![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 50, 35475-35482, December 10, 1999
,
,
, and
From the Research Function for Biotechnology, Frontier
Collaborative Research Center, and
Molecular Medical
Engineering, Department of Biological Information, Graduate School of
Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama 226-8501, Japan
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Ets-related DNA-binding protein human
GA-binding protein (hGABP) In eukaryotes, the control of gene expression often involves
regulated interactions of gene-specific transcription factors with
promoters and enhancer regions. The regulatory properties of
DNA-binding proteins are often modulated in a combinatorial fashion by
interactions among them (1).
hGABP1 has been identified as
the transcription factor E4TF1 in HeLa cells because of its ability to
activate transcription within the adenovirus early 4 (E4) promoter (2,
3). Characterization of cDNAs of E4TF1 subunits (4) revealed that
the subunits are highly homologous to the respective rat transcription
factor GABP (GA-binding protein)
subunits. The GABP subunits bind to the cis-regulatory DNA sequence
important for immediate early gene activation of herpes simplex virus
type-1 (5, 6). Therefore, E4TF1 has been re-designated as hGABP
(human GABP), as described in Ref. 7. The
Ets-related protein hGABP Members of the Ets family of DNA-binding proteins contain about an
85-amino acid region of similarity called the ETS domain, which is
sufficient for direct DNA binding to a sequence containing a common
5'-GGA(A/T)-3' core motif (17, 18). Recently, partnerships between the
Ets-related proteins and transcription factors belonging to other
structural families have been reported, and their functional protein-protein interactions were shown to be important for regulation of gene expression (19-21). The promoter of the adenovirus E4 contains not only an hGABP-binding site, but also several binding sites for the
ATF/CREB family which has been revealed to be important for its
activity by deletion analysis of the promoter (22). Transcription
factors belonging to the ATF/CREB family were found to be required for
its efficient transcriptional activation in vitro (23). But
it is unclear how hGABP and members of ATF/CREB family regulate the transcription.
In order to gain further insight into the transcriptional activator
complex involved with the Ets-related protein hGABP, and to better
understand the molecular basis of synergistic transcriptional regulation, we used co-transfection and biochemical assays to examine
the possibility that hGABP can cooperate with some members of ATF/CREB
family. Based on the studies presented here, we propose that hGABP
functions as a transcriptional partner of ATF1 or CREB, leading to
efficient transcription activation. Our data suggest that a
functional synergy between these factors results from a multitude of
DNA-protein and protein-protein interactions which stabilize the
large activator complex on promoter/enhancer elements.
Plasmid Constructions--
Luciferase reporter plasmid
p4(hGABP-CRE)luc was constructed to insert the DNA fragment
obtained by polymerase chain reaction using pTF1-4(C2AT)
(3) as a template into PicaGene PGV-B plasmid (Toyo-ink), the
polymerase chain reaction product which contains four tandem repeats of
5'-AACGGAAGTGACGAA-3' and TATA box sequence, derived from the
adenovirus E4 promoter. Luciferase reporter plasmids p4(hGABPmt-CRE)luc, p4(hGABP-CREmt)luc, and p4(hGABPmt-CREmt)luc were generated to substitute the tandem repeats of p4(hGABP-CRE)luc for
four tandem repeats of 5'-AACGCTAGTGACGAA-3', 5'-AACGGAAGTGTGGAA-3', and 5'-AACGCTAGTGTGGAA-3', respectively.
The pGEX/hGABP
Expression plasmids for full-length hGABP subunits in Drosophila
melanogaster Schneider line 2 (SL2) cells (25) were constructed as
described previously (7). To facilitate the construction of expression
plasmids for full-length ATF1, pBS/ATF1 was constructed by insertion of
a EcoRI-HindIII DNA fragment containing ATF1
cDNA isolated from pGEM-ATF1 (gift of H. C. Hurst) (26) into
the sites of EcoRI and HindIII of pBlueScriptII
SK+. The DNA fragment encoding ATF1 was isolated from pBS/ATF1 by
digestion with KpnI and EcoRI, and subcloned into
the sites of KpnI and EcoRI of pA5C Protein Preparation--
Nuclear extracts of HeLa cells were
prepared according to Dignam et al. (27). For the gel shift
assay, hGABP and ATF/CREB family were purified from HeLa nuclear
extract using the corresponding binding site-immobilized latex beads
(28). Each eluate was dialyzed against 0.05 TGKEDN (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 20% glycerol, 50 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.1% Nonidet
P-40). hGABP was further purified by size exclusion chromatography
using a Superdex 200 PC 3.2/30 column on SMART system (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) to separate the hGABP
GST fusion proteins were expressed in E. coli, BL21(DE3).
The cells were suspended in lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl pH
7.9, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 M NaCl, 0.5% Nonidet P-40,
5% sucrose), lysed by sonication, and subsequently centrifuged at
12,000 × g at 4 °C for 10 min to remove cell debris. The
supernatants were stored at Gel Shift Assay--
The binding reaction was performed as
described previously by Watanabe et al. (3). Electrophoresis
was performed using a 1% agarose gel containing 2.5% glycerol and TGE
buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 380 mM glycine,
2 mM EDTA) at 4 °C and 5 V/cm for 4 h. The DNA
probes derived from adenovirus early 4 promoter was prepared by
digesting pUCE4-20 (3) with EcoRI and HindIII. The fragments were isolated using 10% polyacrylamide gel and
32P-labeled by treatment with Klenow polymerase in the
presence of [ Cell Culture and Transfections--
SL2 cells were maintained as
described previously (7). Cells were plated onto 35-mm polystyrene
dishes at a density of 1 × 106 cells/2 ml of medium
per dish 5-10 h prior to transfection. DNA/CaPO4 precipitates were formed by the dropwise addition of 100 µl of 0.25 M CaCl2 containing the DNA to 100 µl of
2 × HBS (42 mM Hepes, pH 7.1, 275 mM
NaCl, 1.4 mM Na2HPO4) and added to
the cells 25 min later. Transfection mixture contained 0.6 µg of
reporter construct, 50 ng of the Cell Line and Immunoprecipitations--
N173 cells was
established by transfection of pSV2/neo and an HA-tagged hGABP In Vitro Binding Assay Using GST Fusion Proteins--
The
proteins fused with both a histidine tag and a protein kinase A site
and His-tagged ATF1 were phosphorylated by addition of 2 µl of
[ In Vitro Binding Assay by SPR--
Protein interactions detected
by surface plasmon resonance were performed using a BIACORE instrument
BIACORE2000 (Biacore AB). Sensor Chip CM5 and GST Kit for fusion
capture (Biacore AB) were used. For capture of GST fusion proteins,
polyclonal goat anti-GST antibody was covalently coupled on the sensor
chip surface using standard amine-coupling conditions. The supernatant
of E. coli lysates containing GST fusion proteins were used
for their immobilization on the sensor chip via anti-GST antibody.
