![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 26, 19594-19602, June 30, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, January 12, 2000, and in revised form, April 10, 2000
We have previously shown that Ikaros can repress
transcription through the recruitment of histone deacetylase complexes.
Here we provide evidence that Ikaros can also repress transcription through its interactions with the co-repressor, C-terminal binding protein (CtBP). CtBP interacts with Ikaros isoforms through a PEDLS
motif present at the N terminus of these proteins but not with
homologues like Aiolos which lack this motif. Mutations in Ikaros that
prevent CtBP interactions reduce its ability to repress transcription.
CtBP interacts with Sin3A but not with the Mi-2 co-repressor and it
represses transcription in a manner that is independent of histone
deacetylase activity. These data strongly suggest that CtBP contributes
to a histone deacetylase activity independent mechanism of repression
by Ikaros. Finally, we show that the viral oncoprotein E1A, which binds
to CtBP, also shows a strong association with Ikaros. This Ikaros-E1A
interaction may underlie Ikaros's decreased ability to repress
transcription in E1A transformed cells.
Gene targeting experiments in mice have firmly established that
the zinc finger nuclear factors encoded by the Ikaros gene are
essential for the development of the lymphoid arm of the vertebrate hemopoietic system (1). Mice homozygous for a null mutation in Ikaros
lack B cells and their earliest described progenitors and are impaired
in T cell differentiation (2, 3), whereas those homozygous for a
dominant negative mutation in Ikaros lack all lymphocytes (4). The more
severe phenotype of the dominant negative Ikaros mutation suggested the
existence of homologues and led to the identification of Aiolos (5),
Helios (6, 7), and Daedalus.1
In addition to its role in differentiation, Ikaros plays an important role in regulating proliferation. Mice expressing reduced levels of
Ikaros exhibit augmented T cell receptor-mediated proliferative responses and develop leukemias and lymphomas with complete penetrance (8, 9). Thus, Ikaros is an essential regulator of lymphocyte differentiation and homeostasis. Aiolos plays a similar role to Ikaros
in the B cell lineage (10).
The Ikaros gene encodes by means of alternative splicing at least eight
different isoforms all of which contain a bipartite activation domain
(11-13) and two C-terminal zinc fingers that are involved in homo- and
heteromeric interactions (12). Ikaros isoforms differ in the number of
N-terminal DNA-binding zinc fingers that consequently differentiates
them into DNA binding and non-DNA binding proteins (11, 13). We and
others have shown that the DNA-binding isoforms of Ikaros can activate
transcription of genes when bound in cis to Ikaros-binding
sites (11, 12, 14). In contrast, Ikaros represses transcription when
recruited to DNA through a heterologous DNA-binding domain (15). This
repression is cell type- and promoter-specific and is effected through
two repression domains which interact with the mSin3 (15) and Mi-2 proteins (16) which are components of two distinct histone deacetylase complexes (17-20). Consistent with a role for histone deacetylases in
Ikaros-mediated repression, histones are underacetylated in the
vicinity of Ikaros recruitment sites and the histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin, alleviates repression by Gal4-Ikaros (15).
In addition to histone deacetylase-dependent mechanisms of
repression used by transcription factors such as MAD (21), the unliganded nuclear receptor proteins (22) and MITR (23), histone deacetylase-independent mechanisms of repression have been reported for
Xenopus Polycomb1 (24). Recent studies also indicate that some repressors like Rb2
(25), mSin3 (26, 27), c-Myc promoter binding protein (28), and RBP1
(29) may utilize both of these strategies of repression. Another
co-repressor that may fall into this category is the C-terminal-binding protein, CtBP, so named for its identification as an interactor of the
C-terminal of adenovirus E1A (30, 31). In vivo studies have
established that deletion of the region of E1A that facilitates its
interaction with CtBP significantly increases the transforming and
tumorogenic potential of this oncoprotein (30).
At least two highly related CtBP proteins, CtBP1 and CtBP2, have been
identified in vertebrates (32, 33). CtBP1 transcripts are expressed in
most human tissues at approximately the same level as CtBP2 transcripts
except in the thymus and peripheral blood leukocytes where the latter
are hardly detectable (34). The mechanism by which CtBP effects
repression is largely unclear. Based on the observation that several
Drosophila repressors that recruit CtBP work over distances
of less than 100 base pairs to inhibit the core promoter, it has been
suggested that CtBP may function as a short range repressor (35). There
is evidence from overexpression studies that CtBP can interact with
histone deacetylase 1 (36) and that in some cases repression by
Gal4-CtBP can be relieved by deacetylase inhibitors (37). CtBP has also been described to repress promoters that are unresponsive to
trichostatin (38).
CtBP is targeted to DNA through its association with transcription
factors containing a sequence that is similar to the consensus motif,
PXDLS (31, 39). A number of transcription factors with this
motif have been shown to interact with CtBP. These include transcription factors such as Knirps (35) and Hairy (40) in Drosophila and basic Kruppel-like factor (32),
Xenopus T cell factor 3 (41), Xenopus Polycomb 2 (34), Net (37), FOG (42), and CtIP (39, 43) in vertebrates. Mutations
in the PXDLS motif that prevent interaction with CtBP have
been shown to decrease the ability of several of these proteins to
repress transcription both in vivo and in vitro
(32, 34, 35, 40, 41). Genetic studies in flies have shown that CtBP is
required for appropriate segmentation and dorso-ventral patterning (35,
40) while similar studies in Xenopus also provide a role for
CtBP later in the development of head and notochord structures
(41).
In this report, we provide evidence that Ikaros can repress
transcription through its interaction with CtBP. This is the first functional difference between Ikaros and its family members which cannot interact directly with CtBP. Although CtBP can interact with
Sin3A/HDAC but not with Mi-2/HDAC, CtBP continues to repress transcription even in the presence of histone deacetylase inhibitors. Finally, we show that Ikaros association with the adenoviral
oncoprotein E1A alleviates its ability to repress transcription.
Plasmids--
Flag-Ik1, Flag-Ik1cm, Flag-hCtBP1, Flag-CtN1,
-CtN2, -CtC1, -CtC2, and -CtC3 were constructed by standard cloning
techniques in the pCMV2-Flag vector (Sigma). Mutations in the CtBP
interaction domain on Ikaros were generated by a polymerase chain
reaction based approach. BXG1-hCtBP1, the related N- and C-terminal
deletions of hCtBP1 and different domains of Ikaros lacking or
containing mutations in the CtBP interaction domain were constructed by
cloning the relevant regions into the BXG1 vector (15) which encodes the Gal4 DNA-binding domain (amino acids 1-147). CDM8-Ik1, -2, -3, -7, -Flag-Aio3, -Flag Helios, -HA Sin3B, -Mi2, MT-Sin3A, BXG1-Ik1, -Aio,
-IKD2, -IKD5, -MAD, -mMAD, -Sin3BSF and the reporters 4XIKBS2tkCAT, G5tkCAT, and G5AdMLPCAT have been previously reported (15). CDM8-Daedalus was a generous gift of Dr. B. Morgan. GST-hCtBP1, T7-hCtBP1, and anti-CtBP were generously provided by Dr. G. Chinnadurai (39). CMV-13SE1A and the corresponding empty vector were provided by
Dr. N. Dyson.
Transfections--
293T, NIH3T3, and U20S cell lines were
maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium with 10% fetal
bovine serum (Hyclone). Transfections of these cell lines were carried
out using the HBS-CaP04 method. For activation assays, 0.25 µg of
Flag-tagged Ikaros plasmids, 3 µg of the 4XIKBS2tkCAT reporter, and
0.5 µg of the pXGH5 growth hormone transfection efficiency control
plasmid were used. For repression assays, 0.5 or 1 µg of the
Gal4-fusion plasmid, 5 or 10 µg of the Gal4-reporter plasmid, and 0.5 µg of the pXGH5 control plasmid were used. Twenty-four hours after
transfection, cells were fed with fresh medium and 18-24 h later cells
were harvested and processed for CAT assays as described (15). In those
instances where trichostatin A (Upstate Biotech) was employed, we added the drug to the cells 16-18 h before harvesting. GH assays were done
as recommended by the manufacturer (Nichols Institute). Transfections were typically performed in duplicate and repeated between three and
six times.
Immunoprecipitation and Western Analysis--
Whole cell
extracts from 293T cells transfected with the relevant plasmids were
prepared as described previously (15) and pre-cleared using Protein
G-agarose beads (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). The pre-cleared
extracts were incubated with the antibody of interest or the relevant
isotype control on ice for 1 h. 30 µl of Protein G beads were
then added to the extract and the extracts were rotated overnight. The
beads were collected by centrifugation and washed four times with TS
buffer (12). The beads obtained after this procedure were treated with
SDS sample buffer, boiled at 95 °C for 15 min, and loaded on a
SDS-polyacrylamide gel along with 8-10% of the cell extract used for
the immunoprecipitation. The proteins were transferred to a
nitrocellulose membrane, probed with the relevant antibody, and
examined by autoradiography with ECL (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Antibodies used were: T7 (Novagen), Myc tag (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), HA (BAbCO), Flag M2 (Sigma), Gal4, Sin3B (Santa Cruz),
HDAC2 (Zymed Laboratories Inc.), E1A (Oncogene
Science), and anti-Ikaros, Aiolos, and Mi-2 which have been previously
described (5, 12, 16).
GST Interaction Assays--
GST and GST-hCtBP1 were prepared as
described previously (39). Preparation of thymic nuclear extracts was
essentially as described in Ref. 11. 1-2 µg of the GST proteins were
incubated with thymic nuclear extracts or reticulocyte lysate (Promega) for 1 h at 4 °C and washed extensively with
MT-phosphate-buffered saline. The beads were then boiled in SDS sample
buffer and fractionated on an SDS-polyacrylamide gel. Immunoblotting
was done as described in the previous section.
Histone Deacetylase Assays--
Histone deacetylase assays were
performed on tritiated chicken reticulocyte histones as described (44).
Briefly, immunoprecipitates from 293T whole cell extracts were washed
3× in TS buffer and incubated with 100,000 cpm of tritiated acetylated
histones for 45 min at 30 °C in HD assay buffer. The reaction was
stopped by acidification and the released tritium was extracted with
ethyl acetate.
Ikaros, but Not Its family Members, Interacts with CtBP--
We
have previously reported that Ikaros and Aiolos, when fused to the
GAL4-DNA-binding domain, can function as transcriptional repressors in
a promoter and cell type specific manner. The repression mediated by
Gal4-Ikaros and Gal4-Aiolos on the adenovirus major late promoter
(AdMLP) was found to be significantly relieved but not abolished by the
histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin A. Thus, we argued that
histone deacetylase recruitment serves as one mechanism for Gal4-Ikaros
and Gal4-Aiolos repression on the AdMLP. In agreement with these
findings, Ikaros was found to associate with the NURD and Sin3 histone
deacetylase complexes.
A careful analysis of the primary sequence of the murine Ikaros protein
led to the identification of a 5-amino acid sequence, PEDLS, at its N
terminus (Fig. 1A), that
matches the consensus recognition motif for the C-terminal-binding
protein co-repressor, CtBP (30, 31). This sequence is conserved between
all the described Ikaros orthologs found in chicken, rainbow trout, and zebra fish but is not present in the Ikaros family members: Aiolos, Helios, and Daedalus (Fig. 1A). However, both Daedalus and
Helios contain the sequences, PEDLG and PISLI, respectively, in their last exon, that varies significantly from the well established consensus CtBP interaction motif.
Given the putative CtBP-binding site in Ikaros, we tested their
interaction using bacterially purified GST-hCtBP1 and thymic nuclear
extracts and reticulocyte lysates. We have restricted our study to
hCtBP1 since CtBP2 is not expressed in the thymus (34). GST-CtBP but
not the GST fusion partner interacted with endogenous Ikaros protein
from both sources (Fig. 1B). Importantly, a small amount of
CtBP was also found to be present in Ikaros complexes purified from T
cell nuclear extracts (Fig. 1C) (16). Thus, Ikaros can
interact with CtBP both in vitro and in vivo.
To examine the importance of the PEDLS motif in Ikaros-CtBP
interactions, we constructed two mutations. In the first, we deleted this 5-amino acid region (Ik1d(PEDLS)) and in the second we mutated the
core amino acids DL
At least eight different splice variants of Ikaros have been described
(11-13). Using the 293T transfection/immunoprecipitation approach we
tested whether hCtBP1 could distinguish between these proteins. All
tested isoforms including the non-DNA binding isoform, Ik7, interacted
with CtBP (Fig. 2C). This was expected since all isoforms
contain the PEDLS motif. In addition, point mutations of the C-terminal
zinc fingers of Ikaros that abolish formation of a higher order complex
(12) had no effect on Ikaros interactions with CtBP (data not shown).
We next examined whether the Ikaros family members, Aiolos, Helios, and
Daedalus could interact with CtBP by co-expressing these proteins in
293T cells. None of these proteins interacted in our assay despite the
presence of sequences in Daedalus and Helios with weak homology to the
described CtBP interaction motif (Fig. 2D).
Taken together these data indicate that all of the Ikaros isoforms but
not its family members can interact with CtBP. This interaction is
mediated through a PEDLS sequence present at the N-terminal of the
protein and does not rely on the DNA binding or dimerization properties
of Ikaros. Finally, this is the first described protein interaction
that distinguishes between Ikaros and its family members.
hCtBP1 Exists in a Ternary Complex with Ikaros and Aiolos--
In
lymphocytes a large fraction of Ikaros is found in association with its
family member Aiolos (5, 16). In the preceding section we provided
evidence that Ikaros but not Aiolos can interact with CtBP. Thus, we
were interested in determining whether CtBP could exist in association
with Ikaros and Aiolos or whether it was excluded from their complex.
The three proteins were co-expressed in 293T cells and
immunoprecipitated using the Flag epitope attached to CtBP. As a
control for this analysis, we transfected Ik1cm (an Ikaros-CtBP
interaction mutant) with Aiolos and CtBP. Immunoprecipitation of cell
extracts containing wild type Ikaros but not of extracts containing the
mutant variant, Ik1cm, brought down Aiolos (Fig. 3A). Thus Ikaros, Aiolos, and
CtBP can exist in a ternary complex when expressed in the same cell.
Using the same procedure, we next tested whether Mi-2
In summary, Ikaros and CtBP can exist in a ternary complex with Aiolos
but not with Mi-2 hCtBP1 Interacts with Histone Deacetylases--
The
Ikaros-independent ability of CtBP to interact with histone
deacetylases was further investigated and was found to be heavily
influenced by epitopes attached to its N terminus; T7 tagged CtBP does
not interact with HDAC2 and Flag-CtBP interacts weakly whereas the
strongest interaction was seen when CtBP was fused to the Gal4
DNA-binding domain (data not shown). Consistent with the CtBP
interactions with HDAC2, Gal4-CtBP was found to have significant
histone deacetylase activity (Fig. 3E).
CtBP interactions with endogenous HDAC2 were tested in thymic nuclear
extracts and rabbit reticulocyte lysates. Although HDAC2 was present in
both extracts at roughly similar levels, only HDAC2 derived from the
thymic extracts interacted with GST-CtBP (Fig. 3D). Possible
interactions with other factors or differences in post-translational
modifications in these two cell types may account for these results.
Thus, CtBP can interact with HDAC2 and this interaction may be
dependent on the cell type. In addition, structural perturbations at
the N terminus of CtBP may alter its ability to interact with HDACs and
other factors. Furthermore, interactions of CtBP with HDAC2 and Sin3A
are possibly indirect since both proteins lack a PXDLS motif.
Delineation of Domains on hCtBP1 That Interact with Ikaros and
HDAC2--
In order to identify the minimal region(s) of hCtBP1
required for its interactions with Ikaros and HDAC2, we generated two series of N- and C-terminal deletions of hCtBP1, one of which was Flag
tagged while the other was Gal4 tagged (Fig.
4A). We employed these two
distinct epitope tag strategies since Ikaros interacts most strongly
with Flag-CtBP whereas HDAC2 preferentially associates with
Gal4-hCtBP1. 293T cells were transfected with Flag-tagged CtBP1
proteins and Ikaros to test their interactions and independently with
Gal4-tagged CtBP1 proteins to test its interactions with endogenous
HDAC2. Extracts prepared from these transfections were
immunoprecipitated and Western analysis with appropriate antibodies was
performed. Ikaros interacted most strongly with full-length CtBP1 (Fig.
4, A and B). Deletion of the first 95 amino acids
of CtBP1 dramatically reduced Ikaros interactions with CtBP1 (Fig.
4B, compare CtBP1 and CtN1), however, the first 95 amino
acids of CtBP1 are by themselves insufficient to bind Ikaros as
strongly as full-length CtBP1 (Fig. 4B, compare CtBP1 and
CtC3). A further deletion of the N-terminal region covering the first
178 amino acids of CtBP1(CtN2) partially restored the interaction
between Ikaros and CtBP whereas a deletion of the first 299 amino acids
of CtBP1(CtN3) abolished its interaction with Ikaros (data not shown).
Deletion of the last 245 amino acids only modestly reduced the
Ikaros-CtBP1 interaction (Fig. 4, A and B,
compare CtBP1 to CtC2). Taken together these data suggest that the
first 96 amino acids of CtBP1, although insufficient for binding, can
contribute to binding Ikaros along with amino acids 179 through 196. These data suggest a complex mode of interaction between CtBP and
Ikaros that involves more than one domain on CtBP1 and which may be
influenced by protein folding and(or) other interactions.
Gal4-CtBP interactions with endogenous HDAC2 present a somewhat similar
picture (Fig. 4, A and C). HDAC2 interacts most
strongly with full-length hCtBP1 and only barely above background
levels with either the N- or C-terminal deletion series of CtBP1 (Fig. 4C). Thus, more than one domain on hCtBP1 is required for
its interaction with Ikaros and HDAC2.
Gal4-hCtBP1 Represses Transcription Independent of Histone
Deacetylase Activity--
We have found that Gal4-hCtBP1 can repress
transcription of the tk and AdML promoters in several cell lines (Fig.
5, B and C, and
data not shown). Since Gal4-hCtBP1 represses transcription in cell
lines in which Ikaros is not expressed its mode of repression is
Ikaros-independent. This suggests that as long as CtBP can be recruited
to a target promoter through Ikaros, Gal4, or another DNA bound
transcription factor, it can effectively repress transcription. The
ability of Gal4-hCtBP1 to repress transcription is decreased when it is
recruited to Gal4 sites at increasing distances from the tk promoter
(data not shown). This is in agreement with studies on
Drosophila CtBP which implicate it in short range repression events (45).
To delineate the region on hCtBP1 required for its transcriptional
repression properties, we transfected 293T cells with a Gal4tkCAT
reporter and the Gal4-hCtBP1 deletion series described in the preceding
section. Only the full-length protein and Gal4-CtN1 repressed
transcription of the tk promoter (Fig. 5A). However, Gal4-CtN1 interactions with HDAC2 and Ikaros are barely detectable (Fig. 4, B and C), suggesting that repression by
CtBP fusion's in this assay is independent of histone deacetylase
activity or interactions with Ikaros. Surprisingly, the Gal4-CtN3
deletion mutant activated transcription by 2-fold from this promoter.
To further explore whether the mechanism of CtBP repression relies on
histone deacetylase activity, we tested repression of the tk and the
AdML promoters in NIH3T3 cells in the presence and absence of the
histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin A. Repression by
Gal4-hCtBP1 on both the tk and AdMLP was independent of histone
deacetylase activity in contrast with the repression effected by
Gal4-Sin3BSF used as a control (Fig. 5B). These findings are
in agreement with our previous observation that a deletion mutant of
CtBP1, CtN1, which barely interacts with HDAC, maintains its ability to
repress transcription (Fig. 4C and 5A). We have varied the amount of effector to reporter as well as performed transfections in other cell types but have not observed any significant CtBP de-repression in the presence of trichostatin (data not shown).
Thus, although hCtBP1 can interact with HDACs, it is capable of
repression using mechanisms independent of the enzymatic activity of
histone deacetylases. Its ability to repress is also independent of
Ikaros suggesting that the repression is effected directly by CtBP1
possibly through its interactions with other corepressors and/or the
RNA-polymerase complex. This supposition is strengthened by our recent
findings that CtBP1 can interact with at least two components of the
basal transcriptional machinery (data not shown).
Mutations in Ikaros That Prevent Interactions with CtBP Alleviate
Repression--
To investigate the functional consequence of Ikaros
interactions with hCtBP1, we made Gal4 fusions of the full-length and subregions of Ikaros that contain the wild type PEDLS motif or the
mutant variant PEasS (suffixed "cm") that cannot interact with
hCtBP1 (Fig. 2A). These plasmids were transfected into 293T cells and extracts prepared from these cells were tested with antibodies to Gal4 to ensure that the proteins encoded by these vectors
were made at similar amounts (Fig.
6D). They were then individually transfected along with either the G5tkCAT or G5AdMLPCAT reporter into U2OS and NIH3T3 cells and their effect on transcription was assayed.
A mutation of the CtBP-binding site on Ikaros, that prevents its
interaction with the co-repressor, significantly reduced its ability to
repress transcription on both the tk and AdML promoters (Fig. 6,
A and B, compare BXG1-Ik1 to BXG1-Ik1cm). The
effects of the CtBP-binding site mutation on repression were also
observed in the context of the subregions of Ikaros (Fig. 6,
A and B, compare BXG1-IKD2 to BXG1-IKD2cm and
BXG1-N1 to BXG1-N1cm). These effects on repression were similar in both
U2OS and NIH3T3 cells (data not shown). We take these data to mean that
Ikaros mutants that cannot interact with CtBP are incapable of
recruiting a putative CtBP corepressor complex to a target promoter to
effect repression. It is important to emphasize here that the Ikaros
mutation that prevents interactions with CtBP alleviates but does not
abrogate Ikaros's repression capabilities. This should not be
surprising since Ikaros containing the CtBP interaction site mutation
can still associate with the Sin3 and NURD histone deacetylase
complexes (Fig. 2B).
We next compared untagged Ikaros wild type and CtBP interaction mutant
proteins for their ability to activate transcription from
Ikaros-binding sites. NIH3T3 cells were transfected with wild type or
mutant Ikaros plasmids and a reporter containing four Ikaros-binding
sites (4XIkBS2 tkCAT). No significant difference was observed between
the wild type or the mutant proteins in their ability to activate
transcription from this reporter (Fig. 6C).
In summary, mutations in Ikaros that abolish its interactions with CtBP
weaken its ability to repress transcription on the tk and AdML
promoters when recruited through a heterologous binding domain.
Nonetheless, the ability of Ikaros proteins to activate transcription
from their own sites remains largely unaffected by these mutations.
Ikaros Interactions with Adenovirus E1A Reduces Its Ability
to Repress Transcription--
CtBP was first identified as a protein
that interacted with Exon 2 of adenovirus E1A (30, 31, 46). Since CtBP
interacts with Ikaros, we were interested in determining whether E1A
could associate with Ikaros through CtBP. Extracts from 293T cells
transfected with Flag-hCtBP1 (as a positive control), Flag-Ik1, and
Flag-Aio3 were immunoprecipitated with Flag and E1A antibodies.
Unexpectedly, Flag-Ikaros and -Aiolos proteins brought down more E1A
proteins relative to Flag-hCtBP1(Fig.
7A). We next tested the
ability of Ik1cm, which is incapable of interacting with CtBP1, to
associate with E1A proteins. Ik1cm and Ik1 immunoprecipitated roughly
equal levels of E1A indicating that this protein association was not brought about through CtBP (Fig. 7B).
The functional relevance of the Ikaros-E1A interaction was examined in
transient expression studies. U2OS cells (which lack any viral
oncoprotein) were transfected with Gal4 or Gal4-Ik1 and G5tkCAT and
increasing amounts of 13SE1A and assayed for their effect on Ikaros
transcriptional repression. In the presence of E1A, repression by
Gal4-Ik1 was relieved by 7-fold (Fig. 7C, inset). A much
smaller (2-fold) effect on the transcriptional activity of the Gal4
DNA-binding domain was seen in the presence of E1A (Fig. 7C,
inset). These findings are consistent with the reduced repression
capabilities of Ikaros proteins in the E1A transformed cell lines, 293 and 293T (15). Thus, viral oncoproteins may target Ikaros and its
family members and in the process disrupt their normal interactions and
alter their ability to repress transcription.
In this study we provide evidence for an interaction between the
hemolymphoid zinc finger transcription factor Ikaros and the
co-repressor CtBP. We demonstrate that although CtBP is capable of
interactions with histone deacetylases, it mediates repression even in
the presence of the deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin. These findings
argue for a histone deacetylase activity-independent mode of repression
by Ikaros proteins. Taken together with our previous findings (15, 16),
these data provide compelling evidence that Ikaros can act as a
repressor of transcription by utilizing both histone deacetylase
activity-dependent and -independent mechanisms.
Utilizing distinct repression mechanisms that include direct
interference with holoenzyme recruitment and chromatin compaction events may be necessary for effective down-regulation of gene expression. Since the description of Rb as a repressor that uses both
HDAC-dependent and -independent means of repression (25), several transcription factors including SMRT (26), N-CoR (27), Net
(37), and RBP1 (29) have been included in this category. In addition to
their deacetylase-dependent modes of repression, SMRT and
N-CoR interact with TFIIB and presumably affect the formation of a
functional preinitiation complex (26, 27) while RBP1 and Net have two
repression domains one of which recruits deacetylases while the other
utilizes alternative repression mechanisms (29, 37).
Here we have shown that Ikaros and its orthologs contain a PEDLS motif
and that CtBP interacts with Ikaros proteins through this sequence.
Interestingly, none of the Ikaros family members contain this motif or
interact with CtBP yet they can still exist in a ternary complex with
Ikaros and CtBP. In contrast to the 5 amino acids on Ikaros required
for interaction with CtBP, a larger region within the N-terminal 300 amino acids of CtBP is required for its association with Ikaros.
CtBP was originally identified as an interactor of the adenoviral
oncoprotein, E1A, and was found to reduce the oncoproteins ability to
transform cells (30). In testing whether Ikaros proteins could
participate in an E1A-CtBP complex, we found that Ikaros-E1A interactions occur independently of CtBP. Viral oncoproteins facilitate cell transformation through their interaction with regulatory factors
and by interfering with their normal functions (47-49). Ikaros
interactions with E1A were found to significantly alter its ability to
repress transcription. Interestingly, the Ikaros repression potential
is greatly reduced in various virally transformed cell lines such as
293T (transformed by E1A and SV40 T Ag), COS (transformed by SV40 TAg),
and HeLa (transformed by HPV E7). It is likely that Ikaros may also
serve as a target for several viruses that target lymphoid cells and
cause their transformation by interfering with Ikaros activity.
We have previously shown that Ikaros can interact with the Sin3 and
NURD histone deacetylase complexes (15, 16). Mutations in Ikaros that
prevent interactions with CtBP do not affect Ikaros's ability to
associate with Sin3, Mi-2, or HDAC2. These data suggest that CtBP is
not required for Ikaros association with these histone deacetylase
complexes and implicates a different mechanism of repression.
How does CtBP effect repression? CtBP was originally recognized to have
significant homology with the NAD- dependent D-isomer specific
2-hydroxy acid dehydrogenases which suggested a role for this enzymatic
function in repression (31). However, thus far CtBP has not been
demonstrated to have any significant dehydrogenase activity (31) and a
mutation in the active site of the dehydrogenase domain does not affect
transcriptional repression (32). At least two studies have suggested a
histone deacetylase dependent mode of repression: 1)
co-immunoprecipitation of CtBP and HDAC1 from U2OS cells and in
vitro binding experiments have shown that CtBP can interact with
HDAC1 (36), 2) trichostatin was found to relieve Gal4-CtBP repression
in CHO cells (37). In this report, we also show that CtBP can interact
with endogenous HDAC2 from 293T cells and thymic nuclear extracts. In
addition, we find that CtBP can interact with endogenous Sin3A but not
with Mi-2, which are components of two distinct HDAC complexes.
However, we show that despite the observed interactions between CtBP,
Sin3, and HDAC2, the repression capabilities of CtBP are not dependent
on HDAC enzymatic activity. Repression of two promoters by Gal4-CtBP
was not alleviated by the deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin, in 293T
or in NIH 3T3 cells. In addition, the minimal repression domain on CtBP
did not interact with HDAC2 at any significant level. In agreement with
our findings of a histone deacetylase activity-independent mode of
repression by CtBP, a recent report on Rb repression mechanisms has
implicated the CtIP-CtBP complex in the Rb HDAC Rb's HDAC-independent repression function (38). In summary, our data suggest that the
C-terminal-binding protein can repress transcription through mechanisms
other than the recruitment of histone deacetylase activity. However,
our data does not rule out the possibility that CtBP may repress
transcription through deacetylases that are refractory to the inhibitor
trichostatin and/or through interactions of histone deacetylases with
other co-repressors or the basal transcriptional machinery.
Ikaros appears to repress transcription through its interaction with
histone deacetylases and through means other than the recruitment of
deacetylase activity. Ikaros represses the MLP promoter largely through
the action of histone deacetylases (15). However, Ikaros repression of
the AdML promoter is not completely relieved by trichostatin treatment
suggesting an additional role for histone deacetylase-independent
mechanisms of repression on this promoter. In addition, Ikaros-mediated
repression of the tk promoter is independent of histone deacetylase
activity.3 Mutation of the
CtBP motif on Ikaros significantly reduced Ikaros's ability to repress
both the tk and MLP promoters. Taken together with the HDAC independent
repression by CtBP on these two promoters, we conclude that CtBP is one
component of the histone deacetylase-independent mechanism of
repression utilized by Ikaros. Ikaros can also interact with mSin3
proteins (15). The ability of mSin3A to repress transcription was
largely unaffected by the deletion of its histone deacetylase interaction domain suggesting that it can also repress through histone
deacetylase-independent mechanisms (21). Further support for this
suggestion and the underlying mechanism has been recently provided (26,
27). Thus, both CtBP and Sin3 interactions with Ikaros may play a role
in Ikaros's histone deacetylase activity-independent mechanisms of repression.
What are the possible in vivo consequences of Ikaros
interactions with CtBP? Ikaros is the earliest expressed member of its family during hemopoiesis (1). The Ikaros-CtBP association may play an
important role in regulating hemopoietic lineage commitment decisions.
Lineage commitment requires the activation of lineage specific genes as
well as the down-regulation of non-lineage genes which are expressed in
the early progenitor cells. Ikaros-CtBP interactions could help refine
and restrict committed cells to the lymphoid lineage. Genetic
experiments in flies have suggested a role for CtBP in early in
development (40) while similar studies in Xenopus have
identified additional roles for this protein later in development (41).
CtBP has been shown to interact with Xenopus Polycomb 2 and
a small fraction of CtBP in U2OS cells was also found to co-localize
with Polycomb nuclear domains (34). Polycomb proteins are components of
an elaborate machinery that serves to heritably maintain the silenced
state of genes (50). Thus Ikaros-CtBP interactions may serve to recruit
Polycomb group proteins to maintain the silenced state of non-lineage
and developmentally regulated genes. A conclusive description of the
role of Ikaros-CtBP interactions in lymphocyte development will need to
await future studies which will include generation of "knock-in"
mice carrying Ikaros mutant alleles that cannot interact with CtBP.
We thank our colleagues who have generously
provided us with reagents.
*
This work was supported in part by National Institutes of
Health Grant RO1 AI33062 (to K. G.).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.
§
Supported by an Howard Hughes Medical Institute predoctoral
fellowship. Present address: Graduate program in Molecular and Cellular
Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138.
¶
Stohlman Scholar of the Leukemia Society of America. To whom
correspondence should be addressed: CBRC/MGH, East, Bldg. 149, 13th
St., Charlestown, MA 02129. Tel.: 617-726-4445; Fax: 617-726-4453; E-mail: katia.georgopoulos@cbrc2.mgh.harvard.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, April 13, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M000254200
1
T. Ikeda and B. Morgan, personal communication.
3
J. Koipally and K. Georgopoulos, unpublished observations.
The abbreviations used are:
Rb, retinoblastoma;
CtBP, C-terminal-binding protein;
HDAC/HD, histone deacetylase;
IK, Ikaros;
RBP1, Rb-binding protein 1;
CtIP, CtBP interacting protein;
tk, thymidine kinase;
AdMLP, adenovirus major late promoter;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
HA, hemagglutinin;
MT, Myc
epitope tag;
CAT, chloramphenicol acetyltransferase;
GH, growth
hormone.
Ikaros Interactions with CtBP Reveal a Repression Mechanism That
Is Independent of Histone Deacetylase Activity*
§ and
¶
Cutaneous Biology Research Center,
Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School,
Charlestown, Massachusetts 02129
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Ikaros can interact with CtBP.
A, a diagrammatic representation of the Ikaros protein and
the location (*) of a sequence with similarity to the consensus CtBP
interaction motif. Exons 1/2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are indicated as
horizontal rectangles and the zinc fingers are represented
as vertical rectangles. A comparison of the sequences found
at the N-terminal of Ikaros and its homologues is provided.
Capitalized letters indicate a match to the consensus CtBP
motif. B, in vitro interaction between Ikaros and hCtBP1.
GST interaction assays between CtBP and Ikaros from thymic nuclear
extracts and reticulocyte lysates as determined by immunoblot
(IB) analysis. I, input (5% for thymic extract
and 25% for reticulocyte lysate); G, GST,
GCtBP, GST-hCtBP1. Molecular weight markers are provided in
kDa at the left. C, in vivo interaction between
CtBP and Ikaros in primary activated T cells. Immunopurification of
Ikaros-containing complexes was accomplished using a FlagM2 column. The
unbound proteins (S), final wash (W3), and eluate
(E) were tested by immunoblot analysis (IB) with
antibodies to CtBP.
AS (Ik1cm) in the context of the full-length protein. We transfected these mutants with hCtBP1 tagged with T7 into
293T cells and performed immunoprecipitations. Neither of the Ikaros
mutants was able to interact with CtBP (Fig.
2A). We then tested the impact
of these mutations on the ability of Ikaros to associate with
components of the NURD and Sin3 histone deacetylase complexes. Both of
the Ikaros mutants interacted with Mi-2
, Sin3A, Sin3B, and HDAC2 in
a fashion indistinguishable from wild type (Fig. 2B and data
not shown for Sin3B). Consistent with these results, Flag-Ikaros or
Flag-Ik1cm immunoprecipitated from transfected 293T cells had similar
histone deacetylase activities (Fig. 2E). These data
underscore the importance and specificity of the PEDLS motif in
Ikaros-CtBP interactions. In addition, it shows that the ability of
Ikaros to interact with CtBP or its lack thereof does not influence its
interactions with histone deacetylase complexes.

View larger version (42K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Ikaros interactions with hCtBP1 require an
intact PXDLS motif. A, 293T cells were co-transfected
with expression vectors for T7-hCtBP1 (10 µg) and wild type or CtBP
interaction site mutant (Ik1cm) Ikaros (10 µg of untagged plasmid or
1 µg for Flag-tagged plasmid). Immunoprecipitations (IP)
were performed on whole cell lysates with T7 antibodies. Immunoblot
analysis (IB) with Ikaros revealed differences in
interactions between wild type and mutant Ikaros proteins with hCtBP1.
Blots were stripped and reprobed with the Ab used for
immunoprecipitation to ascertain that the epitope-tagged proteins were
immunoprecipitated (control). I, input; C,
isotype control IP; B, bound fraction from specific IP.
B, the interaction of Mi-2, MT-Sin3A, and endogenous HDAC2
with wild type and mutant Ikaros proteins were tested as in
A. IPs were performed using Flag antibody. C,
interaction between T7-hCtBP1 and Ikaros isoforms were tested as in
A. D, interaction between T7-hCtBP1 and Ikaros family
members, Aiolos, Daedalus, and Helios were tested as in A. E, histone deacetylase assays of Flag immunoprecipitates obtained
from 293T extracts transfected with Flag-Ik1 and Flag-Ik1cm. Assays
were done twice in duplicate with or without trichostatin A.
, a component
of the NURD histone deacetylase complex could exist in a ternary
complex with Ikaros and CtBP. Unlike Aiolos, no interactions were seen
between the Ikaros-CtBP complexes and Mi-2
(Fig. 3B).
Immunopurification of Flag-CtBP complexes from 293T cells revealed that
CtBP associates with a small amount of endogenous Sin3A and HDAC2
regardless of whether wild type Ikaros or Ik1cm was present (Fig.
3C). These findings were independently confirmed by GST
interaction assays (data not shown).

View larger version (34K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Ternary complex formation ability of
CtBP. A, Flag-hCtBP1 (3 µg), Aiolos (10 µg), and
wild type or mutant Ikaros (1 µg) were co-transfected in 293T cells
and ternary complex formation was assessed by immunoprecipitations
using an antibody to Flag which is the epitope for hCtBP1. The
immunoprecipitation of the mutant Ikaros protein serves as a control
since it cannot interact with hCtBP1. B, ternary complex
formation between wild type or mutant Ikaros, Flag-hCtBP1, and Mi-2 was
tested as in A. C, 293T cells were transfected
with Flag-hCtBP1 or Flag vector. CtBP1 complexes were obtained by
running nuclear extracts prepared from these transfectants over a
FlagM2 column. The unbound proteins (S), final wash
(W), and eluates (E1 and E2) were
tested by immunoblot analysis (IB) with antibodies to Flag,
HDAC2, and Sin3A. D, bacterially purified GST (G)
and GST-hCtBP1(GCtBP) were incubated with either thymic
nuclear extract or reticulocyte lysate. Bound HDAC2 was detected by
immunoblot analysis. E, extracts from untransfected 293T
cells or transfected with Gal4 or Gal4-CtBP1 were immunoprecipitated
(IP) with the indicated antibodies and the
immunoprecipitates were tested for histone deacetylase activity in the
presence or absence of trichostatin. The Sin3B protein
immunoprecipitated is endogenous.
, a component of the NURD histone deacetylase
complex. Also, CtBP co-purifies with a small fraction of endogenous
Sin3A and HDAC2 in the absence of Ikaros.

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Identification of Ikaros and HDAC2
interaction domains on hCtBP1. A, a tabulated diagram
of the domains of hCtBP1 and the corresponding interactions with Ikaros
and HDAC2 based on data from B and C. B,
immunoblot analysis of interactions between different domains of
Flag-hCtBP1 and Ik1. Interactions were tested using extracts of 293T
cells transfected with the indicated combination of plasmids. Blots
were probed with Ik1 antibody to identify the interaction. The blots
were stripped and reprobed with Flag to determine whether the Flag
fusions were made and immunoprecipitated. The data for Flag-CtN3/Ik1
interaction is not shown. C, interactions between
Gal4-hCtBP1 subregions and endogenous HDAC2 were tested as in
B.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Histone deacetylase activity is not required
for repression by hCtBP1. A, 293T cells were
transfected with BXG1 or BXG1-hCtBP1 subregions (1 µg), the reporter,
G5tkCAT (10 µg), and a GH plasmid (0.05 µg) to control for the
transfection efficiency. CAT activity was corrected for transfection
efficiency using the GH assay. Fold Repression was
calculated by dividing the decrease in CAT activity (measured in
counts/min) of the BXG1-hCtBP1 subregions by the CAT activity (measured
in cpm) of BXG1. B, NIH3T3 cells were transfected with 10 µg of either G5tkCAT (left panel) or G5AdMLPCAT
(right panel), 1 µg of the indicated Gal4 effector
plasmids and 0.5 µg of a growth hormone plasmid to correct for
transfection efficiency. Sin3BSF is a short form of Sin3B that
interacts with histone deacetylase. Transfectants were left untreated
or treated with trichostatin A (100 ng/ml) 16-18 h before harvest.
Corrected CAT activity was calculated as in A. Fold
derepression upon trichostatin A treatment is indicated below the
graph and was calculated as the increase in normalized CAT activity
upon trichostatin treatment divided by the corrected CAT activity in
untreated cells.

View larger version (44K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
CtBP interactions with Ikaros contribute to
its ability to repress transcription. A, U2OS cells
were transfected with the indicated Gal4 constructs (1 µg), the
reporter, G5tkCAT (10 µg) and GH plasmid (0.5 µg). Fold repression
was calculated as in Fig. 5A. B, same as A except
that the reporter used was G5AdMLPCAT and the amount of Gal4 plasmid
used was 0.5 µg. C, NIH3T3 cells were transfected with 3 µg of 4XIKBS2tkCAT, 0.25 µg of Flag vector, Flag-Ik1, or Flag-Ik1cm
and 0.5 µg of GH plasmid. The normalized CAT activity for
transfection with Flag vector alone was assigned a value of 1. Fold Activation was calculated as the increase in CAT
activity over the vector alone. D, immunoblot analysis using
Gal4 antibodies of 293T extracts transfected with the Gal4 fusions used
in A and B to determine the levels of expression.
The arrowhead indicates a nonspecific band.

View larger version (33K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Ikaros interactions with adenovirus E1A.
A, extracts prepared from 293T cells that had been
transfected with Flag-hCtBP1, Flag-Ik1, Flag-Aio3, or vector alone were
immunoprecipitated with Flag or E1A antibodies. Blots were probed with
E1A to identify interactions between the proteins. Blots were stripped
and reprobed with Flag to determine if the proteins were made and
immunoprecipitated and also to check whether the reverse IP was able to
identify interactions. B, immunoblot analysis of
interactions between Flag-Ik1 and Flag-Ik1cm with endogenous E1A were
done as in A. C, U2OS cells were transfected with
0.5 µg of GH plasmid, 10 µg of the reporter, G5tkCAT, 1 µg of
BXG1 or BXG1-Ik1, and 0, 1, or 4 µg of 13SE1A. The effect of
increasing the concentration of E1A on repression is graphed. The
inset presents the same data as fold increase to illustrate
the effect of titrating E1A on BXG1-Ik1 compared with BXG1.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Cortes, M.,
Wong, E.,
Koipally, J.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Immunol.
11,
167-171
2.
Wang, J.,
Nichogiannopoulou, A.,
Wu, L.,
Sun, L.,
Sharpe, A.,
Bigby, M.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1996)
Immunity
5,
537-549
3.
Winandy, S.,
Wu, L.,
Wang, J. H.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1999)
J. Exp. Med.
190,
1039-1048
4.
Georgopoulos, K.,
Bigby, M.,
Wang, J.-H.,
Molnár, Á.,
Wu, P.,
Winandy, S.,
and Sharpe, A.
(1994)
Cell
79,
143-156
5.
Morgan, B.,
Sun, L.,
Avitahl, N.,
Andrikopoulos, K.,
Gonzales, E.,
Nichogiannopoulou, A.,
Wu, P.,
Neben, S.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
2004-2013
6.
Kelley, C. M.,
Ikeda, T.,
Koipally, J.,
Avitahl, N.,
Georgopoulos, K.,
and Morgan, B. A.
(1998)
Curr. Biol.
8,
508-515
7.
Hahm, K.,
Cobb, B. S.,
McCarty, A. S.,
Brown, K. E.,
Klug, C. A.,
Lee, R.,
Akashi, K.,
Weissman, I. L.,
Fisher, A. G.,
and Smale, S. T.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
782-796
8.
Winandy, S.,
Wu, P.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1995)
Cell
83,
289-299
9.
Avitahl, N.,
Winandy, S.,
Friedrich, C.,
Jones, B.,
Ge, Y.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1999)
Immunity
10,
333-343
10.
Wang, J.-H.,
Avitahl, N.,
Cariappa, A.,
Friedrich, C.,
Ikeda, T.,
Renold, A.,
Andrikopoulos, K.,
Liang, L.,
Pillai, S. A.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1998)
Immunity
9,
543-553
11.
Molnár, Á.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
785-794
12.
Sun, L.,
Liu, A.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
5358-5369
13.
Hahm, K.,
Ernst, P.,
Lo, K.,
Kim, G. S.,
Turck, C.,
and Smale, S. T.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
7111-7123
14.
Wargnier, A.,
Lafaurie, C.,
Legros-Maida, S.,
Bourge, J. F.,
Sigaux, F.,
Sasportes, M.,
and Paul, P.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
35326-35331
15.
Koipally, J.,
Renold, A.,
Kim, J.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
3090-3100
16.
Kim, J.,
Sif, S.,
Jones, B.,
Jackson, A.,
Koipally, J.,
Heller, B.,
Winandy, S.,
Veil, A.,
Sawyer, A.,
Ikeda, T.,
Kingston, R.,
and Georgopoulos, K.
(1999)
Immunity
10,
345-355
17.
Zhang, Y.,
Sun, Z. W.,
Iratni, R.,
Erdjument-Bromage, H.,
Tempst, P.,
Hampsey, M.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
1,
1021-1031
18.
Tong, J.,
Hassig, C.,
Schnitzler, G. R.,
Kingston, R. A.,
and Schreiber, S. L.
(1998)
Nature
395,
917-921
19.
Wade, P.,
Jones, P.,
Vermaak, D.,
and Wolffe, A.
(1998)
Current Biol.
8,
843-846
20.
Struhl, K.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
599-606
21.
Laherty, C. D.,
Yang, W.-M.,
Sun, J.-M.,
Davie, J. R.,
Seto, E.,
and Eisenman, R. N.
(1997)
Cell
89,
349-356
22.
Heinzel, T.,
Lavinsky, R. M.,
Mullen, T.,
Soederstroem, M.,
Laherty, C. D.,
Torchia, J.,
Yang, W.,
Brard, G.,
Ngo, S. D.,
Davie, J. R.,
Seto, E.,
Eisenman, R. N.,
Rose, D. W.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1997)
Nature
387,
43-48
23.
Sparrow, D.,
Miska, E.,
Langley, E.,
Reynaud-Deonauth, S.,
Kotecha, S.,
Towers, N.,
Spohr, G.,
Kouzarides, T.,
and Mohun, T.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
5085-5098
24.
Strouboulis, J.,
Damjanovski, S.,
Vermaak, D.,
Meric, F.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
3958-3968
25.
Luo, R.,
Postigo, A.,
and Dean, D.
(1998)
Cell
92,
463-473
26.
Wong, C.,
and Privalsky, M. L.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
5500-5510
27.
Muscat, G. E. O.,
Burke, L. J.,
and Downes, M.
(1998)
Nucleic Acids Res.
26,
2899-2907
28.
Ghosh, A.,
Steele, R.,
and Ray, R.
(1999)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
260,
405-409
29.
Lai, A.,
Lee, J. M.,
Yang, W. M.,
DeCaprio, J. A.,
Kaelin, W. G. J.,
Seto, E.,
and Branton, P. E.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
6632-6641
30.
Boyd, J. M.,
Subramanian, T.,
Schaeper, U.,
La Regina, M.,
Bayley, S.,
and Chinnadurai, G.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
469-478
31.
Schaeper, U.,
Boyd, J. M.,
Verma, S.,
Uhlmann, E.,
Subramanian, T.,
and Chinnadurai, G.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
10467-10471
32.
Turner, J.,
and Crossley, M.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
5129-5140
33.
Katsanis, N.,
and Fisher, E. M. C.
(1998)
Genomics
47,
294-299
34.
Sewalt, R. G. A. B.,
Gunster, M. J.,
van der Vlag, J.,
Satijn, D. P. E.,
and Otte, A. P.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
777-787
35.
Nibu, Y.,
Zhang, H.,
Bajor, E.,
Barolo, S.,
Small, S.,
and Levine, M.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
7009-7020
36.
Sundqvist, A.,
Sollerbrant, K.,
and Svensson, C.
(1998)
FEBS Lett.
429,
183-188
37.
Criqui-Filipe, P.,
Ducret, C.,
Maira, S. M.,
and Wasylyk, B.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
3392-403
38.
Meloni, A.,
Smith, E.,
and Nevins, J.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
9574-9579
39.
Schaeper, U.,
Subramanian, T.,
Lim, L.,
Boyd, J. M.,
and Chinnadurai, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
8549-8552
40.
Poortinga, G.,
Watanabe, M.,
and Parkhurst, S. M.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
2067-2078
41.
Brannon, M.,
Brown, J. D.,
Bates, R.,
Kimelman, D.,
and Moon, R. T.
(1999)
Development
126,
3159-3170
42.
Fox, A. H.,
Liew, C.,
Holmes, M.,
Kowalski, K.,
Mackay, J.,
and Crossley, M.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
2812-2822
43.
Li, S.,
Chen, P. L.,
Subramanian, T.,
Chinnadurai, G.,
Tomlinson, G.,
Osborne, C. K.,
Sharp, Z. D.,
and Lee, W. H.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
11334-11338
44.
Kolle, D.,
Brosch, G.,
Lechner, T.,
Lusser, A. A.,
and Loidl, P.
(1998)
Methods
15,
323-331
45.
Nibu, Y.,
Zhang, H.,
and Levine, M.
(1998)
Science
280,
101-104
46.
Sollerbrant, K.,
Chinnadurai, G.,
and Svensson, C.
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
2578-2584
47.
Liu, F.,
and Green, M. R.
(1994)
Nature
368,
520-525
48.
Look, D. C.,
Roswit, W. T.,
Frick, A. G.,
Gris-Alevy, Y.,
Dickhaus, D. M.,
Walter, M. J.,
and Holtzman, M. J.
(1998)
Immunity
9,
871-880
49.
Lee, J. S.,
Galvin, K. M.,
See, R. H.,
Eckner, R.,
Livingston, D.,
Moran, E.,
and Shi, Y.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
1188-1198
50.
Pirrotta, V.
(1998)
Cell
93,
333-336
Copyright © 2000 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:
![]() |
S. Loeper, S. L. Asa, and S. Ezzat Ikaros Modulates Cholesterol Uptake: A Link between Tumor Suppression and Differentiation Cancer Res., May 15, 2008; 68(10): 3715 - 3723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Gurel, T. Ronni, S. Ho, J. Kuchar, K. J. Payne, C. W. Turk, and S. Dovat Recruitment of Ikaros to Pericentromeric Heterochromatin Is Regulated by Phosphorylation J. Biol. Chem., March 28, 2008; 283(13): 8291 - 8300. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Alpatov, Y. Shi, G. C. Munguba, B. Moghimi, J.-H. Joo, J. Bungert, and S. P. Sugrue Corepressor CtBP and Nuclear Speckle Protein Pnn/DRS Differentially Modulate Transcription and Splicing of the E-Cadherin Gene Mol. Cell. Biol., March 1, 2008; 28(5): 1584 - 1595. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. M. Thomas, N. Chunder, C. Chen, S. E. Umetsu, S. Winandy, and A. D. Wells Ikaros Enforces the Costimulatory Requirement for IL2 Gene Expression and Is Required for Anergy Induction in CD4+ T Lymphocytes J. Immunol., December 1, 2007; 179(11): 7305 - 7315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Sridharan and S. T. Smale Predominant Interaction of Both Ikaros and Helios with the NuRD Complex in Immature Thymocytes J. Biol. Chem., October 12, 2007; 282(41): 30227 - 30238. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Hu, S. M. Sharma, A. Bronisz, R. Srinivasan, U. Sankar, and M. C. Ostrowski Eos, MITF, and PU.1 Recruit Corepressors to Osteoclast-Specific Genes in Committed Myeloid Progenitors Mol. Cell. Biol., June 1, 2007; 27(11): 4018 - 4027. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Zhu, S. L. Asa, and S. Ezzat Ikaros Is Regulated through Multiple Histone Modifications and Deoxyribonucleic Acid Methylation in the Pituitary Mol. Endocrinol., May 1, 2007; 21(5): 1205 - 1215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Bandyopadhyay, M. Dure, M. Paroder, N. Soto-Nieves, I. Puga, and F. Macian Interleukin 2 gene transcription is regulated by Ikaros-induced changes in histone acetylation in anergic T cells Blood, April 1, 2007; 109(7): 2878 - 2886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|