![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 37, 29061-29065, September 15, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, January 19, 2000, and in revised form, June 6, 2000
FNR is an Escherichia coli
transcription factor that activates gene expression in response to
anaerobiosis at a large number of promoters by making direct contacts
with RNA polymerase. At class II FNR-dependent promoters,
where the DNA site for FNR overlaps the Many bacterial gene regulatory proteins activate transcription by
making direct contact with RNA polymerase holoenzyme
(RNAP).1 A large number of
these activators contact RNAP via the C-terminal domain of the
The FNR protein is another global activator of gene expression in
E. coli, which regulates transcription initiation in
response to oxygen starvation (4, 5). FNR belongs to the same family of
transcription factors as CRP, and the two proteins have related amino
acid sequences (6). Although the high resolution structure of the FNR
protein has not been determined, several crystallographic structures
for CRP have been solved (7-9) and sequence alignments suggest that
FNR and CRP have similar three-dimensional structures (4, 6). Like CRP,
FNR regulates transcription as a dimer and recognizes a 22-base pair
binding sequence at target promoters. However, dimerization of FNR is
triggered by the anaerobic acquisition of a [4Fe-4S]2+
center in each FNR subunit (10-12). By analogy to CRP, during transcription initiation at FNR-dependent promoters it is
proposed that FNR interacts with the Most naturally occurring FNR-dependent promoters contain a
DNA site for FNR that overlaps the Plasmid Construction In Vivo Assays--
pFNR derivatives were transformed into
competent JRG1728 Overexpression and Purification of FNR* Derivatives--
As a
host background for the overexpression of the FNR* derivatives, the
strain M15 (derived from E. coli K12; supplied by QIAGEN)
carrying the plasmid pREP4 (derived from pACYC and encoding constitutively expressed LacI; supplied by QIAGEN) was used.
Cells were transformed with pQE60 derivatives encoding different
C-terminally His-tagged FNR* proteins, and transformants were grown at
37 °C in 100 ml of L-broth with appropriate antibiotics until
cultures reached an A600 of 0.5-0.6.
Overexpression of the His-tagged proteins was then induced by the
addition of 0.1 M
isopropyl-1-thio- In Vitro Transcription Assays--
To measure
FNR-dependent transcription initiation in vitro
we used the pSR plasmid described by Kolb et al. (21). The
test promoter, FF( DNase I and Potassium Permanganate Footprinting
Experiments--
Footprinting studies were performed on
32P-end-labeled PstI-HindIII
fragments containing the FF( Abortive Initiation Assays--
Template DNA was prepared by PCR
amplification of the FF( Heparin Challenge Experiments--
Template DNA was prepared by
PCR amplification of the FF( In Vivo Transcription Assays--
The starting point of this work
was the pFNR plasmid that encodes FNR. A derivative of pFNR, pFNR*,
encoding FNR with the D154A substitution, known to confer FNR activity
in the presence of oxygen (15), was constructed. The aim of this work
was to investigate the role of AR1 in transcription activation by FNR at class II promoters. Thus, three derivatives of pFNR* were
constructed that encoded alanine substitutions at either or both of the
key residues in AR1: pFNR* T118A, pFNR* S187A, and pFNR* T118A/S187A. To check that FNR* was able to function aerobically and to investigate the effects of the different AR1 substitutions when combined with D154A, transcription activation was measured in vivo at the
FF( Purification and Properties of FNR* and FNR* Carrying AR1
Substitutions--
To investigate the effects of substitutions in AR1
of FNR in vitro, His-tagged FNR*, FNR* T118A, FNR* S187A,
and FNR* T118A/S187A were purified from cell lysates using nickel
affinity chromatography. Typically, culture volumes of 100 ml yielded
300-400 mg of soluble protein, of which 20-25% was His-tagged FNR*
protein. Affinity chromatography yielded 2-8 mg of the different
His-tagged FNR* derivatives, and the protein preparations were
estimated to be 90% pure by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
All of the buffers used throughout this procedure contained 0.75 M NaNO3, which was found to improve the
solubility and stability of the FNR* proteins. After anaerobic
reconstitution by the method of Green et al. (20),
His-tagged FNR* and His-tagged FNR* T118A/S187A had optical spectra
indistinguishable from those of unaltered FNR. Assuming that all the
absorbance at 420 nm was because of the [4Fe-4S] form of FNR, the FNR
molar extinction co-efficient (E420 = 13,300 M In Vitro Transcription Assays--
In vitro
transcription assays were used to investigate the effects of different
substitutions in AR1 of FNR. Fig. 1 shows a typical result using the FF( DNase I and Potassium Permanganate Footprinting
Experiments--
To study open complex formation in the presence of
FNR* or FNR* carrying substitutions in AR1, we used DNase I and
potassium permanganate footprinting. Saturating amounts of FNR* or FNR* T118A/S187A (350 nM in both cases) and a range of RNAP
concentrations were used to form open complexes at the
FF(
Potassium permanganate footprints show the appearance of bands because
of unpaired thymine bases that result when the DNA duplex is unwound
near the transcript start point during open complex formation. The
results in Fig. 3A show that,
at FF( Abortive Initiation Assays--
The in vitro footprint
experiments at FF( Heparin Challenge Experiments--
The interpretation of abortive
initiation experiments relies on the formation of stable open
complexes. Thus, using heparin challenge experiments (as described in
Ref. 27), we have measured the stability of the
FNR-dependent open complexes at FF( Many bacterial transcription factors activate transcription by
making direct contact with the We thank Jon Bown, David Lee, Georgina Lloyd,
Virgil Rhodius, and Joseph Wade for many helpful discussions.
*
This work was funded by a Biotechnology and Biological
Science Research Council project Grant G06544.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Present address:
Harvard School of Public Health, 665 Huntington Ave., Dept. I.I.D., Bldg. 1, Rm. 902, Boston, MA 02115. Tel.: 617-432-3239; Fax:
617-432-3259; E-mail: hwing@hsph.harvard.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 8, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M000390200
The abbreviations used are:
RNAP, RNA
polymerase;
Role of Activating Region 1 of Escherichia coli
FNR Protein in Transcription Activation at Class II
Promoters*
§,
School of Biosciences, University of
Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom and
the ¶ Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology,
University of Sheffield, Firth Court, Western Bank,
Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
35 element, activating region
1 of FNR is proposed to interact with the C-terminal domain of the RNA
polymerase
-subunit. Using a model class II
FNR-dependent promoter, FF(
41.5),
we have performed in vivo and in vitro
experiments to investigate the role of this interaction. Our results
show that FNR, carrying substitutions in activating region 1, is
compromised in its ability to promote open complex formation and thus
to activate transcription. Abortive initiation assays were used to
assess the contribution of activating region 1 of FNR to open complex
formation. A new method for the purification of the FNR protein is also described.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-subunit (
CTD) (1). One of the best studied examples of this type
of activator is the Escherichia coli cAMP receptor protein,
CRP (reviewed in Refs. 2 and 3). In response to glucose starvation, CRP
is triggered by cAMP and activates transcription initiation at more
than 100 different promoters. In its active form, CRP binds as a dimer
to specific DNA sequences found at target promoters; the consensus site
is a 22-base pair sequence that is organized as an 11-base pair
inverted repeat. At CRP-dependent promoters, CRP activates
transcription by making several direct contacts with RNAP. One of these
contacts involves the interaction of a single surface-exposed
-turn
of CRP (residues 156-164) with
CTD. This region in CRP is known as
activating region 1 (AR1). The role of AR1 of CRP is to enhance open
complex formation at target promoters simply by increasing the initial binding of RNAP (reviewed in Ref. 2).
CTD of RNAP. Genetic analysis
suggests that the amino acid side chains involved in this interaction
are located in three adjacent surface-exposed loops, residues 71-75, 116-121, and 184-192 (13). These loops form an extended surface of
FNR, also known as AR1, which is much larger than AR1 of CRP (although
AR1 of FNR and CRP do overlap, the 184-192 loop of FNR is equivalent
to the
-turn containing residues 156-164 in CRP). The key residues
in AR1 of FNR, which are likely to provide the crucial side chains for
the FNR-
CTD interaction, were identified as
Thr118 and Ser187 (alanine substitutions
at these positions reduce transcription activation by FNR) (13).
35 element (promoters organized in
this way are known as class II promoters) (5). Previous studies with
class II FNR-dependent promoters showed that AR1 of FNR is
functional on the upstream subunit of the FNR dimer, and thus it is
this subunit that is thought to contact
CTD (14). The aim of this
work was to investigate the role of AR1 of FNR during transcription
activation using in vitro approaches with the model class II
FNR-dependent promoter, FF(-41.5)
(described in Ref. 14). To study the FNR protein under aerobic
conditions in vitro, the D154A variant of FNR
(denoted FNR*) (15) was used. The D154A substitution stabilizes FNR in
its active dimeric form, thereby relieving the need for the
[4Fe-4S]2+ center (16). Our results show that, as for
CRP, substitutions in AR1 of FNR cause clear defects in open complex
formation. Kinetic analysis suggests that AR1 of FNR is involved in
promoting isomerization from the transcriptionally inactive closed
complex to the transcriptionally active open complex.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
--
pFNR T118A/S187A was constructed by
site-directed mutagenesis using PCR with pFNR T118A as template DNA
(13). pFNR derivatives encoding FNR*, FNR* T118A, FNR* S187A, and FNR*
T118A/S187A were also constructed by PCR using pFNR, pFNR T118A, pFNR
S187A, and pFNR T118A/S187A, respectively, as templates. PCR products
from these reactions were cut with BamHI and
HindIII, and the resulting fragments were cloned into
purified BamHI-HindIII vector from pFNR. The
NcoI and BglII restriction sites, which were used
to clone the different fnr derivatives into the pQE60
C-terminal His tag overexpression vector (supplied by QIAGEN), were
created by PCR. The resulting DNA was cut with NcoI and
BglII, and fragments were cloned into the purified
NcoI-BglII vector from pQE60 so that the
fnr gene and the C-terminal His tag were in frame.
lac
fnr cells (17)
containing the
FF(
41.5)::lacZ fusion
carried by the plasmid, pRW50 (described in Ref. 18). Transformants were grown either aerobically or anaerobically at 37 °C in L-broth supplemented with final concentrations of 0.4% (v/v) glucose, 80 µg/ml ampicillin, and 35 µg/ml tetracycline.
-Galactosidase levels were determined using the Miller protocol (19) to quantify transcription from the FF(
41.5) promoter.
-D-galactopyranoside for 1 h.
Cells were harvested, and pellets were sonicated in 10 ml of lysis
buffer at 4 °C (1 mg/ml lysozyme, 50 mM
NaH2PO4/Na2HPO4, pH
8.0, 0.75 M NaNO3, 10 mM imidazole,
10 mM benzamidine). Sonicates were centrifuged at
10,000 × g, and the amount of each His-tagged FNR*
derivative was estimated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Supernatants were applied to nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid-agarose (supplied by QIAGEN) columns at 4 °C so that the binding capacity of
the agarose (5-10 mg/ml) was exceeded (typical column volumes were
0.75-1.0 ml). Columns were then washed with 50 column volumes of wash
buffer (50 mM
NaH2PO4/Na2HPO4, pH
8.0, 0.75 M NaNO3, 20 mM
imidazole), and FNR* derivatives were eluted using elution buffer (50 mM
NaH2PO4/Na2HPO4, pH
8.0, 0.75 M NaNO3, 250 mM
imidazole). Proteins were stored at 4 °C in elution buffer where
they remained stable for up to 6 months. Iron-sulfur clusters were
assembled in anaerobic samples of purified FNR* proteins as described
previously (20). The [4Fe-4S]2+ contents of the
reconstituted proteins were monitored by scanning the reconstitution
reactions between 240 and 900 nm. The spectra were typical of those
obtained with wild-type FNR. When reconstitutions were judged to be
complete, the absorbance at 420 nm was measured, and the [4Fe-4S]
cluster content was calculated using E420 = 13,300 M
1 cm
1 (20). As the His-tagged
FNR* preparations were found to be fully functional (see "Results"
below), the hexa-His tag was not removed from the FNR* preparations
used in this work.
41.5), was cloned into this
plasmid upstream of the
oop terminator, so that
transcripts initiating at FF(
41.5) would be a
discrete length. The protocol used was based on that described in (22):
binding reactions (12 µl of final volume) contained 5 nM
FF(
41.5)/pSR, 25 nM RNAP (supplied
by Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and 500 nM of each
FNR derivative. Labeled RNA products were separated on a 6% denaturing
polyacrylamide gel and quantified using a Molecular Dynamics
PhosphorImager and the software ImageQuant, v3.3.
41.5) promoter, using
the protocols described in Ref. 23. Each reaction contained a final
concentration of 4 nM template DNA, 1.75 µM
FNR* or FNR* derivative, and 250-500 nM RNAP (supplied by
Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). The binding buffer used in these reactions
contained 20 mM Hepes, pH 8.0, 5 mM
MgCl2, 50 mM potassium glutamate, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 30 µg/ml herring sperm DNA, and 500 µg/ml bovine serum albumin. The RNAP concentration was lowered to
100-350 nM in the potassium permanganate footprints
because of the sensitivity of this assay. Footprinting gels were
calibrated with Maxam-Gilbert "A+G" sequencing reactions of the
labeled fragments and quantified using a Molecular Dynamics
PhosphorImager and the software ImageQuant, v3.3.
41.5) promoter. Binding
reactions contained DNA, purified FNR* or mutant derivatives,
ApU, and [
-32P]UTP in 15 µl of binding buffer
(5% (w/v) glycerol, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 50 µg/ml bovine
serum albumin). After preincubation at 37 °C for 10 min, reactions
were started by adding 10 µl of RNAP in binding buffer (this gave
final reaction conditions of 2 nM template DNA, 350 nM FNR* derivative, 50-150 nM RNAP, 0.5 mM ApU, 50 µM UTP, and 0.75 µCi
[
-32P]UTP). At regular time intervals, 2-µl samples
were removed from the reactions and terminated by adding 3 µl of stop
buffer (20 mM EDTA, 80% (v/v) deionized formamide, 0.1%
(w/v) xylene cyanol, 0.1% (w/v) bromphenol blue). The reaction
product, ApUpU, and unincorporated UTP were separated on 20%
denaturing polyacrylamide gels and quantified using a Molecular
Dynamics PhosphorImager and the software ImageQuant, v3.3 (as described
in Ref. 24). The kinetic constants for transcription initiation at
FF(
41.5) were calculated by measuring the rate
of ApUpU production over a range of RNAP concentrations and by plotting
the lag time (
) of these reactions against the reciprocal of RNAP concentration.
41.5) promoter.
Binding reactions contained DNA, purified FNR* or mutant derivatives,
and RNAP in 20 µl of binding buffer (5% (w/v) glycerol, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 50 µg/ml bovine serum albumin). Reactions were preincubated at 37 °C to allow open complexes to form. After 30 min, open complexes were challenged with 10 µl of
heparin (three concentrations were used to give final concentrations of
10, 80, or 150 µg/ml). At appropriate time intervals up to 70 min,
3-µl samples were removed from the challenged complexes and 3 µl of
ApU and [
-32P]UTP were added (this gave final reaction
conditions of 2 nM template DNA, 350 nM FNR*
derivative, 100 nM RNAP, 0.5 mM ApU, 50 µM UTP, and 0.75 µCi of [
-32P]UTP).
After incubation at 37 °C, 2 µl of each reaction was removed and
added to 3 µl of stop buffer. The reaction product, ApUpU, and
unincorporated UTP were separated on 20% denaturing polyacrylamide gels and quantified using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and the
software ImageQuant, v3.3 (as described in Ref. 24). The fraction of
the open complex remaining was calculated from the amount of ApUpU
produced. The decay rate of this fraction was calculated for each
heparin concentration, and the backward rate constants for
isomerization (k
2) of FF(-41.5) in
the presence of FNR* or FNR* T118A/S187A were determined by
extrapolating these data to a zero heparin concentration.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
41.5) promoter. The
FF(
41.5) promoter is an artificial class II
FNR-dependent promoter that contains a consensus DNA site
for FNR centered between 41 and 42 base pairs upstream of the
melR transcript start site (i.e. at position
41.5). The
lac
fnr strain, JRG1728,
carrying the
FF(
41.5)::lacZ fusion in
pRW50 (14), was transformed with the four different pFNR* derivatives.
Levels of transcription from FF(
41.5) were
determined by measuring
-galactosidase expression in cells that had
been grown aerobically or anaerobically. The data in Table
I show that, in the absence of FNR*,
under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions, transcription from the
FF(
41.5) promoter is very low. Expression from
FF(
41.5) is clearly activated by FNR* under
both aerobic and anaerobic conditions, but FNR* variants carrying
either or both of the alanine substitutions in AR1 are compromised in
their ability to activate transcription. Thus, FNR* is able to activate
transcription under aerobic conditions and activation is disrupted by
the different AR1 substitutions. These data suggest that these FNR
derivatives could be used in in vitro studies at the
FF(
41.5) promoter.
In vivo activity of FF(
41.5) with FNR* and different derivatives
carrying alanine substitutions in AR1
-galactosidase activities (Miller units) were measured in
JRG1728 transformants carrying FF(
41.5) in the
lac expression vector, pRW50, and expressing different FNR*
derivatives. Cultures were grown either aerobically or anaerobically.
Average values are shown for three independent assays; in each case the
S.D. fell within 20% of the mean.
1 cm
1) was used to calculate
that our FNR preparations contained 0.95 clusters/FNR subunit. Exposure
of the reconstituted proteins to air caused the loss of the broad
absorbance around 420 nm, indicating that cluster disassembly had
occurred. Therefore, the estimates of [4Fe-4S] content, the typical
shape of the spectra, and the oxygen sensitivity of the clusters
provide good evidence to suggest that neither the His tag nor the amino
acid replacements in AR1 grossly distort the protein structure. Thus,
these studies indicate that the impairment of transcription activation
associated with the amino acid substitutions in AR1, observed both
aerobically and anaerobically in vivo (Table I), is because
of a defective AR1 rather than the failure to acquire a
[4Fe-4S]2+ center.
41.5) promoter cloned
upstream of the
oop terminator in a supercoiled plasmid,
in the presence of purified RNAP and the different purified FNR*
variants. Transcription initiation from
FF(
41.5) is clearly activated by FNR*. This
activation is reduced by the different alanine substitutions in AR1,
confirming the effects observed in vivo, and showing that
substitutions in AR1 compromise the ability of FNR* to activate
transcription at the FF(
41.5) promoter.

View larger version (53K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Transcription activation by FNR* derivatives
carrying different alanine substitutions in AR1 of FNR measured
in vitro. The autoradiograph shows RNA
transcripts generated from the FF(
41.5) promoter carried
by the plasmid pSR. Incubations contained RNAP and FNR* or different
mutant derivatives, as indicated. Transcripts initiating at
FF(
41.5) run to a strong terminator and give bands that
are labeled accordingly. The RNAI transcript, encoded by the pSR
vector, serves as an internal control, and the end-labeled
oligonucleotide provides a loading control. Transcripts initiating from
FF(
41.5) were quantified and normalized using the control
bands. The relative band intensities are: 100% for FNR*, 28% for FNR*
S187A, 30%for FNR* T118A, and 13% for FNR*
T118A/S187A.
41.5) promoter. The DNase I footprints (Fig.
2) show that, when either FNR* or FNR* T118A/S187A is incubated with the promoter fragment alone, a region centered at position
41.5, relative to the transcription start point,
is protected (lanes c and k). Thus both FNR*
derivatives recognize and bind to the FNR target site. With FNR*,
increasing concentrations of RNAP result in increasing protection of
the promoter region both upstream and downstream of the FNR binding site (lanes d-i). Based on footprinting studies of CRP and
RNAP at class II CRP-dependent promoters, the upstream
protection can be attributed to the
CTD of RNAP (25, 26). Footprints
with FNR* T118A/S187A also show increasing protection with increasing RNAP concentrations (lanes l-q), although significantly
less protection is seen in comparison to the footprints with FNR*.
Interestingly, the pattern of protection of ternary complexes
containing either FNR* or FNR* T118A/ S187A is the same. This is in
contrast to the situation observed at class II
CRP-dependent promoters, where substitutions in AR1 of CRP
induce changes in the DNase I footprint in the region of the CRP-
CTD
interface (26). Strikingly, in the experiment described here, no
protection is seen with RNAP alone, even at 500 nM
(lane j), showing that RNAP alone cannot form stable
complexes at the FF(
41.5) promoter.

View larger version (119K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
DNase I footprint analyses of complexes
formed at FF(
41.5). The autoradiograph shows a sequencing
gel run to analyze products after DNase I cleavage of complexes formed
at FF(
41.5) with FNR* (lanes c-i) or FNR*
T118A/S187A (lanes k-q) and increasing concentrations of
RNAP (ranging from 250 to 500 nM, at 50 nM
intervals). Lane j shows the footprint obtained with RNAP
alone (500 nM). A Maxam-Gilbert A+G sequencing
reaction (lane a) was used to calibrate the gel;
+1 denotes the FF(
41.5) transcript start point.
The vertical bars indicate regions of protection by FNR*
derivatives and RNAP.
41.5), bands because of oxidation of
these thymine bases appear at positions +1,
2,
8,
9, and
11,
with both FNR* (lanes c-h) and FNR* T118A/S187A (lanes j-o), as RNAP is added. However, as the RNAP
concentration is increased, the intensity of the bands in lanes
containing FNR* T118A/S187A is significantly lower than in the lanes
containing FNR* (see Fig. 3B). Note that thymine-sensitive
bands are not seen with RNAP alone (lane i), implying that
promoter opening is completely FNR-dependent.

View larger version (51K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Potassium permanganate footprint analyses of
complexes formed at FF(
41.5). A, the figure
shows a typical autoradiograph of a sequencing gel run to analyze
products after potassium permanganate treatment and piperidine cleavage
of complexes formed at FF(
41.5) with FNR* (lanes
c-h) or FNR* T118A/S187A (lanes j-o) and increasing
concentrations of RNAP (100, 150, 200, 300, and 350 nM).
Also included is the footprint obtained by incubating with RNAP alone
(350 nM; lane i) and the Maxam-Gilbert A+G
sequencing reaction used to calibrate the gel (lane a). The
bases around the region of opening and the transcription start point,
+1, are labeled. B, the figure shows a graphical
representation of the band intensities in the region of DNA opening at
the FF(
41.5) promoter. Values have been normalized with
respect to the internal bla promoter (not shown) and are
expressed relative to the level of cleavage achieved with 350 nM RNAP and FNR*. These data represent the average of two
independent experiments.
41.5) clearly show that fewer
open complexes are formed in the presence of FNR* T118A/S187A than with
FNR*. To investigate further the consequences of alterations in AR1,
abortive initiation assays were used to attempt to measure the binding
constant for RNAP (KB) and the forward rate
constant for isomerization from the closed to open complex
(k2) during transcription activation by FNR* or
FNR* T118A/S187A at FF(
41.5). The rate of ApUpU
production at FF(
41.5) was measured in the
presence of FNR* or FNR* T118A/S187A, and the resulting
plots are
shown in Fig. 4. Although our data are
subject to large errors, we can conclude that the alanine substitutions
in AR1 of FNR* cause a reduction in k2. However,
the errors involved in calculating KB are so
large that no reliable comparison of KB values
for FNR* and FNR* T118A/S187A can be made.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Tau plot analysis of the effects of AR1
substitutions on open complex formation at FF(
41.5). The
lag time observed before linear production of ApUpU is plotted against
the reciprocal of RNAP concentration. The plot compares FNR*
T118A/S187A with FNR*. Each data point represents the average of five
independent assays, and the error bars show one standard deviation
either side of the mean. Values for k2 and
KBk2, shown below the graph, were
calculated from the intercepts and slopes of the plots, respectively.
The tight coupling of FF(
41.5) activity to FNR* precludes
the accurate measurement of k2 and
KB in the absence of FNR*.
41.5) by
determining the backward rate constant for isomerization
(k
2). To do this, open complexes were allowed
to form in the presence of either FNR* or FNR* T118A/S187A. These open
complexes were then challenged with a range of heparin concentrations.
At different times after the challenge, the amount of open complex
remaining was estimated by measuring ApUpU production following the
addition of ApU and UTP. Thus, the decay of open complexes and hence
k
2 could be calculated. The results in Fig.
5 show that the values of
k
2 are negligible for both FNR* and FNR*
T118A/S187A (more than 80-fold lower than k2).
This shows that open complexes formed in the presence of both FNR* and
FNR* T118A/S187A are stable. This rules out the possibility that the
substitutions in AR1 of FNR affect the stability of the open complex
and validates the conclusions drawn from the
plots (Fig. 4).

View larger version (12K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Heparin challenge analysis of open complexes
formed at FF(
41.5). The observed rate constant for
dissociation of RNA polymerase from the FF(
41.5) promoter
is plotted as a function of heparin concentration. Values for the
backward rate constant for isomerization (k
2),
in the absence of heparin, were extrapolated to be 8.4 × 10
5 s
1 for FNR* and 6.3 × 10
5 s
1 for FNR* T118A/S187A.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
CTD of RNAP. For example, at CRP-dependent promoters the AR1-
CTD interaction helps to
recruit RNAP to the promoter DNA (2). Previous studies have suggested that FNR also functions by interacting with
CTD and have identified Thr118 and Ser187 as the crucial side chains of
the AR1 equivalent in FNR (13, 14). In this work, we have used in
vitro studies to show that FNR carrying the T118A and S187A
substitutions is indeed defective in transcription activation and is
less able to promote the formation of open complexes. Using abortive
initiation assays, we have assessed the role of AR1 of FNR. Although
the large errors prevent an accurate estimation of
k2 and KB, the results
suggest that AR1 of FNR plays a role in the transition from a closed to
an open complex (at least at the FF(
41.5) promoter). This
is in contrast to the situation with CRP, where AR1 has been reported
to function solely in the initial recruitment of RNAP to promoter DNA
(2). Thus, whereas both CRP and FNR function by interacting directly
with
CTD, the consequences of these interactions appear to differ.
This hypothesis is supported by the observation that FNR fails to
recruit purified
in electromobility shift assays (data not shown),
unlike CRP, which binds
cooperatively (28). Interestingly, the
surface of FNR that is responsible for contacting
CTD is much larger than the equivalent surface of CRP (2, 13). Further studies are needed
to determine the individual contributions of the subregions of AR1 to
the process of transcription activation.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
CTD, C-terminal domain of the
-subunit;
CRP, cAMP
receptor protein;
AR, activating region;
PCR, polymerase chain
reaction.
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Ebright, R. H.,
and Busby, S. J. W.
(1995)
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
5,
197-203
2.
Busby, S. J. W.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
293,
199-213
3.
Kolb, A.,
Busby, S. J. W.,
Buc, H.,
Garges, S.,
and Adhya, S.
(1993)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
62,
749-795
4.
Spiro, S.,
and Guest, J. R.
(1990)
FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
75,
399-428
5.
Guest, J. R.,
Green, J.,
Irvine, A. S.,
and Spiro, S.
(1996)
in
Regulation of Gene Expression in Escherichia coli
(Lin, E. C. C.
, and Lynch, A. S., eds)
, pp. 317-342, R. G. Landes & Co. Austin, TX
6.
Shaw, D. J.,
Rice, D. W.,
and Guest, J. R.
(1983)
J. Mol. Biol.
166,
241-247
7.
Weber, I. T.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1987)
J. Mol. Biol.
198,
311-326
8.
Schultz, S.,
Shields, G. C.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1991)
Science
253,
1001-1007
9.
Parkinson, G.,
Wilson, C.,
Gunasekera, A.,
Ebright, Y.,
Ebright, R. H.,
and Berman, H. M.
(1996)
J. Mol. Biol.
260,
395-408
10.
Lazazzera, B. A.,
Beinert, H.,
Khoroshilova, N.,
Kennedy, M.,
and Kiley, P. J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
2762-2768
11.
Khoroshilova, N.,
Popescu, C.,
Münck, E.,
Beinert, H.,
and Kiley, P.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
6087-6092
12.
Jordan, P. A.,
Thomson, A. J.,
Ralph, E. T.,
Guest, J. R.,
and Green, J.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
416,
349-352
13.
Williams, S. M.,
Savery, N. J.,
Busby, S. J. W.,
and Wing, H. J.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
4028-4034
14.
Wing, H. J.,
Williams, S. M.,
and Busby, S. J. W.
(1995)
J. Bacteriol.
177,
6704-6710
15.
Kiley, P. J.,
and Reznikoff, W. S.
(1991)
J. Bacteriol.
173,
16-22
16.
Lazazzera, B. A.,
Bates, D. M.,
and Kiley, P. J.
(1993)
Genes Dev.
7,
1993-2005
17.
Spiro, S.,
and Guest, J. R.
(1988)
Mol. Microbiol.
2,
701-707
18.
Lodge, J.,
Fear, J.,
Busby, S. J. W.,
Gunasekaran, P.,
and Kamini, N.-R.
(1992)
FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
95,
271-276
19.
Miller, J.
(1972)
Experiments in Molecular Genetics
, pp. 352-355, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
20.
Green, J.,
Bennett, B.,
Jordan, P.,
Ralph, E. T.,
Thomson, A. J.,
and Guest, J. R.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
316,
887-892
21.
Kolb, A.,
Kotlarz, D.,
Kusano, S.,
and Ishihama, A.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
819-826
22.
Lonetto, M. A.,
Rhodius, V.,
Lamberg, K.,
Kiley, P.,
Busby, S.,
and Gross, C.
(1998)
J. Mol. Biol.
284,
1353-1365
23.
Savery, N., Belyaeva, T., and Busby, S. (1996) Essential
Techniques: Gene Transcription (Docherty, K., ed.) pp. 1-5 and
pp. 21-33, BIOS Scientific Publishers, Oxford
24.
Busby, S.,
Kolb, A.,
and Minchin, S.
(1994)
in
Methods in Molecular Biology: DNA-Protein Interactions, Principles and Protocols
(Kneale, G. G., ed)
, pp. 397-411, Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ
25.
Kolb, A.,
Igarashi, K.,
Ishihama, A.,
Lavigne, M.,
Buckle, M.,
and Buc, H.
(1993)
Nucleic Acids Res.
21,
319-326
26.
Attey, A.,
Belyaeva, T.,
Savery, N.,
Hoggett, J.,
Fujita, N.,
Ishihama, A.,
and Busby, S.
(1994)
Nucleic Acids Res.
22,
4375-4380
27.
Cech, C. L.,
and McClure, W. R.
(1980)
Biochemistry
19,
2440-2447
28.
Lloyd, G. S.,
Busby, S. J. W.,
and Savery, N. J.
(1998)
Biochem. J.
330,
413-420
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:
![]() |
J. D. Partridge, R. K. Poole, and J. Green The Escherichia coli yhjA gene, encoding a predicted cytochrome c peroxidase, is regulated by FNR and OxyR Microbiology, May 1, 2007; 153(5): 1499 - 1509. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Durante-Rodriguez, M. T. Zamarro, J. L. Garcia, E. Diaz, and M. Carmona Oxygen-Dependent Regulation of the Central Pathway for the Anaerobic Catabolism of Aromatic Compounds in Azoarcus sp. Strain CIB. J. Bacteriol., April 1, 2006; 188(7): 2343 - 2354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. P. Dibden and J. Green In vivo cycling of the Escherichia coli transcription factor FNR between active and inactive states Microbiology, December 1, 2005; 151(12): 4063 - 4070. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. D. Weber, O. D. Vincent, and P. J. Kiley Additional Determinants within Escherichia coli FNR Activating Region 1 and RNA Polymerase {alpha} Subunit Required for Transcription Activation J. Bacteriol., March 1, 2005; 187(5): 1724 - 1731. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. T. Marr, J. W. Roberts, S. E. Brown, M. Klee, and G. N. Gussin Interactions among CII protein, RNA polymerase and the {lambda} PRE promoter: contacts between RNA polymerase and the -35 region of PRE are identical in the presence and absence of CII protein Nucleic Acids Res., February 10, 2004; 32(3): 1083 - 1090. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. M. L. Barnard, J. Green, and S. J. W. Busby Transcription Regulation by Tandem-Bound FNR at Escherichia coli Promoters J. Bacteriol., October 15, 2003; 185(20): 5993 - 6004. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Overton, E. G. F. Reid, R. Foxall, H. Smith, S. J. W. Busby, and J. A. Cole Transcription Activation at Escherichia coli FNR-Dependent Promoters by the Gonococcal FNR Protein: Effects of a Novel S18F Substitution and Comparisons with the Corresponding Substitution in E. coli FNR J. Bacteriol., August 15, 2003; 185(16): 4734 - 4747. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Blake, A. Barnard, S. J. W. Busby, and J. Green Transcription Activation by FNR: Evidence for a Functional Activating Region 2 J. Bacteriol., November 1, 2002; 184(21): 5855 - 5861. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. I. Hutchings, J. C. Crack, N. Shearer, B. J. Thompson, A. J. Thomson, and S. Spiro Transcription Factor FnrP from Paracoccus denitrificans Contains an Iron-Sulfur Cluster and Is Activated by Anoxia: Identification of Essential Cysteine Residues J. Bacteriol., January 15, 2002; 184(2): 503 - 508. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |