|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 53, 37575-37582, December 31, 1999
Post-translational Regulation of Adr1 Activity Is Mediated by Its
DNA Binding Domain*
James S.
Sloan,
Kenneth M.
Dombek, and
Elton T.
Young
From the Department of Biochemistry, Box 357350, University of
Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195-7350
 |
ABSTRACT |
ADR1 encodes a transcriptional
activator that regulates genes involved in carbon source utilization in
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. ADR1 is itself repressed by
glucose, but the significance of this repression for regulating target
genes is not known. To test if the reduction in Adr1 levels contributes
to glucose repression of ADH2 expression, we generated
yeast strains in which the level of Adr1 produced during growth in
glucose-containing medium is similar to that present in wild-type cells
grown in the absence of glucose. In these Adr1-overproducing strains,
ADH2 expression remained tightly repressed, and UAS1, the
element in the ADH2 promoter that binds Adr1, was
sufficient to maintain glucose repression. Post-translational
modification of Adr1 activity is implicated in repression, since
ADH2 derepression occurred in the absence of de
novo protein synthesis. The N-terminal 172 amino acids of Adr1,
containing the DNA binding and nuclear localization domains, fused to
the Herpesvirus VP16-encoded transcription activation domain, conferred
regulated expression at UAS1. Nuclear localization of an Adr1-GFP
fusion protein was not glucose-regulated, suggesting that the DNA
binding domain of Adr1 is sufficient to confer regulated expression on
target genes. A Gal4-Adr1 fusion protein was unable to confer glucose
repression at GAL4-dependent promoters,
suggesting that regulation mediated by ADR1 is specific to
UAS1.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Proteins that regulate transcription are themselves regulated in a
variety of ways. Post-translational mechanisms, including covalent
alterations such as phosphorylation/dephosphorylation, are common ways
of controlling the activity of transcription factors that mediate
environmental influences where the response is rapid or transient
(1).
In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Adr1 is the principal
transcriptional activator of the glucose-repressible alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH2) gene (2-4). Adr1 also regulates the
expression of genes involved in glycerol metabolism (5) and in
peroxisome function and biogenesis (6, 7). These
ADR1-regulated genes are not expressed when yeasts are
growing in the presence of glucose, but are turned on when glucose is exhausted.
At the ADH2 promoter, activation of gene expression requires
the binding of two monomers of Adr1 to a 22-base pair dyad-symmetric sequence designated UAS1.1
Two Cys2-His2-type zinc fingers and the region
immediately preceding the fingers, make up its DNA binding domain,
designated ABD (8-10). Adr1 appears to contain multiple transcription
activation domains (9, 11, 12) that interact with components of a
histone acetyltransferase complex, TFIIB, and components of TFIID (13, 14). A regulatory region of Adr1, responsible for glucose repression, has not been identified (11, 12).
Glucose repression in yeast involves multiple mechanisms. The best
understood of these requires three genes: MIG1, encoding a
DNA-binding protein, TUP1, and SSN6. A Tup1-Ssn6
complex is recruited by Mig1 to the promoter of glucose-repressed
genes, where it blocks transcription (15-17). Regulated
phosphorylation of Mig1, most likely by Snf1, modulates its nuclear
entry and ability to repress transcription (18).
ADH2 is glucose-repressed by a mechanism that does not
involve Mig1, Ssn6, or Tup1 (19). Instead, glucose repression of ADH2 expression is mediated by modulation of the activity or
the amount of the positive transcription factor Adr1 (20).
Phosphorylation-dephosphorylation is involved in the activity of Adr1,
since repression requires the protein phosphatase Glc7 and its
regulatory subunit, Reg1 (59), and derepression requires Snf1 and the
regulatory subunit of the cAMP-dependent protein kinases
(22, 23). Whether Adr1 itself is the subject of regulated
phosphorylated has not been demonstrated (19, 24-27).
The other alternative, that regulation mediated by Adr1 is due to
changes in its expression, is also a possibility. ADR1
expression is repressed 3-20-fold when glucose is present in the
medium (25, 28). Since ADH2 derepression requires occupation
of both binding sites in UAS1, cooperative binding to UAS1 might be
sensitive to small changes in Adr1 concentration. A 5-fold increase in
the level of the activator Gal4 accounts for glucose repression of GAL4-dependent genes (29-32). However, the
importance of the increase in ADR1 expression for
ADH2 derepression, has not been addressed. While
overexpression of ADR1 leads to constitutive ADH2
expression, further increases in ADH2 expression occur upon
derepression, indicating that glucose repression is still active in the
presence of high level expression of ADR1 (33).
We have investigated the relationship between Adr1 levels and
ADH2 derepression and identified a glucose-regulated domain in Adr1. Three integrated copies of ADR1 increase the level
of Adr1 during glucose repression to a level equivalent to the
derepressed level in wild-type cells. In the presence of derepressing
levels of Adr1, ADH2 expression remains fully repressed
during growth in glucose. Adr1 appears to be rapidly converted to an
active form upon derepression because ADH2 expression is
activated within minutes after glucose is removed from the medium, and
the rate of accumulation of ADH2 mRNA or
-galactosidase activity from an ADH2/lacZ gene fusion is
very rapid. Moreover, ADH2 derepression in these conditions
can occur in the absence of protein synthesis, suggesting that inactive
Adr1 is converted post-translationally to an active form and that
de novo synthesis of proteins is not required for
ADH2 derepression. Utilizing gene fusions, we show that
nuclear targeting is not glucose-regulated and that the DNA binding
domain of Adr1 is the likely target of glucose repression.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Strains and Plasmids--
The S. cerevisiae strains
used are listed in Table I. Strains
containing additional copies of ADR1 were derived from HHY10 (MATa ura3 leu2 trp1 adh3) by a series of
one-step gene disruptions or transformation with integrating plasmids.
HHY10 (MATa adh3 trp1 leu2 ura3) was derived from a cross of
521-6 (MATa adh1-1 adh3 trp1 leu2 ura1) and
3482-16-1 (MAT ura3 trp1 leu2). HHY13 (MATa ura3
leu2 trp1 adh3 adr1 1::LEU2) was obtained by
transformation (34) of HHY10 with a fragment containing ADR1
disrupted with LEU2 as described (28). A Leu+
derivative of HHY10, JSY11, was generated by transformation of HHY10
with an EcoRI digest of the LEU2 integrating
plasmid pRS305 (35). This strain served as a wild-type control.
To generate a series of strains containing multiple copies of
ADR1, a 6.2-kb fragment containing the ADR1 gene
from the SspI site at position 1067 (from the start of
translation) to the PstI site at position 5226 was assembled
between the EcoRV and PstI sites in pBluescript
II (SK+) (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) to create pJS10.
The
ADR1-containing fragment was excised from pJS10 using
SalI and NotI and inserted between the
SalI and NotI sites in pRS305 to create pJS15.
This plasmid was digested with EcoRV and introduced into
HHY10. Leu+ colonies were isolated, and protein extracts
from several of the transformants were examined by immunoblotting to
determine the level of Adr1 under repressed and derepressed growth
conditions. Three transformants (JSY12, JSY13, and JSY14) were selected
that contained levels of Adr1 in glucose media equivalent to or greater than the level of Adr1 in derepressed JSY11. Southern analysis of
ADR1 revealed that these strains contain about 2, 3, and 4 plasmid copies,
respectively.2
A TRP1-CEN6 plasmid containing the full-length
ADR1 gene was constructed by excising ADR1 from
pJS10 with SalI and NotI and inserting it between
the SalI and NotI sites in pRS314 (35) to create
pJS20. A truncated ADR1 gene encoding the N-terminal 172 amino acids of Adr1p was constructed by digesting pJS10 with EcoRI and BamHI and a 482-base pair
EcoRI-BamHI fragment from the plasmid
ADR1(172)lacZ (9). The truncated ADR1 gene was excised from
this plasmid using KpnI and NotI and inserted
between the KpnI and NotI sites of pRS314 to
create pJS21. A fusion of the DNA binding domain of Adr1 with the
activation domain of the the herpes simplex virus protein VP16 was
created by cutting plasmid pJS21 with BamHI and inserting a
VP16-encoding BglII-BamHI fragment from the
plasmid pCRF2 (36). This plasmid was designated pJS23. A tripartite
gene fusion containing the ADR1 promoter, the
GAL4 DNA binding domain (amino acids 1-147), and
ADR1-encoded amino acids 21-1323 was constructed in a
series of steps (details will be provided upon request). The gene
fusion is present on a CEN-HIS3 plasmid, pJSL93.
Growth of Yeast Cultures--
Yeast strains were grown in YPD or
synthetic medium prepared according to standard methods (37). For
maintaining glucose repression, cultures were started in YP or
synthetic medium containing 8% glucose. Cell densities were kept below
about 5 × 107 during growth in glucose and in minimal
media, because we observed ADH2 expression at higher cell
densities even in the presence of glucose. For growing yeast under
derepressing conditions, cultures were grown in YP or synthetic medium
containing 3% ethanol and 0.1% glucose. Alternatively, yeast cultures
were derepressed in 0.05% glucose.
Construction of an ADR1-GFP Expression Plasmid--
A 0.9-kb
fragment encoding the F64L,S65T-enhanced version of green fluorescent
protein (GFP) (38) with an AatII site introduced immediately
5' to sequences coding for an amino-terminal alanine-glycine flexible
linker was created by polymerase chain reaction using plasmid pLI2000,
which was generously supplied by E. Muller, as template with primers
XhoI-GFP-3' (5'-CACTATCTCGAGAATTGGAGCTTCGGTACCAG-3') and
AatII-GFP-5'-N (5'-TCTAGAGACGTCGCAGGCGCTGGAGCCGGTG-3'). The resulting polymerase chain reaction fragment was digested with AatII and XhoI, gel-purified, and then ligated to
the 10.5-kb AatII-XhoI vector fragment of pKD64
to create pKD110. This plasmid was digested with AatII,
treated with T4 polymerase to blunt the ends, and then digested with
XhoI. A 0.9-kb blunt XhoI fragment from the
digestion was gel-purified and ligated to a 2.8-kb
BglII-BsaBI fragment of pKD84 (25), which
contains a portion of the ADR1 open reading frame, and an
8.8-kb BglII-SalI fragment of pKD84, which
contains the 5'-end of the ADR1 gene and pRS314 vector
sequences. The resulting CEN plasmid, pKD113, has the
ADR1 promoter and open-reading frame fused in frame at codon
1245 to sequences coding for the flexible linker amino-terminal to GFP
coding sequences.
Fluorescence Microscopy of Yeast Cells--
Cells were stained
in culture with 2,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Sigma) as described
by Shero et al. (39). A 5-µl aliquot of each DAPI-stained
culture was mounted on a coverslip under a 0.1-mm-thick slab of 0.8%
agarose containing fresh growth medium and suspended over a concave
well on a multiwell slide. Cells were viewed as described by Moser
et al. (40) using a Zeiss Axioplan microscope fitted with
the appropriate filters for discriminating between DAPI and GFP
fluorescence. Images were processed using Adobe Photoshop and prepared
for publication using Microsoft PowerPoint software.
Protein Extracts and Western Blotting--
Denatured whole-cell
extracts and nitrocellulose protein blots were prepared as described
previously (19, 25). Blots were probed with polyclonal rabbit
antibodies raised against amino acids 335-740 of Adr1 ( -Adr1) (19)
and polyclonal anti-GFP antibodies ( -GFP), which were kindly
provided by T. Davis.
Enzyme Assays--
-Galactosidase assays were performed on
protein extracts or on permeabilized cells as described by Guarente
(41). ADH activity assays were performed as described previously
(19).
RNA Extraction and Northern Analysis--
Total yeast RNA was
prepared by disrupting yeast cells with glass beads in the presence of
guanidine isothiocyanate followed by phenol extraction (37). RNA
samples (16 µg) were incubated in a solution of 50% formamide, 2.2 M formaldehyde, 10 mM sodium phosphate (pH
7.4), and 0.5 mM EDTA at 65° for 10 min and then separated on a 1.2% agarose gel containing 10 mM sodium
phosphate at pH 7.4. The RNA was transferred to Zeta-Probe membrane
(Bio-Rad) and treated according to the Zeta-Probe instruction manual.
ADH2 mRNA was specifically detected using the
32P-labeled oligonucleotide ZC-398
(5'-TGGTAGCCTTAACGACTGCGCTA-3'), which does not hybridize with
ADH1 mRNA in the conditions used (26). ACT1
mRNA was detected using a 560-base pair ClaI fragment of
the ACT1 gene as a probe.
 |
RESULTS |
Kinetics of Accumulation of Adr1 and ADH2 mRNA--
We first
examined the time course of appearance of Adr1 and ADH2
mRNA in a strain (JSY11) that contains only the endogenous copy of
ADR1. If Adr1 had to accumulate to a critical level to activate ADH2 expression after the removal of glucose, we
would expect the increase in Adr1 to significantly precede accumulation of ADH2 mRNA. The level of Adr1 is very low but
detectable in repressed cultures, so we can compare the kinetics of
appearance of Adr1 with that of ADH2 mRNA (Fig.
1). Adr1 and ADH2 mRNA
appear concomitantly between 2 and 3 h after inoculation into
derepressing medium, and ADH2 mRNA accumulation
increases at a faster rate than that of Adr1, suggesting that a
threshold level of Adr1 is not necessary to trigger ADH2
transcription. This observation agrees with previous results showing
that a low level of ADR1 expression is capable of activating
ADH2 under derepressing conditions (25).

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Time course of Adr1
(circles) and ADH2 mRNA
(squares) accumulation during growth in derepressing
medium. Values for Adr1 abundance were obtained from
quantification of the Adr1 bands in the JSY11 samples shown in Fig. 6.
ADH2 mRNA levels were determined from quantification of
the JSY11 samples shown in Fig. 5. Values for both Adr1 and
ADH2 mRNA are expressed as a percentage of their
respective levels at 14 h.
|
|
Effect of Overproduction of Adr1 on Glucose Repression of
ADH2--
To study the relationship between Adr1 levels and
ADH2 transcription more directly, isogenic strains
expressing different levels of Adr1 were created by integrating
multiple copies of ADR1 at the LEU2 locus (see
"Experimental Procedures"). Fig. 2 and other data2 show that Adr1 levels in repressed
conditions increased with ADR1 copy number and were about
30-fold higher in the multicopy strain JSY14 than in wild-type strain
JSY11. The Adr1 levels were also higher than normal in the multicopy
strains under derepressing conditions, although by a smaller factor
than under repressed conditions. The high ADR1 expression in
the transformants under glucose growth conditions suggests that the
integrated copies of ADR1 were not subject to glucose
repression. This result could be due to effects on the ADR1
promoter from the adjacent vector sequences or to position effects at
the site of integration.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Abundance of Adr1 in strains containing
multiple copies of ADR1 integrated at the
LEU2 locus during growth under repressing and
derepressing conditions. Western blot analysis was performed with
cell lysates from the indicated strains. All lanes were loaded with 50 µg of protein. Adr1 was detected as described under "Experimental
Procedures."
|
|
Fig. 3A shows that ADHII
enzyme activity was not detectable in extracts from the three
ADR1 multicopy strains grown under repressed conditions,
suggesting that ADH2 expression was still repressed despite
the high level of Adr1. ADHI levels were comparable in extracts from
all five strains after growth on glucose. Under derepressing
conditions, the multicopy strains contained greater ADHII activity than
the wild-type strain, indicating that the excess Adr1 was active in the
multicopy strains.

View larger version (67K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
High levels of Adr1 do not overcome glucose
repression of ADH2. A, ADH activity in
glucose-repressed ADR1 multicopy strains. Cell lysates were
subjected to native gel electrophoresis and stained for ADH activity as
described under "Experimental Procedures." All lanes were loaded
with 20 µg of total cellular protein. B, total RNA was
prepared from the indicated strains grown under repressing and
derepressing conditions. All lanes were loaded with 20 µg of RNA. The
Northern blot was probed with an ADH2-specific radiolabeled
probe. The blot was then stripped and reprobed for ACT1
mRNA.
|
|
The effect of high Adr1 levels on ADH2 expression was
examined directly by Northern blot analysis of ADH2 mRNA
(Fig. 3B). Under glucose growth conditions, ADH2
mRNA was virtually undetectable in all of the strains. Under
derepressing conditions, ADH2 mRNA accumulated to levels
in the Adr1-overproducing strains JSY12, JSY13, and JSY14 that were
2.7-, 5.5-, and 6-fold higher, respectively, than in the wild-type
strain.2
A more sensitive and quantitative assay of ADH2 expression
was provided by an ADH2/lacZ gene fusion. When the reporter
was present on an episomal plasmid, -galactosidase activity was low in all of the strains in repressed conditions (Table
II). In particular, -galactosidase
activity in the strain with the highest level of Adr1 (JSY14) was only
10% of the derepressed level in the wild-type strain (JSY11).
Derepression was about equally effective in the four strains containing
ADR1, and was about 15-26-fold higher than in the
adr1-null strain.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Effect of Adr1 overproduction on expression of an ADH2/lacZ
reporter under repressing and derepressing conditions
Cultures of the indicated strains were grown in selective media (ura )
containing 8% glucose to about 2 × 107 cells/ml. A
portion of the cultures was removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The remainder of the culture was centrifuged, and the
pelleted cells were resuspended in selective medium containing 3%
ethanol and 0.1% glucose and grown for 18 h, at which time
portions of the cells were removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." -Galactosidase activity is expressed in Miller units.
Three transformants of each strain were assayed, and the average
deviation was about 30%. The reporter gene is carried on the plasmid
YEpADH2/lacZ.
|
|
Thus, by three independent assays, the level of Adr1 that is present in
derepressed cells is not sufficient to activate ADH2 expression during growth on glucose.
Overproduction of Adr1 Alters the Time of Onset and Rate of
Accumulation of ADH2 mRNA and ADHII/ -Galactosidase Activity in
Derepressing Cells--
To determine whether the increased Adr1 in
glucose-grown cells influences ADH2 derepression, we
followed the expression of ADH2 in two strains overproducing
Adr1. In these strains, Adr1 levels are already high under glucose
conditions, and they remain fairly constant during the first 8 h
following the shift to nonfermentable medium.2 In both
strains, ADH2 mRNA appeared within the first 30 min
(Fig. 4), significantly before its
appearance in the wild-type strain, and accumulated rapidly
thereafter.