Sensor chips containing about 2,500 resonance units of GST fusion
protein and running buffer 3 (50 mM Hepes, pH 7.5, 1 mM EDTA, 120 mM KCl, 10 mM
MgCl2, 0.01% Tween 20) were used for experiments.
Different concentrations of analyte proteins were injected over the
surface in a total volume of 250 µl of running buffer 3 at 30 µl/min continuous flow. After each protein injection, the sensor chip
surfaces were washed with an injection of 2 M KCl at 30 µl/min continuous flow for 1 min to dissociate proteins interacting
with the surface-bound GST fusion protein. All experiments were
performed at 24 °C. Kinetics constants of the interactions were
calculated by the analysis software BIAevalution, adapted to the
modified sensorgrams.
Proteins of the hGABP and ATF/CREB Family Bind Simultaneously to
Promoter DNA--
The E4 promoter has ATF/CREB-binding sites and an
hGABP-binding site. To investigate whether hGABP and ATF/CREB family
proteins exist on the promoter simultaneously to regulate its activity, gel shift assays were performed with probes derived from the E4 promoter (Fig. 1). This probe DNA
contains an hGABP-binding site and a major and a minor recognition site
for ATF/CREB family. As shown in Fig. 1, purified hGABP, containing
both Synergistic Transactivation by hGABP and Select Members of ATF/CREB
Family--
To study which members of the ATF/CREB family functionally
interact with hGABP, we performed co-transfection assays using D. melanogaster Schneider (SL2) cells with pE4-luci, a luciferase reporter gene under control of the adenovirus E4 promoter (7). In this
study, activating transcription factor 1 (ATF1) (31), cAMP response
element-binding protein (CREB) (32), and cAMP response element-binding
protein 1 (CRE-BP1 (33) which is identical to ATF2 except for two amino
acids) were examined as representative members of the ATF/CREB family
because these three factors belonging to ATF/CREB family were reported
to be involved in the regulation of adenovirus E4 gene (26, 33).
Transfected ATF1 increased luciferase activity only slightly above
background levels, even when large quantities were transfected (Fig.
2A, solid columns). In
contrast, co-transfections of increasing amounts of transfected ATF1
with constant amounts of hGABP Functional Interaction of hGABP with ATF1 and CREB--
To explore
whether the synergy between hGABP and ATF1 or CREB entirely
depends on the interactions to their binding sites on DNA, we used four
luciferase reporter gene constructs. The p4(hGABP-CRE)luc reporter
plasmid was constructed to be under control of an artificial promoter
including four tandem repeats of an E4 promoter-derived DNA sequence
containing both an hGABP-binding site and a CRE site (ATF/CREB family
binding site). It is noted that the CRE sequence 5'-TGACGAAA-3' is not
a very good CRE site with some deference compared with the consensus
one 5'-TGACGTCA-3'. The p4(hGABPmt-CRE)luc, p4(hGABP-CREmt)luc,
and p4(hGABPmt-CREmt)luc reporter plasmids were also constructed to
have mutations in their hGABP-binding sites, CREs, or both sites,
respectively, resulting in the inability of each factor to bind to
their reporter genes. Lack of the hGABP-binding motif resulted in no
activation by transfected hGABP
To further investigate which subunit of hGABP effects synergistic
transactivation, either hGABP Physical Interaction between hGABP
Synergism and in vitro association of hGABP
The physical interaction of hGABP Complex of hGABP and ATF1--
We examined the possibility that
hGABP hGABP ATF1 Interacts with the Amino-terminal Region of hGABP In this report, we have demonstrated that hGABP interacts
functionally with selective members of the ATF/CREB family, ATF1 and
CREB, which results from formation of a large transcriptional activator
complex on the E4 promoter.
In this study, the adenovirus E4 promoter was used as model promoters
to demonstrate the synergy of hGABP with ATF1 and CREB. We do not have
any direct evidence that the synergy functions on the promoters
in vivo, and need additional experiments to study which gene
expression the synergy functions for in cells. Our transient
transfection assays also demonstrated the synergistic transcription
activation on minimal promoter of retinoblastoma gene (data not shown).
The likelihood of synergy contributing to adenovirus E4 gene and
retinoblastoma gene expression appears high, based on our results
presented here (Figs. 1 and 2) and our previous report (2, 7, 12, 35,
36).
