![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 21, 16160-16166, May 26, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,
,
,
¶
From the
Department of Nutritional Sciences,
University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211 and the
§ Departments of Hematology and Biochemistry, University of
Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah 84132
Received for publication, January 24, 2000, and in revised form, February 22, 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Zap1 transcriptional activator of
Saccharomyces cerevisiae plays a major role in zinc
homeostasis by inducing the expression of several genes under
zinc-limited growth conditions. This activation of gene expression is
mediated by binding of the protein to one or more zinc-responsive
elements present in the promoters of its target genes. To better
understand how Zap1 functions, we mapped its DNA binding domain using a
combined in vivo and in vitro approach. Our
results show that the Zap1 DNA binding domain maps to the carboxyl-terminal 194 amino acids of the protein; this region contains
five of its seven potential zinc finger domains. Fusing this region to
the Gal4 activation domain complemented a zap1 Zinc is an essential trace element necessary for the growth of all
organisms. Its nutritional importance can be illustrated by the large
number of proteins that require zinc for their function. For example,
there are over 300 known zinc metalloenzymes (1), and it has been
estimated that as many as 1% of the genes in the human genome encode
proteins with C2H2 zinc finger motifs (2). In
contrast, zinc excess can be toxic to cells so mechanisms of controlling intracellular zinc levels are critical to cell viability. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, zinc homeostasis is largely
regulated at the transcriptional level. The Zap1 transcriptional
activator directly controls the expression of a number of genes in
response to zinc (3). For example, in zinc-limited cells, Zap1 induces the expression of a high affinity zinc transporter encoded by the
ZRT1 gene and a low affinity transporter encoded by
ZRT2 (4, 5). Zap1 also controls the transport of stored zinc
out of the vacuole by regulating the expression of yet another
transporter encoded by the ZRT3
gene.1 In addition to these
important zinc transporters, DNA microarray analysis indicated that
perhaps as many as 46 total genes in the yeast genome are directly
regulated by this factor.2
Clearly, Zap1 is a critical determinant of zinc homeostasis and the
ability of cells to thrive under zinc-limiting conditions.
Zap1 binds in a sequence-specific manner to an 11-base pair sequence
called the zinc-responsive element
(ZRE).3 This element is found
in one or more copies in the promoter regions of Zap1 target genes.
Experimental evidence (8) and computer-aided motif analysis of Zap1
target gene promoters2 have indicated that the sequence
5'-ACCTTNAAGGT-3' is the preferred recognition site for this protein.
Determining how Zap1 recognizes and binds to this sequence is a
critical issue in understanding how Zap1 functions as a transcriptional
activator. Zap1 contains seven potential C2H2
zinc finger domains, and previous studies suggested that only a subset
of these may be required for ZRE binding in vitro (8). In
this study, we use a combined in vitro and in
vivo analysis to map the DNA binding domain of Zap1 and determine
which of its zinc fingers contribute to ZRE recognition and binding.
Strains and Culture Conditions--
The strains used in this
study are YM4271 (MATa ura3-52 his3- Plasmid Constructions--
All plasmids generated for this study
were confirmed by DNA sequencing. The ZAP1 open reading
frame was PCR-amplified with primers containing added 5' and 3'
SalI sites. This fragment was inserted into
SalI-digested pGAD424 (CLONTECH) to
create pGAD-Zap11-880. Other GAD-Zap1 fusions were created
similarly with 5' primers containing an added EcoRI site and
3' primers containing a BamHI site. The fragment containing
GAD-Zap1
The Gal4 DNA binding domain fusion plasmid
pGBD-Zap1552-880 was generated by PCR-amplifying the
ZAP1 open reading frame encoding residues 552-880 using
primers with added 5' EcoRI and 3' BamHI sites.
The resulting fragment was inserted into
BamHI-EcoRI-digested pMA424 (14). This allele and
its mutant derivatives are expressed from the ADH1 promoter.
ZAP1 truncate and the zinc finger mutant alleles were
subcloned from pMA424 vectors into pGEX4T-1 (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech) using EcoRI and SalI sites to generate
NH2-terminal glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusions.
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
To create a template for
site-directed mutagenesis, a 2-kilobase pair fragment encoding Zap1
amino acids 187-880 was isolated from pGBD-Zap11-880 (see
Footnote 5) by digestion with BamHI and SalI and
subcloned into BamHI-SalI-digested pBluescript
SK+ (Stratagene) to create pAB3. Site-directed mutagenesis
was performed using Transformer site-directed mutagenesis
(CLONTECH) with the following mutagenic primers:
mZnF1, 5'-CCTACAAAGACAACTTTTGAAGGATCAAGTCTCTCAAG-3'; mZnF2,
5'-GTTCCATAGTGAACCAAATTAATTGTCAACAAGGTATCAATTTTG-3'; mZnF3, 5'-GGAATTAAACGACCAATTAGAAGCAGTACAATTAACCCGGGG-3'; mZnF4,
5'-CAAAAATTAATCCGTCAATTAAAAGTGCAATCGAAATACAACC-3'; mZnF5,
5'-CTTTAGTTCAGCAAACCAGGACACAATCTGGCGAAAAACC-3'; mZnF6, 5'-CTTTGAAGATTCAAATAAGAACCCAAACTGGTGAAAAACC-3'; mZnF7,
5'-CGTCAAATTTGAGCAAACAAATTAAGACCCAACAGAAAAAATACAAGTGC-3'. Following confirmation of each mutation by DNA sequencing, the region encoding amino acids 552-880 was cloned into pMA424 as described above.
