|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 32, 24928-24934, August 11, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, May 4, 2000, and in revised form, May 22, 2000
We have investigated the structural basis for the
differential catalytic function of the yeast Gcn5p-containing histone
acetyltransferase (HAT) A2 complex and free recombinant yeast Gcn5p
(rGcn5p). HAT A2 is shown to be a unique complex that contains Gcn5p,
Ada2p, and Ada3p, but not proteins specific to other related HAT A
complexes, e.g. ADA, SAGA. Nevertheless, HAT A2 produces
the same unique polyacetylation pattern of nucleosomal substrates
reported previously for ADA and SAGA, demonstrating that proteins
specific to the ADA and SAGA complexes do not influence the enzymatic
activity of Gcn5p within the HAT A2 complex. To investigate the role of substrate interactions in the differential behavior of free and complexed Gcn5p, sucrose density gradient centrifugation was used to
characterize the binding of HAT A2 and free rGcn5p to intact and
trypsinized nucleosomal arrays, H3/H4 tetramer arrays, and nucleosome
core particles. We find that HAT A2 forms stable complexes with all
nucleosomal substrates tested. In distinct contrast, rGcn5p does not
interact stably with nucleosomal arrays, despite being able to
specifically monoacetylate the H3 N terminus of nucleosomal substrates.
Our data suggest that the ability of the HAT A2 complex to bind stably
to nucleosomal arrays is functionally related to both local and global
acetylation by the complexed and free forms of Gcn5p.
Histone acetylation is a dynamic process in vivo
involving multiple acetyltransferase and deacetylase enzymes (1-3).
Acetylation occurs at specific lysine residues of each of the core
histone N termini, and influences chromatin structure and function at all levels from the folded chromatin fiber to the nucleosome (4-6). Because of the key role of acetylation in transcription and
replication, a great deal of attention has been focused on the
properties and functions of recently identified histone
acetyltransferase enzymes (HATs).1 HAT A enzymes
(e.g. Gcn5p, Esa1p) primarily are involved in
transcriptional regulation, whereas HAT B enzymes (e.g.
Hat1p) are thought to participate in replication coupled-chromatin
assembly. The Tetrahymena equivalent of yeast Gcn5p (Gcn5p)
was the first specific HAT A enzyme to be cloned and overexpressed (7),
and the Gcn5 family of HATs remains the focus of intense investigation
(see Refs. 5, 8, and 9, and references therein).
The catalytic function of yeast Gcn5p in vitro is strongly
dependent on whether the enzyme is free or is a component of large multiprotein complexes such as HAT A2, ADA, and SAGA (8, 9). Purified
ADA and SAGA complexes both have been shown to contain the
non-DNA-binding, transcriptional adaptor proteins Ada2p and Ada3p
(8-10). Consistent with these in vitro results, genetic experiments in yeast have documented that mutations in Ada2p or Ada3p
yield phenotypes identical to loss of Gcn5p in terms of both
transcriptional regulation at specific gene loci (11, 12) and cell
growth (11, 13). In addition, several specific proteins have recently
been identified as unique components of ADA or SAGA. For example, Ahc1
is found only in the ADA complex (14), whereas certain members of the
Spt and TAF proteins are unique components of the SAGA complex (10, 15,
16). There is compelling evidence that Gcn5p-containing HAT A complexes
play key roles in transcriptional regulation by acetylating small
regions of chromatin in the vicinity of specific genes (16-19).
However, essentially nothing is known about either the solution
properties of these complexes, or the extent to which they are involved
in the maintenance of the high levels of global genome-wide acetylation
in yeast, e.g. at steady-state there are ~13 acetates per
histone octamer throughout the entire Saccharomyces
cerevisiae genome in log growth phase (20).
To address these issues, we have analyzed the subunit composition and
enzymatic properties of the HAT A2 complex, and used sucrose density
gradient centrifugation to determine the relative strength and
stability of HAT A2 and free rGcn5p interactions with different
nucleosomal substrates. Results indicate that the substrate acetylation
pattern of the HAT A2 complex is very similar to that of the larger ADA
and SAGA complexes, even though HAT A2 lacks many of the subunits found
in ADA and SAGA. We also observe that HAT A2, but not free Gcn5p, binds
stably to nucleosomal substrates. The relevance of these results to the
mechanisms of both local and global acetylation by type A histone
acetyltransferases is discussed in detail.
Materials--
Whole chicken blood was purchased from Pel-Freez
and used to obtain free histones (21), intact core histone octamers
(22), and nucleosome core particles (23) as described. 208-12 DNA templates consisting of 12 tandem repeats of a 208-base pair sequence derived from the Lytechinus 5 S rRNA gene (24) were grown
and purified from plasmid using pPOL208-12 as described (22). 12-mer nucleosomal arrays were obtained after salt dialysis reconstitution of
a mixture of purified chicken erythrocyte histone octamers and 208-12 DNA as described (25). pUC18 supercoiled plasmid was isolated from
Escherichia coli DH5 Purification of HAT A2 and Recombinant Gcn5p--
rGcn5p was
expressed and purified from BL21 cells containing plasmid pRSET-yGCN5
as described previously (26). Saccharomyces cerevisiae
strain BQS241 (MATa, ura3-52, lys2-801,
ade2-101, trp Histone Acetyltransferase Assays--
Liquid HAT activity assays
were performed with chicken core histones or nucleosomal substrates and
[1-14C]acetyl-CoA (54 mCi/mmol, ICN) as described (26).
Briefly, an aliquot from the indicated chromatographic or sucrose
gradient fraction was mixed with 0.02 µCi of
[1-14C]acetyl-CoA and 15 µg of the indicated substrate
in a final reaction volume of 60 µl. Reactions were incubated for 20 min at 30 °C, and quenched by spotting the sample onto GF/F glass
filters (Whatman). Filters were then washed four times in 5 ml of 25%
with trichloroacetic acid and then four times in 5 ml with 100%
ethanol using a Millipore vacuum manifold. Scintillation counting was
used to determine the amount of [14C]acetate incorporated
into the substrate.