Models for the Mechanism of the Synergistic
Transactivation--
An important question in understanding the role
of the promoter/enhancer region is how gene-specific transcription
factors can regulate transcription efficiency. Our results indicate an architecture of gene-specific activators in the context of the adenovirus E4 promoter, and we suggest a feasible model for synergistic transcription activation. The theory is that the synergistic effect is
a result of a large number of individual contacts between, at least,
promoter DNA, hGABP subunits, and ATF1 (or CREB). Direct interaction
between hGABP The Transcription Factor Network between Ets and bZip Family
Transcription Factors--
As reviewed in the Introduction, some of
Ets family members are often found as subunits of larger transcription
complexes and are involved in the regulation of viral and cellular
function via promoter/enhancer sequences. In particular, bZip family
transcription factors which include the ATF/CREB subfamily and the
Fos/Jun subfamily, were previously reported to act as the interaction
partners of Ets proteins. Our results show a large transcription
enhancer complex including Ets transcription factor hGABP and
strengthen the notion that the Ets family proteins functionally and
physically interact with bZip family proteins to regulate gene
expression. Transcriptional activity within the Ets/bZip transcription
factor network represents both repression, in the case of MafB and
Ets-1 for erythroid differentiation (20), and stimulation, in the case
of the Ets protein Pointed and Jun in R7
Drosophila eye cells (19). Also, Ets-1 and ATF2/CRE-BP1
promotes activity through the TCR
interacts with the four ankyrin-type
repeats of hGABP
to form an hGABP tetrameric complex that stimulates
transcription through the adenovirus early 4 (E4) promoter. Using
co-transfection assays, this study demonstrated that the hGABP complex
mediated efficient activation of transcription from E4 promoter
synergistically with activating transcription factor (ATF) 1 or cAMP
response element-binding protein (CREB), but not ATF2/CRE-BP1. This
synergy also partially occurred when hGABP
was used alone in place
of the combination of hGABP
and hGABP
. hGABP activated an
artificial promoter containing only ATF/CREB-binding sites under
coexistence of ATF1 or CREB. Consistent with these results, physical
interactions of hGABP
with ATF1 or CREB were observed in
vitro. Functional domain analyses of the physical interactions
revealed that the amino-terminal region of hGABP
bound to the
DNA-binding domain of ATF1, which resulted in the formation of ternary
complexes composed of ATF1, hGABP
, and hGABP
. In contrast to
hGABP
, hGABP
did not significantly interact with ATF1 and CREB.
Taken together, these results indicate that hGABP functionally
interacts with selective members of the ATF/CREB family, and also
suggest that synergy results from multiple interactions which mediate
stabilization of large complexes within the regulatory elements of the
promoter region, including DNA-binding and non-DNA-binding factors.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
can bind by itself to the DNA sequence
5'-CGGAAGTG-3' in the E4 promoter, but has no effect on in
vitro or in vivo transcription (3, 7, 8). By itself, hGABP
, which contains four notch/ankyrin-type repeats, neither binds
to a specific sequence nor stimulates transcription, but has
homodimerization activity via the carboxyl-terminal leucine zipper-like
domain. However, the four ankyrin repeats mediate the association of
hGABP
with hGABP
, leading to the formation of an
2
2 heterotetrameric complex on the DNA,
resulting in in vitro and in vivo transcriptional
activation (3, 7-9). Certain transcription factors, such as NRF-2,
EF-1A, XrpFI, and RBF-1, which have been independently studied as
transcription factors involved in cellular or viral gene expression,
have been found to be immunologically related to GABP or hGABP
(10-13). In particular, subunits of NRF-2 are identical to those of
hGABP at the level of cDNA (14). The genes for the hGABP subunits,
hGABP
and hGABP
, have been mapped to human chromosome 21.q
21.2-q21.3 and 7.q11.21, respectively (15, 16).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
plasmid, which encodes hGABP
fused with
glutathione S-transferase (GST) to its amino terminus
(designated GST/hGABP
), was created by the insertion of a
BamHI digested DNA fragment from hGABP
cDNA into
pGEX/prehGABP
that was constructed by insertion of Klenow
polymerase-treated NcoI DNA fragment from pET60 (4) into the
SmaI site of the GST fusion vector pGEX-2T. The
pGEX/hGABP
mutant plasmids, which encode various GST/hGABP
mutants were constructed using available restriction sites or polymerase chain reaction-mediated strategies. The pGEX/hGABP
plasmids, which encode hGABP
fused with GST to their amino terminus (designated GST/hGABP
), were constructed by the insertion of Klenow
polymerase-treated NcoI-BamHI DNA fragments from
pET53 (4) into the SmaI site of pGEX-2T. Restriction
enzyme-digested DNA fragments encoding the full-length of hGABP
and
hGABP
were cloned into NdeI-BamHI-digested
pKA, a plasmid designed for the expression of a histidine-stretch and
the phosphorylation target sequence of a catalytic subunit of
cAMP-dependent protein kinase-fused proteins to the amino
terminus in Escherichia coli. The GST-ATF1 expression
plasmid pGEX-ATF1 was described previously (24) and a series of
GST-ATF1 mutant expression plasmids were constructed using available
restriction sites or polymerase chain reaction-mediated strategies.
P to create
an ATF1 expression plasmid, pA5C
PATF1. The coding region for CREB
was obtained by polymerase chain reaction using pT7
CREB (gift of
H. C. Hurst) (26) as template, and the polymerase chain reaction
product was then ligated into the site of SmaI of pUC119 to
create pUC119/CREB. The CREB expression plasmid, pA5C
P/CREB was
constructed by insertion of an EcoRI-BamHI DNA
fragment containing CREB cDNA isolated from pUC119/CREB into the
site of BamHI and EcoRI of pA5C
P.
and hGABP
complex from
the hGABP
and hGABP
complex.
80 °C until they were used for
in vitro protein binding assays. hGABP
and hGABP
with
six histidine residues and a PKA phosphorylation site fused to their
amino terminus, which were used in Figs. 5 and 6, and also expressed in
E. coli BL21(DE3). These fused proteins were purified from
supernatants on His-Bind Resin and dialyzed against 0.05 TGKEDN. They
were stocked at
80 °C until they were used as
32P-labeled proteins for GST pull-down assays. Recombinant
hGABP
intact form used in Fig. 5B was expressed in
E. coli BL21(DE3) and purified from the bacteria extract
using the hGABP-binding site-immobilized latex beads as described
previously (9).
-32P]dATP, followed by purification using
a Nick column (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). About 2 ng of the DNA probe
was used for the binding reactions.