Immunoblot and Immunofluorescence Analysis--
Protein extracts
were prepared as described previously (9), and protein concentrations
were measured by the method of Bradford (15). Samples (5 µg of
protein/lane) were fractionated by SDS-PAGE and then transferred to
nitrocellulose. Blots were incubated with monoclonal anti-Gal4 DNA
binding domain antibodies (CLONTECH) or anti-Vph1
vacuolar ATPase 100-kDa subunit (Molecular Probes), washed, incubated
with goat anti-mouse IgG antibody coupled to horseradish peroxidase
(Pierce), and then detected by enhanced chemiluminescence (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech). Indirect immunofluorescence was performed as
described previously (9) using anti-GBD primary antibody
(CLONTECH) and Alexa 488-conjugated goat anti-mouse
IgG secondary antibody (Molecular Probes).
Protein Expression and Purification--
GST-Zap1 fusion
proteins were expressed in BL21(DE3)pLysS cells pre-grown at 37 °C
to an A600 of 0.4 in the presence of 0.5 mM ZnSO4. Following transfer to 30 °C,
expression was induced with
isopropyl-1-thio-
Where specified, the GST-Zap1538-880 fusion was again
bound to GSH-Sepharose and incubated with thrombin (0.1 unit
µg Determination of Zn2+ Stoichiometry--
Amino acid
analysis (Beckman 6300) was used to determine protein concentration
following hydrolysis in 5.7 M HCl for 24 h in
vacuo at 110 °C. Simultaneous readings of iron, copper, and zinc were obtained by inductively coupled plasma emission spectroscopy using a Perkin-Elmer Optima 3100XL instrument. Zn2+ levels
were also measured by atomic absorption spectrometry (Perkin Elmer
AAnalyst 100). Protein samples in sonication buffer were diluted in
deionized water as needed prior to analysis.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA)--
The
oligonucleotides ZRE-1 (5'-CCAAAGATACCCTCAAGGTTCTCATCTGTG-3') and
ZRE-2 (5'-CACAGATGAGAACCTTGAGGGTATCTTTGG-3'), containing the
consensus sequence for the ZRE recognized by Zap1, were annealed and
used in both EMSA and affinity chromatography. Mutant oligonucleotides M2a (5'-GCCAAAGATCAAAGACCTTGTCTCATCTGTGG-3') and M2b
(5'-CCACAGATGAGACAAGGTCTTTGATCTTTGGC-3'), containing a mutated
ZRE known to be inactive in vivo with respect to Zap1
function (8), were used to verify the specificity of Zap1 binding to
the ZRE site.
The standard 15-µl EMSA reaction contained hybridization mix (65 mM KCl, 0.2 mg ml Measurement of Apparent Dissociation Constants (Kd)--
A series of 15-µl reactions were prepared containing different
concentrations of protein in hybridization mix and
32P-radiolabeled oligonucleotides maintained at a constant
DNA concentration. Reactions were allowed to reach equilibrium by
incubation at room temperature for 15 min. The protein-DNA complex was
then separated from free DNA by EMSA. Phosphorimages of dried gels were
obtained and quantified using QUANTITY ONE software. The percentage of complex formation (as determined by the loss of free DNA) was plotted
against concentration on a logarithmic scale to determine the apparent
Kd.
In Vivo Mapping of the Zap1 DNA Binding Domain--
The functional
and structural domains of Zap1 that were predicted from its primary
amino acid sequence (3) are diagrammed in Fig.
1. Based on the distribution of acidic
residues, this protein was predicted to have two potential activation
domains designated AD1 and AD2. Zap1 also contains seven zinc finger
motifs that fit the minimal consensus sequence
C-X2-4-C-X12-H-X3-5-H. Our previous results suggested that the region containing the five
COOH-terminal zinc fingers was sufficient for sequence-specific Zap1
DNA binding (8). A Zap1 fragment including only amino acids 687-880,
i.e. zinc fingers ZnF3-ZnF7, produced in vitro by coupled transcription and translation reactions behaved in EMSA and
DNase I footprinting assays in a similar fashion to the wild type
protein. It was unclear from these studies, however, whether this
domain retained the full DNA binding activity of the intact protein. As
a first in vivo test of this hypothesis, the
Zap1687-880 region was fused to the Gal4 activation domain
(GAD) and tested for its ability to complement a zap1
Wild type and zap1
We noted that the zap1 Assessing the Role of Zap1 Zinc Fingers in DNA Binding by
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
To determine which of the Zap1 zinc
fingers are required for specific ZRE binding, we used site-directed
mutagenesis to convert the two conserved histidine Zn2+
ligands in each finger to glutamines (Fig. 1). These mutations impair
Zn2+ binding in these sites and therefore interfere with
proper formation of the zinc finger structures. The mutations were
introduced into a fusion allele in which the amino acid 552-880 region
of Zap1 was fused at its amino terminus to the Gal4 DNA binding domain (GBD). This domain was included to provide both an epitope tag and a
nuclear localization signal for these proteins, and for future studies
of Zap1 zinc responsiveness. When expressed in zinc-limited
zap1
Although the simplest interpretation of these results is that each of
these zinc fingers is required for DNA binding, a number of other
explanations were also possible. For example, these mutant proteins may
be unstable and fail to accumulate. Immunoblot analysis of total
protein samples prepared from these strains demonstrated that this is
not the case (Fig. 4B). All of the GBD-Zap1 proteins accumulated to similar levels. We did note that the nonfunctional GBD-Zap1 fusions also accumulated as lower mobility forms that may
represent homo- or heteromultimeric complexes of the protein that are
not disrupted by SDS-PAGE. Another explanation for the inactivity of
these mutant proteins is that they fail to accumulate in the nucleus
despite the presence of the Gal4 nuclear localization signal. To test
this hypothesis, we examined their intracellular distribution by
indirect immunofluorescence microscopy using an anti-GBD antibody.