View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Time course of ADH2 mRNA
accumulation following the transfer of cells from repressing to
derepressing medium. Northern blot analysis was performed with
total RNA isolated from samples of JSY11, JSY12, JSY14, and HHY13 that
were taken from derepressing cultures at the indicated time points. All
lanes were loaded with 20 µg of RNA. The membrane was hybridized with
a radiolabeled probe specific for ADH2 mRNA.
|
|
A more sensitive assay for ADH2 expression was used to
confirm its rapid release from glucose repression in strains with extra copies of ADR1. Isogenic strains containing an integrated
ADH2/lacZ plasmid were grown in repressing conditions and
then transferred to media lacking glucose (Fig.
5). -Galactosidase activity increased about 5000-fold in the strains overproducing Adr1, yet the levels in
repressed conditions were nearly identical to those in the wild-type
strain, confirming that stringent glucose repression occurred in the
presence of derepressed levels of Adr1. ADH2/lacZ derepression in the multicopy ADR1 strains was detected at
the earliest time point, significantly before derepression occurred in
the wild-type strain. In the absence of ADR1,
ADH2/lacZ derepression occurred after a lag
period and proceeded slowly, reaching a level 100-fold lower than in
the presence of ADR1 (note that Fig. 5 shows the activity on a log
scale). The ADR1-independent activity is due to UAS2, a
second regulated UAS element in the ADH2 promoter (42).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Derepression of ADH2/lacZ in
response to high Adr1 levels. The graph shows the time course of
derepression in JSY20 (no ADR1, triangles), JSY21
(one copy of ADR1, circles), JSY22 (two copies,
diamonds), and JSY24 (four copies, squares).
-Galactosidase activities are plotted on a logarithmic scale.
|
|
UAS1 Is Glucose-repressed in Strains Containing Derepressed Levels
of Adr1--
One possibility for maintenance of ADH2
repression in the presence of high levels of Adr1 invokes other
cis-acting repressing elements in the ADH2
promoter. Although no strong repressing element has been found in the
ADH2 promoter (20), we tested this possibility by employing
a gene fusion, pHDY10, with UAS1 as the sole upstream activating
sequence (42) driving expression of a CYC1/lacZ gene fusion
(41). The CYC1 promoter is not subject to glucose repression when a constitutive activating element is inserted upstream of the TATA
box (43) but is repressed in the presence of glucose and derepressed in
an ADR1-dependent manner when UAS1 is present (42). As shown in Table III, pHDY10 is
inactive in glucose-containing medium and is derepressed in an
ADR1 copy number-dependent manner. Thus, it is
unlikely that sequences other than UAS1 in the ADH2 promoter
are responsible for its repression in the presence of high levels of
Adr1.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table III
Effect of Adr1 overproduction on expression of a CYC1/lacZ
reporter containing UAS1 alone
Cultures of the indicated strains were grown in selective media (ura )
containing 8% glucose to about 2 × 107 cells/ml. A
portion of the cultures was removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The remainder of the culture was centrifuged, and the
pelleted cells were resuspended in selective medium containing 3%
ethanol and 0.1% glucose and grown for 18 h, at which time
portions of the cells were removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." -Galactosidase activity is expressed in Miller units.
Three transformants of each strain were assayed, and the average
deviation was about 30%. The reporter gene is carried on the plasmid
pHDY10.
|
|
ADH2 Derepression Does Not Require de Novo Protein
Synthesis--
The rapid appearance of ADH2 mRNA and
ADHII/ -galactosidase activities in strains with high levels of Adr1
suggests that the activator was rapidly converted to an active form. To
determine whether this change in its activity requires de
novo protein synthesis, derepression was carried out in the
presence of cycloheximide, an inhibitor of protein synthesis.
ADH2 derepression could be detected at 1 h in
cycloheximide-treated cells when high levels of Adr1 were present (Fig.
6, lanes 9 and
12), but not in wild-type cells or in cells lacking Adr1
(lanes 3 and 6). Thus, de
novo protein synthesis is not required for derepression of
ADH2 expression. Cycloheximide appeared to allow
superderepression of ADH2 expression in the high copy
strains (compare lanes 8 and 11 with
lanes 9 and 12).
Surprisingly, cycloheximide treatment of cells maintained in
glucose led to ADR1-independent derepression of
ADH2 (Fig. 6B).

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Effect of cycloheximide treatment on
expression of ADH2. A, Northern blot
showing ADH2 expression during growth in derepressing
medium. Cultures of HHY13, JSY11, JSY12, and JSY14 were grown in
repressing medium and then transferred to medium containing 5% glucose
(+glucose) or medium containing ethanol
( glucose) with (+) or without ( ) cycloheximide (at 10 µg/ml) for 1 h. B, cycloheximide treatment results in
ADR1-independent expression of ADH2 in repressing
medium. A portion of the cultures described above were transferred from
glucose medium to medium containing 5% glucose and 10 µg/ml
cycloheximide and grown for 1 h. The control lanes showing
ADH2 mRNA in extracts prepared from cells grown in
glucose medium without cycloheximide are shown in Fig. 9A,
lanes 1, 4, 7, and
10.
|
|
Glucose Repression of ADH2 Expression Is Mediated by the DNA
Binding Domain of Adr1--
The results described above suggest that
Adr1 is regulated post-translationally. The domain responsible for this
regulation appears to lie in the amino terminus of Adr1, since
mini-Adr1, consisting of the first 172 amino acids of Adr1 and
transcription activation domain III (amino acids 420-462 of Adr1) is
active and confers glucose-regulated expression on ADH2 and
other UAS1-containing genes (12). However, transcription activation
domain III is not glucose-regulated when fused to GAL4,
suggesting that it is not the target of post-translational regulation
(11, 12). The regulatory region thus includes the DNA binding domain
(9) and the nuclear localization signal (44). However, it is possible that transcription activation domain III confers regulation
specifically on the Adr1 DNA binding domain. To test this possibility,
we fused the first 172 amino acids of Adr1 to a heterologous
transcription activation domain. We used the viral VP16 activation
domain, since it is very active in yeast (45). The gene fusion was
driven by the ADR1 promoter carried on a low copy plasmid.
Fig. 7 shows that ADH2 expression, as
monitored by ADH activity gels, is tightly glucose-repressed and
strongly derepressed by this hybrid regulatory protein. An
UAS1-containing reporter gene also showed stringent glucose repression.
The -galactosidase activity increased 110-fold after glucose was
removed from cultures carrying the Adr1-VP16 activator.2
Thus, a hybrid Adr1 activator containing only the first 172 amino acids
of Adr1 conferred tight glucose repression on its target promoters, and
it was as active after derepression as wild-type Adr1. Adr1-VP16 is
present and competent for DNA binding in extracts of glucose-repressed
cells,2 so differential stability is not responsible for
its inactivity.

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
ADR1-VP16 confers glucose-regulated
expression on ADH2. Strain TYY303 was transformed
with the plasmids pJS20 (ADR1), pJS21
(ADR1 172), pJS23 (ADR1-VP16), or pRS314
(vector). The cultures were grown in selective conditions in either
repressing (5% glucose) or derepressing media (2% ethanol, 2%
glycerol, 1% lactate, 0.05% glucose). ADH activity was visualized
after electrophoresis and staining for enzyme activity as described
under "Experimental Procedures."
|
|
ADR1 is important for expression of genes required for
glycerol metabolism and for peroxisome biogenesis. We tested
ADR1-VP16 for its ability to complement an
adr1-null strain for growth on glycerol or oleate. As shown
in Fig. 8, ADR1-VP16
complemented this growth defect as well as wild-type ADR1
did. The DNA binding domain of Adr1 without an activation domain
(ADR1 172) was unable to complement the mutant. Thus,
derepression of genes required for glycerol growth or for peroxisome
induction does not require ADR1-specific activation
domains.

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
ADR1-VP16 complements an
adr1-null mutant for growth on glycerol or oleate
media. Strain TYY303 was transformed with the plasmids
pJS20 (ADR1), pJS21 (ADR1 172), pJS23
(ADR1-VP16), or pRS314 (vector). After overnight growth in
derepressing media, portions of each culture were streaked on selective
(trp ) plates containing either glucose, glycerol, or
oleate as the sole carbon source. Glucose- and glycerol-containing
plates were incubated at 30 °C; oleate-containing plates were
incubated at 25 °C.
|
|
To test whether Adr1-VP16 is subject to the same regulatory genes as
wild-type Adr1, we measured ADH2 derepression in
snf1 and reg1 mutant strains. ADH2
expression was dependent on SNF1 for derepression when
Adr1-VP16 was the activator and constitutive ADH2 expression
was observed in a reg1 mutant strain.2 Thus, the
Adr1/VP16 activator responds to the same regulatory signals as Adr1
itself. These data show that the amino-terminal 172 amino acids of
Adr1, fused to a nonyeast activation domain, is sufficient to carry out
all of the known functions of ADR1
Adr1-GFP Is Nuclearly Localized in both Repressed and Derepressed
Yeast Cells--
Extracellular cues can influence the activity of
DNA-binding proteins by altering their subcellular distribution
(46-51). A particularly relevant example of this effect is the
DNA-binding repressor Mig1, which is phosphorylated when glucose in the
growth medium is exhausted and then is rapidly translocated out of the nucleus (18). One possible explanation for the glucose-regulated activity of Adr1 is that glucose could be inhibiting its nuclear accumulation.
Indirect immunofluorescence and subcellular fractionation had been used
previously to show that a -galactosidase fusion protein containing
the amino-terminal 642 amino acids of Adr1 was localized to the nucleus
in repressed cells (44, 52). If the activity of the fusion protein was
as tightly glucose-regulated as that of wild-type Adr1, then this
result might have implied that that the nuclear localization of Adr1 is
not regulated by glucose. However, the Adr1- -galactosidase fusion
protein showed substantial activity in glucose-repressed cells,
allowing about 30% of the derepressed level of ADH2
expression in cells expressing wild-type Adr1.
To more rigorously address the question of whether the nuclear
localization of Adr1 is glucose-regulated, the N-terminal 1245 amino
acids of Adr1 were fused to GFP, and the subcellular localization of
the fusion protein in live yeast cells was determined by fluorescence microscopy. The micrographs presented in Fig.
9 show the subcellular localization of
Adr1-GFP in repressed (A) and derepressed (B) cells. A substantial amount of GFP fluorescence co-localized with DAPI-stained nuclear DNA in both repressed and derepressed cells, indicating that Adr1-GFP is nuclearly localized and that this localization is not regulated by glucose. These results suggest that
glucose probably does not regulate the accumulation of Adr1 or of
mini-Adr1 and Adr1-VP16 in the nucleus. The activity of this fusion
protein was indistinguishable from that of wild-type Adr1.
ADH2 expression in cells having the fusion protein as the only functional Adr1 was as tightly repressed by glucose as in cells
with wild-type Adr1, and it derepressed to the same level.2
Western blots of extracts from repressed and derepressed cells detected
a 170-kDa protein, the size expected for the fusion
protein.3 This protein appeared to be stable in
repressed cells. However, in derepressed cells, a fraction of the
protein was cleaved near to amino acid 1084 to release an approximately
45-kDa Adr1-GFP fragment. This fragment was expected to yield some
cytoplasmic fluorescence, because it had no nuclear targeting sequence
and the localization of GFP lacking a nuclear targeting sequence is cytoplasmic (53). This complication was not a factor for repressed cells, since the fusion protein is stable in glucose-grown cells.

View larger version (100K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Localization of Adr1-GFP in repressed and
derepressed yeast cells. A, repressed KDY29
transformants expressing either Adr1-GFP from pKD113 or Adr1 from pKD84
were prepared by growing transformants in synthetic medium lacking
tryptophan with 5% glucose as the carbon source. At a density of
approximately 7 × 106 cells/ml, one aliquot of each
culture was saved for ADH enzyme assays. The values in
parentheses are ADH enzyme activities in milliunits/mg of
protein. Cells in another aliquot of each culture were stained with
DAPI and then viewed through both fluorescence and Normarsky
interference optics. B, derepressed cells were prepared by
shifting 2 × 107 repressed cells to 10 ml of
synthetic medium lacking tryptophan with 0.05% glucose as the carbon
source and incubating them at 30 °C for 5 h. Aliquots of each
culture were processed as above for ADH enzyme activities and
microscopy.
|
|
A GBD-ADR1 Gene Fusion Confers Glucose Repression on UAS1 but Not
on UASG--
The nuclear localization data show that
Adr1-GFP is nuclear in repressed conditions and yet is inactive. To
determine whether the glucose regulation mediated by Adr1 can be
conferred on a heterologous DNA binding domain, we fused most of Adr1
to the DNA binding domain (GBD) of GAL4. The fusion protein,
consisting of amino acids 1-147 of Gal4 and 21-1323 of Adr1, was
driven by the ADR1 promoter and was expressed from a low
copy, centromere-containing plasmid, pJSL93. pJSL93 was introduced into
two strains, one containing a GAL4-responsive
lacZ reporter and another containing an
ADR1-responsive lacZ reporter. The
GAL4-responsive reporter was derepressed only 2-fold in the
absence of glucose, whereas the ADR1-responsive reporter was
derepressed over 100-fold (Table IV).
Western blotting showed similar levels of intact fusion protein in both
strains in both growth
conditions.4 The data
demonstrate that GBD-Adr1 is present and functional in the nucleus of
glucose-repressed cells and that the activity of Adr1 fused to Gal4 is
not glucose-regulated when bound to UASG.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table IV
GBD-ADR1 confers glucose repression on UAS1 but not UASG
Cultures of the indicated strains were grown in selective media (ura ,
his ) containing 8% glucose to about 2 × 107 cells/ml.
A portion of the cultures was removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The remainder of the culture was centrifuged, and the
pelleted cells were resuspended in selective medium containing 3%
ethanol and 0.1% glucose and grown for 18 h, at which time
portions of the cells were removed and prepared for assay of
-galactosidase activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." -Galactosidase activity is expressed in Miller units.
Three transformants of each strain were assayed, and the average
deviation was about 30%. The reporter gene for Adr1 binding is carried
on plasmid pHDY10 in strain TYY303. The reporter gene for Gal4 binding
is an integrated GAL7-lacZ gene in strain TYY69. pMA424 is a
HIS3 vector containing no ADR1-GAL4 fusion.
pJSL93 carries an ADR1-GAL4 fusion gene containing the
ADR1 promoter and encoding the amino terminal 147 amino
acids of Gal4 and Adr1 amino acids 20-1323.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
ADH2 expression remains strongly glucose-repressed in
the presence of high levels of Adr1, indicating that the concentration of Adr1 is not the limiting factor for ADH2 expression
during glucose repression. Thus, glucose repression of ADH2
expression is not regulated in a manner analogous to glucose repression
of GAL4-dependent genes, where a 5-fold increase
in GAL4 expression is sufficient to overcome glucose repression.
Our results and conclusions differ from those of a previous study (54).
In that study, ADR1 copy number was varied by integrating multiple copies of ADR1. ADHII activity in glucose growth
conditions increased in proportion to the copy number of
ADR1 present. However, Adr1 itself was not measured, and it
is possible that the integrated copies of ADR1 were more
active than the single endogenous gene, as we observed in our study. In
support of this interpretation, high ADR1 copy number
decreased the growth rate in the previous study, while we did not
observe a detrimental effect of additional copies of
ADR1.
As with many transcription factors, activity of Adr1 is regulated
post-translationally, as demonstrated by derepression of ADH2 expression in the absence of protein synthesis. The
most common form of post-translational modification involved in
changing the activity of a transcription factor is phosphorylation.
Although Adr1 can be phosphorylated in vitro by PKA (55),
there is no evidence that this phosphorylation is important for glucose
repression (25). Mini-Adr1 lacks the site of phosphorylation by PKA,
Ser230, yet it is regulated in the same manner as
ADR1 itself. Thus, this phosphorylation site cannot be
important for glucose repression, either as a target of a protein
kinase (19, 24, 25) or as a binding site for a repressor (11).
Phosphorylation in vivo within the amino-terminal 180 amino
acids was not detected,3 so if it occurs, it must be
transient or occurring only on a small population of Adr1.
Other data do indicate an important role for phosphorylation in
regulating the derepression of ADH2. Glc7, a type 1 protein phosphatase, and its regulatory subunit, Reg1, are involved in glucose
repression of ADH2 expression in an
ADR1-dependent manner. The Snf1 protein kinase
is necessary for ADH2 derepression. Thus, post-translational regulation of Adr1 and of Adr1/VP16 requires phosphorylation/dephosphorylation reactions catalyzed by these proteins. The substrate for these presumed reactions could be Adr1
itself or an unidentified protein that interacts with Adr1.
It was surprising that ADH2 mRNA could be detected in
the absence of protein synthesis during glucose repression in the
absence of Adr1, since ADH2 expression is normally dependent
on Adr1. One possibility is that continued DNA synthesis in the absence of protein synthesis leads to loss of nucleosomes at the
ADH2 promoter (56, 57), and that this allows promiscuous
transcription. Although we cannot rule out an effect of cycloheximide
on the stability of ADH2 mRNA in these experiments, we
consider this unlikely, since ADH2 mRNA was about
500-fold reduced in glucose-grown cells compared with derepressed cells.
Fusion of the amino-terminal 172 amino acids of Adr1 to a constitutive
transcription activation domain, that of the Herpesvirus VP16 gene, created a stringently glucose-regulated
transcription factor. This region of Adr1 contains a nuclear
localization signal and the DNA binding domain. Nuclear localization of
Adr1/GFP was not glucose-regulated as is the Mig1 repressor. Thus, the
regulatory region of Adr1 appears to be the DNA binding domain. Adr1
isolated from glucose-grown cells is able to bind UAS1 (26) as is the Adr1/VP16 fusion protein studied here.4 Thus, it seems
unlikely that the DNA-binding activity is modified to an inactive form
in these conditions. However, we have been unable to detect Adr1 bound
to UAS1 in either repressed or derepressed cells, so we do not know if
Adr1 exists in a transcriptionally inactive form when it is bound to
DNA in repressed conditions. However, the transactivation function of
Adr1 is not inherently inactive in glucose-repressed cells, since a
Gal4/Adr1 fusion protein was not subject to glucose repression when
assayed at a GAL4-dependent promoter.
The discovery that the DNA binding domain of Adr1 or its binding site,
UAS1, is the target of glucose repression appears to be unique among
glucose-regulated transcription factors. Many glucose-repressed genes
in yeast are regulated by altering the activity of the DNA-binding
repressor, Mig1. The region of Mig1 responsible for glucose repression
lies outside of the DNA-binding region of Mig1 (45), and it is nuclear
entry, rather than DNA binding, that is glucose-regulated (18). A
putative glucose-sensitive region of Gal4 lies outside of its DNA
binding domain as well (58). Cat8, another glucose-sensitive
transcription factor, can confer glucose regulation through a
heterologous DNA binding domain, unlike Adr1 (21).
We envision two alternative models for regulation of Adr1 activity. In
the first model, Adr1 is prevented from binding to UAS1. This could be
due to competition between Adr1 and a repressor for binding to UAS1.
There are several other zinc finger proteins in yeast, some of which
are predicted to have the same binding specificity as Adr1. One or more
of these zinc finger proteins or an unrelated protein could act as a
repressor by binding to UAS1. The putative repressor could be displaced
by high levels of Adr1, and activation of transcription could ensue
even in the presence of glucose. The putative repressor(s) could be
inactivated after glucose removal, or its synthesis could be
glucose-dependent. This could explain the more rapid
derepression of ADH2 expression that is observed in the
presence of high levels of Adr1 and the apparent "super-induction"
seen in the absence of protein synthesis. However, evidence against
this model is that UAS1 does not appear to act as an operator site when
inserted into a constitutive
promoter.5
In a second model, protein-protein interaction is responsible for lack
of activity of Adr1 in repressed conditions. These interactions could
be negative, preventing Adr1 from binding or activating transcription,
or they could be positive but absent in the presence of glucose. For
example, a transcription component essential for Adr1 activity could be
absent or modified to an inactive form in glucose-growth conditions.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by NIGMS, National Institutes of
Health, Grant GM26079 (to E. T. Y.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 206-543-6517;
Fax: 206-685-9144; E-mail: ety@u.washington.edu.
4
E. T. Young, unpublished data.
5
L. Karnitz and E. T. Young, unpublished data.
3
K. M. Dombek, unpublished data.
2
J. S. Sloan, unpublished data.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
UAS1, upstream
activation sequence 1 in the ADH2 promoter;
kb, kilobase pair(s);
DAPI, 2,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole;
GFP, green fluorescent
protein;
ADHI and ADHII, alcohol dehydrogenase I and II,
respectively.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Hunter, T.,
and Karin, M.
(1992)
Cell
70,
375-387[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Ciriacy, M.
(1975)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
138,
157-164[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Ciriacy, M.
(1979)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
176,
427-431[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Donoviel, M. S.,
Kacherovsky, N.,
and Young, E. T.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
3442-3449[Abstract]
|
| 5.
|
Bemis, L. T.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
2125-2131[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Simon, M.,
Binder, M.,
Adam, G.,
Hartig, A.,
and Ruis, H.
(1992)
Yeast
8,
303-309[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Simon, M. M.,
Pavlik, P.,
Hartig, A.,
Binder, M.,
Ruis, H.,
Cook, W. J.,
Denis, C. L.,
and Schanz, B.
(1995)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
249,
289-296[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Thukral, S. K.,
Eisen, A.,
and Young, E. T.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
1566-1577[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Thukral, S. K.,
Tavianini, M. A.,
Blumberg, H.,
and Young, E. T.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
2360-2369[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Eisen, A.,
Taylor, W. E.,
Blumberg, H.,
and Young, E. T.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
4552-4556[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Cook, W. J.,
Chase, D.,
Audino, D. C.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
629-640[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Young, E. T.,
Saario, J.,
Kacherovsky, N.,
Chao, A.,
Sloan, J. S.,
and Dombek, K. M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
32080-32087[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Komarnitsky, P. B.,
Klebanow, E. R.,
Weil, P. A.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
5861-5867[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Chiang, Y.,
Komarnitsky, P.,
Chase, D.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
32359-32365[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Gancedo, J. M.
(1998)
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
62,
334-361[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Treitel, M. A.,
and Carlson, M.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
3132-3136[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Tzamarias, D.,
and Struhl, K.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
821-831[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
DeVit, M. J.,
Waddie, J. A.,
and Johnston, M.
(1997)
Mol. Biol. Cell
8,
1603-18[Abstract]
|
| 19.
|
Dombek, K. M.,
Camier, S.,
and Young, E. T.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
4391-4399[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Beier, D. R.,
Sledziewski, A.,
and Young, E. T.
(1985)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5,
1743-1749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Randez-Gil, F.,
Bojunga, N.,
Proft, M.,
and Entian, K. D.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
2502-2510[Abstract]
|
| 22.
|
Cherry, J. R.,
Johnson, T. R.,
Dollard, C.,
Shuster, J. R.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1989)
Cell
56,
409-419[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Denis, C. L.,
and Audino, D. C.
(1991)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
229,
395-399[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Denis, C. L.,
Fontaine, S. C.,
Chase, D.,
Kemp, B. E.,
and Bemis, L. T.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
1507-1514[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Dombek, K. M.,
and Young, E. T.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1450-1458[Abstract]
|
| 26.
|
Taylor, W. E.,
and Young, E. T.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
4098-4102[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Vallari, R. C.,
Cook, W. J.,
Audino, D. C.,
Morgan, M. J.,
Jensen, D. E.,
Laudano, A. P.,
and Denis, C. L.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
1663-1673[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Blumberg, H.,
Hartshorne, T. A.,
and Young, E. T.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
1868-1876[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Griggs, D. W.,
and Johnston, M.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
8597-8601[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Lamphier, M. S.,
and Ptashne, M.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
5922-5926[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Nehlin, J. O.,
Carlberg, M.,
and Ronne, H.
(1991)
EMBO J.
10,
3373-3377[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Johnston, M.,
Flick, J. S.,
and Pexton, T.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
3834-3841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Irani, M.,
Taylor, W. E.,
and Young, E. T.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
1233-1241[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Ito, H.,
Fukuda, Y.,
Murata, K.,
and Kimura, A.
(1983)
J. Bacteriol.
153,
163-168[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Sikorski, R. S.,
and Hieter, P.
(1989)
Genetics
122,
19-27[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Sadowski, I.,
Ma, J.,
Triezenberg, S.,
and Ptashne, M.
(1988)
Nature
335,
563-564[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Sherman, F.
(1991)
Methods Enzymol
194,
3-21[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Cormack, B. P.,
Valdivia, R. H.,
and Falkow, S.
(1996)
Gene (Amst.)
173,
33-38[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Shero, J. H.,
Koval, M.,
Spencer, F.,
Palmer, R. E.,
Hieter, P.,
and Koshland, D.
(1991)
Methods Enzymol.
194,
749-773[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Moser, M. J.,
Flory, M. R.,
and Davis, T. N.
(1997)
J. Cell Sci.
110,
1805-1812[Abstract]
|
| 41.
|
Guarente, L.
(1983)
Methods Enzymol.
101,
181-191[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Yu, J.,
Donoviel, M. S.,
and Young, E. T.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
34-42[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Karnitz, L.,
Morrison, M.,
and Young, E. T.
(1992)
Genetics
132,
351-359[Abstract]
|
| 44.
|
Blumberg, H.
(1987)
Characterization of ADR1, a Transcription Factor in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiaePh.D. thesis
, University of Washington, Seattle
|
| 45.
|
Ostling, J.,
Carlberg, M.,
and Ronne, H.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
753-761[Abstract]
|
| 46.
|
Kuge, S.,
Jones, N.,
and Nomoto, A.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
1710-1720[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Legrand-Poels, S.,
Schoonbroodt, S.,
Matroule, J. Y.,
and Piette, J.
(1998)
J. Photochem. Photobiol. B
45,
1-8[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Moll, T.,
Tebb, G.,
Surana, U.,
Robitsch, H.,
and Nasmyth, K.
(1991)
Cell
66,
743-758[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
O'Neill, E. M.,
Kaffman, A.,
Jolly, E. R.,
and O'Shea, E. K.
(1996)
Science
271,
209-212[Abstract]
|
| 50.
|
Pratt, W. B.,
Czar, M. J.,
Stancato, L. F.,
and Owens, J. K.
(1993)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
46,
269-279[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Sidorova, J. M.,
Mikesell, G. E.,
and Breeden, L. L.
(1995)
Mol. Biol. Cell
6,
1641-1658[Abstract]
|
| 52.
|
Blumberg, H.,
Eisen, A.,
Sledziewski, A.,
Bader, D.,
and Young, E. T.
(1987)
Nature
328,
443-445[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Niedenthal, R. K.,
Riles, L.,
Johnston, M.,
and Hegemann, J. H.
(1996)
Yeast
12,
773-786[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Denis, C. L.
(1987)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
208,
101-106[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 55.
|
Denis, C. L.,
Kemp, B. E.,
and Zoller, M. J.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
17932-17935[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 56.
|
Verdone, L.,
Cesari, F.,
Denis, C. L.,
Di Mauro, E.,
and Caserta, M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
30828-30834[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 57.
|
Verdone, L.,
Camilloni, G.,
DiMauro, E.,
and Caserta, M.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
1978-1988[Abstract]
|
| 58.
|
Stone, G.,
and Sadowski, I.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
1375-1385[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 59.
|
Dowbek, K. M.,
Voronkova, V.,
Raney, A.,
and Young, E. T.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
6029-6040[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

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

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. T. Young, C. Tachibana, H.-W. E. Chang, K. M. Dombek, E. M. Arms, and R. Biddick
Artificial Recruitment of Mediator by the DNA-Binding Domain of Adr1 Overcomes Glucose Repression of ADH2 Expression
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
April 15, 2008;
28(8):
2509 - 2516.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Tachibana, R. Biddick, G. L. Law, and E. T. Young
A Poised Initiation Complex Is Activated by SNF1
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 28, 2007;
282(52):
37308 - 37315.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Voronkova, N. Kacherovsky, C. Tachibana, D. Yu, and E. T. Young
Snf1-Dependent and Snf1-Independent Pathways of Constitutive ADH2 Expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Genetics,
April 1, 2006;
172(4):
2123 - 2138.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. P. Lin-Cereghino, L. Godfrey, B. J. de la Cruz, S. Johnson, S. Khuongsathiene, I. Tolstorukov, M. Yan, J. Lin-Cereghino, M. Veenhuis, S. Subramani, et al.
Mxr1p, a Key Regulator of the Methanol Utilization Pathway and Peroxisomal Genes in Pichia pastoris
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
February 1, 2006;
26(3):
883 - 897.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Taylor, B. W. Kebaara, T. Nazarenus, A. Jones, R. Yamanaka, R. Uhrenholdt, J. P. Wendler, and A. L. Atkin
Gene Set Coregulated by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Pathway
Eukaryot. Cell,
December 1, 2005;
4(12):
2066 - 2077.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Tachibana, J. Y. Yoo, J.-B. Tagne, N. Kacherovsky, T. I. Lee, and E. T. Young
Combined Global Localization Analysis and Transcriptome Data Identify Genes That Are Directly Coregulated by Adr1 and Cat8
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
March 15, 2005;
25(6):
2138 - 2146.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. M. Dombek, N. Kacherovsky, and E. T. Young
The Reg1-interacting Proteins, Bmh1, Bmh2, Ssb1, and Ssb2, Have Roles in Maintaining Glucose Repression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
J. Biol. Chem.,
September 10, 2004;
279(37):
39165 - 39174.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. T. Young, K. M. Dombek, C. Tachibana, and T. Ideker
Multiple Pathways Are Co-regulated by the Protein Kinase Snf1 and the Transcription Factors Adr1 and Cat8
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 3, 2003;
278(28):
26146 - 26158.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. T. Young, N. Kacherovsky, and K. Van Riper
Snf1 Protein Kinase Regulates Adr1 Binding to Chromatin but Not Transcription Activation
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 4, 2002;
277(41):
38095 - 38103.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Walther and H.-J. Schuller
Adr1 and Cat8 synergistically activate the glucose-regulated alcohol dehydrogenase gene ADH2 of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Microbiology,
August 1, 2001;
147(8):
2037 - 2044.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 1999 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|