-galactosidase plasmid as an
internal control for transfection efficiency and the indicated
activators' expression plasmids. In each transfection assays, empty
expression plasmid A5C
P was added as necessary to achieve a constant
amount of transfected DNA. After addition of DNA, cells were incubated
at 27 °C and left undisturbed until the time of harvest 40 h
later. Transfected SL2 cells were lysed and assayed for luciferase and
-galactosidase activity, as described previously (7).
expression plasmid pCHA/E4TF1-60 which was constructed to insert
HA-tagged hGABP
cDNA into mammalian expression plasmid pCAGGS
(29), and following two isolations of a colony in Dulbecco's modified
Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal calf
serum and 100 µg/ml G418. The cell line was maintained in tissue
culture dish containing Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal calf serum and 50 µg/ml
G418. N173 and HeLa monolayer cells were harvested and washed twice
with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline, and cell extracts were
prepared as previous described (30) with slight modification. The
nuclear fraction and cytoplasm fraction were mixed and dialyzed against
0.1 TGKEDNP buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 10% glycerol,
100 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM
dithiothreitol, 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 1 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) for 6 h. Immunoprecipitation was
performed by adding anti-HA antibody HA.11 (Babco) immobilized on
protein A-Sepharose (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) to 200 µl of the
cell extract followed by rotation at room temperature for 2 h. The
immunoprecipitation pellet was washed once with 200 µl of 0.1 TGKEDNP
buffer, and antigens were released by five subsequent incubating for 3 min in 20 µl of 100 mM glycine, pH 2.5. Samples were
loaded on SDS-PAGE and examined by immunoblotting experiment using
antibodies against hGABP
, hGABP
, CREB (Santa Cruz), and Sp1
(Santa Cruz) and the ECL Western blotting analysis system (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech).
-32P]ATP (>7,000 Ci/mmol; Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech) or 0.1 mM ATP (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and 5 units of PKA catalytic subunit (Promega), followed by incubation in 10 µl of kinase buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 10 mM MgCl2, 100 mM KCl) at 30 °C
for 30 min. The radiolabeled proteins were purified on His-Bind resin and subsequently loaded onto a Nick column (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech)
to remove [
-32P]ATP and imidazole. For the in
vitro binding assay, equal amounts (about 5 µg) of GST fusion
proteins were immobilized on 3 µl of glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) using the corresponding volumes of the
supernatants containing GST fusion proteins. The GST
protein-immobilized beads were equilibrated in binding buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 10% glycerol, 50 mM KCl,
1 mM EDTA, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mM CaCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.01~0.05% Nonidet P-40). The beads were then incubated with about 1 ng of 32P-labeled proteins at 4 °C for 2 h and
packed in a 1-ml syringe as an affinity column and then washed with 300 µl of binding buffer. Bound proteins were eluted by boiling the beads
in 25 µl of SDS sample buffer. Released proteins were resolved by
10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. After staining with
Coomassie Blue, the gels were dried and subjected to autoradiography.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
and
subunits, formed
2
2
heterotetramers with the probe as described previously (lanes
1 and 8). Members of the ATF/CREB family were prepared by purification from HeLa nuclear extract using DNA affinity beads (28), and ATF/CREB family proteins formed DNA-protein complexes with
higher mobility (lane 2). When hGABP
/hGABP
heterotetramers were incubated with purified ATF/CREB family proteins,
a new complex with the least mobility appeared (lane 3).
Three retarded bands appeared when HeLa nuclear extract was used
(lane 7). The mobility of the three bands were similar to
those of the three bands obtained by combination use of the purified
proteins of hGABP and ATF/CREB family. In either case when the purified
proteins or HeLa nuclear extract were used, the DNA-protein complex
with the least mobility was competed out with both cold DNA fragments
containing hGABP and ATF/CREB family recognition sequences, while the
two complex with faster mobility disappeared by adding either
competitor containing hGABP or ATF/CREB-binding sites (lanes 4, 5, 8, and 9). This result indicates that hGABP and the
ATF/CREB family can bind to the E4 promoter simultaneously with
sequence-specific interaction. To further examine whether the slowest
migrated DNA-protein complex by HeLa nuclear extract contains hGABP and
the ATF/CREB family, antibodies were used in gel shift assay. The most
slowly migrated band was obviously reacted against both anti-hGABP
and anti-CREB antibodies (lanes 13 and 15). These
results show that hGABP and some members of the ATF/CREB family
simultaneously bind to the adenovirus E4 promoter in a
sequence-specific manner in vitro.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
hGABP and ATF/CREB family proteins bind to
the E4 promoter simultaneously. A, the sequences of the
probe and competitors used in panel B. The binding sequences
for hGABP and ATF/CREB family protein are underlined.
B, gel shift assays were performed using the E4 promoter
probe as described under "Experimental Procedures." The binding
reactions in lanes 1, 2, and 3-6 contain 0.8 µl of purified hGABP, 1.2 µl of purified ATF/CREB family, and a
combination of them, respectively. The binding reactions in lanes
7-10 and 12-16 contain 1.0 µl of HeLa nuclear
extract. Lanes 11 and 17 contains no proteins.
The reactions in lanes 4 and 8, 5 and
9, and 6 and 10 contain 20 ng of
non-radiolabeled DNA with the recognition sequence for hGABP and
ATF/CREB family, and without that for them. The reactions in
lanes 13-16 contain antibody against hGABP
, ATF1, CREB,
and rabbit IgG, respectively. * represents the most slowly migrated
protein-DNA complex that appeared in use of HeLa nuclear extract or
combination use of purified hGABP and purified ATF/CREB family.
and hGABP
led to a marked synergistic transactivation in a dose-dependent manner
(Fig. 2A, white columns). Qualitatively similar results were
obtained with the use of transfected CREB as substitute for transfected
ATF1 (Fig. 2B). But ATF2/CRE-BP1 transfected together with
hGABP did not lead to a synergistic activation of transcription
(Fig. 2C). These results show that hGABP functionally
interacts with ATF1 and CREB, but not ATF2/CRE-BP1, resulting in
stimulation of synergistic transcription.

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
hGABP stimulates transcription from the E4
promoter synergistically with ATF1 or CREB. Fold activation
indicates relative luciferase activities of reporter plasmids to the
luciferase activity without effector expression plasmids. SL2 cells
were transfected with 0.6 µg of reporter plasmid containing E4
promoter followed by the luciferase gene, 0.05 µg of
-galactosidase expression plasmid, and 0.03, 0.1, 0.3, 1.0 µg
(columns 2-5, respectively) of ATF1 (A), CREB
(B), or ATF2/CRE-BP1 (C) expression plasmid along
with/without 0.3 µg of each expression plasmids of hGABP
and
hGABP
. Total amount of transfected DNA in each assay was adjusted to
be equal with the empty expression plasmid A5C
P. Luciferase
activities were standardized for the corresponding
-galactosidase
activities as internal controls. All results shown represent mean ± S.E. of three separate experiments.
and hGABP
, even when large
amounts of the expression plasmids were used (Fig.
3A, compare solid
columns 2-5 with white columns 2-5). But
p4(hGABPmt-CRE)luc did not abrogate the ability of hGABP to
synergistically activate transcription in the presence of
co-transfected ATF1 or CREB (Fig. 3A, solid columns 6-15).
Importantly, the magnitude of the synergistic effect was reduced when
compared with the reporter constructs p4(hGABP-CRE)luc (Fig.
3A, compare solid columns 6-15 with white
columns 6-15). In the case of the reporter construct p4(hGABP-CREmt)luc, lack of a CRE motif did not abolish the ability of
ATF1 or CREB to synergistically transactivate in the presence of
co-transfected hGABP
and hGABP
(Fig. 3B, lanes 1-7).
However, the synergism was not observed when p4(hGABPmt-CREmt)luc was
used as a reporter gene (Fig. 3B, lanes 8-12). These
results suggest that the synergism requires the binding of proteins to
their corresponding binding sites on the promoter DNA.

View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
hGABP and either ATF1 or CREB affect
transcription from artificial promoters containing four tandem repeats
of both the hGABP-binding site and CRE or CRE alone
(A), the hGABP-binding site alone
(B), but not the binding site. A, SL2
cells were transfected with 0.6 µg of either p4(hGABP-CRE)luc or
p4(hGABPmt-CRE)luc, each 0.03, 0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 µg (columns
2-5, 7-10, and 12-15, respectively), of hGABP
and
hGABP
expression plasmids, along with 0.3 µg of ATF1
(columns 6-10), or CREB (columns 11-15)
expression plasmid. B, SL2 cells were transfected with 0.6 µg of p4(hGABP-CREmt)luc, 0.03, 0.1, and 0.3 µg of ATF1
(columns 2-4, respectively) or CREB (columns
5-7, respectively) expression plasmid, along with/without each
0.3 µg of hGABP
and hGABP
expression plasmids (lanes
1-7). SL2 cells were transfected with 0.6 µg of
p4(hGABPmt-CREmt)luc, 0.3 and 1.0 µg of ATF1 (columns 8 and 9, respectively) or CREB (columns 11 and
12, respectively) expression plasmid, along with/without
each 0.3 µg of hGABP
and hGABP
expression plasmids (lanes
8-12). Co-transfection assays and their analyses were carried out
as described in the legend Fig. 2. All results shown represent
mean ± S.E. of three separate experiments.
or hGABP
were co-transfected together with ATF1 (Fig. 4A).
Although synergistic transactivation was not detected when hGABP
was
co-transfected with ATF1 (solid columns), transfected
hGABP
synergistically activated the transcription from the E4
promoter in the presence of ATF1 (white columns). When CREB
was substituted for ATF1 as shown in Fig. 4B, transfected hGABP
similarly showed synergistic transactivation with CREB. A weak
synergistic transactivation was detected when a large amount of
hGABP
was co-transfected together with CREB. The magnitude of the
synergy of hGABP
with ATF1 or CREB decreased compared with that of
the synergy of when hGABP
and hGABP
were used in combination
(compare Figs. 4, A and B, with 2, A
and B).

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
hGABP
stimulates
transcription synergistically with ATF1 or CREB. SL2 cells were
transfected with 0.6 µg of the reporter plasmid pE4-luc, 0.03, 0.1, and 0.3 µg (columns 2-4, respectively) of ATF1
(A) or CREB (B) expression plasmid with/without
0.3 µg of either hGABP
or hGABP
expression plasmid.
Co-transfection assays and their analyses were carried out as described
in the legend to Fig. 2. All results shown represent mean ± S.E.
of three separate experiments.
and ATF1--
The results of
our co-transfection assay could be explained if hGABP somehow
interacted with ATF1 and CREB on the promoter. To study potential
physical interaction between hGABP and ATF1 or CREB, we performed
co-immunoprecipitation experiments using the whole cell extract
prepared from a HeLa cell transformant N173 cell line which
constitutive expressed HA-tagged hGABP
. The immunoprecipitate with
anti-HA monoclonal antibody was loaded on 10% SDS-PAGE and examined by
immunoblotting assay with antibodies against hGABP
, hGABP
, and
CREB. Immunoreacted bands corresponding to hGABP
and CREB were
present in the immunoprecipitate as well as that to HA-tagged hGABP
,
whereas they were not detected in an immunoprecipitate from HeLa cell
extract using anti-HA antibody (Fig.
5A). We also did not detect
DNA-binding transcription factor Sp1 in the immunoprecipitate by
HA-antibody (data not shown).

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
hGABP
physically
binds to ATF1 and CREB. A, co-immunoprecipitation of
CREB with HA-tagged hGABP
from whole extracts of N173 cells.
Immunoprecipitations using anti-HA antibody were performed as described
under "Experimental Procedures." Whole cell extracts of N173
(lanes 1-4) and HeLa cells (lanes 5-8) were
used. 10 and 50 µl of the immunoprecipitates (lanes 4 and
8) were separated by 10% SDS-PAGE and examined by
immunoblotting assay for detecting hGABP subunits and CREB,
respectively. 10 µl of input extracts (lanes 1 and
5), flow-though fractions (lanes 2 and
6), and wash fractions (lanes 3 and 7)
were also examined. Note that there are two forms of hGABP
in HeLa
cells (7, 14). B, in vitro binding assay using
GST-fused proteins. GST-fused proteins used are indicated above.
Arrowheads indicate the binding of ATF1, CREB, and hGABP
onto GST-fused protein resin. GST pull-down assays were performed as
described under "Experimental Procedures." The bound fractions to
each GST-fused protein resin were analyzed by 10% SDS-PAGE and stained
for autoradiography. C, the in vitro binding
assay using SPR. Sensorgrams indicate the real-time interactions
between hGABP
and GST-ATF1 immobilized on sensor chip surface via
anti-GST antibody. The sensorgrams measured by BIACORE were modified by
subtraction of the background SPR trace using GST proteins as the
negative control. D, hGABP
-hGABP
and hGABP
-ATF1
interactions were not exclusive each other. In vitro binding
assay using GST-ATF1 were performed as described under "Experimental
Procedures." GST-ATF1 immobilized onto glutathione Sepharose was
mixed first with (lanes 3-6) or without (lanes
7-9) 5 ng of 32P-labeled hGABP
, followed by the
addition of 32P-labeled hGABP
(lanes 4-6 and
7-9; 5, 15, and 50 ng, respectively) to the binding
reaction. Lanes 1 and 2 show 0.75 ng of
32P-labeled hGABP
and 7.5 ng of 32P-labeled
hGABP
, respectively.
with CREB
indicated that hGABP
may interact directly with ATF1 and CREB. We examined this possibility by in vitro binding assays using
GST fused proteins. When 32P-labeled recombinant ATF1 and
CREB were mixed and captured with GST-hGABP subunits bound to
glutathione-coated Sepharose beads, about 8% of input ATF1 and CREB
bound to GST-hGABP
beads (Fig. 5B, lanes 5 and
6), and they were not retained to a significant degree when
GST-hGABP
immobilized beads were used (lanes 8 and 9). GST-hGABP
used in the assay appeared to retain their
native structure as judged by their ability to bind to hGABP
(lane 7). To test if the observed interaction of hGABP
with ATF1 and CREB depends on contaminated DNA, the in vitro
interaction assays were performed in the presence of ethidium bromide
(34). When 32P-labeled recombinant hGABP
was mixed and
captured with GST-ATF1 bound to glutathione-coated Sepharose
beads, about 15% input of hGABP
was retained on GST-ATF1 beads,
either in the presence or absence of 100 µg/ml ethidium bromide (Fig.
5A, lanes 10 and 11). On the other hand, hGABP
was not bound to a significant degree onto GST immobilized beads
(lanes 12 and 13).
with ATF1 or CREB was hereafter
studied using the binding activity of ATF1 as a representative of the
ATF/CREB family because the primary structures of these proteins are
very similar to each other. To study the kinetics of the interaction
between hGABP
and ATF1, an in vitro binding assay was
performed with the BIACORE system (Biacore AB), using surface plasmon
resonance (SPR), a technique able to direct protein-protein interactions in real-time manner. A GST-ATF1 fusion protein that had
been immobilized to the sensor surface, via anti-GST antibody coupled
to the surface via their amino group, was exposed to purified recombinant hGABP
, and the association and dissociation of hGABP
were recorded in real time. As shown in Fig. 5C, the
interaction of hGABP
with GST-ATF1 was detected in a
dose-dependent manner when increasing concentrations of
hGABP
were used. As a result of analyzing the sensorgrams, the
dissociation and association rate constants of the interaction were
measured as 2.4 × 10
3 s
1 and 1.2 × 105 M
1 s
1,
respectively, which indicates the dissociation constant as 2.0 × 10
8 M. These results show that ATF1 and CREB
interact physically with hGABP
in cell extract and in
vitro, but not with hGABP
or hGABP
.
could influence the ATF1-hGABP
interaction, for hGABP
was originally copurified with hGABP
from HeLa cell nuclear extract
(3, 4). hGABP
was mixed alone, or in the presence of hGABP
with
GST-ATF1 fusion protein immobilized on beads, and the captured proteins
were detected by autoradiography (Fig. 5D). Approximately
8% of the input hGABP
was bound to the beads in the absence of
hGABP
, the same result as in Fig. 5 (lane 3). When
increasing amounts of hGABP
were mixed together with constant
amounts of hGABP
, the amounts of the captured hGABP
progressively
increased (lanes 4-6). hGABP
was also progressively
captured, together with hGABP
, via an hGABP
-hGABP
interaction
(lanes 4-6), while hGABP
were not captured to a
significant degree by the beads in the absence of hGABP
, as a
negative control (lanes 7-9). These results show that the ATF1-hGABP
and hGABP
-hGABP
interactions were mutually
permissible, and that the association of hGABP
with hGABP
led to
a more stable interaction of hGABP
with ATF1.
Interacts with the DNA-binding Domain of ATF1--
To
define the domains responsible for complex formation between hGABP
and ATF1, a series of ATF1 deletion mutants, with GST fused to their
amino termini, were used for the in vitro binding assay
(Fig. 6A). Roughly equal
amounts of GST-ATF1 deletion mutants bound to glutathione-coated beads
were incubated with 32P-labeled full-length hGABP
. Fig.
6B shows the result of the deletion analysis performed to
identify the hGABP
interaction region of ATF1. Incubation with GST
alone served as a negative control (Fig. 6B, lane 7). The
results show that the amino-terminal deletion mutants tested were
sufficient to interact with hGABP
(lanes 5 and
6). Removal of the basic region-leucine zipper (bZip) domain, known as a DNA-binding motif, led to a complete loss of the
interaction activity with hGABP
(lanes 2-4). These
results demonstrate that hGABP
interacts with the DNA-binding bZip
domain of ATF1.

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Mapping of the protein interaction domains
in vitro. A, schematic structures of
GST-fused ATF1 variants. B, in vitro binding
assay using GST-ATF1 variants. An arrowhead indicates the
bound hGABP
to GST-fused ATF1 variant immobilized on
glutathione-Sepharose. Binding assays and the analysis were carried out
as described in the legend to Fig. 5. Coomassie Blue staining and
autoradiography of the same gel are shown. C, schematic
structures of GST-fused hGABP
variants. D, identification
of hGABP
domain that interacts with ATF1 in vitro.
Binding assays using GST-hGABP
variants were performed as in
panel B. An arrowhead indicates the bound
32P-labeled ATF1 to GST-hGABP
variants immobilized on
glutathione-Sepharose. Twenty percent of the total
32P-labeled ATF1 protein input (IN) are shown in
lane 1. Coomassie Blue staining and autoradiography of the
same gel are shown.
--
To
map the ATF1-binding region of hGABP
, GST-hGABP
mutants as shown
in Fig. 6C were applied to the in vitro binding
analysis using GST fused proteins. As shown in Fig. 6D,
deletion of the amino-terminal portion (amino acids 1-399) of hGABP
had a severe impact on its ability to bind to ATF1 (lane 5).
The amino-terminal region (amino acids 1-319) and the Ets DNA-binding
domain (amino acids 294-406) of hGABP
were sufficient to form a
complex with ATF1 (lanes 3 and 4). Similar
results were obtained by analyses using the BIACORE system and
indicated that the GST fused N-region (1-319) and Ets domain
(294-406) bound to ATF1 with low efficiency compared with
GST-hGABP
, while the GST fused C-region detected the same change of
SPR as when the GST protein was used alone (results not shown). These
results appear that ATF1 associates with the amino-terminal region
(amino acids 1-399) of hGABP
, which is not always necessary for the
interaction with hGABP
(8). These results are consistent with the
previous results that ATF1-hGABP
and hGABP
-hGABP
interactions
are not exclusive to each other (Fig. 5D).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
and ATF1 (or CREB) may contribute to the stability of
their binding to the promoters. Furthermore, this possible effect could
increase since hGABP
binding to hGABP
enhances the affinity of
the interaction between hGABP
and ATF1 as shown in Fig.
5D. However, the direct interaction between hGABP
and
ATF1 was not so stable that the transcription factors would not form a
complex without tethering them on the promoter DNA in vivo.
Studies of the mechanism by which ATF1 and CREB activate transcription
reveals that the CREB-binding protein (CBP) act as their coactivator
and their interactions are in a phosphorylation dependent manner (37,
38). Recently, Bannert (39) reported that hGABP control the interleukin
16 promoter activity in concert with CBP which interacted with
hGABP
. In the case of the simultaneous and stable existence of ATF1
and hGABP on the promoter, the complex can have multiple CBP-docking
sites, which contribute to a great advantage to competition for
limiting the level of CBP, the subsequent recruitment onto the
promoter, and the maintenance of CBP on the promoter. This would allow
the formation of a large activator complex that would be important for
the stimulation of transcription. For synergistic transcription
regulation, it is understandable that CBP have multiple interfaces to
be occupied directly and simultaneously by different DNA-binding
activators in some unique fashions (40). Another possible mechanism
that explains the synergistic transactivation, although neither negated
by the model described above nor substantiated by our results, is that
the interaction of hGABP
with ATF1 and CREB may facilitate
phosphorylation of them. It was written previously that ATF1 and CREB
must be phosphorylated to interact with CBP (37, 38). This possibility was supported by our preliminary findings that hGABP
enhanced the
phosphorylation of ATF1 in vitro using HeLa nuclear extract as a source of kinases and that hGABP
preferred to interact with unphosphorylated ATF1 to the phosphorylated form by protein kinase A
in vitro (results not shown). This model is different from
the previously reported model, which suggests that multiple direct interactions of activators with specific TAFs, components of the RNA
polymerase II complex, may account for synergism and proper gene
expression (41). In any case, multiple binding of these activators
appears to lead to multiple contact with cofactors or basal
transcription factors. This enables coordination and efficient
recruitment of the complex containing RNA polymerase II to form a
stable and active initiation complex. Although we did not show here any
evidence that CBP plays a functional role in the synergism, this
proposal should stimulate further experimental tests to study the
possibility and which step makes the most important contribution to the
synergistic transactivation in vivo.
enhancer (21). Synergistic
activity of hGABP with ATF1 and CREB within the Ets/bZip network is an
example of the latter case. It is possible that a selective partnership
generating synergistic transcriptional activation does not depend only
on the degree of the interaction affinity among Ets proteins and bZip
proteins, cooperative DNA binding activity, a common coactivator and
recruitment of a kinase (discussed above), but on unknown important
regulations at several points. It is likely that elucidation of such
signal pathways which regulate the formation and activity of the large transcription complex will establish a general idea for gene expression control.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Dr. H. C. Hurst (Imperial
Cancer Research Fund) for plasmids pGEM-ATF1 and pT7
-CREB1. The
contribution of Dr. M. Ikeda and Dr. K. Tamai (Medical & Biological
Laboratories Co., Ltd.) to the production of polyclonal antibody
against hGABP
and hGABP
is gratefully acknowledged. We also thank
all members of the Handa laboratory for helpful comments and technical
help throughout the project.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by a Research Grant from Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) of Japan Science and Technology Corporation (JST), a grant-in-aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas from The Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, a grant of R and D Projects in Cooperation with Academic Institutions from New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO), and research fellowships from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists.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: Molecular Medicine Laboratories, Institute for Drug Discovery Research, Yamanouchi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 21 Miyukigaoka, Tsukuba 305-8585, Japan.
¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Research Function for Biotechnology, Frontier Collaborative Research Center, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 4259 Nagatsuta-cho, Midori-ku, Yokohama 226-8501, Japan. Tel.: 81-45-924-5797; Fax: 81-45-924-5834; E-mail: hhanda@bio.titech.ac.jp.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: hGABP, human GA-binding protein; ATF, activating transcription factor; CREB, cAMP response element-binding protein; CRE-BP1, cAMP response element-binding protein 1; CRE, cAMP response element; Sp1, specificity protein 1; SPR, surface plasmon resonance; HA, hemagglutinin; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis; GST, glutathione S-transferase; E4, adeno early 4 promoter.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Thanos, D., and Maniatis, T. (1995) Cell 83, 1091-1100[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. |
Watanabe, H.,
Imai, T.,
Sharp, P. A.,
and Handa, H.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
1290-1300 |
| 3. | Watanabe, H., Wada, T., and Handa, H. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 841-847[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. |
Watanabe, H.,
Sawada, J.,
Yano, K.,
Yamaguchi, K.,
Goto, M.,
and Handa, H.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
1385-1391 |
| 5. |
LaMarco, K. L.,
Thompson, C. C.,
Byers, B. P.,
Walton, E. M.,
and McKnight, S. L.
(1991)
Science
253,
789-792 |
| 6. |
Thompson, C. C.,
Brown, T. A.,
and McKnight, S. L.