Little cell-associated fluorescence was observed in untransformed cells
or vector-only controls, whereas the GBD-Zap1 fusions were easily
detectable (Fig. 4C, data not shown). The wild type (Fig.
4C), mZnf1, mZnf2, and mZnF1/2 (data not shown) GBD
fusions clearly localized in the nucleus. Mutants mZnF3 and mZnF7 were
largely present in the nucleus, and fluorescence was also visible in
the cytoplasm as punctate spots of apparently aggregated protein. In
the mZnF4, mZnF5, and mZnF6 mutants, the proteins were mostly visible
as cytoplasmic aggregates and little nuclear staining was observed. We
can conclude from this analysis that ZnF3 and Znf7 are likely required
for DNA binding; these proteins accumulate in the nucleus in
substantial amounts but fail to activate transcription. However, it was
not possible to assess if mZnF4, mZnF5, or mZnF6 could bind to a ZRE,
i.e. their failure to activate in vivo could
simply be due to the inability to accumulate in the nucleus. Finally,
it is intriguing that all of the mutant forms of Zap1 that are seen as
cytoplasmic aggregates also appear in lower mobility forms on SDS-PAGE,
suggesting that their may be a link between these observations.
In Vitro Analysis of Zap1 DNA Binding--
To complement this
in vivo analysis, in vitro DNA binding studies
using purified recombinant Zap1 protein were performed. Various Zap1
truncate and mutant proteins were expressed in E. coli as
NH2-terminal GST fusions and purified using GSH-Sepharose affinity chromatography. Attempts to purify full-length Zap1 were unsuccessful because of the formation of insoluble inclusion bodies. However, GST-Zap1538-880, GST-Zap1611-880,
and GST-Zap1687-880 were isolated, and each contains the
functional DNA-binding domain (ZnF3-ZnF7) implicated by our in
vivo studies. These GST-Zap1 fusion proteins were largely soluble
in E. coli. The Zn2+ content of
GST-Zap1538-880 was found to be approximately 5 mol eq
(Table I), suggesting metal occupancy of
only five of the seven possible zinc finger domains in this protein. No
significant quantities of Cu or Fe ions were observed in the purified
samples.
Binding of these purified Zap1 proteins to a functional ZRE was
analyzed by EMSA. Each protein bound specifically to a ZRE-containing oligonucleotide (Fig. 5). ZRE sequence
specificity was demonstrated by the lack of protein-DNA complex
formation using a mutant DNA oligonucleotide lacking the intact ZRE
element (M2, Ref. 8) (data not shown). The apparent dissociation
constant (Kd) for the GST-Zap1538-880
fusion protein-ZRE complex was determined to be approximately 2 nM (Fig. 5A, Table I). Protein-DNA complex formation was not lost with addition of
The two other Zap1 truncates also showed high affinity ZRE binding
interactions. Both GST-Zap1687-880 (Fig. 5, C
and D) and GST-Zap1611-880 (Table I) bind
specifically to the ZRE duplex with affinities similar to the longer
GST-Zap1538-880 protein. The complex formed with
GST-Zap1687-880 was not disrupted by addition of
The high affinity ZRE binding of Zap1687-880 containing
only ZnF3-ZnF7 suggested that mutation of fingers 1 and 2 would not
disrupt DNA binding. A mutant form of GST-Zap1 was purified in which
zinc fingers 1 and 2 contained the same histidine to glutamine
substitutions as were analyzed in vivo. The
GST-Zap1552-880 mZnF1/2 mutant protein bound DNA with a
similar degree of ZRE specificity and affinity as did the wild type
GST-Zap1538-880 protein (Fig. 5, E and
F, Table I). Mutation of any one of zinc fingers 3-7
resulted in the loss of this specific interaction with ZREs. These
mutant proteins bound the ZRE duplex with a low affinity in the high
nanomolar to low micromolar concentration range indicative of only low
affinity interactions. Most of these zinc finger mutant proteins bound
on average one less Zn2+ atom per molecule than the wild
type protein (Table I). The reason why mZnF6 and mZnF7 may retain a 5 mol eq Zn2+ stoichiometry is not yet clear. Perhaps
mutation of these fingers allow for Zn2+ binding to
alternate ligands in these domains.
Finally, two Zap1 truncates lacking portions of the protein's COOH
terminus were purified and evaluated. These two truncates remove either
55 (GST-Zap1552-825) or 83 (GST-Zap1552-797) COOH-terminal residues. Both of these proteins exhibited low affinity for the ZRE duplex with apparent Kd values in the
micromolar concentration range. GST-Zap1552-825 and
GST-Zap1552-797 bind ZREs only at protein concentrations
>20 nM, and, in each case, complex formation was abolished
with the addition of 0.04 mg ml The fully functional DNA binding domain of Zap1 maps to the
carboxyl-terminal 194 amino acids of Zap1, i.e. residues
687-880. Fusion of this region to the Gal4 activation domain
complemented a zap1 Region 687-880 contains five of the seven zinc finger domains found in
Zap1 (Fig. 1). All seven of the Zap1 fingers fit the zinc finger
consensus sequence and are predicted to form the These considerations raise a question regarding which fingers of Zap1
contact DNA. Mutagenesis studies reported here demonstrate that all
five zinc fingers are required for DNA binding, yet the 11-base pair
ZRE sequence predicts that at most only three or four of these are
involved in site-specific interactions. For example, three fingers in
transcription factor IIIA are sufficient to recognize an 11-base pair
binding site (19). Structural studies of the GLI zinc finger protein
may explain this paradox (18). Like Zap1, GLI contains five tandem zinc
fingers that are required for DNA binding. Although GLI zinc fingers 2 through 5 bind in the major groove, finger 1 does not contact DNA but
rather makes extensive protein-protein interactions with finger 2. For
Zap1, a similar structure may exist with ZnF4-ZnF7 making major groove contacts and ZnF3 making protein-protein contacts analogous to GLI
finger 1. Alternatively, Zap1 ZnF3 may make nonspecific DNA contacts
with the phosphate backbone.
The hypothesis that Zap1 has a protein-DNA complex structure similar to
that of GLI is supported by examining the sequences and lengths of the
spacer regions between the fingers. Adjacent zinc fingers known or
predicted to make major groove contacts are typically separated by a
linker with the consensus sequence (T/S)-G-E-(R/K)-P (6, 17, 18).
Sequences that precisely match this consensus separate Zap1 ZnF5 and
ZnF6, and ZnF6 and ZnF7, whereas a closely related sequence, SKYKP,
separates ZnF4 and ZnF5 (Fig. 1). The presence of these conserved
linker sequences suggests that ZnF4-ZnF7 make major groove contacts. A
very different linker in terms of both sequence and length, LTRGKSE,
separates ZnF3 and ZnF4, suggesting that ZnF3 does not bind in the
major groove. The preceding discussion assumes that Zap1 binds to DNA as a monomer, as is commonly found among zinc finger proteins. However,
if Zap1 binds as a dimer, as is predicted by the palindromic nature of
the ZRE (7, 8), perhaps as few as two fingers of each monomer make
major groove contacts. The other fingers may form a dimer interface (7)
or make phosphate backbone DNA contacts.
Significant progress has been made recently in devising a protein-DNA
recognition code for zinc finger proteins like Zif268 (13). Such
a code, in which the identity of DNA contacting residues can be
predicted from the nucleotide sequence of the recognition site, and
vice versa, would be extremely useful for designing zinc
finger proteins that bind specifically to target DNA sequences. Attempts to apply the current recognition codes to predict which fingers of Zap1 bind to which bases of the ZRE have yet to provide unambiguous results.
Surprisingly, our results demonstrate that Zap1 ZnF1 and ZnF2 are not
required for high affinity ZRE binding. Either deletion of these two
finger domains or site-directed mutagenesis such that they could no
longer bind Zn2+ failed to reduce the ability of Zap1 to
function in vivo or bind to DNA in vitro.
Furthermore, our results suggest that ZnF1 and ZnF2 bind
Zn2+ with lower affinity than do the other five Zap1 finger
domains. GST-Zap1538-880 contains 5 mol eq of
Zn2+ when purified from E. coli and mutation of
ZnF1 and ZnF2 had no effect on this stoichiometry. One explanation for
their apparent lower affinity for Zn2+ is suggested by the
sequence of these two fingers. Most zinc fingers have a hydrophobic
residue located in a turn between What role then do these two fingers play in Zap1 function? One
potential function is as Zn2+ sensors; Zap1 binds to DNA
and activates transcription under low zinc conditions, but this
activity is repressed in high zinc. Although the precise mechanism of
this regulation is unknown, we postulate that Zap1 is the primary zinc
sensor and that binding of the metal to lower affinity sites in the
protein repress its activation function. The apparently low affinity of
ZnF1 and ZnF2 for Zn2+ suggests that these two fingers may
be regulatory rather than structural components. In this regard, it is
intriguing that ZnF1 and ZnF2 are found within an activation domain of
Zap1; perhaps, binding of Zn2+ to these fingers may control
the activity of this domain. The observation that ZnF1 and ZnF2
mutations increase ZRE-lacZ expression (Fig. 4A)
are consistent with this model. Ongoing studies are addressing this
hypothesis and further characterizing the roles of the zinc fingers in
Zap1 function.
mutation
for low zinc growth and also conferred high level expression on a
zinc-responsive element-lacZ reporter. In
vitro, the purified 194-residue fragment bound to DNA with a high
affinity (dissociation constant in the low nanomolar range) similar to
that of longer fragments of Zap1. Furthermore, by deletion and
site-directed mutagenesis, we demonstrated that each of the five
carboxyl-terminal zinc fingers are required for high affinity DNA binding.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
200 ade2-10
lys2-801 leu2-3, 112 trp1-901 tyr1-501 gal4-
512 gal80-
538 ade5::hisG)
(CLONTECH) and DEY1538 (YM4271;
zap1
::TRP1). Yeast cultures were
grown in YP medium containing 2% glucose or in synthetic defined (SD)
medium supplemented with 2% glucose and any necessary auxotrophic
supplements. Where indicated, EDTA and Zn2+ were added to
SD to generate zinc-limiting growth conditions. An alternative low zinc
medium, LZM, was prepared as described previously (9).
553-686 was generated by two-step overlapping
PCR (10) and cloned into pGAD424 as described above. pGAD424 allows
expression of cloned inserts from the ADH1 promoter. To
allow expression from the GAL1 promoter, the fragments
encoding the Gal4 activation domain-Zap1 fusions were subcloned into
pRS316-GAL1 (11) by gap repair (12). Expression from the
GAL1 promoter using the GEV
-estradiol-responsive system was performed as described by Gao and
Pinkham.4 Cells were
co-transformed with plasmid pGEV-HIS3, which expresses a hybrid
activator protein, GEV, that contains the Gal4 DNA binding domain, the
human estrogen receptor hormone response domain, and the VP16
activation domain. The activity of the GEV protein was induced by
adding 100 nM
-estradiol. The c-Myc epitope-tagged ZAP1 allele was expressed from plasmid
pYef2-mycZap1.5
-Galactosidase Assays--
Cells were grown for 15-20 h to
mid-exponential phase (A600 = 0.3-0.7) in LZM
supplemented with 5 µM ZnCl2.
-Galactosidase activity was assayed as described by Guarente (16)
and is expressed in units calculated as follows
(
A420 × 1000)/(min × ml of culture used × absorbance of the culture at 600 nm). The
ZRE-lacZ reporter used was pDG2 in which a ZRE fragment was
inserted into a minimal CYC1 promoter lacking its normal
upstream activation sequences (8).
-D-galactopyranoside and the cells were incubated for an additional 4 h. Cells were harvested by
centrifugation and washed in 0.25 M sucrose. The pellet was
resuspended in buffer (20 mM
NaH2PO4, 3.6 mM
KH2PO4, pH 7.3, 280 mM NaCl, 5.4 mM KCl, 10% glycerol, 5 mM dithiothreitol)
containing lysozyme for sonication. The lysate was clarified by
ultracentrifugation (100,000 × g, 30 min, 4 °C) and
the proteins were purified by affinity chromatography using glutathione
(GSH)-Sepharose (CLONTECH). Eluted protein was concentrated in VIVA spin concentrators (6000-8000-kDa cut-off), dialyzed against sonication buffer to remove GSH, and analyzed by 12%
SDS-PAGE. The protein was estimated to be >85% pure, and 12 liters of
cells typically yielded approximately 8 mg of protein.
1 protein in sonication buffer) for 6 h at room
temperature. Following cleavage of the NH2-terminal GST
fragment, the eluted Zap1 protein obtained was of the expected
molecular mass and found to be >95% pure by gel electrophoresis. To
obtain active protein, GSH affinity-purified GST-Zap1538-880 was further purified using a DNA affinity column. Biotinylated ZRE-1 and ZRE-2 oligonucleotides (see below) were
annealed and bound to 5 ml of streptavidin resin (Pierce). Zap1 protein
was bound to the resin and washed on ice in low salt buffer (3 mM NaH2PO4, 0.5 mM
KH2PO4, pH 7.3, 42 mM NaCl, 0.8 mM KCl, 10% glycerol, 5 mM dithiothreitol).
The protein was eluted with 0.75 M NaCl and dialyzed
against sonication buffer.
1 bovine serum albumin, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7, with 20% glycerol and 0.04% IGEPAL
CA-630; Sigma) with end-labeled oligonucleotides and protein in
sonication buffer. Following incubation at room temperature for 15 min,
the samples were applied to a 6% polyacrylamide nondenaturing gel and
electrophoresed for 1.5 h at 30 mA. Gels and running buffer
contained 1× Tris borate buffer, pH 8, and they were
pre-electrophoresed for 1 h at 30 mA. A reaction lacking protein
was used as a "free probe" control. Dried gels were viewed by
autoradiography. Results from electrophoretic mobility shifts assays
were shown to be identical following incubation of binding reactions
for 1 h, 30 min, and 5 min. Therefore, these reactions were judged
to be at equilibrium.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
mutation. The GAD fusion approach allows assessment of DNA binding ability without requiring Zap1 activation domain function. Furthermore, the GAD fragment used contains the VP16 nuclear localization sequence to facilitate trafficking of the fusions to the nucleus should the
still unmapped Zap1 localization signal be deleted.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Potential domain structure of Zap1. The
predicted activation domains (hatched boxes) and
zinc finger domains (ZnF1-ZnF7, filled boxes)
are shown. The sequences of the potential Zap1 zinc finger domains are
shown below. The conserved Zn2+ ligand residues are
boxed, the normally hydrophobic "fingertip" amino acids
are underlined, and the locations of the presumed
1,
2, and
-helix structures are shown. The amino acids relative to
the start site of the
-helix are numbered
1
to 7, and the histidine to glutamine substitutions in the
mZnF mutations are indicated.
mutant cells grow equally well on
zinc-supplemented media (Fig. 2), but the
zap1
mutant is unable to grow under zinc-limiting
conditions. When the full-length Zap1 protein (in this experiment, a
functional allele with six NH2-terminal c-Myc epitope tags)
was expressed in the zap1
mutant from the GAL1
promoter, wild type growth in low zinc was restored. Expression of the
Gal4 activation domain Zap1687-880 fusion
(GAD-Zap1687-880) also strongly complemented the mutant
defect. These results supported the in vitro data suggesting
that ZnF3-ZnF7 were sufficient for Zap1 DNA binding.

View larger version (61K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Complementing the zinc-dependent
phenotype of the zap1
mutation with
Zap1-Gal4 activation domain fusions. Yeast strains YM4271
(WT), DEY1538 (zap1
), or DEY1538 transformed
with plasmids expressing either Myc-Zap11-880 or
GAD-Zap1687-880 under the control of the GAL1
promoter were grown on SD glucose medium in the absence (+ Zn) or presence (
Zn) of 1 mM EDTA,
100 µM ZnCl2. All strains were co-transformed
with pGEV-HIS3 allowing
-estradiol-regulated expression induced by
100 nM
-estradiol.
strain expressing
GAD-Zap1687-880 grew slightly slower than the same strain
expressing full-length Zap1 (data not shown). Therefore, as an
independent test of these complementation results, we compared the
ability of the GAD-Zap1687-880 and other GAD-Zap1 fusions
to activate expression of a ZRE-lacZ reporter gene in a
zap1
mutant (Fig. 3). These
assays were conducted using cells grown in low zinc to avoid the
repressive effect of zinc on Zap1 activity. In all cases, these fusions
were found to complement the zinc-limited growth defect of the
zap1
mutant (data not shown). Although wild type cells
showed high level lacZ reporter expression, the
zap1
mutant transformed with the vector alone showed only
low levels of
-galactosidase activity. The zap1
mutant
expressing either the full-length Zap1 protein or amino acids
552-880 fused to the Gal4 activation domain showed similarly high
levels of expression, i.e. ~80% of wild type. To test
if ZnF1 and/or ZnF2 are important for DNA binding, the
GAD-Zap1642-880 fusion was constructed in which these two
fingers are deleted. Although expression is somewhat diminished
relative to the larger fusion proteins, this allele retained high
levels of expression suggesting that these fingers are not necessary
for DNA binding. The small reduction in expression is most likely
caused by the removal of a Zap1 activation domain located within the
552-642 region.5 Thus, deletions eliminating the
NH2-terminal 640 amino acids of Zap1 can bind DNA in
vivo. In contrast, the GAD-Zap1687-880 fusion
produced only about 20% of wild type expression levels. These results
are consistent with at least two models. First, the ZRE binding
activity of this Zap1 fragment may be partially impaired by deletion of
the region from amino acids 642-686. Alternatively, fusion of the Gal4
activation domain close to the Zap1 DNA binding domain may inhibit the
function of either domain perhaps through steric interference. An
additional fusion, GAD-Zap1
553-686 in which the
642-686 region in question was deleted from the full-length protein,
was constructed to address these models. This fusion showed wild type
lacZ expression, indicating that the region of Zap1 from 642 to 686 is not required for DNA binding activity. Thus, the reduced
ability of GAD-Zap1687-880 to complement the growth defect
of the zap1
mutant is due to reasons other than deletion
of important DNA binding domain function.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Activity of Zap1-Gal4 activation domain
fusions in vivo. The indicated regions of Zap1
were fused to the Gal4 activation domain under the control of the
GAL1 promoter and tested for their ability to activate
expression of a ZRE-lacZ reporter in DEY1538
(zap1
). Expression was compared with ZRE-lacZ
activity of chromosomal ZAP1 (YM4271, WT). All
strains were co-transformed with pGEV-HIS3 allowing
-estradiol-regulated expression. Cells were grown to exponential
phase in LZM supplemented with 5 µM ZnCl2 and
100 nM
-estradiol prior to
-galactosidase assay. A
representative experiment is shown, and the error
bars indicate 1 S.D.
mutant cells, GBD-Zap1552-880 induced a
high level of expression from the ZRE-lacZ reporter (Fig.
4A). Mutation of zinc fingers
1 (mZnF1) or 2 (mZnF2) individually or both ZnF1 and 2 together
(mZnF1/2) resulted in no loss of expression, supporting the hypothesis
that these domains are not required for DNA binding. In fact,
lacZ expression in each of these mutants was increased by
50-100% relative to the corresponding wild type protein fragment,
suggesting that these mutations may increase activation domain function
under these conditions. Similar mutations in ZnF3, ZnF4, ZnF5, ZnF6, or
ZnF7 resulted in complete loss of ZRE-lacZ expression.

View larger version (39K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
In vivo analysis of the
Zap1 zinc finger mutants. Strain DEY1538
(zap1
) expressing the vector (pMA424),
GBD-Zap1552-880, or its mutant derivatives containing
histidine to glutamine substitutions in the indicated zinc finger
domains were assayed for their ability to activate expression of a
ZRE-lacZ reporter (A), fusion protein
accumulation by immunoblotting (B), and subcellular location
of GBD-Zap1 proteins (C). In panels B
and C, V = vector-transformed cells,
WT = GBD-Zap1552-880, and mZnF1, mZnF2,
etc., are shown. In panel B, the arrow
indicates the expected GBD-Zap1 fusion and the asterisks
mark the lower mobility forms. The positions of molecular mass markers
and a Vph1 loading control blot are also shown. In panel
C, cells expressing the indicated proteins were viewed by
Nomarski optics or epifluorescence. DAPI was used to stain the nucleus
and the GBD-Zap1 protein was detected by immunofluorescence. The
blue fluorescence of DAPI staining was changed to
red, and the DAPI and GBD-Zap1 images were overlaid using
ADOBE PHOTOSHOP (Merge). Yellow color in the
merged images indicates colocalization of the markers. Cells were grown
to exponential phase in LZM supplemented with 100 nM
-estradiol and 5 µM ZnCl2
(panel A) or 1000 µM
ZnCl2 (panels B and C)
prior to analysis. The higher zinc concentration greatly facilitated
the immunoblot and immunofluorescence experiments owing to the poor
growth of some of the strains in low zinc.
Zinc stoichiometry and ZRE binding affinities of purified Zap1 fusions
and zinc finger mutants mZnF1/2-mZnF7 constructed in
GST-Zap1552-880 fusions
0.3 mg
ml
1 poly(dI/dC) (data not shown).
GST-Zap1538-880 protein forms two complexes with DNA in
EMSA (Fig. 5B), perhaps indicative of limited proteolysis
that does not affect DNA binding. Alternatively, we may be observing
different oligomeric states of the Zap1 protein and this is currently
under investigation. Removal of the GST fragment by thrombin cleavage
of the GST-Zap1 fusion did not greatly alter the affinity of Zap1 for
the ZRE duplex (Table I). Furthermore, the affinity was also not
altered by further purification of the fusion on a ZRE-DNA affinity
column. Thus, the GST-Zap1 fusions appear to be predominantly active
for DNA binding.

View larger version (44K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Determination of apparent dissociation
constants (Kd). Reactions containing
increasing amounts of protein ranging from pM to
µM, with a constant radiolabeled ZRE concentration, were
analyzed by EMSA to determine apparent dissociation constants
(Kd) as measured at 50% protein-DNA complex. A free
probe (FP) control lacking protein was also analyzed. The
binding isotherms plots (upper panels) were
generated by quantifying phosphorimages (lower
panels) using QUANTITY ONE software. Proteins analyzed were
GST-Zap1538-880 (panels A and
B), GST-Zap1687-880 (panels
C and D), and GST-Zap1552-880
mZnF1/2 (panels E and F). A
representative experiment for each protein is shown.
0.3 mg
ml
1 poly(dI/dC).
1 poly(dI/dC) (data not shown).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
mutation for growth under
zinc-limiting conditions and conferred expression from a
ZRE-lacZ reporter gene in vivo. In vitro, a
purified 687-880 fragment and a much longer fragment with amino acids
538 (or 552)-880 bound to a ZRE-containing duplex oligonucleotide with
high affinity. The dissociation constant of this interaction was
estimated to be in the 0.8-4 nM range.


structure
found for other such domains. Zinc finger proteins bind to DNA through
a generally conserved docking arrangement with each finger
-helix
fitting into the major groove of the DNA double helix (17, 18).
Residues
1, 2, 3, and 6 (numbering with respect to the start of the
-helix) typically make key base contacts that are responsible for
the sequence specificity of the interaction. Thus, each zinc finger
commonly recognizes a 4-base subsite that can overlap the recognition
site of an adjacent finger by 1 base.
2 and the
-helix that provides
part of a stabilizing hydrophobic core at the "tip" of each finger.
For Zap1 ZnF3-ZnF7, this residue is a phenylalanine (Fig. 1). However,
ZnF1 has a cysteine and ZnF2 has a glycine in the corresponding
position, and neither of these residues would provide this important
hydrophobic interaction.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant GM58265.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Nutritional Sciences, 217 Gwynn Hall, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211. Tel.: 573-882-9686; Fax: 573-882-0185; E-mail: eided@missouri.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, March 15, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M000664200
1 MacDiarmid, C. W., Gaither, L. A., and Eide, D. (2000) EMBO J., in press.
2 T. J. Lyons, A. P. Gasch, L. A. Gaither, D. Botstein, P. O. Brown, and D. J. Eide, submitted for publication.
4 C. Y. Gao and J. L. Pinkham, submitted for publication.
5 A. Bird, H. Zhao, H. Luo, L. T. Jensen, C. Srinivasan, M. Evans-Galea, D. R. Winge, and D. J. Eide, manuscript submitted.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: ZRE, zinc-responsive element; GST, glutathione S-transferase; ZnF, zinc finger domain; LZM, low zinc medium; EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay; GAD, Gal4 activation domain; GBD, Gal4 DNA binding domain; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; SD, synthetic defined; DAPI, 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Vallee, B. L., and Auld, D. S. (1990) Biochemistry 29, 5647-5659 |
| 2. | Hoovers, J. M., Mannens, M., John, R., Bliek, J., van Heyningen, V., Porteous, D. J., Leschot, N. J., Westerveld, A., and Little, P. F. (1992) Genomics 12, 254-263 |
| 3. | Zhao, H., and Eide, D. J. (1997) Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 5044-5052 |
| 4. | Zhao, H., and Eide, D. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 2454-2458 |
| 5. | Zhao, H., and Eide, D. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 23203-23210 |
| 6. | Turner, J., and Crossley, M. (1999) Trends Biol. Sci. 24, 236-241 |
| 7. | Sun, L., Liu, A., and Georgopoulos, K. (1997) EMBO J. 15, 5358-5369 |
| 8. | Zhao, H., Butler, E., Rodgers, J., Spizzo, T., Duesterhoeft, S., and Eide, D. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 28713-28720 |
| 9. | Gitan, R. S., Luo, H., Rodgers, J., Broderius, M., and Eide, D. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 28617-28624 |
| 10. | Ho, S. N., Hunt, H. D., Horton, R. M., Pullen, J. K., and Pease, L. R. (1989) Gene (Amst.) 77, 51-59 |
| 11. | Liu, H., Krizek, J., and Bretscher, A. (1992) Genetics 132, 665-673 |
| 12. | Kunes, S., Ma, H., Overbye, K., Fox, M. S., and Botstein, D. (1987) Genetics 115, 73-81 |
| 13. | Wolfe, S. A., Greisman, H. A., Ramm, E. I., and Pabo, C. O. (1999) J. Mol. Biol. 285, 1917-1934 |
| 14. | Ma, J., and Ptashne, M. (1987) Cell 48, 847-853 |
| 15. | Bradford, M. M. (1976) Anal. Biochem. 72, 248-254 |
| 16. | Guarente, L. (1983) Methods Enzymol. 101, 181-191 |
| 17. | Pavletich, N. P., and Pabo, C. O. (1991) Science 252, 809-817 |
| 18. | Pavletich, N. P., and Pabo, C. O. (1993) Science 261, 1701-1707 |
| 19. | Nolte, R. T., Conlin, R. M., Harrison, S. C., and Brown, R. S. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 2938-2943 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. J. Bruinsma, D. L. Schneider, D. E. Davis, and K. Kornfeld Identification of Mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans That Cause Resistance to High Levels of Dietary Zinc and Analysis Using a Genomewide Map of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Scored by Pyrosequencing Genetics, June 1, 2008; 179(2): 811 - 828. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Soto and G. M. Carman Regulation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae CKI1-encoded Choline Kinase by Zinc Depletion J. Biol. Chem., April 11, 2008; 283(15): 10079 - 10088. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Dainty, C. A. Kennedy, S. Watt, J. Bahler, and S. K. Whitehall Response of Schizosaccharomyces pombe to Zinc Deficiency Eukaryot. Cell, March 1, 2008; 7(3): 454 - 464. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C.-Y. Wu, A. J. Bird, D. R. Winge, and D. J. Eide Regulation of the Yeast TSA1 Peroxiredoxin by ZAP1 Is an Adaptive Response to the Oxidative Stress of Zinc Deficiency J. Biol. Chem., January 26, 2007; 282(4): 2184 - 2195. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Bird, S. Swierczek, W. Qiao, D. J. Eide, and D. R. Winge Zinc Metalloregulation of the Zinc Finger Pair Domain J. Biol. Chem., September 1, 2006; 281(35): 25326 - 25335. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Qiao, M. Mooney, A. J. Bird, D. R. Winge, and D. J. Eide Zinc binding to a regulatory zinc-sensing domain monitored in vivo by using FRET PNAS, June 6, 2006; 103(23): 8674 - 8679. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. C. Kersting and G. M. Carman Regulation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae EKI1-encoded Ethanolamine Kinase by Zinc Depletion J. Biol. Chem., May 12, 2006; 281(19): 13110 - 13116. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-H. Han, G.-S. Han, W. M. Iwanyshyn, and G. M. Carman Regulation of the PIS1-encoded Phosphatidylinositol Synthase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by Zinc J. Biol. Chem., August 12, 2005; 280(32): 29017 - 29024. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Chen, B. Zhang, P. M. Harmon, W. Schaffner, D. O. Peterson, and D. P. Giedroc A Novel Cysteine Cluster in Human Metal-responsive Transcription Factor 1 Is Required for Heavy Metal-induced Transcriptional Activation in Vivo J. Biol. Chem., February 6, 2004; 279(6): 4515 - 4522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Rutherford and A. J. Bird Metal-Responsive Transcription Factors That Regulate Iron, Zinc, and Copper Homeostasis in Eukaryotic Cells Eukaryot. Cell, February 1, 2004; 3(1): 1 - 13. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Rutherford, S. Jaron, E. Ray, P. O. Brown, and D. R. Winge A second iron-regulatory system in yeast independent of Aft1p PNAS, December 4, 2001; 98(25): 14322 - 14327. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||