For determination of substrate specificity, 0.1 µCi of
[14C]acetyl-CoA was used in the above reaction and
samples loaded onto either an 18% SDS-PAGE or a Triton X-100/acetic
acid/urea (TAU) (29) gel. All gels first were visualized by Coomassie
Blue staining, and then destained and fluorographed with Amplify
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Sucrose Density Gradient Ultracentrifugation--
Prior to
sedimentation, isolated HAT A2 (~25 µg of total protein) or rGcn5p
(~6 µg of total protein) in 125 µl were mixed with 30 µg of the
different nucleosomal substrates or 20 µg of the free DNAs in a total
volume of 175 µl. Under these conditions, nucleosomal substrates were
present in ~10-50-fold excess over HAT A2 or rGcn5p. In parallel,
samples containing purified HAT A2 complex alone, or the different
nucleosomal substrates and free DNAs without added enzyme, were
prepared with DB buffer to the same final volume. All samples were
incubated at 4 °C for 30 min, and then layered on the top of an
11-ml linear 10-30% (w/v) sucrose gradient in DB buffer lacking
glycerol. Gradients were ultracentrifuged in a Beckman SW41 Ti rotor at
30,000 rpm for 14 h at 4 °C. Each centrifuge tube subsequently
was fractionated (0.54 ml) from bottom to top, and the
A260 (or the A280 in the case of HAT A2 sample alone) was measured. Portions of each fraction were mixed with free histones and assayed for HAT activity as described
above. Results of the ultracentrifugation experiments were completely
reproducible using different batches (n = 3) of purified HAT A2 complex preparations.
Western Blotting and Immunoprecipitation--
Typically, 20-25
µl of the indicated chromatographic fractions were used for Western
blotting after electrophoresis on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel.
Protein gels were transferred to nitrocellulose using a semi-dry
transfer apparatus (Bio-Rad). The blots were blocked and probed using
standard procedures (30), and visualized using an ECL chemiluminescent
detection kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) according to the
manufacturer's instructions. Anti-Ahc1 antiserum raised in rabbits
(13) was a gift from J. L. Workman (Pennsylvania State University,
State College, PA). Rabbit polyclonal antibodies against Gcn5p
and Ada2p (31) proteins were kindly provided by S. L. Berger
(Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, PA). Commercial goat polyclonal
anti-Gcn5p and anti-Ada2p antibodies (probes yE-19 and yC-20,
respectively; Santa Cruz Biotech) also were used in Western blotting
experiments, but in these cases secondary antibody-alkaline phosphatase
conjugates were used for detection. Identical bands were visualized
with rabbit and commercial goat antisera. Rabbit polyclonal antibodies
against Spt7 and 20 proteins were generously provided by F. Winston
(Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA). Antisera against TAF 60 and 68 proteins were kindly provided by C. Peterson (University of
Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA). For immunoprecipitation
experiments, rabbit anti-Ada2p, anti-Ahc1, and non-immune antisera were
mixed with purified HAT A2 fractions (100 µl) and incubated for
2 h at 4 °C. 15 µl of pre-equilibrated Protein A-Sepharose
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) were then added and incubated for 4 h
at 4 °C on a rotating wheel. After incubation supernatants were
collected, and the beads washed four times with 0.4 ml of
immunoprecipitation buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.8, 150 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 0.1% Tween 20, 1 mM
PMSF, 2 µM E64, 2 µM/ml chymostatin). Input
material, supernatants, and beads were directly assayed for HAT
activity using free histones as a substrate.
Properties of the Yeast HAT A2 Complex--
We have previously
isolated from S. cerevisiae a Gcn5p-containing histone
acetyltransferase complex termed HAT A2 (28). In these studies the
molecular mass of HAT A2 was found to be ~170 kDa when determined by
sucrose density gradient ultracentrifugation (28), consistent with our
observation that HAT A2 sediments more slowly than the globular
~200-kDa nucleosome core particle (see Fig. 5C). However,
analysis by either standard exclusion chromatography on Sephacryl S-300
HR (Fig. 1A), or by fast
protein liquid chromatography on a Superdex 200 HR 10/30 column (data not shown), reproducibly yielded an apparent molecular mass for HAT A2
of ~480 kDa. Note that the position of the HAT A2 complex was
monitored by both liquid HAT assays (Fig. 1A) and by its
distinct acetylation pattern of exogeneously added free histones as
determined by fluorography (Fig. 1B). Since gel filtration
and sedimentation should give the same results for globular
macromolecules, these findings strongly suggest that the shape of HAT
A2 is asymmetric. Consequently, the actual molecular mass of HAT A2
probably lies somewhere between 200 and 500 kDa. Most importantly for
the interpretation of the results shown below, these data demonstrate
that HAT A2 is significantly smaller than the ~800-kDa ADA and
~1.8-mDa SAGA complexes.
The subunit composition of the HAT A2 complex, which had not been
determined in earlier studies (28), is shown in Fig. 1. Western blots
of the column fractions from Fig. 1A indicate that Ada2p and Gcn5p
(Fig. 1C) are present in the HAT A2 complex (fractions 25-27 from the gel filtration column). The finding that extracts from
a yeast ADA3 deletion strain lacked the HAT A2 complex (data not shown) suggests that Ada3p also is a component of HAT A2, and is
required for structural integrity of the complex. These observations
are consistent with the strong genetic, physical, and functional
association of Ada2p and Ada3p observed by others (11, 31-33), and the
findings that Ada2p and Ada3p are present in all yeast Gcn5p-containing
HAT complexes isolated to date (8, 9). Certain TAFs and Spts are unique
to the 1.8-mDa SAGA complex (8, 9). Western analysis of the HAT A2
fractions using antibodies against TAF 60 and 68 and Spt 7 and 20 (Fig.
1C) indicate that these proteins are not components of HAT
A2. A protein unique to the 0.8-mDa ADA complex is Ahc1 (14). Neither
an immunoprecipitation assay (Fig. 1D) nor Western blotting
(data not shown) detected Ahc1 in the HAT A2 complex. Moreover, unlike
what was observed for the ADA3 mutant, HAT A2 was present in
extracts from an AHC1 deletion strain (data not shown). In
summary, our results indicate that HAT A2 is a unique HAT A complex
that contains Ada2p, Ada3p, and Gcn5p, but is smaller and lacks several
types of proteins unique to the ADA and SAGA complexes.
Substrate Utilization by the HAT A2 Complex--
The pattern of
acetylation of free histones and nucleosomal substrates by HAT A2
obtained over a 80-min reaction period is shown in Fig.
2A. HAT A2 polyacetylated free
histone H3 and to a lesser extent free H4 and H2A (Fig. 2B).
In terms of nucleosomal substrates, HAT A2 polyacetylated the H3 N
termini of nucleosomal arrays and nucleosome core particles extensively
and to an equal extent (Fig. 2A). However, unlike the case
for free histones, HAT A2 moderately acetylated nucleosomal H2B, only
very weakly acetylated nucleosomal H4, and did not acetylate
nucleosomal H2A (Fig. 2A). The former observation is
consistent with recent results obtained with the ADA and SAGA complexes
(10, 14), whereas the latter observations are unique to these studies.
The pattern of acetylation of free and nucleosomal histones by HAT A2
in 1-2 mM MgCl2 was the same as that observed
in low salt DB buffer (data not shown), indicating that HAT A2
acetylation of nucleosomal arrays occurs equally well under conditions
that promote extensive array folding (22). Importantly, the pattern of
acetylation of nucleosomal substrates by HAT A2 (Fig. 2A) is
distinctly different than that observed previously for rGcn5p (Ref. 26;
see Fig. 2B). Particularly, although rGcn5p can strongly
polyacetylate free histone H3 and acetylate free H4 to a lesser extent
(Fig. 2B, lane 2), the enzyme in its
free form only is able to monoacetylate the H3 N termini nucleosomal
substrates (Fig. 2B, lane 3).
Interaction of HAT A2 with Nucleosomal Arrays--
The molecular
basis for the different acetylation patterns of nucleosomal substrates
and free histones by HAT A2 and free Gcn5p (Fig. 2) is unknown. To
determine whether HAT A2 and free Gcn5p interact differently with
nucleosomal arrays, which is consistent with the proposed functions of
HAT A complexes (8, 9, 34, 35), HAT A2 and rGcn5p were incubated with
12-mer nucleosomal arrays for 30 min, followed by ultracentrifugation
for 14 h in linear 10-30% sucrose density gradients. The same
buffer DB used to obtain the substrate specificity results (Fig.
2A) also was used for the HAT A2-nucleosomal array
incubations and the sucrose density gradients. The
A260 of each gradient fraction was measured to
determine the position of nucleosomal arrays, whereas the HAT A2
position was identified by adding exogenous free histones to each
fraction and performing liquid HAT assays. The position of HAT A2 in
all cases was verified by fluorography of SDS gels of portions of each
HAT assay (as in Fig. 1B). The HAT activity and A260 gradient elution peaks were then normalized
to equal heights and plotted on the same graph to obtain information
about the relative strength and stability of HAT A2-nucleosomal
substrate interactions (36).
Fig. 3 shows the representative elution
profiles obtained after sedimentation of 12-mer nucleosomal arrays
alone, HAT A2 alone, and HAT A2/nucleosomal array mixtures. The 12-mer
nucleosomal array peak eluted in fraction 10 (Fig. 3A),
whereas the HAT A2 peak eluted in fraction 18 (Fig. 3B).
After mixing nucleosomal arrays and HAT A2 for 30 min in the absence of
acetyl-CoA, the nucleosomal array peak and the major peak of HAT A2
activity co-eluted in fraction 9 (Fig. 3C). These results
demonstrate that HAT A2 binds to nucleosomal arrays. Identical elution
profiles were obtained when HAT A2 and nucleosomal arrays were
incubated in the presence of 40 µM acetyl-CoA (Fig.
3D), indicating that HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions
remained stable after acetylation of endogenous nucleosomal histones by
HAT A2 during the 30-min incubation period. The very small but
reproducible peak present in fraction 18 (Fig. 3, C and
D) represents the amount of unbound HAT A2 present at the
start of centrifugation, and in all cases consisted of <3% of the
total HAT A2 activity detected under these binding conditions. Finally,
overexposure of the fluorograms of the HAT assays revealed that only a
very small amount of "trailing" HAT A2 activity (<5-10% of the
total) could be detected in fractions 12-18 (data not shown), indicating that very little HAT A2 dissociated from the nucleosomal arrays during the course of the sucrose density gradient
experiments.
To determine the extent to which free rGcn5p was able to interact with
nucleosomal arrays, we sedimented a mixture of rGcn5p and 12-mer
nucleosomal arrays in DB buffer ± 2 mM
MgCl2 and 40 µM acetyl-CoA, the optimal
conditions for monoacetylation of the H3 N termini of nucleosomal
arrays by rGcn5p (25). The broader nucleosomal array gradient profile
and the faster sedimenting peak seen in 2 mM
MgCl2 (Fig. 4A)
compared with DB (Fig. 3A) reflect the extensive folding of
the nucleosomal arrays in 2 mM MgCl2 (22, 37,
38). Importantly, in distinct contrast to the HAT A2 complex, mixtures
of rGcn5p and nucleosomal arrays (Fig. 4C) resolved into
separate HAT activity and A260 peaks
characteristic of free enzyme (Fig. 4B) and nucleosomal
arrays (Fig. 4A), respectively. Thus, rGcn5p was not able to
form a stable complex with 12-mer nucleosomal arrays, despite being
able to utilize these arrays as a substrate for acetylation. Note that
the nucleosomal array binding properties of both free rGcn5p and HAT A2
were independent of the folded state of the array; rGcn5p was not able
to bind to nucleosomal arrays in DB buffer (where the arrays are
unfolded), whereas HAT A2 bound strongly to extensively folded
nucleosomal arrays in 2 mM MgCl2 (data not
shown). Detailed investigations of the effects of monovalent cations
and salt concentration on the stability of HAT A2-nucleosomal array
interactions are in progress.
Macromolecular Determinants of HAT A2-Nucleosomal Array
Interactions--
To better define which constituents of the
nucleosomal array (e.g. core histone N termini, linker DNA)
were responsible for stable interactions with HAT A2, sucrose density
gradients initially were used to analyze mixtures of HAT A2 and 12-mer
rDNA templates assembled with either trypsinized histone octamers (Fig.
5A) or H3/H4 tetramers (Fig.
5B). The A260 and HAT activity
profiles in both cases overlapped precisely and closely resembled the
profiles observed for intact nucleosomal arrays (Fig. 3, C
and D). The level of trailing HAT activity in peaks 12-18
in all cases remained very low (data not shown), and were
indistinguishable from the amounts seen with intact nucleosomal arrays.
Thus, neither the core histone N termini nor H2A/H2B dimers were
required for stable HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions. Note that
the relative difference in the gradient fraction peaks of the intact
(peak 10), trypsinized (peak 12), and H3/H4 tetramer arrays (peak 13) in DB (Figs. 3 and 4) mimic previously observed differences in the
actual sedimentation coefficients of these same arrays in low salt as
measured by analytical ultracentrifugation (22, 37, 39).
To determine whether nucleosomal subunits and(or) linker DNA were
involved in stabilizing HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions, we next
characterized the ability of HAT A2 to interact with nucleosome core
particles. Despite lacking any extranucleosomal DNA, the A260 and HAT activity profiles of mixtures of
nucleosome core particles and HAT A2 (Fig. 5C) overlapped
precisely, and the peak was shifted to a lower fraction number relative
to the peak migration of the free constituents. The same result also
was observed in linear 5-18% gradients (data not shown). These data
suggest that HAT A2 binds to the nucleosomal subunits of nucleosomal
arrays rather than linker DNA. Further support for this conclusion
comes from the observation that HAT A2 acetylates nucleosome core
particles (which lack linker DNA) and 12-mer nucleosomal arrays (which
contain 12 stretches of linker DNA) identically (Fig. 2A).
We also used the sucrose density gradient approach to analyze HAT A2
interactions with linear 208-12 DNA, linear pUC18 DNA, and supercoiled
pUC18 DNA. Incubations with linear 208-12 DNA (Fig. 5D) and
both types of pUC DNAs (data not shown) yielded overlapping
A260 and HAT activity profiles similar to those
obtained for nucleosomal arrays. However, more HAT A2 activity appeared
to be present in the trailing fractions than was observed for any of
the nucleosomal templates (data not shown). Thus, HAT A2 interacts with
naked DNA, albeit with a reduced relative affinity compared with
nucleosomal arrays.
Our studies have characterized in detail the interaction of
purified yeast HAT A2 complex with nucleosomal arrays. The primary technical approach used, sucrose density gradient ultracentrifugation, provides rigorous information about the relative strength and stability
of macromolecular interactions (36). A major finding of this work is
that only the HAT A2 complex binds stably to nucleosomal arrays under
conditions where nucleosomal arrays efficiently are acetylated by both
free Gcn5p and HAT A2. The evidence for stable HAT A2-nucleosomal array
interactions is as follows. First, only 1-3% of the HAT A2 is not
bound after a 30-min incubation with length-defined 12-mer nucleosomal
arrays. These incubations were performed in the presence of a
significant molar excess of nucleosomal arrays, mimicking the situation
encountered by HAT A2 in vivo. Second, ~90% of the HAT A2
precisely co-elutes with the nucleosomal arrays after 14 h of
sedimentation. Finally, very little (~5-10%) of the bound HAT A2
dissociates from the nucleosomal arrays during the course of the long
sucrose density gradient experiment. Functionally important
ramifications of the stable HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions
observed in these studies are discussed below.
Insight into the determinants of HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions
also has been obtained. Stable binding is not dependent on whether HAT
A2 is catalytically active during incubation with nucleosomal arrays
(Fig. 3, compare C and D), or whether the
nucleosomal arrays are folded or unfolded (data not shown). In
addition, the stability of the interactions is not substantially
influenced when either the core histone N termini or H2A/H2B dimers are
removed from the nucleosomal array (Fig. 5, A and
B). The former observation is of particular importance in
that it indicates that interaction of the N termini with the Gcn5p
component of HAT A2 provides no detectable stabilization of HAT
A2-nucleosomal array interactions, either prior to or during catalysis.
HAT A2 appears to interact as stably with nucleosome core particles
(Fig. 5C) as with nucleosomal arrays (Fig. 3), and also
acetylates core particles and arrays identically (Fig. 2).
Collectively, these observations suggest that HAT A2 interacts with the
nucleosomal subunits of nucleosomal arrays. Further, the finding that
HAT A2 binds to linear (Fig. 5D) and supercoiled naked DNAs
with reduced affinity relative to nucleosomal arrays suggests that both
nucleosomal DNA and structured domain(s) of the histone octamer may
mediate interactions with HAT A2.
Several Gcn5p-containing HAT A complexes have been isolated to date,
including HAT A2, ADA, and SAGA (8, 9, 34, 35). Our compositional
analyses and substrate specificity data suggest that HAT A2 may be the
"core" enzymatic complex for this family of histone
acetyltransferases. The physically smaller HAT A2 complex (Fig.
1A) contains Gcn5p, Ada2p, and Ada3p, but does possess
proteins specific to SAGA (e.g. Spts 7 and 20, TAFs 60 and
68), or ADA (e.g. Ahc1). Nevertheless, HAT A2 exhibits the
same distinctive enzymatic properties of the SAGA and ADA complexes
(10, 14, 40, 41). Specifically, HAT A2 strongly polyacetylates histone H3 and, to a lesser extent, the H2B and H4 N termini of nucleosomal substrates. Thus, the functions of proteins specific to ADA and SAGA
clearly are not related to modification of the catalytic activity of
Gcn5p within the HAT complexes. Instead, they most likely involve
targeting of HAT complexes to specific locations in the genome, and
physical linkage of the complexes with components of the
transcriptional machinery at these genomic sites (discussed further
below). The steric accessibility of the various core histone N termini
to HAT A2 will be altered when HAT A2 is stably bound to nucleosomal
substrates compared with when histones are free in solution (see Ref.
5, and references therein). This likely explains why HAT A2 can
acetylate nucleosomal but not free H2B, and why HAT A2 only very weakly
acetylates nucleosomal H4 and cannot acetylate nucleosomal
H2A despite acetylating these histones when they are free (Fig. 2A). It
is worth noting that none of the known individual components of HAT A2
(i.e. Gcn5p, Ada2p, Ada3p) are chromatin- or DNA-binding
proteins. Thus, the ability of HAT A2 to interact with nucleosomal
arrays either originates from undefined HAT A2 subunits, or from the
establishment of a complex-specific nucleosomal array binding domain
during HAT A2 assembly. Finally, although it has yet to be tested, we
suspect from their biological functions that ADA and SAGA also will
bind nucleosomal arrays stably (see below).
There is strong genetic (11, 17) and biochemical (19) evidence that the
function of Gcn5p-containing HAT A complexes involves localized
acetylation of a relatively small number of nucleosomes
(i.e. ~6 or less) at specific gene loci. The fact that the
HAT A2 complex can bind strongly to the nucleosomal subunits of
nucleosomal arrays is consistent with a localized function for
Gcn5p-containing multisubunit complexes during gene expression. This
observation also provides a mechanistic basis for understanding how
such HAT complexes are able to acetylate only a relatively small region
of chromatin, i.e. proteins that are not components of HAT
A2 are likely to play a key role in targeting of HAT complexes to
specific genetic loci as discussed above. Once targeted to the desired
genomic region, the strong nucleosomal array binding capabilities
should favor maintenance of a localized specific steady-state
acetylation pattern, even under dynamic acetylation and deacetylation
conditions. As has been proposed recently, the resulting pattern of
acetylation (and other concurrent post-translational modifications)
either may alter the structure of the N termini (5) and/or provide a
specific recognition domain (6), in either case establishing a histone
"code" that serves to attract other functional macromolecules to
the specific region of chromatin (6).
Although our findings are consistent with a role of HAT complexes in
localized acetylation, they argue against the involvement of these HAT
complexes in global, genome-wide acetylation. It recently has been
demonstrated that non-synchronized S. cerevisiae cells in
log growth phase have an average steady-state level of acetylation
throughout the entire genome of ~13 acetates/nucleosome (20).
Although there will be microheterogeneity in these levels that
fluctuate with the cell cycle (18), the studies of Waterborg (20)
ultimately indicate that much of the S. cerevisiae genome contains at least 13 acetates/nucleosome throughout most of the cell
cycle at steady-state. The function of this high level of global
acetylation, as well as analogous global modifications in vertebrates
(e.g. Refs. 42-44), presumably is linked in part to
acetylation-induced nucleosomal array decondensation (45-47) and
subsequent enhancement of the biological activity of the array (46).
However, in contrast to their role in localized gene expression, the
function of the HAT A enzymes in maintaining global acetylation is
unknown. The finding that the HAT A2 binds stably to nucleosomal arrays
suggests that HAT A complexes may be incapable of maintaining the high
levels of global acetylation present in vivo,
i.e. there are not enough HAT complexes in the cell to
acetylate the entire genome presuming that they remain locally bound.
However, free Gcn5p can acetylate the H3 N termini of
nucleosomal arrays (Fig. 2B; Ref. 26) in the absence of
stable nucleosomal array interactions (Fig. 4). Thus, it seems likely
that either the free HAT enzymes themselves, or some fundamentally
different type of non-genome binding HAT complex, must be involved in
global acetylation events. In this regard, Krebs et al. (18)
have shown that global monoacetylation of H3 by Gcn5p increases
dramatically during S phase. Additionally, there is now evidence that
some HAT A complexes may function locally whereas others function more
globally (19). Finally, it should be emphasized that, despite much
recent progress, many key questions remain unanswered regarding the
molecular and structural basis for the actions of HATs and their
complexes in those situations where dynamic global or local core
histone acetylation is linked to alteration of biological function.
We are indebted to Drs. S. Berger, J. Workman, C. Peterson, and F. Winston for supplying us with antibodies
and to C. Peterson for critically evaluating the manuscript.
*
This work was supported by Grant PB98-1456 from
Dirección General de Ens
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
210-567-6980; Fax: 210-567-6595; E-mail:
hansen@bioc02.uthscsa.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 23, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M003783200
The abbreviations used are:
HAT, histone
acetyltransferase;
TAU, Triton X-100/acetic acid/urea;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
PMSF, phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride;
E64, trans-epoxysuccinyl-L-leucylamido-(4-guanidino)butane;
TAF, TATA-associated factor.
The Yeast Histone Acetyltransferase A2 Complex, but Not Free
Gcn5p, Binds Stably to Nucleosomal Arrays*
,
Departament de Bioquímica i Biologia
Molecular, Universitat de València, E-46100 València, Spain
and the § Department of Biochemistry, University of Texas
Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas 78284
![]()
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
cells using the Maxi plasmid purification kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's
instructions. Linearized pUC18 plasmid was obtained by BamHI
endonuclease digestion of the supercoiled plasmid for 3 h at
37 °C with 2 units/µg DNA. All chemicals were of reagent grade.
1, his3-
200,
hat2::TRP1, hat1::kan MX3), which lacks
cytoplasmic HAT B and nuclear HAT A3 enzymes (see Ref. 27), was used to purify the HAT A2 complex. Eight-liter batches of BQS241 cells were
grown to exponential phase at 28 °C in liquid YPD medium (1% yeast
extract, 2% peptone, 2% glucose), harvested by centrifugation, and
spheroplasted by Zymolase digestion as described (28). Crude extracts
were obtained by the salt dissociation/ultracentrifugation method used
previously (28) with the following modifications. Spheroplasts were
lysed in buffer containing 75 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 0.25 mM EDTA, 5 mM MgCl2, 10 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, 0.05% (v/v) Tween 20, and the
protease inhibitors PMSF (1 mM),
trans-epoxysuccinyl-L-leucylamido-(4-guanidino)butane (E64) (2 µM), and chymostatin (2 µg/ml), and
homogenized with 10 strokes in a motor-driven Potter-Elvehjem
homogenizer. This and all subsequent steps were performed at 4 °C.
The homogenate was centrifuged for 1 h at 100,000 × g, the supernatant discarded, and the pellet containing
crude chromatin resuspended with a Potter-Elvehjem homogenizer in
buffer B (15 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.9, 0.25 mM EDTA, 5 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, 0.05% (v/v) Tween 20, 10% (v/v)
glycerol) containing 1 mM PMSF, 2 µM E64, 2 µg/ml chymostatin, and 0.5 M NaCl. The suspension was
stirred for 30 min and subsequently was centrifuged at 100,000 × g for 1 h. The resulting supernatant (~40 ml) was
saved and dialyzed against three changes of buffer B. The dialyzed
supernatant was made to 80 mM NaCl by addition of solid
NaCl, centrifuged for 20 min at 27,000 × g and loaded onto a Q-Sepharose FF (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) column (1.4 × 9 cm) equilibrated in buffer B + 80 mM NaCl. After washing
with five volumes of the same buffer, bound proteins were eluted with a
linear 80-380 mM NaCl gradient in buffer B (240 ml).
Fractions (8.5 ml) were collected and assayed for protein content
(A280) and histone acetyltransferase activity.
Peak HAT A2 fractions (identified by their histone specificity; see
Fig. 1, A and B), were pooled, dialyzed against
buffer B containing 120 mM NaCl and lacking glycerol, and
concentrated by ultrafiltration in an Amicon cell fitted with an YM30
membrane and operated under N2 pressure. The concentrate
was ultracentrifuged in a linear 5-18% (w/v) sucrose gradient in
glycerol-free buffer B + 120 mM NaCl. After sedimentation
at 190,000 × g for 16 h, the gradient was fractionated and assayed for HAT activity. Fractions containing the HAT
A2 complex were pooled and directly loaded onto a 2-ml Q-Sepharose FF
column equilibrated in buffer B + 120 mM NaCl. After
washing with the same buffer, proteins were eluted with a 120-280
mM NaCl gradient in buffer B (50 ml). HAT A2, which eluted
at ~210 mM NaCl, was then concentrated to 0.5 ml using an
Ultrafree concentrator (Mr cut-off: 30,000;
Millipore), and subsequently loaded onto a Sephacryl S-300 HR (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) size exclusion column (1 × 60 cm) equilibrated
with buffer B + 120 mM NaCl. The peak HAT A2 fractions were
pooled, dialyzed against buffer DB (15 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.8, 0.25 mM EDTA, 0.05% (v/v) Tween 20, 2.5 mM
dithiothreitol, 5% (v/v) glycerol), and concentrated to ~0.2 mg/ml
as before. Following addition of 1 µM E64, 1 µg/ml
chymostatin, and 2 µg/ml pepstatin A, the HAT A2 preparation was
divided into aliquots, frozen with liquid N2, and stored at
80 °C until use.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Characterization of the HAT A2 complex.
A, elution profile of HAT A2 from a Sephacryl S-300 HR gel
filtration column. Chromatography was performed as described under
"Experimental Procedures." Fractions (1 ml) were collected and
assayed for HAT activity as described under "Experimental
Procedures." The amount of 14C incorporated into histones
is indicated by the dashed line. Protein
concentration was monitored by A280, and is
indicated by the solid line. Arrows
indicate the positions of the markers used for the column calibration,
and their molecular mass in kDa. The void volume
(Vo) was measured with dextran blue (2.0 mDa).
B, acetylation of exogenously added free histones by
gel-filtration column fractions. The HAT assay was performed as
described under "Experimental Procedures." Shown are the SDS gel of
the HAT A2 sample fractionated in A after staining with
Coomassie Blue (upper panel), and the
corresponding fluorogram (bottom panel).
C, Western blot analysis of the composition of HAT A2.
Indicated fractions from the Sephacryl S-300 chromatography column
shown in A were electrophoresed and transferred onto
nitrocellulose membranes, and blots were incubated with antibodies
(
) against the indicated proteins as described under "Experimental
Procedures." D, immunoprecipitation assay for Ahc1.
Indicated fractions from the Sephacryl S-300 column shown in
A was incubated with anti-Ada2p, Ahc1, or non-immune
antisera. Protein A-Sepharose beads were then added, and the mixtures
were incubated for 4 h at 4 °C. Input material, supernatants
(S), and beads (B) were directly assayed for HAT
activity using free core histones as described under "Experimental
Procedures." After histone separation by SDS-PAGE, the gel was
subsequently fluorographed. The Coomassie Blue-stained gel
(upper panel) and corresponding fluorogram
(lower panel) are shown.

View larger version (50K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Substrate utilization by HAT A2.
A, TAU-PAGE of acetylated substrates. HAT activity assays
were carried out with HAT A2 as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Reactions were stopped at t = 0, 40, and
80 min, histone species resolved by TAU-PAGE, and the gel subsequently
stained with Coomassie Blue and subjected to fluorography. Only the
fluorogram is shown. The position of histones and their acetylated
isoforms was determined from the Coomassie Blue-stained gel.
B, schematic illustration of the substrate utilization by
free rGcn5p. The diagram shows the TAU-PAGE acetylation pattern
produced by rGcn5p for free histones (lane 2) and
nucleosomal arrays (lane 3). Lane
1 schematically indicates the typical acetylation pattern of
chicken erythrocyte core histones after resolution by TAU-PAGE.
See Ref. 26.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Analysis of HAT A2-nucleosomal array
interactions by sucrose density gradient ultracentrifugation.
A, sedimentation profile of 208-12 nucleosomal arrays. Free
208-12 nucleosomal arrays were sedimented on linear 10-30% sucrose
density gradients as described under "Experimental Procedures."
After sedimentation, gradients were fractionated from bottom to top,
and the absorbance at 260 nm of each fraction was determined
(solid line). B, sucrose density
gradient profile of free HAT A2. Isolated HAT A2 complex was
centrifuged and fractionated as described in A. Fractions
(0.54 ml) were collected. The solid line
indicates the absorption profile at 280 nm. HAT activity
(dashed line) was measured using the standard
assay as described under "Experimental Procedures." C,
sedimentation profile of a mixture of HAT A2 and 12-mer nucleosomal
arrays in the absence of acetyl-CoA. Isolated HAT A2 was mixed with
208-12 nucleosomal arrays in the absence of acetyl-CoA, followed by
ultracentrifugation and gradient fractionation as described in part 3A.
The position of the nucleosomal arrays in the gradient was determined
from the absorption of each column fraction at 260 nm (solid
line). The position of HAT A2 was determined by standard HAT
assays (dashed line). D, sedimentation
profile of a mixture of HAT A2 and 12-mer nucleosomal arrays in the
presence of acetyl-CoA. The same experiment as in C was
performed, except that the incubations occurred in the presence of
acetyl-CoA (40 µM).

View larger version (14K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Sedimentation analysis of rGcn5p-nucleosomal
array interactions. A, sucrose density gradient profile
of free 208-12 nucleosomal arrays in DB buffer + 2 mM
MgCl2. B, sucrose density gradient profile of
free rGcn5p in DB buffer + 2 mM MgCl2.
C, sucrose density gradient profile of a mixture of 208-12 nucleosomal arrays and rGcn5p in DB buffer + 2 mM
MgCl2. The sucrose concentration of the gradients,
ultracentrifugation conditions, gradient fractionation, HAT assay, and
graph symbols are the same as in Fig. 3.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Characterization of macromolecular
determinants of HAT A2-nucleosomal array interactions. Sucrose
density gradient profiles of mixtures of HAT A2 complex and 12-mer
trypsinized nucleosomal arrays (A), 12-mer H3/H4 tetramer
arrays (B), nucleosome core particles (C), and
naked 208-12 rDNA (D). The sucrose concentration of the
gradients, ultracentrifugation conditions, gradient fractionation, HAT
assay, and graph symbols are the same as in Fig. 3. Arrows
at the top of the panels indicate the gradient profile peaks
of the free HAT A2 complex (large black arrow) and the free
nucleosomal substrates or naked DNA (small gray arrow) after
ultracentrifugation under identical conditions.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
nanza Superior (Spain) and
National Institutes of Health Grant GM45916 (to J. C. H.).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.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Davie, J. R.,
and Hendzel, M. J.
(1994)
J. Cell. Biochem.
55,
98-105
2.
Davie, J. R.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
8,
173-178
3.
Kuo, M. H.,
and Allis, C. D.
(1998)
BioEssays
20,
615-626
4.
Grunstein, M.
(1997)
Nature
389,
349-352
5.
Hansen, J. C.,
Tse, C.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
17637-17641
6.
Strahl, B. D.,
and Allis, C. D.
(2000)
Nature
403,
41-45
7.
Brownell, J. E.,
Zhou, J.,
Ranalli, T.,
Kobayashi, R.,
Edmondson, D. G.,
Roth, S. Y.,
and Allis, C. D.
(1996)
Cell
84,
843-851
8.
Grant, P. A.,
Sterner, D. E.,
Duggan, L. J.,
Workman, J. L.,
and Berger, S. L.
(1998)
Trends Cell Biol.
8,
193-197
9.
Grant, P. A.,
and Berger, S. L.
(1999)
Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.
10,
169-177
10.
Grant, P. A.,
Duggan, L.,
Cote, J.,
Roberts, S. M.,
Brownell, J. E.,
Candau, R.,
Ohba, R.,
Owen-Hughes, T.,
Allis, C. D.,
Winston, F.,
Berger, S. L.,
and Workman, J. L.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
1640-1650
11.
Pollard, K. J.,
and Peterson, C. L.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
6212-6222
12.
Candau, R.,
Zhou, J. X.,
Allis, C. D.,
and Berger, S. L.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
555-565
13.
Marcus, G. A.,
Silverman, N.,
Berger, S. L.,
Horiuchi, J.,
and Guarente, L.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
4807-4815
14.
Eberharter, A.,
Sterner, D. E.,
Schieltz, D.,
Hassan, A.,
Yates, J. R., III,
Berger, S. L.,
and Workman, J. L.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
6621-6631
15.
Roberts, S. M.,
and Winston, F.
(1997)
Genetics
147,
451-465
16.
Grant, P. A.,
Schieltz, D.,
Pray-Grant, M. G.,
Steger, D. J.,
Reese, J. C.,
Yates, J. R., III,
and Workman, J. L.
(1998)
Cell
94,
45-53
17.
Kuo, M. H.,
Zhou, J.,
Jambeck, P.,
Churchill, M. E.,
and Allis, C. D.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
627-639
18.
Krebs, J. E.,
Kuo, M. H.,
Allis, C. D.,
and Peterson, C. L.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
1412-1421
19.
Vignali, M.,
Steger, D. J.,
Neely, K. E.,
and Workman, J. L.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
2629-2640
20.
Waterborg, J. H.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
13007-13011
21.
Johns, E. W.
(1977)
Methods Cell Biol.
16,
183-203
22.
Schwarz, P. M.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
16284-16289
23.
Yager, T. D.,
and van Holde, K. E.
(1984)
J. Biol. Chem.
259,
4212-4222
24.
Simpson, R. T.,
Thoma, F.,
and Brubaker, J. M.
(1985)
Cell
42,
799-808
25.
Hansen, J. C.,
and Lohr, D.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
5840-5848
26.
Tse, C.,
Ruiz-Garcia, A. B,
Georgieva, E. I.,
Sendra, R.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
32388-32392
27.
Ruiz-García, A. B.,
Sendra, R.,
Galiana, M.,
Pamblanco, M.,
Pérez-Ortín, J. E.,
and Tordera, V.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
12599-12605
28.
Ruiz-Garcia, A. B.,
Sendra, R.,
Pamblanco, M.,
and Tordera, V.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
403,
186-190
29.
Bonner, W. M.,
West, M. H.,
and Stedman, J. D.
(1980)
Eur. J. Biochem.
109,
17-23
30.
Harlow, E., and Lane, D.
(eds)
(1988)
Antibodies: A Laboratory Manual
, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
31.
Candau, R.,
and Berger, S. L.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
5237-5245
32.
Horiuchi, J.,
Silverman, N.,
Marcus, G. A.,
and Guarente, L.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
1203-1209
33.
Saleh, A.,
Lang, V.,
Cook, R.,
and Brandl, C. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
5571-5578
34.
Davie, J. R.,
and Spencer, V. A.
(1999)
J. Cell. Biochem.
32/33,
141-148
35.
Berger, S. L.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
336-341
36.
Kegeles, G.,
and Cann, J. R.
(1978)
Methods Enzymol.
48,
248-270
37.
Tse, C.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1997)
Biochemistry
36,
11381-11388
38.
Carruthers, L. C.,
Bednar, J.,
Woodcock, C.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
14776-14787
39.
Tse, C.,
Fletcher, T. M.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
12169-12173
40.
Syntichaki, P.,
and Thireos, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
24414-24419
41.
Grant, P. A.,
Eberharter, A.,
John, S.,
Cook, R. G.,
Turner, B. M.,
and Workman, J. L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
5895-5900
42.
Hebbes, T. R.,
Thorne, A. W.,
Clayton, A. L.,
and Crane-Robinson, C.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
1017-1022
43.
Hebbes, T. R.,
Clayton, A. L.,
Thorne, A. W.,
and Crane-Robinson, C.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
1823-1830
44.
Keohane, A. M.,
Lavender, J. S.,
O'Neill, L. P.,
and Turner, B. M.
(1998)
Dev. Genet.
22,
65-73
45.
Garcia-Ramirez, M.,
Rocchini, C.,
and Ausio, J.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
17923-17928
46.
Tse, C.,
Sera, T.,
Wolffe, A. P.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
4629-4638
47.
Pollard, K.,
Samuels, M. L.,
Crowley, K. A.,
Hansen, J. C.,
and Peterson, C. P.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
5622-5633
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:
![]() |
A. Ciurciu, O. Komonyi, T. Pankotai, and I. M. Boros The Drosophila Histone Acetyltransferase Gcn5 and Transcriptional Adaptor Ada2a Are Involved in Nucleosomal Histone H4 Acetylation Mol. Cell. Biol., December 15, 2006; 26(24): 9413 - 9423. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Guelman, T. Suganuma, L. Florens, V. Weake, S. K. Swanson, M. P. Washburn, S. M. Abmayr, and J. L. Workman The Essential Gene wda Encodes a WD40 Repeat Subunit of Drosophila SAGA Required for Histone H3 Acetylation. Mol. Cell. Biol., October 1, 2006; 26(19): 7178 - 7189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. G. Rosenfeld, V. V. Lunyak, and C. K. Glass Sensors and signals: a coactivator/corepressor/epigenetic code for integrating signal-dependent programs of transcriptional response Genes & Dev., June 1, 2006; 20(11): 1405 - 1428. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. G. E. Martin, D. E. Grimes, K. Baetz, and L. Howe Methylation of Histone H3 Mediates the Association of the NuA3 Histone Acetyltransferase with Chromatin Mol. Cell. Biol., April 15, 2006; 26(8): 3018 - 3028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Q. Yu, J. Sandmeier, H. Xu, Y. Zou, and X. Bi Mechanism of the Long Range Anti-silencing Function of Targeted Histone Acetyltransferases in Yeast J. Biol. Chem., February 17, 2006; 281(7): 3980 - 3988. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Kimura, K. Matsubara, and M. Horikoshi A Decade of Histone Acetylation: Marking Eukaryotic Chromosomes with Specific Codes J. Biochem., December 1, 2005; 138(6): 647 - 662. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Pankotai, O. Komonyi, L. Bodai, Z. Ujfaludi, S. Muratoglu, A. Ciurciu, L. Tora, J. Szabad, and I. Boros The Homologous Drosophila Transcriptional Adaptors ADA2a and ADA2b Are both Required for Normal Development but Have Different Functions Mol. Cell. Biol., September 15, 2005; 25(18): 8215 - 8227. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X.-J. Yang The diverse superfamily of lysine acetyltransferases and their roles in leukemia and other diseases Nucleic Acids Res., February 11, 2004; 32(3): 959 - 976. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C.J. FRY, M.A. SHOGREN-KNAAK, and C.L. PETERSON Histone H3 Amino-Terminal Tail Phosphorylation and Acetylation: Synergistic or Independent Transcriptional Regulatory Marks? Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol, January 1, 2004; 69(0): 219 - 226. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. A. Boudreault, D. Cronier, W. Selleck, N. Lacoste, R. T. Utley, S. Allard, J. Savard, W. S. Lane, S. Tan, and J. Cote Yeast Enhancer of Polycomb defines global Esa1-dependent acetylation of chromatin Genes & Dev., June 1, 2003; 17(11): 1415 - 1428. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Kusch, S. Guelman, S. M. Abmayr, and J. L. Workman Two Drosophila Ada2 Homologues Function in Different Multiprotein Complexes Mol. Cell. Biol., May 1, 2003; 23(9): 3305 - 3319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Shogren-Knaak, C. J. Fry, and C. L. Peterson A Native Peptide Ligation Strategy for Deciphering Nucleosomal Histone Modifications J. Biol. Chem., April 25, 2003; 278(18): 15744 - 15748. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||