(1991)
Science
253,
762-768 |
| 7. |
Sawa, C.,
Goto, M.,
Suzuki, F.,
Watanabe, H.,
Sawada, J.-i.,
and Handa, H.
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
4954-4961 |
| 8. | Sawada, J-i., Goto, M., Sawa, C., Watanabe, H., and Handa, H. (1994) EMBO J. 13, 1396-1402[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 9. |
Suzuki, F.,
Goto, M.,
Sawa, C.,
Ito, S.,
Watanabe, H.,
Sawada, J.,
and Handa, H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
29302-29308 |
| 10. |
Bolwig, G. M.,
Bruder, J. T.,
and Hearing, P.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
6555-6564 |
| 11. |
Marchioni, M.,
Morabito, S.,
Salvati, A. L.,
Beccari, E.,
and Carnevali, F.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6479-6489 |
| 12. | Savoysky, E., Mizuno, T., Sowa, Y., Watanabe, H., Sawada, J-i., Nomura, H., Ohsugi, Y., Handa, H., and Sakai, T. (1994) Oncogene 9, 1839-1846[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Virbasius, J. V.,
Virbasiu, C. A.,
and Scarpulla, R. C.
(1993)
Genes Dev.
7,
380-392 |
| 14. | Gugneja, S., Virbasius, J. V., and Scarpulla, R. C. (1995) Mol. Cell. Biol. 15, 102-111[Abstract] |
| 15. | Sawada, J-i., Goto, M., Watanabe, H., Handa, H., and Yoshida, M. C. (1995) Jpn. J. Cancer Res. 86, 10-12[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. | Goto, M., Shimizu, T., Sawada, J-i., Sawa, C., Watanabe, H., Ichikawa, H., Ohira, M., Ohki, M., and Handa, H. (1995) Gene (Amst.) 166, 337-338[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. | Janknecht, R., and Nordheim, A. (1993) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1155, 346-356[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. | Wasylyk, B., Hahn, S. L., and Giovane, A. (1993) Eur. J. Biochem. 211, 7-18[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 19. | Treier, M., Bohmann, D., and Mlodzik, M. (1995) Cell 83, 753-760[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. | Sieweke, M. H., Tekatte, H., Frampton, J., and Graf, T. (1996) Cell 85, 49-60[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 21. |
Giese, K.,
Kingsley, C.,
Kirshner, J. R.,
and Grosschedl, R.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
995-1008 |
| 22. | Ooyama, S., Imai, T., Hanaka, S., and Handa, H. (1989) EMBO J. 8, 863-868[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. | Hai, T., Horikoshi, M., Roeder, R. G., and Green, M. R. (1988) Cell 54, 1043-1051[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 24. |
Wada, T.,
Takagi, T.,
Yamaguchi, Y.,
Kawase, H.,
Hiramoto, M.,
Ferudous, A.,
Takayama, M.,
Lee, K. A.,
Hurst, H. C.,
and Handa, H.
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
876-884 |
| 25. | Schneider, I. (1972) J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 27, 353-365[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. |
Hurst, H. C.,
Totty, N. F.,
and Jones, C.
(1991)
Nucleic Acids Res.
19,
4601-4609 |
| 27. |
Dignam, J. D.,
Lebovitz, R. M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1983)
Nucleic Acids Res.
11,
1475-1489 |
| 28. | Inomota, Y., Kawaguti, H., Hiramoto, M., Wada, T., and Handa, H. (1992) Anal. Biochem. 206, 109-114[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. | Niwa, H., Yamamura, K., and Miyazaki, J. (1991) Gene (Amst.) 108, 193-199[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 30. |
Schreiber, E.,
Matthias, P.,
Muller, M. M.,
and Schffner, W.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
6419 |
| 31. |
Hai, T.,
Liu, F.,
Coukos, W. J.,
and Green, M. R.
(1989)
Genes Dev.
3,
2083-2090 |
| 32. | Gonzalez, G. A., Yamamoto, K. K., Fisher, W. H., Karr, D., Menzel, P., Biggs, W., Vale, W. W., and Montminy, M. R. (1989) Nature 337, 749-752[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 33. | Maekawa, T., Sakura, H., Kanei-Ishii, C., Sudo, T., Yoshimura, T., Fujisawa, J., Yoshida, M., and Ishii, S. (1989) EMBO J. 8, 2023-2028[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 34. |
Lai, J.-S.,
and Herr, W.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
6958-6962 |
| 35. | Sakai, T., Ohtani, N., McGee, T. L., Robbins, P. D., and Dryja, T. P. (1991) Nature 353, 83-86[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. |
Sowa, Y.,
Siio, Y.,
Fujita, T.,
Matsumoto, T.,
Okuyama, Y.,
Kato, D.,
Inoue, J.-i.,
Sawada, J.-i.,
Goto, M.,
Watanabe, H.,
Handa, H.,
and Sakai, T.
(1997)
Cancer Res.
57,
3145-3148 |
| 37. | Chrivia, J. C., Kwok, R. S. P., Lamb, N., Hagiwara, M., Montminy, M. R., and Goodmann, R. H. (1993) Nature 365, 855-859[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 38. |
Shimomura, A.,
Ogawa, Y.,
Kitani, T.,
Fujisawa, H.,
and Hagiwara, M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
17957-17960 |
| 39. |
Bannert, N.,
Avots, A.,
Baier, M.,
Serfling, E.,
and Kurth, R.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
1541-1546 |
| 40. | Shikama, N., Lyon, J., and Thangue, N. B. L. (1997) Trends Cell Biol. 7, 230-236 |
| 41. |
Sauer, F.,
Hansen, S. K.,
and Tjian, R.
(1995)
Science
270,
1783-1788 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. D. Smith, P. Sumazin, Z. Xuan, and M. Q. Zhang DNA motifs in human and mouse proximal promoters predict tissue-specific expression PNAS, April 18, 2006; 103(16): 6275 - 6280. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. T. Smith, R. D. Nicholls, and D. Reines The gene encoding the fragile X RNA-binding protein is controlled by nuclear respiratory factor 2 and the CREB family of transcription factors Nucleic Acids Res., February 25, 2006; 34(4): 1205 - 1215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|