glutamate receptor subunit KA2, down-regulates gene
expression. In our present studies, mutation of an 11-base pair element
within this fragment resulted in a loss of nuclear protein binding and reverses negative regulation by the intron. Using yeast one-hybrid screening, we have identified intron-binding proteins from rat brain as
COUP-TFI, EAR2, and NURR1. Gel shift studies with postnatal day 2 rat
brain extract indicate the presence of COUP-TFs, EAR2, and NURR1 in the
DNA-protein complex. Competition assays with GRIK5-binding
site mutations show that the recombinant clones exhibit differential
binding characteristics and suggest that the DNA-protein complex from
postnatal day 2 rat brain may consist primarily of EAR2. The DNA
binding activity was also observed to be enriched in rat neural tissue
and developmentally regulated. Co-transfection assays showed that
recombinant nuclear orphan receptors function as transcriptional
repressors in both CV1 cells and rat CG4 oligodendrocyte cells. Direct
interaction of the orphan receptors with and relief of repression by
TFIIB indicate likely role(s) in active and/or transrepression.
Our findings are thus consistent with the notion that multiple
nuclear orphan receptors can regulate the transcription of a widely
expressed neurotransmitter receptor gene by binding a common element in
an intron and directly modulating the activity of the transcription machinery.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Glutamate is the principal excitatory neurotransmitter in the
vertebrate central nervous system ,and its physiological effects are
mediated through the activation of
N-methyl-D-aspartate,
-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid
(AMPA),1 and kainate receptors (1). Although assigning a
specific role for kainate receptors has
been difficult, the presence of functional kainate receptors in neural
cells (2-4) and their involvement in synaptic transmission (5-7) have
been demonstrated. It has also been shown that kainate/AMPA receptor
agonists promote the survival of rat spinal cord cells (8) and
kainate-generated currents were detected in human fetal astrocytes (9).
Despite overlapping binding properties between kainate and AMPA
receptor classes, kainate preferentially promotes neurite arborization in rat cerebellar neurons in culture, an effect not reproduced by AMPA,
thus demonstrating differential effects on neural cell growth and
survival (10). In addition, kainate receptors are found both in the rat
embryonic neural tube as well as in cell cultures derived from this
tissue (11), and expression of the subunits GluR6 and KA2 is
up-regulated by culture conditions that stimulate cell differentiation
(11). Taken together, these observations support the notion that
kainate receptors may play important role(s) in neural cell differentiation.
Nuclear orphan receptors constitute the majority of members in the
nuclear receptor superfamily (12). These proteins are of great
interest, because the lack of identified ligands presents a challenge
to the elucidation of their function. COUP-TFI was shown to antagonize
retinoic acid-induced differentiation of teratocarcinoma cell lines
(13). More recently, targeted gene ablation has provided evidence that
COUP-TFI is an important regulator of neuronal development, because
COUP-TFI-null mice display deficiencies in the formation of cranial
nerves IX and X and do not survive after birth (14). Deletion of NURR1
resulted in a failure to generate midbrain dopaminergic neurons, a
condition that was also lethal in neonatal mice (15). To understand the
function of members of the nuclear orphan receptor family in neural
development, it is important to identify neural-specific genes that are
targets of orphan receptor action and whose products are themselves
involved in neural cell function and possibly maturation.
Studies have previously demonstrated the expression of the
neural-specific KA2 subunit to be widespread in the rat brain (16, 17);
however, the factors that regulate KA2 subunit expression have not been
characterized. Elucidation of these factors is necessary to understand
the physiological basis of changes in kainate receptor composition in
neural cells. In our effort to address regulatory factors of KA2 gene
expression, we have cloned the rat GRIK5 gene (glutamate receptor ionotropic
kainate 5), which encodes the KA2 receptor, and
shown that neural cell-specific activity of its TATA-less promoter is
largely dictated by sequences contained within 2 kb of its upstream
region (18). Although most studies of transcriptional regulation have
localized cis-acting regulatory regions in 5'-flanking
sequences, there are many examples of specific regulatory functions,
mediated by both positively and negatively acting genetic elements,
that have been attributed to introns (Refs. 19-21 and references
therein). Such elements appear to be located most commonly in the first
intron, perhaps because of its proximity to the promoter and to the cap
site of the gene. Transfection studies with rat GRIK5
constructs also revealed the presence of negative regulatory element(s)
within the first intron (18). Inclusion of this intron in reporter
constructs represses, in a position-independent manner,
GRIK5 promoter activity not only in neural cells but also in
HeLa cells (18). In contrast to RE1-silencing transcription factor,
REST/neuron-restrictive silencer factor, NRSF, which was found to
control neural-specific expression of a sodium channel (22, 23) and the
AMPA receptor subunit GluR2 (24), the repressor(s) acting on the
GRIK5 intron is not a determinant of neural-specific KA2
expression but rather a modulator of transcript levels in
KA2-expressing cells.
In this study, we show that binding of nuclear proteins to an 11-bp
element in this intron is sufficient for transcriptional repression of
GRIK5 promoter activity. We identify several nuclear orphan
receptors from rat brain that are capable of binding this GRIK5 element. In addition, we also examine their binding
characteristics in various neural cell types and, using binding site
mutations, establish a profile of binding activity in the rat brain and
neural cells to determine the major component of the repressor-DNA
complex. Protein interaction assays with TFIIB suggest that each of
these receptors can participate in active repression of transcription. Previous studies of other neural-specific genes, mouse arrestin (25),
and preproenkephalin (26) have implicated COUP-TF as a positive
modulator of gene transcription. However, there is now much evidence
supporting the notion that transcriptional repression is as common and
important as transcriptional activation (27). Our observations thus
represent the first description of negative regulation of a widely
expressed neurotransmitter-gated ion channel gene by members of the
nuclear orphan receptor family.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Preparation of Nuclear Protein Extracts from Cultured Cells and
Tissues--
CG-4 cells were cultured as described previously by Louis
et al. (28) and Patneau et al. (3) and were
harvested 2 days after replating (80% confluency). Cortical type-1
astrocyte cultures were prepared as described previously in accordance
with the National Institutes of Health Animal Welfare guidelines (29)
and were harvested after 12 days in culture. Cerebellar granule cell
cultures were prepared as described previously (30) and were harvested after 2 and 7 days in culture. Nuclear protein extracts from CG-4 cells, astrocytes, and granule cells were prepared with the protocol described by Dignam et al. (31). The nuclear proteins from
tissues were extracted by using a rapid method developed by Deryckere and Gannon (32) with modifications. Rat tissues were dissected out,
frozen in liquid nitrogen, and shattered between layers of aluminum
foil. Approximately 500 mg of tissue powder was homogenized in 5 ml of
solution A (0.6% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM
AEBSF and homogenized with five strokes with a Teflon pestle. The
homogenate was centrifuged for 30 s at 2,000 rpm. The supernatant
was centrifuged for 5 min at 5,000 rpm. The pelleted nuclei were
resuspended in 500 µl of solution B (25% glycerol, 20 mM
HEPES, pH 7.9, 420 mM NaCl, 1.2 mM
MgCl2, 0.2 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM
dithiothreitol, 0.5 mM AEBSF, 5 µg/ml pepstatin, leupeptin, and aprotinin) and incubated on ice for 20 min. The lysed
nuclei were transferred to a microcentrifuge tube and centrifuged for
15 s. The supernatant was aliquoted in small fractions, frozen rapidly in liquid nitrogen, and stored at
80 °C. The protein concentration of nuclear extracts was determined by the Bradford assay.
DNA Gel Mobility Shift Assays--
The sequences of probe
62 and other competitors are given in Table II. Probe 62 is a 27-bp
probe containing the putative 11-bp GRIK5 silencer element
and corresponds to the sequence between positions +3206 and +3232 in
the rat GRIK 5 gene relative to the start of exon 1 (18). The probes
were end-labeled with [
-32P]ATP (NEN Life Science
Products), purified on G50 columns, and used in gel shift assays. The
reactions were carried out in a total volume of 20 µl of binding
buffer containing 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 60 mM
KCl, 10% glycerol, 5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM EDTA, 50 µg/ml
poly(dI-dC) (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). For in vitro
translated recombinant clones, the reaction buffer contained 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 50 mM KCl, 10% glycerol, 2 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol,
0.05% Nonidet P-40, 0.1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin, and 0.1 mM EDTA. The binding reactions were incubated on ice for 30 min with 6 µg of nuclear proteins from cell and tissue extracts or
3-8 µl of crude translation mixture. Then 10 fmol of labeled probe
was added to each reaction and incubated for another 30 min on ice. For
supershifts, 1-2 µl of antiserum was added to the reactions 15-30
min prior to loading. After adding 2 µl of 0.1% bromphenol blue
loading dye, each reaction was directly loaded onto a 4% nondenaturing
polyacrylamide gel and electrophoresced at 100 V. The gels were then
dried and autoradiographed on x-ray film (Kodak) for 16-24 h. In
competition experiments, the wild type probe was
32P-labeled, and unlabeled competitor oligonucleotides were
used in 50- and 100-fold molar excess. The intensity of the shifted bands was quantitated on a PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics). In a
separate set of experiments, complementary Sp1 consensus oligonucleotides (5'-ATTCGATCGGGGCGGGGCGAGC-3' and
5'-GCTCGCCCCGCCCCGATCG-3') were used as a control in gel shift assays.
RXR antibodies were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Santa
Cruz, CA).
Construction of Mutated Intron 1-CAT Plasmids--
A common 5'
primer (5'-ATGGAGCTCAATCTGGCTTTGAA-3') and a series of 3' primers
containing different mutations (m11-21) were used for polymerase chain
reaction (PCR). All primers contained a SacI site at their
5' ends for cloning of PCR products into SacI sites. PCR was
performed with these primers using 5.4-CAT plasmid DNA as template
(18). The annealing temperatures were different, depending on the
primer pairs (m11-13,15-21 at 45 °C; m11-13 and m15-17 at
50 °C; all others at 55 °C). Eight PCR products with different
mutations at distinct positions were generated, and each one was
used as a cassette to replace the corresponding wild type sequence in
5.4-CAT between two SacI sites. The 5.4-CAT DNA lacking the
2-kb SacI fragment (5.4-
SacI-CAT) was
generated by digestion of 5.4-CAT with SacI, and individual
SacI-digested PCR products containing mutations were ligated
with 5.4-
SacI-CAT.
Transformants were screened by hybridizing with individual
mutated 32P-labeled primers as probes to select for desired
clones. The orientation of positive clones was determined by
restriction digestion, and all the mutations verified by
dideoxynucleotide DNA sequencing. The resulting plasmid DNAs were used
in transient transfection assays (see below).
Transient Transfections--
All expression plasmids used in
transfections were purified with Qiagen DNA purification kits. A
plasmid containing a lacZ gene driven by the RNA polymerase
II gene promoter (pPolIIplacF.
-gal) was simultaneously transfected
with all the CAT constructs to correct for variations in transfection
efficiency. CAT constructs (10 µg) and pPolIIplacF·
-gal (2 µg)
were used to transiently transfect CG-4 cells using LipofectAMINE
reagent (Life Technologies, Inc.). Transfections were carried out for
8 h, and the culture medium was replaced. Cells were harvested
38 h after transfection and assayed for CAT and
-galactosidase
activities as described previously (18). Levels of CAT activity were
determined on a PhosphorImager. For nuclear orphan receptor
co-transfections, reporter plasmid was transfected with varying amounts
of orphan receptor cDNA cloned into the expression vector
pcDNA3 (Invitrogen). DNA concentrations were balanced with the
empty expression vector pcDNA3. pBLCAT51 was generated by ligating,
between the HindIII and XbaI sites of the
thymidine kinase promoter-driven reporter pBLCAT5, synthetic
oligonucleotides containing the sequence of wild-type probe 62 (see
Table I). The construction of
-actin-I-CAT has been previously
described (18). For TFIIB co-transfections, reporter plasmids were
transfected with either 0.2 or 2 µg of RSV-TFIIB or negative control
RSV-Luciferase. CAT activity was determined by scintillation counting,
and values were normalized against total protein content instead of
-galactosidase activity, because COUP-TF expression vectors have
been shown to repress the expression of
-galactosidase expression
vectors (33).
One-hybrid Screen for Binding Protein(s)--
The in
vivo screening strategy was carried out using the Yeast Matchmaker
One-hybrid system (CLONTECH). This required
generating a yeast reporter strain containing three tandem copies of
wild type or mutated probe 62 sequences (to eliminate false positives) cloned upstream of yeast promoters driving two different reporter genes, HIS3 and lacZ. The dual reporter yeast
strain containing the wild type 62 sequence was used as a host for
introducing a postnatal day 2 rat brain GAL4 activation domain cDNA
library in pGAD10 (custom generated by CLONTECH).
After introduction of the cDNA library (corresponding to
approximately 150 × 106 independent clones) into
yeast cells by the LiAc method, cells were selected on SD/
His/
Leu
plates in the presence of 45 mM 3- amino-1,2,4-triazole.
The transformation efficiency was 12 × 104 cfu/µg
DNA, and putative positives were screened for lacZ
expression by a filter assay (CLONTECH). The
cDNA clones from these colonies were isolated, amplified, and
reintroduced into the yeast reporter strain carrying the mutated probe
62 reporter. The confirmed positives were analyzed by restriction
mapping and sequencing. The inserts were subsequently cloned into
pcDNA3 (Invitrogen) for in vitro translation and
co-transfection assays. Expression plasmid for rat EAR2 cDNA
carried a modified Kozak sequence upstream of the coding region for
improved translation efficiency.
In Vitro Translation and Immunoprecipitations--
Coupled
transcription-translation of nuclear receptor constructs was carried
out in rabbit reticulocyte lysates according to the manufacturer's
directions (Promega). For recombinant proteins used in gel shift
assays, a 1 mM amino acid stock (Promega) was used in the
translation reactions. For immunoprecipitation, translation products
were labeled with [35S]methionine (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech). Equal volumes of the labeled products were analyzed by
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and autoradiographed. Relative
intensities of the bands were estimated by scanning densitometry, so
that equivalent amounts could be used in immunoprecipitation reactions.
Approximately 3-6 µl of crude translation mixture was mixed with 4 µl of TFIIB antibody (Santa Cruz) and 20 µl of protein A-agarose
(Santa Cruz) in a total volume of 150 µl, containing binding buffer
of the following composition: 10% glycerol, 50 mM HEPES,
pH 7.9, 100 mM KCl, 6 mM magnesium acetate, 5 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM dithiothreitol, 0.5% nonfat dry milk. The mixtures were rocked at 4 °C for 1-2 h, after which the tubes were centrifuged for 5 min at 500 × g and
washed three times with cold binding buffer. The agarose pellets were
then resuspended in 20 µl of SDS loading buffer and boiled prior to SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis analysis.
 |
RESULTS |
An 11-bp Segment Is Responsible for Repressor Activity of the First
Intron--
GRIK5 promoter constructs have previously been
shown to be expressed in cells of the oligodendrocyte line CG4 (18).
Fig. 1A shows two
GRIK5 constructs used in our studies. 2-CAT consists of the
GRIK5 promoter and 2 kb of upstream sequences cloned into a
promoterless CAT vector, pCATbasic, whereas 5.4-CAT contains the 3.4 kb
first intron cloned downstream of the 2-kb promoter fragment. As shown
in Fig. 1B and as described previously (18), inclusion of
the 3.4-kb first intron resulted in a 3-fold repression of reporter
gene activity. Preliminary analysis of mice bearing 7.7 kb of
GRIK5 sequences that contain the 4-kb promoter fragment and
the 3.4-kb first intron cloned upstream of a
-galactosidase reporter
gene indicates that the inclusion of the intron results in a
generalized decrease in reporter gene expression in the brain, when
compared with transgenic mice bearing only a 4-kb promoter fragment.2 This suggests that
the intronic element also acts to repress GRIK5
transcription in vivo. Extensive deletion analysis and
transfection assays as well as DNase 1 footprint assays have previously
delineated a single 24-bp region (3207-3231) in this intron that binds
nuclear protein from CG4 cells. The role of this region in
transcriptional repression is thus the main focus of our present
studies.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Identification of 10 bp in intron 1 that are
responsible for mediating repressor activity in transfected cells.
A, structure of the GRIK5 reporter constructs
that were transfected into CG4 cells. Arrows denote the
start of transcription located in the 2-kb promoter fragment. The
bracket shows the region in the intron in 5.4-CAT previously
shown to bind nuclear protein and in which specific nucleotide changes
were subsequently made. B, transient transfections in CG4
cells with wild type and mutated intron-containing reporter constructs.
The left panel shows the sequence of the mutations
corresponding to the transfection data on the right. The mutated
constructs are named according to the position(s) where nucleotides
were replaced. CAT activity is expressed as a percentage of the
activity of 5.4-CAT. Each value represents the mean ± S.E. of
three independent transfection experiments. *, p < 0.005 compared with 5.4-CAT (one-way analysis of variance, Fisher's
protected least significant difference).
|
|
A series of mutations was generated in 5.4-CAT in which 1-3
nucleotides were systematically replaced from 5' to 3' with their respective complements (Fig. 1B). Transfection of these
constructs in CG-4 cells showed that changes in 10 nucleotides
significantly affected repressive capacity of the intron (Fig.
1B). When clustered together in m11-13,15-21, reporter
activity was restored to levels similar to 2-CAT, indicating a complete
loss of repressor function of the intron. Although the CAT activities
of mutant constructs m18,19, m15-17, m11-13, and m20,21 were clearly
lower than that of 2-CAT, they were still significantly higher than
that of 5.4-CAT, indicating that these mutations had partially affected
the activity of the repressor. In contrast, mutations in m22-25,
m9,10, and m14 were ineffective, suggesting that these nucleotides were
not important for mediating repressor activity (Fig. 1B).
Thus the positions 11-13,15-21 form a putative GRIK5
silencer element.
To correlate the transfection results with DNA binding, a series
of oligonucleotide probes containing 5' to 3' nucleotide changes was
also tested in gel shift assays, using nuclear extracts from CG4 cells.
The wild type probe 62 corresponds to the region between +3206
and +3232 relative to the start of transcription, a region previously
shown to bind nuclear protein from CG4 cells (18). As summarized in
Table I, the binding potential of probes that carried mutations outside of the 11-bp silencer region identified by transfections (Fig. 1B) was not significantly different
from that of wild type probe 62. Changing 10 bp in m11-13,15-21
rendered the probe incapable of binding nuclear protein (Table I). This is consistent with the complete loss of negative regulation by the same
cluster of mutations in transient transfections (Fig. 1B).
Mutations in probe 62, which affected 3 bp or fewer within this 11-bp
silencer region, such as m11,12, m18,19, and m20-23, severely impaired
but did not abolish protein binding. These mutations also resulted in
elevated reporter activity in transfections, indicating that repressor
activity of the nuclear protein(s) can still be partially mediated by
weakened binding to the element. It is also noteworthy that m14,
despite being situated within the 11-bp region, was no different from
wild type, both in transfections and in gel shift assays (Fig.
1B and Table I).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Effect of probe mutation on nuclear protein binding
Summary of effect of changes in probe sequence on binding by CG4
nuclear protein, as analyzed by gel shift assays. Equivalent amounts of
probe and nuclear protein were used, and the intensities of the
complexes formed are expressed relative to the intensity of the wild
type complex. +++, intensity of complex formed on wild type probe 62 (wt 62); ++, between 50 and 80% of wild type complex; +, <50% wild
type complex; +/ , barely detectable specific complex; , specific
complex undetectable. Numbers refer to positions of replaced
nucleotides relative to the 5' end of the DNA sequence. Underlining
indicates the 10 nucleotides determined by transient
transfection (Fig. 1B) to be the putative silencer element.
Replaced nucleotides are denoted in lowercase bold lettering.
|
|
Characterization of Binding Activity in Rat Tissues and Neural
Cells--
Because the GRIK5 promoter is known to be active
only in neural cells, we asked whether there was a differential
expression of the intron-binding proteins in vivo. Nuclear
extracts were prepared from various tissues of P6 rats and equivalent
amounts of nuclear protein used in gel shift assays. As illustrated in Fig. 2A, a clear abundance of
binding activity in the brain over peripheral tissue is observed,
suggesting a neural-selective role for the binding protein(s). To
assess possible developmental changes in binding activity, gel shift
assays were performed using equivalent amounts of brain and cerebellar
nuclear protein isolated from rats at various ages. Fig. 2B
shows that in both these regions, binding activity dramatically
declines toward adulthood, indicating that binding activity of these
protein(s) is closely associated with maturation of neural tissue. To
determine whether the binding activity exhibited cell-type selectivity
among neural cells, nuclear extracts were prepared from purified glial
cells, immature dorsal root ganglion neurons, cerebellar granule
neurons, and PC12 cells. As shown in Fig. 2 (C and
D), binding activity was abundant in all of these
preparations, indicating that multiple cell types present in the
developing central and peripheral nervous systems possess nuclear
factor(s) potentially capable of regulating GRIK5 expression. In addition, the decrease in binding activity from brain
tissue during development is also observed in cultured cells that are
allowed to undergo neuronal differentiation (Fig. 2D), providing evidence for an early role in neural cell development.

View larger version (61K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Characterization of binding activity in rat
tissues. All panels show gel shift experiments using probe 62 and
6 µg of nuclear protein in each lane. A, higher levels of
binding activity are present in brain tissue. Tissue distribution of
binding activity using 6 µg of nuclear extracts isolated from various
tissues of a postnatal day 6 (P6) rat. B,
decrease in binding activity in rat brain and cerebellum during
development. Gel shift assays were performed using extracts of tissues
isolated from embryonic day 16 (E16) through postnatal day
30 (P30). C, both glial cells (astrocytes and
oligodendrocytes, lanes 2 and 3) and immature
peripheral neurons (DRG) contain abundant DNA binding
activity. The brain tissue sample was from a postnatal day 6 rat.
D, central neurons and a neuron-like cell line contain
abundant DNA binding activity that decreases with neuronal cell
differentiation. Cerebellar granule cells were harvested for nuclear
protein after 3 h (0 days), 2 days and 7 days (lanes
1-3) in culture. Lanes 4 and 5 show PC12
cells prior to (PC12 ) and after treatment with 50 ng/ml nerve growth
factor for 5 days (PC12+).
|
|
Isolation of Nuclear Orphan Receptor cDNA from Rat
Brain--
Using the yeast matchmaker one-hybrid screen, with tandem
repeats of probe 62 as bait and a P2 rat brain cDNA library
(without cerebellum), we isolated a number of overlapping clones
encoding members of the family of nuclear orphan receptors. The most
highly represented clones, upon BLAST analysis, showed 95% homology to the recently cloned rat COUP-TFI, EAR2, and NURR1. The sequences for
rat COUP-TFI, EAR2 (a distant relative of the COUP family), and NURR1
have been previously reported (35,
36).3 The full-length
cDNA clones were subcloned into expression vectors and translated
in vitro, generating products between 40 and 66 kDa (see
Fig. 7), which agrees with the known molecular masses of these
receptors. Gel shift assays performed with the recombinant orphan
receptors indicated that each of the recombinant orphan receptors forms
specific DNA-protein complexes in a dose-dependent fashion
on wild type probe 62 (data not shown).
Characterization of Nuclear Proteins in Brain and Cell
Extracts--
To confirm the presence of COUP-TF family members and
NURR1 in the brain DNA complexes, supershift experiments with
recombinant orphan receptors were first designed to demonstrate
antibody specificity among members of the COUP family. Fig.
3A shows that the COUP-TFI antibody does not discriminate between COUP-TFI and COUP-TFII, whereas
those for COUP-TFII and EAR2 show no cross-reactivity with other
members of the family. The activity of the NURR1 antibody has been
previously demonstrated (37).

View larger version (84K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Identification of components of DNA-bound
complexes from cell and tissue extracts by antibody supershift
assays. A, antibody specificity demonstrated with
recombinant orphan receptors and probe 62. Lanes 1-4,
in vitro translated COUP-TFI (CP); lanes
5-8, in vitro translated COUP-TFII (TII);
lanes 9-12, in vitro translated EAR2
(E2). B, antibody supershift analysis of
postnatal day 2 rat brain (lanes 1-7) and CG4 cell nuclear
extracts (lanes 8-14) Rp, pan-specific
anti-RXR antibody; R , RXR -specific antibody.
C, presence of RXR binding to RA probe (Table II) in
postnatal day 6 rat liver nuclear extract. D, presence of
COUP-TF (C) and NURR1 (N) in cultured neural
cells. Granule cells were maintained in culture for 7 days prior to
isolation of nuclear extract. Ab, antibody; CP,
COUP-TF; TII, COUP-TFII; E2, Ear2.
Arrow denotes position of supershifted complexes.
|
|
Gel shift experiments were then performed with these antibodies
on probe 62, using nuclear extracts prepared from P2 rat brain as well
as CG4 cells. As shown in Fig. 3B, supershifts were produced by each of the antibodies, except for retinoid X receptor (RXR). In
contrast to recombinant proteins, the intensity of the DNA-protein complex from cell extracts was surprisingly enhanced by addition of
specific antisera, so that inferences on the major component of the
heterogeneous complex could not be made from these results. The
supershifts nonetheless indicate that in cells that express the KA2
gene, COUP-TFII, EAR2, NURR1, and, very likely, COUP-TFI are able to
bind the KA2 element without forming a heterodimer with RXR, although
heterodimerization with RXR has been reported previously (38). As a
positive control for the RXR antibodies, the binding of liver RXR to
RA probe was demonstrated in a separate experiment (Fig.
3C). Finally, Fig. 3D illustrates that different neural cells in primary culture possess both COUP and NURR1 binding activity. Further supershift assays of equivalent protein
concentrations using specific antibodies against COUP-TFI and
COUP-TFII, showed that rat brain and cerebellum at P2 contained a
greater relative abundance of both COUP-TFs in the brain than in
cerebellum. Rat dorsal root ganglia at E15 contained markedly higher
levels of COUP-TFII activity than COUP-TFI, whereas EAR2 activity
showed little relative difference among the tissues examined (data not shown).
DNA Binding Characteristics of CG4 and P2 Brain
Extracts--
Based on supershift analysis, it is clear that more than
one nuclear orphan receptor forms a complex on probe 62. However, it is
still possible that one of the receptors may constitute a predominant
component of the complex, because orphan receptor expression patterns
are distinct in the brain (39). Characterization of individual binding
profiles may provide clues to the composition of the heterogeneous
complex from mixed extracts. It is known that COUP-TFs exist in
solution as dimers and also bind to consensus response elements as
dimers in gel mobility shift assays (40). COUP-TFs are able to assume a
variety of conformations to accommodate spatial changes, such as the
spacing between direct repeats, although the relative affinities for
direct repeats have been ranked as follows: DR1 > DR4 > DR0
(40). This is confirmed in gel shift experiments with recombinant
receptors using probe 62 and 100-fold molar excess of consensus DR0-5
as competitors (Fig. 4A). As
expected, COUP-TFI and COUP-TFII binding is competed by all DRs tested, but relative differences in binding affinity among these DRs are also
apparent. The strongest competitors are DR1 and DR2. A similar profile
is exhibited by EAR2, which is considered a more distant member of the
COUP family (41). NURR1, on the other hand, shows weaker binding to
probe 62 and is not observed to be affected by competitors with perfect
DRs. The lack of competition may be explained by the absence of the
extended half-site AAAGGTCA in the competitors and would be consistent
with reports that members of the NGFI-B/Nor-1/NURR1 family bind DNA as
monomers and recognize an extended consensus sequence called the
NGFI-B-response element (AAAGGTCA; Ref. 42).

View larger version (69K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Characterization of recombinant orphan
receptor binding to probe 62 by gel shift analysis. A,
comparison of competitive potential of AGGTCA direct repeats DR0-5
(Table II) for binding to wild type probe 62 by recombinant orphan
receptors. B, comparison of competitive potential of
half-site changes (Table II) for binding to wild type 62 by recombinant
orphan receptors. In both A and B, binding
reactions in lanes 1-14 contained 3 µl of translation
mix, those in lanes 15-21 contained 5 µl of translation mix, and
those in lanes 22-28 contained 8 µl of translation mix.
Comp, 100-fold molar excess unlabeled competitor.
|
|
Because direct repeats effectively compete for binding to probe 62, this GRIK5 element should be expected to contain AGGTCA repeats as well. The GRIK5 element contains an imperfect
DR1, as represented by probe 62 in Table
II. To study the binding preferences of
each of the recombinant clones to probe 62, the sequence of the
half-sites was mutated, and the resulting oligonucleotides were used in
gel shift experiments as unlabeled competitors. Changing the relative
orientation of these half-sites to an inverted repeat (IR) or everted
repeat (ER) produces differential effects by each of the recombinant
orphan receptors as illustrated in Fig. 4B. Neither IR nor
ER is able to compete for binding to probe 62 by COUP-TFI and
COUP-TFII, indicating that both receptors bind as obligate dimers with
a strict requirement for direct repeats. On the other hand, EAR2 binds
IR partially but not ER, indicating asymmetrical binding or a
preference for inverted repeats over everted ones, although direct
repeats still bind best. Similarly, NURR1 does not bind ER, but IR
competes as effectively as probe 62 itself. This provides
evidence that NURR1 binds as a monomer to the right half-site only,
because it bears the NGFI-B-response element. In the remaining
competitors, the left half-site is scrambled, leaving only the right
half-site intact (N1 and N2). Once again, COUP-TFI and -TFII were
indistinguishable in binding to these mutants. EAR2 is able to bind
partially as a monomer requiring a 5' 2A extension, because it binds N1
but not N2. Interestingly, the requirement for the extension can be
overridden when a DR1 is present (binding to N3; Fig. 4B).
NURR1 binds only N1 and not N2 or N3, confirming its binding as a
monomer with an absolute requirement for the extended half-site. Taken
together, the results show that the binding of EAR2 to probe 62 appears
unique in its versatility, i.e. partial binding to one
half-site with a conditional dependence on a 2A extension.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Oligonucleotides used for gel mobility shift assays and competition
studies
The core sequence is shown for all oligonucleotides used in this study
for gel mobility shift competition assays. AGGTCA-like motifs are
underlined, and orientations are indicated by arrows. Mutated
nucleotides are in lowercase bold lettering. DR0-5, direct repeats
with 0-5 spaces; 62, probe sequence corresponding to region between
+3206 and +3232 in the GRIK5 gene; IR, inverted repeat; ER, everted
repeat; N1, N2, and N3, novel variants of probe 62; UR, unrelated
sequence in the first intron, corresponding to region between +2660 and
+2683 in the GRIK5 gene. RA, retinoic acid-responsive element (25).
|
|
Using the above battery of competitors as a tool to distinguish the
various recombinant receptors, gel shift experiments were performed
with nuclear extracts from P2 rat brain and CG4 cells to determine
whether one particular orphan receptor formed a predominant component
of the DNA-binding complex. Fig. 5 shows
that the DNA-protein complexes from cells and tissue extracts are
effectively competed by DRs and N3. This rules out NURR1 as a major
component. Partial binding to IR and N1 by the extracts closely
resembles the binding profile of EAR2 (compare Fig. 5 with Fig.
4B). Thus, although COUP-TFI, TFII, and NURR1 were all
detected by supershift analysis, these gel shift competitions provide
evidence that one receptor type, which is likely to be homomeric EAR2,
may predominate in the DNA-bound complex.

View larger version (118K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Gel shift competition analysis of CG4 cell
and P2 rat brain nuclear extract using the DR oligonucleotides and
half-site sequence mutations as in Fig. 4. 6 µl of
nuclear extract was used in binding reactions for all lanes.
Comp, 100-fold molar excess unlabeled competitor whose
sequences are shown in Table II. The autoradiographs shown are have
been deliberately underexposed (note DR0-DR5) to
accommodate the intense control and N2 signals. Longer exposures show
preferential competition by DR1 and DR2 more clearly.
|
|
Differential Effects of Recombinant Nuclear Orphan Receptors in
Transient Transfections--
To determine whether each of the
recombinant clones functions as a repressor on the GRIK5
binding site, transient co-transfections were performed in Green monkey
kidney cells (CV1) using a CAT construct carrying a single copy of the
GRIK5 silencer cloned immediately upstream of the thymidine
kinase promoter (pBLCAT51). In contrast to previous reports showing
NURR1 in transactivation (43, 44), NURR1 represses pBLCAT51 activity in
CV1 cells (Fig. 6A). It was
observed that the basal activity of pBLCAT51 was not significantly
different from that of the parent vector pBLCAT5 (not shown),
indicating that endogenous binding and transcriptional modulation at
the GRIK5 silencer in these cells, if any, was undetectable. Fig. 6A shows that co-transfection of recombinant COUP-TFI,
EAR2, and NURR1 represses the activity of pBLCAT51 in a
dose-dependent manner. However, when the recombinant orphan
receptors are instead co-transfected with reporter constructs
containing the full-length intron 1 downstream of the
-actin
promoter (
-actin-I-CAT), only COUP-TFI and EAR2 showed repressor
activity (Fig. 6B). The reason for this discrepancy for
NURR1 is unclear, but the results appear consistent with gel shift
competitions which implicate EAR2, a distant member of the COUP-TF
family, as a major component of the complex bound to the
GRIK5 element.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Effect of co-transfection of recombinant
orphan receptors on CAT activity in CV1 and CG4 cells.
A, co-transfection of recombinant receptors with pBLCAT51.
Data are expressed as percentages of controls, in which pBLCAT51 is
co-transfected with 4 µg (for COUP-TFI and EAR2) or 6 µg (for
NURR1) of the empty expression vector pcDNA3. *, p < 0.005 versus control (Student's t test).
Values are presented as the means ± S.E. of at least three
independent experiments. B, co-transfection of receptors
with -actin-I-CAT. Controls contained 4 µg (for COUP-TFI) or 6 µg (for EAR2 and NURR1) of pcDNA3. *, p < 0.005 versus controls (Student's t test). Values are
presented as the means ± S.E. of at least three independent
experiments. C, effect of co-transfection of recombinant
orphan receptors in CG4 cells using CAT constructs driven by the
GRIK5 promoter. 20 µg of 5.4-CAT (empty bars)
or mutated construct m11-13,15-21-CAT (filled bars) were
co-transfected with expression plasmids for COUP-TFI (2 µg), EAR2 (1 µg), or NURR1 (1µg). Data are expressed as percentages of
respective controls in which the empty expression vector pcDNA3 was
co-transfected in place of recombinant orphan receptors. *,
p < 0.05 versus mutated construct
(Student's t test). Values are presented as the means ± S.E. of at least three independent experiments.
|
|
We also wanted to examine the effects of recombinant orphan receptors
on GRIK5 promoter-driven reporter expression.
Transcriptional repression of GRIK5 promoter activity in CG4
cells is shown to be dependent on the silencer element. In the
experiments depicted in Fig. 6C, CG4 cells were transfected
with 5.4-CAT or 5.4-CAT with a mutated orphan receptor-binding site
(m11-13,15-20 -CAT; see Fig. 1B) in the presence of
expression vectors for COUP-TFI, EAR2, or NURR1. The results show that
the repression of CAT activity by recombinant COUP-TFI and EAR2 is
significantly more pronounced with 5.4-CAT than with the mutant
construct m11-13,15-21-CAT. This indicates that a functional intronic
COUP-binding site facilitates transcriptional repression in the context
of the native GRIK5 promoter. NURR1 overexpression also
repressed reporter activity of both the wild type and mutated reporter
constructs; however, binding site dependence could not be demonstrated.
It may be possible that the activity of recombinant NURR1 is
promoter-dependent, and our result may suggest a preference
for transrepression in CG4 cells. It should also be noted that COUP-TFs
have been shown to repress basal and activator-dependent
transcriptional activities of various promoters with binding sites
placed upstream or downstream of these promoters (63), whereas
DNA-dependent NURR1 action appears to favor an upstream
site (Fig. 6, B and C).
TFIIB Is a Target for COUP-TFs, EAR2, and NURR1--
In the course
of the co-transfection experiments, it was also observed that although
basal activity of pBLCAT51 was not significantly different from that of
the vector pBLCAT5 in CV1 cells in the absence of recombinant orphan
receptors, co-transfection of the recombinant receptors repressed the
activity of the parent vector pBLCAT5 by approximately 50% of control
values for COUP-TFI and EAR2 and by 54% for NURR1 (not shown).
Repression of CAT activity in both wild type 5.4-CAT and
m11-13,15-21-CAT was also observed in CG4 cells. There is evidence in
the literature that COUP-TF acts by active repression on DR3-DR5
response elements (33, 45). The mechanism of active repression involves
transcriptional silencing by interfering with the formation of the
transcription complex or competing with other activators for limiting
coregulators. One member of the transcription initiation complex,
TFIIB, has been demonstrated to be a target of COUP, estrogen receptor,
and progesterone receptor (46, 47). However, the detailed mechanism by
which COUP-mediated transcriptional repression occurs remains unclear.
We wanted to determine whether there were detectable differences in the
interaction of the various orphan receptors with the basal
transcription machinery which might explain the transfection results.
Co-immunoprecipitation experiments were performed using
35S-labeled recombinant receptors and human TFIIB. As shown
in Fig. 7, each of the receptors is
co-precipitated with TFIIB by the anti-TFIIB antibody, indicating that
each orphan receptor is capable of directly interacting with TFIIB
in vitro. This indicates that each orphan receptor is
capable of either transrepression and/or active repression.
35S-Labeled luciferase did not interact with TFIIB and
serves as a negative control against nonspecific binding (Fig. 7).

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Interaction of COUP-TFI, EAR2, and NURR1 with
TFIIB. Co-immunoprecipitation assay showing interaction between
COUP-TFI (a), EAR2 (b), and NURR1 (c)
and TFIIB. Input labeled proteins are shown in the first three and four
lanes from the right in each panel. 3-6 µl of
in vitro translated 35S-labeled lysates
programmed with nuclear orphan receptor (NOR), TFIIB, and/or
luciferase (Lucifer) as indicated by +, were incubated with
antibody directed against either TFIIB (TFIIB Ab) or the
glutamate receptor subunit 4, GluR 4 (Cntrl Ab). After
incubation and washing, antibody-bound proteins were resolved by
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
|
|
Based on the interaction of recombinant nuclear orphan receptors with
TFIIB, we hypothesized that the overexpression of TFIIB in intact cells
should be expected to enhance GRIK5 promoter activity by
preventing the repressor function of endogenous nuclear orphan receptors. Fig. 8 shows that
co-transfection of a human RSV-TFIIB expression vector into CG4 cells
relieves repression by the wild type intron (5.4-CAT), while having an
insignificant effect on the mutated intron (m11-12, 13-15-CAT). This
indicates that the effect of recombinant TFIIB is specifically
dependent on the presence of endogenous DNA-bound nuclear orphan
receptors and that this interaction is likely to contribute to the
mechanism of negative regulation of GRIK5 promoter
activity.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Co-transfection of recombinant human TFIIB
relieves repression of transcription by endogenous nuclear orphan
receptors in CG4 cells. Data are expressed as fold activity over
controls in which RSV-Luciferase (RSV-Luc) is co-transfected.
Consistent with Fig. 1, reporter activities of 5.4-CAT controls
(lanes a and e) were 3-4-fold lower than those
of respective mutated controls (m11-13,15-21, lanes c and
g; data not shown), confirming no interference on basal
activity by RSV-Luc. 10 µg of reporter construct (5.4-CAT,
filled bars; m11-13,15-21-CAT, empty bars) was
co-transfected with 0.2 µg of RSV-Luc or TFIIB (lanes
a-d) or 2 µg of RSV-Luc or TFIIB (lanes e-h). DNA
content was made up to a total of 12 µg with pGL3-Luc (Promega). *,
p < 0.05, b versus d,
f versus h, Student's t
test). Values are presented as the means ± S.E. of at least three
independent experiments performed in duplicate.
|
|
These results suggest that the interaction of nuclear orphan receptors
with TFIIB may form a general mechanism by which these receptors
mediate transcriptional repression in vivo, and apparently additional factors may be involved in determining the specificity of
action for members of the COUP-TF family in the context of the intact
first intron (Fig. 6B) and the GRIK5 promoter
(Fig. 6C).
 |
DISCUSSION |
Nuclear orphan receptors have been proposed to play a key role in
regulating organogenesis, neurogenesis, and cellular differentiation during embryonic development. Genetic ablation of nuclear orphan receptors including COUP-TF and NURR1 is lethal, and perinatal mortality arises from severe deficiencies in nervous system maturation (14, 15). Revealing the target genes of orphan receptor action will
therefore help us to understand the mechanisms of nervous system
development. Studies in rat embryonic neural tubes have shown the
expression of the kainate receptor subunits GluR6 and KA2 to be
up-regulated following the onset of differentiation (11).
Kainate-activated receptor function was also shown to be present in the
human fetus as early as 5.5 weeks of gestation, indicating functional
role(s) during neural cell maturation (48). In our present study, we
describe the identification of several members of the orphan nuclear
receptor family as potential participants in the process of neural
development, through their demonstrated action on the promoter activity
of a widely expressed, developmentally regulated neurotransmitter
receptor gene encoding the KA2 subunit.
The documented tissue distribution of COUP-TFI, COUP-TFII, EAR2, and
NURR1 (25, 36, 49-51) is consistent with the brain-enriched nuclear
protein binding to the GRIK5 silencer, as shown in Fig. 2A. In supershift experiments (data not shown), we have
observed differences in the relative abundance of COUP-TFI and
COUP-TFII between brain, cerebellum, and peripheral ganglia, supporting the notion of distinct functional roles for each nuclear orphan receptor. Thus, consistent with the expression patterns of the nuclear
orphan receptors, it is reasonable to speculate that negative modulation of GRIK5 expression could vary among distinct
neural cell populations according to the cellular orphan receptor repertoire.
Nonetheless, the overall developmental changes in binding activity of
brain nuclear protein(s), as illustrated in Fig. 2B, overlaps with the observed increase in endogenous GRIK5 gene
expression in the rat CNS between embryonic day 14 and postnatal day 1 (11). From previous in situ hybridization studies (16) and
preliminary RNA analysis in our
lab,4 it was observed that
expression of the rat GRIK5 gene is induced early in
development but remains constant between neonate and adult when binding
activity of nuclear orphan receptors is clearly diminished. The early
expression of COUP-TFs predominantly in the developing rodent central
nervous system (50, 72, 73), albeit in partially overlapping domains,
is largely in agreement with a regulatory role for these proteins in
endogenous GRIK5 expression. However, because an inverse
relationship between orphan receptor binding activity and
GRIK5 expression is not immediately apparent in the
developmental profile of steady state GRIK5 RNA, it is more
likely that nuclear orphan receptors contribute to maintaining
postnatal levels of GRIK5 RNA at a plateau following an
embryonic period of induction. It is plausible that COUP-TFs play very
early roles in the developmental control of target neural genes. The
low levels of COUP-TF expression and activity later in mature
neuronal tissue (50, 72, 73, Fig. 2, B and
D) is in keeping with the demonstrated antagonistic effect
of COUP-TFI overexpression on neuronal differentiation of mouse
teratocarcinoma PCC7 cells (13). Furthermore, additional positive
regulatory factors acting elsewhere on the native GRIK5 gene
could help maintain balanced KA2 RNA levels in vivo early in
development, whereas other uncharacterized mechanisms may later take
over as neural cells mature and acquire properties of the adult phenotype.
Yeast one-hybrid screening and supershift analysis (Fig. 3) indicate
that multiple nuclear orphan receptors can regulate GRIK5 gene expression by binding the GRIK5 silencer. However, gel
shift assays suggest that homomeric EAR2 may predominate in the
DNA-protein complexes from rat brain and CG4 cells (Figs. 4B
and 5). In addition, transfection assays have indicated that in the
context of GRIK5 promoter activity, the physiological
relevance of members of the COUP-TF family may be determined by
flanking sequences of the intron (Fig. 6). In contrast to COUP-TF,
relatively little is known about EAR2 and NURR1 as repressors of neural
gene expression, apart from reports of EAR2 in the modulation of
oxytocin gene expression in mouse Neuro-2A (52) and rat uterine
cells (53). However, its demonstrated inhibitory effects on myeloid
cell differentiation (54) strongly suggest that EAR2 may be involved in
an important switch mechanism that determines the choice between growth
or differentiation for myeloid cells. This may have implications for
EAR2 in cells of the central nervous system and will be an important
question to address in future studies.
Mutational analyses of the GRIK5 repressor binding site by
transfections and binding assays were not only essential for
delineation of the silencer (Fig. 1 and Table I), but they also
provided clues to the possible mode of repression mediated by orphan
receptors at the GRIK5 promoter. Based on studies of
COUP-TF, transcriptional repression by nuclear orphan receptors can
occur by several distinct mechanisms, namely, competition for occupancy
of activator sites, competition for RXR, active repression, and
transrepression (for review see Ref. 40). In a recent report of another
neuronal gene, the thyroid hormone (T3)-responsive cerebellar specific gene, PCP-2, it was suggested that COUP-TF repressed
T3-dependent activation of the PCP-2 promoter by
competing with thyroid hormone receptor for binding the thyroid
hormone-responsive element (55). Several lines of evidence suggest that
the first two scenarios of competitive binding and RXR sequestration
are unlikely in the repression of GRIK5 expression. If
repression occurs through competitive displacement of an activator,
removal of the activator binding site would be expected to reduce the
basal transcriptional activity. This was not observed with
m11-13,15-21, whose activity was higher, not lower, than that of the
construct containing the wild type intron, 5.4-CAT (Fig. 1). Even if
activation at an uncharacterized site on the intron was being
repressed, mutation of the repressor-binding site would be expected to
raise reporter activity significantly above that of the intronless
2-CAT. This was not the case (Fig. 1B), and the lack of
other protein-binding sites elsewhere in the first intron (18) strongly
suggests that repressing such modes of transactivation are unlikely for
the GRIK5 gene.
It is well documented that RXR is a universal heterodimeric
partner for retinoic acid receptor, thyroid hormone receptor, vitamin D
receptor, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, and orphan
receptors (38, 56-59). In our studies, RXR was not detected in
DNA-bound complexes from CG4 and P2 rat brain (Fig. 3B) and
its cDNAs not isolated in the yeast one-hybrid screen. This
indicates that contrary to previous studies describing COUP-RXR heterodimers (33, 38, 60), COUP-TFs, as well as EAR2 and NURR1, are
likely to bind the silencer as either as homodimers or monomers. This
is also supported by studies with COUP-TFII, which form homodimers in
preference to heterodimers with RXR
or thyroid hormone receptor
in intact cells (61). Thus, it appears unlikely that COUP-TF, EAR2, and
NURR1 in the brain repress GRIK5 promoter activity by
sequestering RXR.
The remaining possible mechanisms, active repression and
transrepression, both involve the direct interaction of repressor protein with the general transcription machinery, except that the
latter model requires the tethering of repressor protein indirectly to
DNA by interacting with another DNA-bound protein. Evidence for
transrepression by COUP-TF was also provided by the demonstration that
COUP-TF interacts directly with the estrogen receptor (62). The results
of the CV-1 transfections shown in Fig. 6A may be explained
by both DNA-dependent and DNA-independent mechanisms, because the activity of the parent pBLCAT5 vector was found to be
reduced when repressors are overexpressed (not shown). The results of
the CG4 transfections in Fig. 6C may be similarly explained. Indeed, COUP-TF has been shown to be capable of both active repression and transrepression (63), and the demonstrated physical interaction of
orphan receptors with TFIIB (Fig. 7 and Ref. 46) would be consistent
with both hypotheses, but the strong competition in gel shift assays
with unlabeled consensus DR1 and DR2, which are the preferred
binding sites for COUP-TF (Fig. 5), would argue against transrepression
in GRIK5 regulation.
Eukaryotic activators have been found to contact several general
transcription factors, including subunits of TFIID, TFIIB, TFIIF, and
TFIIH (64). Our studies have shown the physical interaction of nuclear
orphan receptors with TFIIB (Fig. 7) to have functional consequences in
the intact cell (Fig. 8). This relief of nuclear orphan
receptor-mediated repression is apparently DNA-dependent, because overexpression of TFIIB had no significant "squelching" effect on basal activity of the mutant reporter construct. The pivotal
role of TFIIB in the apparently symmetrical processes of
transcriptional activation and repression have received increasing support; TFIIB not only interacts with transcription coactivators, such
as CBP/p300 and p/CAF (65, 66), but also interacts with co-repressors
N-CoR (nuclear receptor
co-repressor) (67) and SMRT
(silencing mediator for retinoic
acid receptor and thyroid hormone receptor), which in turn
are involved in diverse regulatory mechanisms (68). In fact, repressor
activity of COUP-TFI has been shown to be potentiated by overexpression
of both N-CoR and SMRT (69). It remains to be seen, however, whether
there are differences in the interaction of the individual orphan
receptors with corepressors in the control of GRIK5 expression.
Our studies have thus far shown that neurotransmitter receptor proteins
are subject to a form of transcriptional repression that is not
REST-mediated. REST binding sites are found in many neuronal
genes encoding proteins of fundamental importance, i.e. ion
channels and synaptic vesicle proteins (for review see Ref. 74). The
mechanistic distinction between nuclear receptors and REST as repressor
proteins has recently been demonstrated by the lack of interaction of
REST with N-CoR (34), whose action is often associated with repressor
function of members of the nuclear receptor family. Further work on the
action of nuclear orphan receptors at the GRIK5 promoter may
also help elucidate the nature of negative regulatory mechanisms
operating at TATA-less promoters, which are prevalent among the family
of glutamate receptor genes (24, 70, 71).
In summary, we have shown that the transcription of a widely expressed
neurotransmitter receptor gene is regulated by nuclear orphan
receptors. The observations described support a model involving a form
of active repression, which may provide a simple mechanism by which
transcription can be down-regulated once cell-specific kainate receptor
gene expression is induced during development (27). Further studies of
the molecular events occurring at the promoter will be necessary to
understand the role of active repression in the context of
developmentally regulated neural-specific gene expression.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful to Xiaoqing Yuan and
Kathryn Sciarretta for technical assistance in some experiments, to
Drs. Ming-Jer Tsai, Sophia Tsai and Astar Winoto for generous gifts of
antibodies, and to Dr James Segars for the human TFIIB expression
plasmid. We are particularly thankful to Dr. Keiko Ozato for helpful
discussion and critical comments on this manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
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.
§
Present address: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Pharmaceutical
Research Inst., Princeton, NJ 08543.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Laboratory of
Cellular and Molecular Neurophysiology, NICHD, NIH, 49 Convent Dr., Bldg. 49, Rm. 5A78, Bethesda, MD 20892-4495. Tel.: 301-402-4776; Fax:
301-402-4777; E-mail: vgallo@helix.nih.gov.
2
S. E. Scherer, F. Huang, X. Yuan, and V. Gallo, unpublished observations.
3
J. M. Boutin, B. Ronsin, D. Devost, S. M. Lipkin, M. G. Rosenfeld, and G. Morel (1997)
GenBankTM accession number AF003926.
4
L. J. Chew and V. Gallo, unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
AMPA,
-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid;
kb, kilobase(s);
AEBSF, 4-(2-aminoethyl)-benzenesulfonyl fluoride
hydrochloride;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
CAT, chloramphenical
acetyltransferase;
RSV, Rous sarcoma virus;
Luc, luciferase;
bp, base pair(s);
IR, inverted repeat;
ER, everted repeat.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Dingledine, R.,
Borges, K.,
Bowie, D.,
and Traynelis, S. F.
(1999)
Pharmacol. Rev.
51,
7-61[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Heuttner, J.
(1990)
Neuron
5,
255-266[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Patneau, D. K.,
Wright, P. W.,
Winter, C.,
Mayer, M. L.,
and Gallo, V.
(1994)
Neuron
12,
357-371[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Sahara, Y.,
Nobuhiro, N.,
Iida, Y.,
Soma, K.,
and Nakamura, Y.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
6611-6620[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Castillo, P. E.,
Malenka, R. C.,
and Nicoll, R.
(1997)
Nature
388,
182-186[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Clarke, V. R. J.,
Ballyk, B. A.,
Hoo, K. H.,
Mandelzys, A.,
Pellizzari, A.,
Bath, C. P.,
Thomas, J.,
Sharpe, E. F.,
Davies, C. H.,
Ornstein, P. L.,
Schoepp, D. D.,
Kamboj, R. K.,
Collingridge, G. L.,
Lodge, D.,
and Bleakman, D.
(1997)
Nature
389,
599-603[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Vignes, M.,
and Collingridge, G. L.
(1997)
Nature
388,
179-182[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Bardoul, M.,
Drian, M. J.,
and König, N.
(1997)
Int. J. Dev. Neurosci.
15,
695-701[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Cauley, K.,
Kukekov, V.,
and Young, D.
(1997)
J. Neurosci. Res.
47,
311-321[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Pizzi, M.,
Fallacara, C.,
Consolandio, O.,
Memo, M.,
and Spano, P. F.
(1994)
Neurosci. Lett.
166,
77-80[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Scherer, S. E.,
and Gallo, V.
(1998)
J. Neurosci. Res.
52,
356-368[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Enmark, E.,
and Gustafsson, J.-Å.
(1996)
Mol. Endocrinol.
10,
1293-1307[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Neuman, K.,
Soosaar, A.,
Nornes, H. O.,
and Neuman, T.
(1995)
J. Neurosci. Res.
41,
39-48[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Qiu, Y.,
Pereira, F. A.,
DeMayo, F. J.,
Lydon, J. P,
Tsai, S. Y.,
and Tsai, M.-J.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
1925-1937[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Zetterström, R. H.,
Solomin, L.,
Jansson, L.,
Hoffer, B. J.,
Olson, L.,
and Perlmann, T.
(1997)
Science
276,
248-250[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Bahn, S.,
Benedikt, V.,
and Wisden, W.
(1994)
J. Neurosci.
14,
5525-5547[Abstract]
|
| 17.
|
Herb, A.,
Burnashev, N.,
Werner, P.,
Sakmann, B.,
Wisden, W.,
and Seeburg, P. H.
(1992)
Neuron
8,
775-785[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Huang, F,
and Gallo, V.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
8618-8627[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Bergers, G.,
Graninger, P.,
Braselmann, S.,
Wrighton, C.,
and Busslinger, M.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
3748-3758[Abstract]
|
| 20.
|
Franklin, G. C.,
Donovan, M.,
Adam, G. I. R.,
Holmgren, L.,
Pfeiferohlsson, S.,
and Ohlsson, R.
(1991)
EMBO J.
10,
1365-1373[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Sun, Z. M.,
and Means, A. R.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
20962-20967[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Chong, J. A.,
Tapia-Ramirez, J.,
Kim, S.,
Toledo-Aral, J. J.,
Zheng, Y.,
Boutros, M. C.,
Altshuller, Y. M.,
Frohman, M. A.,
Kraner, S. D.,
and Mandel, G.
(1995)
Cell
80,
949-957[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |