![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 42, 32617-32627, October 20, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,
From The Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology and the Department of Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California 92037
Received for publication, June 13, 2000, and in revised form, July 19, 2000
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Ligand-dependent transcriptional
regulators were generated by fusion of designed
Cys2-His2 zinc finger proteins and
steroid hormone receptor ligand binding domains. To produce novel DNA binding domains, three-finger proteins binding specific 9-base pair
sequences were constructed from modular building blocks. Fusion of
these zinc finger proteins to a transcriptional activation domain and
to modified ligand binding domains derived from either the estrogen or
progesterone receptors yielded potent ligand-dependent transcriptional regulators. Together with optimized minimal promoters, these regulators provide 4-hydroxytamoxifen- or RU486-inducible expression systems with induction ratios of up to 3 orders of magnitude. These inducible expression systems are functionally independent, and each can be selectively switched on within the same
cell. The potential use of zinc finger-steroid receptor fusion proteins
for the regulation of natural promoters was also explored. A
gene-specific six-finger protein binding an 18-base pair target sequence was converted into a ligand-dependent regulator by
fusion with either two estrogen receptor ligand binding domains or one ecdysone receptor and one retinoid X receptor ligand binding domain. These single-chain receptor proteins undergo an intramolecular rearrangement, rather than intermolecular dimerization and are functional as monomers. Thus, the ability to engineer DNA binding specificities of zinc finger proteins enables the construction of
ligand-dependent transcriptional regulators with potential for the regulation of virtually any desired artificial or natural promoter. It is anticipated that the novel chemically regulated gene
switches described herein will find many applications in applied and
basic research, where the specific modulation of gene expression can be exploited.
Designed transcription factors with defined target specificity and
regulatory function could provide invaluable tools for basic and
applied research and for gene therapy. Accordingly, the design of
sequence-specific DNA binding domains has been the subject of intense
interest for the last 2 decades. Of the many classes of DNA-binding
proteins studied, the modular Cys2-His2 zinc
finger DNA binding motif has shown the most promise for the production
of proteins with tailored DNA binding specificity (1-7). The novel
architecture of this class of proteins provides for the rapid
construction of gene-specific targeting devices. Polydactyl zinc finger
proteins are most readily prepared by assembly of modular zinc finger
domains recognizing predefined three-nucleotide sequences (6, 8, 9).
Polydactyl proteins may be assembled using variable numbers of zinc
finger domains of varied specificity providing DNA-binding proteins
that not only recognize novel sequences but also sequences of varied
length. By combining six zinc finger domains, proteins have been
produced that recognize 18 contiguous base pairs of DNA sequence, a DNA
address sufficiently complex to specify any locus in the 4 billion-base
pair human genome (or any other genome). Fusion of polydactyl zinc
finger proteins of this type to activation or repression domains
provides transcription factors that efficiently and specifically
modulate the expression of both transgenes and endogenous genes (8, 9).
While the availability of designed transcription factors with tailored
DNA binding specificities provides novel opportunities in
transcriptional regulation, additional applications would be available
to ligand-dependent transcription factors. Designer zinc
finger proteins dependent on small molecule inducers would have a
number of applications, both for the regulation of endogenous genes and
for the development of inducible expression systems for the regulation
of transgenes.
Natural transcription factors are regulated by a number of different
mechanisms, including posttranslational modification such as
phosphorylation (10, 11), or by ligand binding. The prototype
ligand-activated transcription factors are members of the nuclear
hormone receptor family, including the receptors for sex steroids or
adrenocorticoids (12, 13). These receptors are held inactive in the
absence of hormone, by association with a number of inactivating
factors including hsp90 (14). Upon ligand binding, nuclear hormone
receptors dissociate from the inactivating complex, dimerize, and
become able to bind DNA and activate transcription (12-14).
Significantly, not only hormone binding but also inactivation and
dimerization functions reside within the ligand binding domain
(LBD)1 of these proteins
(15). This fact has been exploited experimentally and steroid hormone
receptor LBDs have found wide use as tools to render heterologous
proteins hormone-dependent. In particular, the estrogen
receptor (ER) LBD has been used to render the functions of c-Myc (16),
c-Fos (17), and even the cytoplasmic kinase c-Raf (18)
hormone-dependent.
To develop an inducible expression system for use in basic research and
gene therapy, the availability of ligand-dependent transcriptional regulators is a prerequisite. Preferentially, these
regulators would be activated by a small molecule inducer with no other
biological activity, bind specific sequences present only in the target
promoter, and have low immunogenicity. A number of ligand-regulated
artificial transcription factors have been generated by various means,
using functional domains derived from either prokaryotes (19-22) or
eukaryotes (23-29). Of the functional domains derived from eukaryotic
proteins, nuclear hormone receptor LBDs have been the most widely used.
In particular, regulators based on the Gal4 DNA binding domain (DBD)
fused to a human ER (27, 28) or progesterone receptor (PR) LBD (25,
26), as well as the ecdysone-inducible system based on the
Drosophila ecdysone receptor (EcR) and the mammalian
retinoid X receptor (RXR) (23, 24) have been described. Compared with
the heterodimeric EcR/RXR system, regulators based on the ER and PR
LBDs have the important advantage that they function as homodimers and
require the delivery of only one cDNA. However, while ecdysone has
no known biological effect on mammalian cells, estrogen and
progesterone elicit a biological response in cells or tissues that
express the endogenous steroid receptors. With the availability of a
modified ER and PR LBDs that have lost responsiveness to their
natural ligands but not to synthetic antagonists such as
4-hydroxytamoxifen (4-OHT) (30) or RU486 (31), respectively, this is no
longer of great concern. Thus, steroid hormone receptor LBD-based
inducible expression systems can be developed that function
independently of the endogenous steroid receptors. To date, this has
been shown for the PR LBD through the development of an RU486-inducible
expression system based on the Gal4 DBD (25, 26). An inducible
expression system based on a point-mutated (G525R) ER LBD (30) that has lost the responsiveness to estrogen but not the antagonist 4-OHT has
not been described to date.
Designed zinc finger proteins have a number of advantages as compared
with other DBDs, including the one derived from Gal4, since the ability
to engineer DNA binding specificities allows ligand-dependent regulators to be directed to any desired
artificial or natural promoter. Here we explore the utility of fusion
proteins between designed zinc finger proteins and nuclear hormone
receptor LBDs for the inducible control of gene expression.
Construction of Zinc Finger Proteins--
For the construction
of the B3 and N1 zinc finger proteins, DNA recognition helices from the
Zif268 finger 2 variants pmGAA, pmGAC, pmGGA, pmGGG, and pGTA
were utilized (6).2
Three-finger proteins binding the respective 9-bp target sites were
constructed by grafting the appropriate DNA recognition helices into
the framework of the three-finger protein Sp1C (33); DNA fragments
encoding the two three-finger proteins were assembled from six
overlapping oligonucleotides as described (8). The three-finger protein
coding regions were then cloned into the bacterial expression vector
pMal-CSS, a derivative of the bacterial expression plasmid pMal-C2 (New
England Biolabs) using SfiI restriction sites.
Protein Purification--
Maltose-binding protein (MBP) fusion
proteins were purified to >90% homogeneity using the Protein Fusion
and Purification System (New England Biolabs), except that zinc buffer
A (10 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 90 mM KCl, 1 mM MgCl2, 90 µM
ZnCl2), 1% BSA, 5 mM dithiothreitol was used
as the column buffer. Protein purity and concentration were determined
from Coomassie Blue-stained 15% SDS-PAGE gels by comparison with BSA standards.
ELISA Analysis--
In 96-well ELISA plates, 0.2 µg of
streptavidin (Pierce) was applied to each well for 1 h at 37 °C
and then washed twice with water. Biotinylated target oligonucleotide
(0.025 µg) was applied in the same manner. Zinc buffer A plus 3% BSA
was applied for blocking, but the wells were not washed after
incubation. All subsequent incubations were performed at room
temperature. Starting with 2 µg of purified MBP fusion protein in the
top wells, 2-fold serial dilutions were applied in 1× binding buffer
(zinc buffer A, 1% BSA, 5 mM dithiothreitol, 0.12 µg/µl sheared herring sperm DNA). The samples were incubated 1 h, followed by 10 washes with water. Mouse anti-maltose binding protein
monoclonal antibody (Sigma) in zinc buffer A plus 1% BSA was applied
to the wells for 30 min, followed by 10 washes with water. Goat
anti-mouse IgG monoclonal antibody conjugated to alkaline phosphatase
(Sigma) was applied to the wells for 30 min, followed by 10 washes with water. Alkaline phosphatase substrate (Sigma) was applied, and the
A405 was quantitated with SOFTmax 2.35 (Molecular Devices).
Gel Mobility Shift Assays--
Target oligonucleotides were
labeled at their 3'-ends with 32P and gel-purified. Eleven
3-fold serial dilutions of protein were incubated in 20 µl of binding
reactions (1× binding buffer, 10% glycerol, 1 pM target
oligonucleotide) for 3 h at room temperature and then resolved on
a 5% polyacrylamide gel in 0.5× TBE buffer. Quantitation of dried
gels was performed using a PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software
(Molecular Dynamics, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) The KD was
determined by Scatchard analysis.
Zinc Finger-Steroid Receptor Fusion Constructs with N-terminal
Effector Domains--
The VP16 coding region was PCR-amplified from
pcDNA3/C7-VP16 using the primers VPNhe-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GCT
AGC GCC ACC ATG GGG CGC GCC GGC GCT CCC CCG ACC GAT GTC AGC CTG-3') and
VPHind-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG AAG CTT GTT AAT TAA ACC GTA CTC GTC AAT
TCC AAG GGC ATC G-3'). The C7 coding region was amplified from the same
plasmid, using the primers C7Hind-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG AAG CTT GGG GCC
ACG GCG GCC CTC GAG CCC TAT GC-3') and C7Bam-B (5'-GAG GAG GGA TCC CCC
TGG CCG GCC TGG CCA CTA GTT CTA GAG TC-3'). The truncated human PR LBD
(aa 645-914) was amplified from PAPCMVGL914VPc'-SV (26) using the
primers PRBam-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GGA TCC AGT CAG AGT TGT GAG AGC ACT
GGA TGC TG-3') and PREco-B (5'-GAG GAG GAA TTC TCA AGC AAT AAC TTC AGA
CAT CAT TTC TGG AAA TTC-3'). The VP16-C7-PR coding region was then
assembled in pcDNA3.1(+)Zeo (Invitrogen) using the NheI,
HindIII, BamHI, and EcoRI restriction sites incorporated in the PCR primers. In the resulting constructs, the
C7 coding region was flanked by two SfiI sites, and the VP16 coding region was flanked by AscI and PacI
sites. These restriction sites were introduced to facilitate the
exchange of DBDs and effector domains, respectively.
To generate VP16-C7-ER, the point-mutated murine ER LBD coding region
(aa 282-599, G525R) was excised from pBSKS+ER (30) and used to replace
the PR LBD coding region via BamHI-EcoRI
restriction digestion.
Fusion constructs containing a VP64 effector domain were produced by
replacing VP16 with the VP64 coding region via
AscI-PacI digestion. To generate fusion
constructs with B3 or N1 DBDs, C7 was replaced by the B3 or N1 coding
regions via SfiI digestion.
Zinc Finger-Steroid Receptor Fusion Constructs with C-terminal
Effector Domains--
The truncated human PR LBD was amplified from
PAPCMVGL914VPc'-SV (26) using the primers PRFse-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG
GAG GGC CGG CCG CGT CGA CCA GGT CAG AGT TGT GAG AGC ACT GGA TGC-3') and
PRAsc-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG GGC GCG CCC CGT CGA CCC AGC AAT AAC TTC
AGA CAT CAT TTC TGG-3'). The point-mutated mouse ER LBD was amplified
from pBSKS+ER (30) using the primers ERFse-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG
GGC CGG CCG CCG AAA TGA AAT GGG TGC TTC AGG AGA C-3') and ERAsc-B (5'-
GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG GGC GCG CCC GAT CGT GTT GGG GAA GCC CTC TGC
TTC-3'). The resulting PCR products were then inserted into
pcDNA3/E2C-VP16 (8), in between the E2C and VP16 coding regions,
via digestion with the restriction endonucleases FseI and
AscI.
To generate fusion constructs with B3 or N1 DBDs, E2C was replaced by
the B3 or N1 coding regions via SfiI digestion. Fusion constructs containing a VP64 effector domain were produced by replacing
VP16 by the VP64 coding region via AscI-PacI digestion.
Heterodimeric Switch Constructs--
For construction of the
E2C-ER fusion, the point-mutated mouse ER LBD was amplified from
pBSKS+ER (30) using the primers ERFse-F and ERPac-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG
GAG TTA ATT AAG ATC GTG TTG GGG AAG CCC TCT GCT TC-3'). The PCR product
was then inserted into the construct pcDNA3/E2C-VP64, replacing the
VP64 coding region, via FseI-PacI digestion. To
generate the ER-VP64 fusion, the ER LBD was amplified using the primers
ERATGBam-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GGA TCC GCC ACC ATG CGA AAT GAA ATG GGT
GCT TCA GGA GAC-3') and ERAsc-B. The PCR product was then inserted into
pcDNA3/E2C-VP64 (8), replacing the E2C coding region, via
BamHI-AscI digestion.
Single-chain Switch Constructs--
For construction of
single-chain fusions with two ER LBDs, the point-mutated mouse ER LBD
was amplified from pBSKS+ER (30) either using the primers ERFse-F and
ERSpeI-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG ACT AGT GGA ACC ACC CCC
ACC ACC GCC CGA GCC ACC GCC ACC AGA GGA GAT CGT GTT GGG GAA GCC CTC
TGC-3') or using the primers ERNheI-F1 (for the 18-aa linker
construct; 5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG GCT AGC GGC GGT GGC GGT GGC TCC
TCT GGT GGC GGT GGC GGT TCT TCC AAT GAA ATG GGT GCT TCA GGA GAC-3') or
ERNheI-F2 (for the 30-aa linker construct; 5'- GAG GAG GAG
GAG GAG GAG GCT AGC TCT TCC AAT GAA ATG GGT GCT TCA GGA GAC-3') and
ERAsc-B. The PCR products were then digested with, respectively,
FseI and SpeI, or NheI and
AscI, and inserted into
FseI-AscI-linearized pcDNA3/E2C-VP64 (8).
For construction of RXR-EcR single-chain fusions, the ligand binding
domain of the human retinoid X receptor (hRXR
To generate the 36-aa linker E2C-RLLE-VP64 fusion construct, the RXR
LBD was PCR-amplified from pcDNA3/E2C-RE-VP64 using the primers
RXRFse-F and RXRSpeLL-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG ACT AGT AGA GCC ACC GCC
CCC TTC AGA ACC GCC CGA GCC ACC GCC ACC AGA GG-3'). The EcR LBD was
amplified from the same plasmid, using the primers EcRNheLL-F (5'-GAG
GAG GAG GAG GCT AGC GGG GGT TCG GAG GGT GGC GGG TCT GAG GGT GGG GGT GGT
TCC ACT AGC TCT TCC-3') and EcRAsc-B. The PCR products were inserted
into pcDNA3/E2C-VP64 as described above.
Reporter Constructs for Determining the Optimal Spacing and
Orientation of the Two Half-sites--
C7 dimer-TATA fragments were
generated by PCR amplification with C7 dimer-TATA primers (5'-GAG GGT
ACC GCG TGG GCG A0-5 GCG TGG GCG
AGT CGA CTC TAG AGG GTA TAT AAT GG-3' for direct repeats; 5'-GAG GGT
ACC GCG TGG GCG A0-5 CGC CCA CGC
AGT CGA CTC TAG AGG GTA TAT AAT GG-3' for inverted repeats; 5'-GAG GGT
ACC CGC CCA CGC A0-5 GCG TGG GCG
AGT CGA CTC TAG AGG GTA TAT AAT GG-3' for everted repeats) and
GLprimer2 (5'-CTT TAT GTT TTT GGC GTC TTC C-3'; Promega), using
p17x4TATA-luc (gift from S. Y. Tsai) as a template. PCR products
were cloned into pGL3-Basic (Promega) via digestion with the
restriction endonucleases KpnI and NcoI.
RU486- and Tamoxifen-inducible Promoter
Constructs--
10xB3-TATA and 10xN1-TATA fragments were assembled
from two pairs of complementary oligonucleotides each and cloned into
SacI-XbaI-linearized pGL3-Basic (Promega),
upstream of the firefly luciferase coding region, creating the plasmids
10xB3-TATA-luc and 10xN1-TATA-luc. To generate the 10xN1-TATA-lacZ
reporter construct, the lacZ coding region was
excised from p Luciferase and Generation of Hormone-regulated Zinc Finger-Steroid Receptor Fusion
Proteins--
Previous studies have demonstrated the potential of
engineered C2-H2 zinc finger proteins for the
regulation of target gene expression (8, 9, 34, 35). However, to fully
realize the potential of engineered zinc finger proteins, it is
desirable that their otherwise constitutive DNA binding activity be
rendered ligand-dependent. The LBDs of the human PR and the
murine ER have previously been used for the regulation of heterologous
proteins, after having been modified to remove their responsiveness to
their natural hormone inducers while retaining activity with synthetic antagonists (26, 30). In our initial study, the Zif268 variant C7 (4) was fused to a transcriptional activation domain plus the LBD of
either of the two nuclear hormone receptors. The VP64-C7-PR fusion
protein contains an N-terminal VP64 activation domain (8) and a
C-terminal human PR LBD (aa 645-914) lacking amino acids 915-933.
This LBD is responsive to the progesterone antagonist RU486/mifepristone but not to progesterone (26). The VP64-C7-ER fusion
protein contains a C-terminal murine ER LBD (aa 282-599) with a single
amino acid substitution (G525R) and is responsive to the estrogen
antagonist 4-OHT but not to estrogen (30) (Fig. 1A). Preliminary experiments
confirmed that fusion to either LBD rendered the C7 protein
hormone-dependent (data not shown).
Determination of the Optimal Response Element for Zinc
Finger-Steroid Receptor Fusion Proteins--
Naturally occurring
steroid receptors bind DNA as dimers and typically recognize response
elements consisting of palindromic sequences (12, 13). Furthermore, it
was demonstrated that in some cases direct repeats can also serve as
binding sites for receptor dimers (36). Given this obvious flexibility
in DNA recognition by the naturally occurring receptor dimers, the
optimal structure of a response element for an artificial, zinc
finger-based transcriptional switch was not known. In order to develop
an efficient, hormone-inducible system for the regulation of target
gene expression, a detailed knowledge of the binding site architecture
is required.
To determine the optimal orientation and spacing of the two half-sites
of a response element for a zinc finger-LBD fusion protein, a series of
reporter plasmids was constructed. Each contained two C7 binding
sites upstream of a TATA box and a firefly luciferase coding region
(Fig. 1B). The two C7 binding sites were introduced in
different orientations (direct, inverted, or everted repeat) and with
various spacings (no spacing or 1-5-bp spacing). Plasmids directing
expression of VP64-C7-PR or VP64-C7-ER fusion constructs were then
co-transfected with the various reporter plasmids and assayed for
hormone-induced luciferase expression (Fig.
2). Significantly, each of the C7 dimer
binding sites was able to act as a response element for both PR- and
ER-based proteins, albeit with varying efficiency. In contrast, a
reporter plasmid with a single C7 binding site was not activated,
indicating that hormone-induced activation of transcription was
mediated by dimerized transcription factors (data not shown).
Optimal spacing depended on the orientation of the two half-sites. In
the case of the PR fusion protein, optimal spacing was observed at 2-3
bp for inverted repeats and 3 bp for everted repeats. Response elements
consisting of direct repeats had no single optimal spacing; the best
response was obtained with 4-5-bp spacing or no spacing at all (Fig.
2A). For the ER fusion protein, optimal spacing was at 3-4
bp for direct repeats, 1-2 bp for inverted repeats, and 3 bp for
everted repeats (Fig. 2B). It should be noted that there
were significant variations in the basal, i.e. ligand-independent, activity of PR and ER fusion proteins, depending on
the response element tested. Most notably, increasing the spacing of
direct repeats from 3 to 4 bp led to a 1.9-fold higher basal activity
of VP64-C7-PR and a 3.7-fold increase in the case of VP64-C7-ER. High
basal activity is extremely undesirable for an inducible promoter
system, where tight control over the expression levels of a particular
gene of interest is often required, especially if the gene product is
toxic. Thus, in choosing appropriate response elements, particular
attention must be paid not only to hormone inducibility but also to its
basal activity in the presence of the regulatory protein. The response
element consisting of direct repeats with a spacing of three
nucleotides was considered to be a good choice for use in a
hormone-inducible artificial promoter, since it was compatible with
both PR and ER fusion proteins. Significantly, basal activity of these
promoters in the presence of either PR or ER fusion proteins was among
the lowest of all response elements tested. Furthermore, good
hormone-induced activation of transcription was observed with both
VP64-C7-PR (3.9-fold) and VP64-C7-ER (9.5-fold).
Generation of Novel DNA Binding Domains--
While the use of the
C7 DNA binding domain was well suited for the preliminary studies
described above, it may not be the best choice for incorporation into
an inducible transcriptional regulator. The C7 protein is a variant of
the mouse transcription factor Zif268 (37), with increased
affinity but unchanged specificity for a Sp1-type site (4). We reasoned
that the use of alternate DNA binding domains would minimize potential
pleiotropic effects of the chimeric regulators. Previously, we
described a strategy for the rapid assembly of zinc finger proteins
from a family of predefined zinc finger domains specific for each of
the 16 5'-GNN-3' DNA triplets (6, 8). Three-finger proteins binding any
desired 5'-(GNN)3-3' sequence can be rapidly prepared by
grafting the amino acid residues involved in base-specific DNA
recognition into the framework of the consensus three-finger protein
Sp1C (33). To date, well over 100 three-finger proteins have been produced in our laboratory. Two of these, B3 and N1, were chosen for
use in the construction of inducible transcriptional regulators (Fig.
3A). The B3 and N1 proteins
are designed to bind the sequences 5'-GGA GGG GAC-3' or 5'-GGG GTA
GAA-3', respectively. To verify their DNA binding specificity, these
proteins were purified as MBP fusions and tested by ELISA analysis
using an arbitrary selection of oligonucleotides containing
5'-(GNN)3-3' sequences (Fig. 3B). Significantly,
both proteins recognized their target sequence and showed no
cross-reactivity to any of the other 5'-(GNN)3-3' sequences
tested. However, as judged by ELISA, binding of N1 was much weaker than
binding of B3. Therefore, affinities were determined by electrophoretic
mobility shift analysis. The B3 protein bound its target sequence with
a KD value of 15 nM, similar to the
KD values we previously reported for other
three-finger proteins (8). In contrast, the N1 protein displayed an
affinity for its target that was dramatically lower, and we estimated
its KD value to be in the range of 5-10
µM. The fact that the two proteins had very different
affinities for their respective target sequences allowed us to
investigate the influence of affinity on the functionality of the
inducible expression systems.
RU486- and 4-OHT-inducible Systems for the Control of Gene
Expression--
To allow for a comparative analysis, a series of
RU486- or 4-OHT-inducible transcriptional regulators were constructed
containing either the B3 or the N1 DNA binding domain (Fig.
4A). The role of placement of
the activation domain was investigated, by fusing it either to the N or
the C terminus of the protein. Two different activation domains were
compared: the herpes simplex virus VP16 transactivation domain (38) and
the synthetic VP64 activation domain, which consists of four tandem
repeats of VP16's minimal activation domain (8).
Synthetic promoters were constructed based on the B3 and N1 DNA target
sequences and the optimal response element structure defined above
(Fig. 4B). The 10xB3-TATA-luc and 10xN1-TATA-luc plasmids
each contain five response elements, consisting of direct repeats
spaced by three nucleotides, upstream of a TATA box and a firefly
luciferase coding region. The response elements are separated from each
other by six nucleotides and should provide for the binding of five
dimers and maximal promoter activity.
The activity of the various fusion
constructs was assessed by transient
cotransfection studies with the cognate
TATA reporter plasmids in HeLa cells (Figs. 5 and 6; Table
I). In general, the ER fusion
proteins were more potent transactivators, and 4-OHT-induced luciferase
activity was typically 3-7 times higher than RU486-induced luciferase
activity mediated by the PR fusion proteins (compare Figs. 5 and 6).
However, since the basal (i.e. ligand-independent) activity
of ER chimeras was often somewhat higher, their hormone-induced -fold
stimulation was not generally better. Hormone-dependent gene activation in excess of 2 orders of magnitude was commonly observed with both PR and ER fusion proteins, values that are significantly better than those previously reported for ER and PR
fusion proteins (26, 27, 39).
The placement of the activation domain had a significant influence on
the activity of the chimeric regulators. However, optimal placement was
dependent on the nature of the activation domain. Whereas the VP16
domain yielded the more potent activators when placed at the C
terminus, the VP64 domain was more active at the N terminus (Figs. 5
and 6; compare A and B with C and
D). Accordingly, direct comparisons demonstrated that an
N-terminal VP64 was more potent than a N-terminal VP16 domain, and a
C-terminal VP16 was more potent than a C-terminal VP64 domain (data not
shown). The nature and placement of the activation domain was also
found to have an influence on the basal activity of the chimeric
regulators. In particular, a relatively high basal activity was
observed in the case of regulators with N-terminal VP64 domain (Fig.
5C and Fig. 6, C and D).
The nature of the DNA binding domain had a major influence on the
extent of ligand dependence of the chimeras. Use of the N1 protein as
the DNA binding domain led to more tightly regulated fusion constructs
with significantly better -fold stimulation of promoter activities
(Figs. 5 and 6; compare A and C with B and D) than the use of B3. This difference is most likely
due to the dramatic affinity differences between N1 and B3. In
particular, the N1-ER-VP64 regulator had no significant basal activity
and was capable of mediating a 464-1319-fold activation of the
10xN1-TATA minimal promoter upon 4-OHT induction (Fig. 6D;
Table I).
Coordinated Regulation of Multiple Promoters--
Zinc finger
technology has made a large repertoire of DNA binding specificities
available for use in protein engineering (6, 8, 9). The availability of
different steroid hormone receptor-derived regulatory domains (26, 30)
and the ability to redirect chimeric regulators to virtually any
desired target sequence should make it possible to independently
regulate the expression of multiple genes at the same time. To examine
this possibility, a reporter plasmid directing the expression of
Potential of Zinc Finger-LBD Fusions for the Regulation of Natural
Promoters--
Ready access to polydactyl zinc finger proteins that
bind 18 bp of DNA sequence has provided for the generation of
artificial transcription factors capable of imposing dominant
regulatory effects on endogenous genes (9). For many applications of
this approach it may be desirable that the effect on endogenous gene expression is reversible. We therefore sought to extend our previous studies and generate LBD fusion proteins suitable for
ligand-dependent regulation of natural promoters. One major
drawback of steroid hormone receptors in this approach is that they
bind DNA as dimers. Thus, when the fusion protein C7-ER-VP64 was
transiently expressed in HeLa cells, it was unable to regulate a
reporter construct carrying a single C7 binding site, while it readily
regulated a reporter that had two C7 binding sites and therefore
accommodated the binding of a dimer to a defined 18-bp site consisting
of a repeat of two identical 9-bp sites (Fig. 9A). The most
direct approach toward targeting natural promoters would therefore be through binding to a composite target sequence that is in accord with
the symmetry requirements imposed by dimerization. However, we reasoned
that this approach would be limited, since promoter-specific homodimer
binding sites consisting of two identical 9-bp sequences with the
appropriate spacing and orientation would be too rare to be of general
use. While targeting promoters using heterodimeric proteins binding a
composite site consisting of two distinct 9-bp sites would be feasible,
it is also not desirable, because it would require the delivery of a
heterodimer and hence two genes. In addition, most steroid receptor
LBDs function as homodimers and are not suitable to direct the
formation of specific heterodimers. Thus, we reasoned that the type of
chimeras that have proven very powerful in regulating artificial
promoters would not be optimal for the inducible regulation of
endogenous genes. Ideally, inducible regulation of endogenous genes
would be achieved by targeting a long DNA sequence lacking specific
symmetry requirements, i.e. a long asymmetric sequence. Such
sequences might be targeted if the requirement for dimerization of the
steroid hormone receptor-based transcription factors could be removed
and monomeric hormone-dependent gene switches could be prepared.
Development of a Monomeric Hormone-dependent Gene
Switch--
We have previously described zinc finger-based artificial
transcription factors capable of imposing regulation on the expression of endogenous target genes in a very specific manner (9). These transcription factors contain six zinc finger domains and recognize specific 18-bp sequences. Statistically, any given 18-bp sequence will
only occur once every 6.9 × 1010 bp and has the
potential to be unique even in the complex 3.5 × 109-bp human genome, thus fulfilling an important
prerequisite of a gene-specific regulator. We were therefore interested
in utilizing six-finger proteins as gene-specific targeting devices
with a ligand-dependent regulator. Initially, the
E2C-ER-VP64 fusion construct was prepared (Fig.
8A). The E2C protein contains
six zinc finger domains and recognizes the 18-bp sequence 5'-GGG GCC GGA GCC GCA GTG-3' in the 5'-untranslated region of the proto-oncogene c-erbB-2 (8, 40). However, when this chimera was tested on the e2c-TATA luciferase reporter plasmid that carries a single E2C
binding site upstream of a TATA box, it was constitutively active.
Further, the extent of activity was similar to the E2C-VP64 fusion
without an ER LBD, and hormone-dependent regulation was also minimal (Fig. 9B).
Apparently, the use of a large DNA binding domain recognizing an
extended stretch of DNA sequence with high affinity renders the ER LBD
fusion protein hormone- and dimerization-independent. To overcome this
problem, we produced two types of ER-based chimeric regulators,
designed to be capable of regulating gene expression through a single
binding site in a hormone-dependent manner. In the first
strategy, a heterodimeric regulator was generated consisting of the
engineered zinc finger protein E2C fused to an ER LBD as well as an ER
LBD fused to a VP64 activation domain (Fig. 8A). When this
heterodimeric regulator was expressed in HeLa cells, it had no
significant activity on the e2c-TATA luciferase reporter plasmid in the
absence of 4-OHT. The addition of hormone led to a 3-5-fold
stimulation of luciferase expression, indicating the formation of
functional heterodimers (Fig. 9, B and C).
However, hormone-induced reporter gene activation was significantly
lower than that induced by an E2C-VP64 fusion protein, a result due presumably in part to the formation of E2C-ER and ER-VP64 homodimers. Homodimers were inactive, since neither E2C-ER nor ER-VP64 alone induced luciferase expression (data not shown). In the second strategy,
fusion proteins were generated by linking the dimerization partners
E2C-ER and ER-VP64 with a flexible polypeptide linker, thereby creating
single-chain ligand binding domains. Two linker peptides of 18 or 30 amino acids in length were used to create the proteins E2C-scER/18-VP64
and E2C-scER/30-VP64 (Fig. 8A). Combination of two ER LBDs
into one single-chain fusion construct might allow for efficient
hormone-induced intramolecular dimerization and therefore yield more
efficient activators. Indeed, when E2C-scER/18-VP64 and
E2C-scER/30-VP64 were transiently expressed in HeLa cells, they
efficiently activated the e2c-TATA-luciferase reporter in a largely
hormone-dependent manner (Fig. 9C).
4-OHT-inducible transcriptional regulation was also observed with a
luciferase reporter construct under the control of a natural
erbB-2 promoter fragment, encompassing nucleotides Monomeric Gene Switch Based on EcR and RXR LBDs--
To further
explore the concept of ligand-dependent monomeric
transcriptional regulators by fusion of two LBDs, the utility of other
nuclear hormone receptors was tested. Initially, fusion proteins based
on the PR LBD, similar to the single-chain ER constructs, were
prepared. However, both 18- and 30-aa linker constructs responded with
low induction upon the addition of RU486 (approximately 2-fold stimulation; data not shown). The reason for this discrepancy is
presently unclear. Thus, the utility of the LBDs of the
Drosophila EcR was investigated. In Drosophila,
this receptor functions as a heterodimer between EcR and the product of
the ultraspiracle gene (41). However, it has been shown that
EcR also efficiently heterodimerizes with ultraspiracle's
vertebrate homologue RXR in response to the ecdysone agonists
muristerone A or ponasterone A (PonA) (24, 41, 42). The EcR and RXR
LBDs were therefore used to prepare a monomeric gene switch analogous
to the scER chimeras described above (Fig. 8B). Thus, the
human RXR Gene function is often probed by methods that either increase the
level of the gene product or decrease it. Such perturbations can be
imposed at the genomic, transcriptional, or posttranscriptional levels.
With the development of zinc finger technology, in particular the
development of polydactyl zinc finger proteins with the potential for
genome-specific targeting, new approaches toward the directed modulation of gene function have become available. The versatility of
this approach could be significantly enhanced if the function of zinc
finger-based transcription factors could be controlled in a direct
fashion with a small organic molecule. Of the strategies used in nature
to control the action of transcription factors with small molecules,
the strategy displayed by the steroid hormone receptor family of
transcription factors appears to be the most versatile of strategies by
which to accomplish this goal. Protein engineering within this family
of receptors is further facilitated by their modular structure wherein
DNA binding and ligand binding domains are readily defined.
Inducible expression systems based on the ER and PR LBDs fused to the
Gal4 DBD have been described previously (26, 27, 39). However, while
the Gal4 DBD is commonly used in transcriptional studies for the
characterization of activation and repression domains (43, 44), it may
not be an optimal choice for use in an inducible expression system. In
a gene therapy setting, both immunogenicity and specificity or unique
targeting may be of concern. In addition, the Gal4 DBD is known to
contain both a dimerization function (45) and a nuclear translocation
signal (46), both of which have the potential to attenuate hormone dependence of an artificial regulator. Accordingly, the induction ratios of expression systems based on Gal4-ER and -PR fusion proteins are relatively low (well below 100-fold) (26, 27, 39). In contrast,
with designed zinc finger proteins lacking dimerization and nuclear
localization functions, we observed induction ratios of up to 3 orders
of magnitude. In addition, the availability of various zinc finger
framework sequences of human origin coupled with the availability of a
wide variety of DNA binding specificities (6, 8, 9) should allow for
the construction of regulators with minimal immunogenicity and
experimenter-defined targeting specificity.
Little is known about nonspecific effects of designed transcriptional
regulators used in the various inducible expression systems described
to date (19-29). However, in order to be able to correlate an observed
phenotype with the function of the induced gene, the absence of
concomitant nonspecific regulation of endogenous genes is essential.
Recent progress in DNA microarray technologies has made it possible to
assess the specificity of gene regulation in great detail (47, 48), and
it will be important to compare available systems using this new
approach. It is to be expected that engineered zinc finger proteins
will prove to be the DBDs of choice, since they can be easily optimized
for minimal pleiotropic effect by screening DBDs of different
specificities. In addition, while most zinc finger proteins described
to date recognize G + C-rich sequences, recent progress from our
laboratory will make proteins binding A + T-rich sequences as readily
available (data not shown). An inducible expression system acting
through an A + T-rich minimal promoter might present advantages because
natural promoters are generally rather G + C-rich. Targeting of A + T-rich sequences should further reduce the probability of
cross-reactivity of the designed regulator.
It is commonly believed that heterologous proteins fused to a nuclear
hormone receptor LBD are rendered inactive in the absence of a ligand.
However, while many of our transcriptional regulators did indeed have
very low basal activities, we found significant variations between the
degree of ligand independence of the different fusion constructs (Figs.
5 and 6). Evidence of ligand independence can also be found in the
previous reports of ER- and PR-based transcription factors (26, 27,
39). Steroid hormone receptors are rendered inactive at least in part
due to hsp90 binding to the LBD (14). Since both the ER and the PR
fusion constructs described herein contain receptor fragments long
enough to encompass the entire hsp90 binding domain, this raises
questions concerning the mechanism of ligand-independent
transcriptional activation. It seems possible that hsp90 interaction
with the chimeric proteins is weaker than with the full-length steroid
hormone receptors and that the decreased stability of the
hsp90-sequestered state leads to a pool of free monomeric chimeric
regulators that are transcriptionally active. This scenario may be true
particularly in the case of the ER fusion proteins, since it has been
shown that a region immediately preceding the LBD may be required for high affinity hsp90 binding, although there may be no direct
interaction (14). Regardless of the mechanism, our results show that
the extent of the basal activity is dependent on the zinc finger
protein used as DBD, the nature of the LBD, the type of activation
domain, and the placement of the activation domain within the protein. The most important of these factors appears to be the DBD, since the N1
fusion proteins generally had a lower basal activity, or none at all,
and therefore displayed higher induction ratios than the B3 fusion
proteins. An even more extreme observation was made with the
E2C-ER-VP64 construct, which displayed a very high constitutive activity (Fig. 8C). The E2C protein binds DNA with a 0.5 nM dissociation constant. Thus, there is a direct
correlation between affinity and basal activity. The N1 protein binds
its target sequence with a very low affinity, with a
KD value in the micromolar range (5-10
µM; see Fig. 3B), which may be too weak for
efficient transcriptional activation as an unliganded monomer.
Dimerization, on the other hand, should cause a significant increase in
the effective affinity of the bound transcription factor that may explain the efficient ligand-induced transcriptional activation observed for this transcription factor. Thus, for the construction of
the ligand-dependent regulators described here that
function as dimeric proteins, zinc finger proteins with low affinity
seem to be preferable over those with high affinities. High affinity binding of a monomeric DBD may simply act to shift the equilibrium between the hsp90-sequestered state and the DNA-bound state in favor of
the DNA-bound state, thereby enhancing the basal activity and reducing
the magnitude of ligand responsiveness.
We have shown that our modular system for controlling target gene
expression is able to independently control the expression of two genes
within the same transfected cell population, as evidenced by
RU486-dependent luciferase induction and 4-OHT-induced
Engineered zinc finger proteins recognizing unique 18-bp addresses have
proven to be potent gene-specific targeting devices for the production
of artificial transcription factors (9). Typically, long asymmetric DNA
sequences have been targeted using polydactyl zinc finger proteins
consisting of six zinc finger domains. While the ER- and PR-based
transcription factors described above function through recognition of
an 18-bp target site, homodimerization places specific constraints on
the nature of the target site (Fig. 11). To overcome these targeting
constraints, we designed monomeric steroid-hormone receptor variants.
We rendered transcriptional regulators prepared from six zinc finger
domains ligand-dependent by incorporation of two serially
connected LBDs (Figs. 8 and 11). Single-chain regulators containing
either two ER LBDs or one EcR and one RXR LBD were functional as
monomers and efficiently regulated a natural or synthetic promoter in a
ligand-inducible manner by binding to a single 18-bp binding site (Fig.
9 and 10). While we only show ligand-dependent reporter
gene activation, this strategy should also be suitable for the
regulation of endogenous genes and for transcriptional repression by
incorporation of a repression domain. The use of these types of fusion
proteins for the inducible regulation of endogenous genes would have
significant advantages over other strategies, i.e.
expression of the regulator from an inducible promoter. We have
recently shown that the use of a
tetracycline/doxycycline-dependent expression vector (19)
to regulate the expression of an artificial transcription factor is a
viable strategy to impose inducible regulation on the endogenous
erbB-2 gene (9). However, this strategy requires the
delivery of two genes: one encoding the zinc finger protein under the
control of a regulatable promoter and the other encoding the regulatory
protein. Delivery of multiple vectors is a laborious process and a
major hurdle, especially in a gene therapy setting. The use of a
monomeric, ligand-dependent transcriptional regulator would
be a much more simple and elegant approach and would require only
one gene to be delivered. Single-chain steroid hormone receptor LBDs
also have the potential for fewer pleiotropic effects, since they are
unlikely to engage in heterodimerization with endogenous steroid
hormone receptor LBDs due to their intramolecular mode of action. It
has not escaped our attention that single-chain steroid hormone LBDs
may provide considerable advantages toward the engineering of domains
responsive to different ligands. Since homodimerization is no longer
required for these receptors to be functional, each of the LBDs present
in a single-chain steroid hormone receptor can be independently mutated
to create ligand binding sites not accessible to the native LBDs that
function by intermolecular dimerization of identical LBDs.
In summary, we describe novel fusion proteins constructed from designed
zinc finger DNA binding domains and steroid hormone receptor LBDs. We
show that the utility of such chimeras is 2-fold. First, fusion of zinc
finger proteins to a transcriptional activation domain and a modified
LBD derived from either ER or PR yields potent,
ligand-dependent, and highly sequence-specific
transcriptional regulators. Together with optimized minimal promoters,
these regulators provide 4-OHT- or RU486-inducible expression systems
with induction ratios of 2-3 orders of magnitude. Second, we also
explore the potential use of zinc finger-steroid receptor fusion
proteins for the regulation of natural promoters where single
experimenter-defined response elements might be targeted. A
gene-specific six-finger protein binding an 18-bp target sequence was
converted into a ligand-dependent regulator by fusion with
either two ER LBDs or one EcR and one RXR LBD. These engineered
single-chain steroid hormone receptor LBDs undergo an intramolecular
rearrangement, are functional as monomers, and have potential for the
inducible regulation of natural promoters associated with endogenous
genes. Together, these chemically regulated transcription factors
provide powerful new tools that may be applied to the study of gene
function and the alteration of phenotypes of cells or organisms.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
; aa 373-654) was
PCR-amplified from pVgRXR (Invitrogen) using the primers RXRFse-F (5'-GAG GAG GAG GGC CGG CCG GGA AGC CGT GCA GGA GGA GCG GC-3') and
RXRSpe-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GAG ACT AGT GGA ACC ACC CCC ACC ACC GCC
CGA GCC ACC GCC ACC AGA GGA AGT CAT TTG GTG CGG CGC CTC CAG C-3'). The
ligand binding domain of the ecdysone receptor (EcR, aa 202-462;
Drosophila melanogaster) was PCR-amplified from pVgRXR using
the primers EcRNhe-F1 (for the 18-aa linker construct; 5'-GAG GAG GAG
GAG GCT AGC TCT TCC GGT GGC GGC CAA GAC TTT GTT AAG AAG G-3') or
EcRNhe-F2 (for the 30-aa linker construct; 5'-GAG GAG GAG GAG GCT AGC
GGC GGT GGC GGT GGC TCC TCT GGT GGC GGT GGC GGT TCT TCC GGT GGC GGC CAA
GAC TTT GTT AAG AAG G-3') and EcRAsc-B (5'-GAG GAG GAG GGC GCG CCC GGC
ATG AAC GTC CCA GAT CTC CTC GAG-3'). The PCR products were then
digested with, respectively, FseI and SpeI, or
NheI and AscI, and inserted into
FseI-AscI-linearized pcDNA3/E2C-VP64 (8).
DNA binding domains were exchanged via SfiI digestion, and
effector domains were exchanged via
AscI-PacI digestion.
gal-Basic (CLONTECH) and used to
replace the luciferase coding region of 10xN1-TATA-luc via
HindIII-BamHI digestion.
-Galactosidase Reporter Assays--
For all
transfections, HeLa cells were plated in 24-well dishes and used at a
confluency of 40-60%. For luciferase reporter assays, 175 ng of
reporter plasmid (promotor constructs in pGL3 or, as negative control,
pGL3-Basic) and 25 ng of effector plasmid (zinc finger-steroid receptor
fusions in pcDNA3 or, as negative control, empty pcDNA3) were
transfected using the LipofectAMINE reagent (Life Technologies, Inc.).
After approximately 24 h, expression was induced by the addition
of 10 nM RU486 (Biomol), 100 nM 4-OHT (Sigma),
or 5 µM ponasterone A (Invitrogen). Cell extracts were prepared approximately 48 h after transfection and assayed for luciferase activity using the Promega luciferase assay reagent in a
MicroLumat LB96P luminometer (EG&G Berthold, Gaithersburg, MD). For
dual reporter assays, 85 ng of luciferase reporter plasmid, 85 ng of
-galactosidase reporter plasmid, and 15 ng of each of the two
effector plasmids were transfected.
-Galactosidase activity was
measured using the luminescent
-galactosidase detection kit II
(CLONTECH).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (15K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
A, domain structure of zinc finger
protein-steroid hormone receptor fusion proteins. VP64,
activation domain; C7, DNA binding domain.
B, reporter constructs used for determining the optimal
structure of a response element (RE). The arrows
indicate position and orientation of the two half-sites.

View larger version (37K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Determination of the optimal spacing and
orientation of the half-sites of an artificial response element.
HeLa cells were cotransfected with VP64-C7-PR (A) or
VP64-C7-ER (B) expression vectors and the indicated reporter
plasmids. 24 h after transfection, cells were either left
untreated (
) or induced (+) by the addition of 10 nM
RU486 (A) or 100 nM 4-OHT (B).
Luciferase activity in total cell extracts was measured 48 h after
transfection. Each bar represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate measurements. RLU, relative light units;
dr, direct repeat; iv, inverted repeat;
ev, everted repeat.

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Generation of designed zinc finger proteins
with novel DNA binding specificity. A, amino acid
sequence of the three-finger proteins B3 and N1. DNA recognition helix
positions
2 to 6, shown in boldface type, were
grafted into the framework of the three-finger protein Sp1C. The
location of the antiparallel
sheets and the
helices, structural
hallmarks of zinc finger domains, are as indicated. DNA binding
specificity of each finger is shown on the left.
F1 to F3, fingers 1-3. B, ELISA
analysis of DNA binding specificity. Zinc finger proteins were
expressed in E. coli as MBP fusions and purified.
Specificity of binding was analyzed by measuring binding to
immobilized biotinylated hairpin oligonucleotides containing
the indicated 5'-(GNN)3-3' sequences. Black
bars, B3; gray bars, N1. Binding of
the N1 protein was much weaker, and development time was about 10 times
longer than for the B3 protein. The maximal signals were normalized to
1. The KD value for binding to the specific target
sequence was measured by electrophoretic mobility shift assay and is
labeled above the corresponding bars.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
RU486- and 4-OHT-inducible systems for the
control of gene expression. A, domain structure of zinc
finger protein-steroid hormone receptor fusion proteins. AD,
activation domain (VP16 or VP64); ZF, zinc finger DNA
binding domains (B3 or N1). B, structure of the
10xB3-TATA-luc- and 10xN1-TATA-luc-inducible promoter constructs. Each
contains 10 binding sites, organized into five response elements
consisting of direct repeats spaced by three nucleotides. Response
elements are spaced by six nucleotides.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Analysis of PR fusion proteins. HeLa
cells were cotransfected with expression vectors encoding the indicated
PR fusion proteins and 10xB3-TATA-luc (A and C)
or 10xN1-TATA-luc (B and D). 24 h after
transfection, cells were either left untreated (
), or 10 nM RU486 was added (+). Luciferase activity in total cell
extracts was measured 48 h after transfection. Each bar
represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate measurements;
vertical axes show the relative light units.
RU486-induced stimulation of luciferase expression is indicated.
C, control plasmid pcDNA3 that does not express a fusion
protein.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Analysis of ER fusion proteins. HeLa
cells were cotransfected with expression vectors encoding the indicated
ER fusion proteins and with 10xB3-TATA-luc (A and
C) or 10xN1-TATA-luc (B and D).
24 h after transfection, cells were left untreated (
), or 100 nM 4-OHT was added (+). Luciferase activity in total cell
extracts was measured 48 h after transfection. Each bar
represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate measurements;
vertical axes show the relative light units.
4-OHT-induced stimulation of luciferase expression is indicated.
C, control plasmid pcDNA3 that does not express a fusion
protein.
Summary of RU486- and 4-OHT-induced gene expression
-galactosidase under the control of the 10xN1-TATA minimal promoter
was constructed. The chimeric regulators B3-PR-VP16 and N1-ER-VP64 were
then transiently expressed in HeLa cells along with the 10xB3-TATA-luc
and 10xN1-TATA-
-galactosidase reporter plasmids. The transfected
cells were treated with either RU486 or 4-OHT, and the luciferase and
-galactosidase activities were monitored (Fig.
7). Significantly, RU486 induced the
expression of luciferase while having no effect on
-galactosidase
reporter gene activity. 4-OHT, on the other hand, did not affect
luciferase expression but efficiently activated
-galactosidase
expression. These results demonstrate that the two regulator/promoter
combinations act independently of one another and that multiple genes
can be efficiently and independently regulated by the selective
addition of the desired hormone.

View larger version (12K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Independent regulation of two reporter
genes. HeLa cells were cotransfected with expression vectors
encoding B3-PR-VP16 and N1-ER-VP64 fusion proteins and with the
10xB3-TATA-luc and 10xN1-TATA-
-gal reporter plasmids. 24 h
after transfection, cells were left untreated, or either 10 nM RU486 or 100 nM 4-OHT was added. 48 h
after transfection, luciferase activity (black
bars) and
-galactosidase (
-gal) activity
(gray bars) was measured in total cell extracts.
Each bar represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate
measurements. RLU, relative light units.
758 to
1 with respect to the ATG initiation codon (Fig. 9D).
Significantly, the constructs with the longer linkers were reproducibly
somewhat more ligand-dependent than the short linker
variants (10.3- and 4.9-fold versus 8.3- and 3.6-fold
4-OHT-induction, respectively). In summary, these results show that
dimeric regulators requiring response elements similar to those of
natural steroid hormone receptors were successfully converted into
monomeric ligand-dependent transcription factors capable of
modulating gene expression by binding to a long asymmetric DNA
sequence.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Domain structure of
ligand-dependent, monomeric transcriptional
regulators. A, structure of various ER fusion proteins.
B, structure of single-chain RXR/EcR fusion proteins.
E2C, six finger protein mediating DNA binding;
VP64, transcriptional activation domain.

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 9.
Regulation of gene expression by
hormone-dependent, single-chain ER fusion constructs.
A, fusion proteins with a single ER-LBD bind as dimers. HeLa
cells were cotransfected with a C7-ER-VP64 expression vector and the
indicated TATA luciferase reporter plasmids carrying either one or two
C7 binding sites. 24 h after transfection, cells were left
untreated (
), or 100 nM 4-OHT was added (+). Luciferase
activity in total cell extracts was measured 48 h after
transfection. Each bar represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate measurements; vertical axes
show the relative light units. C, control plasmid pcDNA3
that does not express a fusion protein. B-D, regulation of
transcription through a single binding site by fusion proteins with two
ER-LBDs. HeLa cells were cotransfected with the indicated expression
vectors and either the e2c-TATA luciferase reporter (B and
C) or the erbB-2 promoter (
758 to -1)
luciferase reporter (D). 4-OHT induction and measurement of
luciferase activity were carried out as described in A. No
induction was observed when cells were treated with RU486 or
ponasterone A (not shown).
LBD (aa 373-654) and the Drosophila EcR LBD
(aa 202-462) were inserted between the E2C DBD and the VP64 activation
domain, creating E2C-RE-VP64. In this fusion construct, the two LBDs
are connected by an 18-amino acid flexible linker, the same linker that
was used in E2C-scER/18-VP64. When this chimeric regulator was
transiently expressed in HeLa cells along with an erbB-2
promoter luciferase reporter plasmid, a 3-fold PonA-induced
transcriptional activation was observed (Fig.
10A). This effect was
specific, since no activation of an erbB-2 promoter reporter
construct lacking the E2C zinc finger binding site was observed.
However, basal activity in the absence of PonA was relatively high,
about 2-fold higher than the reporter alone. To enhance the ligand
dependence, the length of the linker connecting the RXR and EcR LBDs
was increased, a measure that seemed beneficial in the case of the
single-chain ER constructs (Fig. 9, C and D). A
longer linker should allow the LBDs to optimize their contact as well
as add to the conformational disorder of the unliganded state. Indeed,
when the linker was elongated from 18 aa (in E2C-RE-VP64) to 30 aa (in
E2C-RLE-VP64) or 36 aa (in E2C-RLLE-VP64), basal activity was
significantly reduced. When tested on the erbB-2 promoter
luciferase reporter, PonA inducibility increased from 3-fold to 9- or
10-fold, respectively, an extent of responsiveness comparable with that
of the single-chain ER fusion constructs (Fig. 10B). Thus,
serial connection of pairs of nuclear hormone receptor LBDs appears to
be a generally applicable strategy to render monomeric DNA-binding
proteins ligand-dependent (Fig.
11).

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 10.
Regulation of gene expression by
hormone-dependent, single-chain RXR/EcR fusion
constructs. A, regulation of an erbB-2
(
758 to
1) promoter-luciferase reporter construct. The
erbB-2 (
1571 to
24) reporter lacks the E2C zinc finger
target sequence located between positions
24 and
7. B,
effect of linker length on ligand-dependent transcriptional
regulation of the erbB-2 (
758 to
1) luciferase reporter
construct. HeLa cells were cotransfected with the indicated expression
vectors and reporter plasmids. 24 h after transfection, cells were
left untreated (
), or 5 µM ponasterone A was added (+).
Luciferase activity in total cell extracts was measured 48 h after
transfection. Each bar represents the mean value ± S.D. of duplicate measurements; vertical axes
show the relative light units. pcDNA3.1, control plasmid that does
not express a fusion protein. No induction was observed when cells were
treated with RU486 or 4-OHT (not shown).

View larger version (31K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 11.
Schematic representation of the two modes of
action of zinc finger-steroid hormone receptor fusion proteins.
Left, three-finger fusion proteins undergo intermolecular
dimerization and bind composite target sequences consisting of two 9-bp
subsites. Right, six-finger "single-chain" fusion
proteins undergo an intramolecular rearrangement and bind to a single,
contiguous 18-bp DNA sequence. 3F, three finger protein;
6F, six finger protein; ED, effector
domain.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-galactosidase expression (Fig. 7). The lack of
-galactosidase
induction by RU486 and luciferase induction by 4-OHT convincingly
demonstrates the specificity of the chimeric regulators described here.
Not only is the exquisite specificity of the DNA binding domains
retained, but also there is no detectable cross-reaction between RU486
and the ER LBD or between 4-OHT and the PR LBD. The ability to
reversibly control the expression of multiple genes or alleles of a
gene could prove very useful for many basic research applications. In
particular, selective and independent expression of one gene but not
another (and vice versa) by small nontoxic ligands would allow for a comparative analysis of gene function, both in
vitro and in vivo. In addition, the system described
here also allows for both genes to be expressed simultaneously, which
could be useful to study the functional interactions between proteins. This is an advantage over a recently described system based on engineered tetracycline-controlled transactivators, which allows switching between the expression of two genes but not their
simultaneous expression (32). It should be possible to combine the
systems described here with the Tet system to control as many as five genes specifically.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We are very grateful to Sophia Y. Tsai for providing the GL914VPc' and p17x4TATA-luc constructs and to Trevor D. Littlewood for the pBSKS+ER plasmid.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant CA86258, Novartis, and the Skaggs Institute for Chemical Biology (to C. F. B.).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.
Recipient of fellowships from the Krebsliga beider Basel and the
Swiss Cancer League.
§ Present address: Novartis Pharma AG, CH-4002 Basel, Switzerland.
¶ Recipient of a fellowship from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: The Scripps
Research Institute, Department of Molecular Biology, BCC-550, 10550 N. Torrey Pines Rd., La Jolla, CA 92037. Tel.: 858-784-9098; Fax: 858-784-2583; E-mail: carlos@scripps.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 2, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M005108200
2 Dreier, B., Segal, D, J., and Barbas, C. F., III (2000) J. Mol. Biol., in press.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: LBD, ligand binding domain; 4-OHT, 4-hydroxytamoxifen; DBD, DNA binding domain; EcR, ecdysone receptor; ER, estrogen receptor; MBP, maltose-binding protein; PonA, ponasterone A; PR, progesterone receptor; RXR, retinoid X receptor; bp, base pair(s); aa, amino acid(s); BSA, bovine serum albumin; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Desjarlais, J. R., and Berg, J. M. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 89, 7345-7349 |
| 2. | Choo, Y., and Klug, A. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 11163-11167 |
| 3. | Rebar, E. J., and Pabo, C. O. (1994) Scienc 263, 671-673 |
| 4. | Wu, H., Yang, W.-P., and Barbas, C. F., III (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 344-348 |
| 5. | Greisman, H. A., and Pabo, C. O. (1997) Science 275, 657-661 |
| 6. | Segal, D. J., Dreier, B., Beerli, R. R., and Barbas, C. F., III (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 2758-2763 |
| 7. | Segal, D. J., and Barbas, C. F., III (2000) Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 4, 34-39 |
| 8. | Beerli, R. R., Segal, D. J., Dreier, B., and Barbas, C. F., III (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 14628-14633 |
| 9. | Beerli, R. R., Dreier, B., and Barbas, C. F., III (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 97, 1495-1500 |
| 10. | Janknecht, R., and Hunter, T. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 1620-1627 |
| 11. | Darnell, J. E., Jr. (1997) Science 277, 1630-1635 |
| 12. | Carson-Jurica, M. A., Schrader, W. T., and O'Malley, W. (1990) Endocr. Rev. 11, 201-220 |
| 13. | Evans, R. M. (1988) Science 240, 889-895 |
| 14. | Pratt, W. B., and Toft, D. O. (1997) Endocr. Rev. 18, 306-360 |
| 15. | Beato, M. (1989) Cell 56, 335-344 |
| 16. | Eilers, M., Picard, D., Yamamoto, K. R., and Bishop, J. M. (1989) Nature 340, 66-68 |
| 17. | Superti-Furga, G., Bergers, G., Picard, D., and Busslinger, M. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 88, 5114-5118 |