RNA Polymerase-cNMP-ligated cAMP Receptor Protein (CRP)
Mutant Interactions in the Enhancement of Transcription by CRP
Mutants*
Shenglun
Wang,
Ying
Shi,
Inna
Gorshkova
, and
Frederick P.
Schwarz§
From the Center for Advanced Research in Biotechnology/National
Institute of Standards and Technology, Rockville, Maryland 20850
Received for publication, June 6, 2000, and in revised form, August 4, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The enhancement of the transcription of three
synthetic promoters by cNMP-ligated cAMP receptor protein (CRP)/mutant
complexes was determined from the transcription yields of a short AAUU
transcript in an abortive initiation in vitro transcription
assay. The cNMP-ligated CRP and mutants were cAMP, cGMP, and cIMP
ligated with CRP, T127L CRP, S128A CRP, and T127L/S128A CRP. The
transcriptional activation of a 152-base pair lacUV5
promoter (synlac promoter) with a CRP consensus binding
site sequence (syncon promoter) was enhanced by an average
factor of 12.3 ± 0.5 with the cAMP-ligated complexes of
CRP/mutants and cGMP-ligated T127L, although their promoter binding
site affinities varied by a factor of 5. However, in the presence of
bound RNA polymerase, the binding affinities only ranged from 0.8 ± 0.2 × 107 M
1
for cAMP-ligated CRP* to 1.8 ± 0.3 × 107
M
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP,
indicating that the CRP/mutant interacts with the bound RNA polymerase,
which would account for the near constancy of the enhancement factors.
The corresponding enhancement factors for the synlac
promoter and a promoter with a different CRP binding site sequence
(syngal promoter) were also nearly the same, 7.2 ± 0.7 and 6 ± 1, respectively. The binding reaction of the
syncon promoter to the RNA polymerase is exothermic, with a
binding constant (Kb) = 2.1 ± 0.2 × 107 M
1.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The transcription of over 25 operons, which code for enzymes
involved in carbohydrate metabolism, is enhanced by the binding of cAMP
receptor protein (CRP)1 to
the promoter region of the operon at a site adjacent to the RNA
polymerase binding site. Low glucose levels in the cell increase the
level of cAMP, resulting in substantial cAMP binding to the amino-terminal domains of the CRP dimer (45,000 g
mol
1), which induces a conformational change
in the CRP so that the two carboxyl-terminal domains bind specifically
to a site in the promoter (1), centered either 70.5, 61.5, or 41.5 base
pairs upstream from the promoter transcription start point (P1).
Mutations along the helical monomer-monomer interface of CRP
significantly alter the in vivo level of transcriptional
enhancement by CRP. Conversion of the helical interface to a more
perfect leucine zipper by mutating Thr127 to Leu
(T127L) results in in vivo activation of transcription in
the presence of cGMP, an analog of cAMP (2). Mutation of the
Ser128 residue, which interacts with cAMP in the other
subunit, to Ala (S128A) reduces the enhancement of in vivo
transcription by CRP (2, 3). A mutant of CRP with both mutations (CRP*)
enhances in vivo transcription in the absence of cAMP (2).
In addition, the mutation of Thr127 to Cys, Ile, or Ser
also resulted in the enhancement of in vivo and in
vitro transcription in the presence of cGMP, and it was concluded
that the Thr127
Cys, Ile, and Ser mutations in CRP
produced structural changes in CRP similar to those induced by cAMP
binding to CRP (3). Since the binding affinities of cAMP to CRP and the
CRP mutants are nearly the same (3, 4), changes in the enhancement of transcription by CRP must involve processes subsequent to the binding
of cAMP to CRP. A recent isothermal titration calorimetric (ITC) study
of the binding of three 40-bp DNA duplexes with each one containing the
CRP binding site sequence of a promoter to cNMP-ligated CRP, T127L,
S128A, and CRP* revealed large differences in the CRP binding site
affinities, which could account for differences in the enhancement of
transcription by the cNMP-ligated CRP mutants (5). In addition,
fluorescence polarization studies show that CRP with bound DNA (6) also
interacts with RNA polymerase. Photocross-linking studies indicate that
CRP is in close enough proximity to interact with RNA polymerase on the
lac promoter (7). Transcription results from surface
mutations on CRP show that the most likely RNA polymerase contact
points on the CRP are on a loop centered at His159 in the
RNA polymerase proximal subunit of CRP when the CRP binding site is at
61.5 bp from P1 and also include contacts with a second loop centered
at Lys52 on the distal subunit when the CRP binding site is
at
40 bp from P1 (8). More specifically, Ryu et al. (9),
using nitrocellulose filter binding assays, observed a 40% increase in
the amount of protein-bound lac promoter in a solution of
RNA polymerase and cAMP-ligated CRP relative to the amount of
protein-bound lac promoter in the absence of RNA polymerase.
They inferred that the RNA polymerase bound to the lac
promoter increases the CRP binding affinity to the promoter-RNA
polymerase complex by a factor of 1.4. More recently, Leu at al. (10)
have shown that the cAMP-ligated Thr127
Cys, Gly, Ile,
and Ser mutants form ternary complexes with RNA polymerase and the
lac promoter, although the T127G, T127I, and T127S CRP
mutants exhibited low binding affinity to the lac promoter.
The results show that the mutation at Thr127 affects the
CRP binding affinity to the promoter but has only a minor effect or no
effect on the formation of CRP promoter-RNA polymerase complexes
(10).
To elucidate the roles of the CRP binding site affinity to the promoter
and of the interaction of CRP with bound RNA polymerase in the
enhancement of transcription, the in vitro activation of transcription of a 152-bp length of the lacUV5 promoter with
a consensus CRP binding site sequence (syncon promoter) by
cNMP-ligated CRP mutants was determined quantitatively and compared
with the cNMP-ligated CRP/mutant binding site affinity to the promoter with and without bound RNA polymerase. The syncon promoter,
shown in Fig. 1, is the same as the native lac promoter with
the following exceptions: (i) the TA and GC pairs at positions
8 and
9, respectively, are mutated to AT and AT (11), which removes a
second in vitro transcription start point located about 20 bases upstream from P1 in the lac promoter and enhances the
RNA yield (12), and (ii) the 22-bp CRP binding site sequence centered
at
61.5 bp from P1 is based on the CRP binding site sequences of the
26 operons. The sequence of the native lac promoter with
just the mutations described in the first case above is the same as
that of the lacUV5 promoter. The enhancement of
transcription was determined from an abortive in vitro
transcription assay (13), which is designed to eliminate the processes
of RNA chain elongation and termination by including only the
ribonucleotides, adenyl(3'-5') adenosine monophosphate (ApA) and
radioactive labeled uridine 5'-triphosphate (U) in the reaction
mixture. Transcription terminates after yielding the short RNA
transcript AAUU, since guanosine 5'-triphosphate would be required to
continue the transcription as shown in Fig. 1. The enhancement
factors determined for the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants in the in
vitro transcription assay were compared with their binding affinities to a shorter 104-bp syncon promoter (Fig. 1) with
and without bound RNA polymerase, determined from ITC measurements. The
enhancement factors were also compared with those determined in the
same assay with two other synthetic promoters where the CRP binding
site sequence is replaced by that found in the lac promoter
(synlac promoter in Fig. 1) and similar to that found in the
gal promoter (syngal promoter in Fig. 1) as well
as to the enhancement factors reported earlier (2) from an in
vivo assay. Thus, the rest of the promoter sequence, including the RNA polymerase binding site and the transcription P1 start site, is the
same in all three promoters, and changes in the amount of transcription
product from these three promoters in the in vitro assay
would presumably result exclusively from differences in the CRP binding
site properties.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
The production from E. coli of CRP and
mutants and their purification have been described previously (2), and
their activities were checked by an in vitro transcription
assay described below (13). The concentration of the CRP/mutants was
determined from UV measurements at 280 nm using an extinction
coefficient of 3.5 × 104 M
1
cm
1 (14). The RNA polymerase holoenzyme was prepared and
purified according to the procedure described by Lowe et al.
(15), and an extinction coefficient of 2.77 × 105
cm
1 M
1
at 280 nm was used to determine the concentration of the RNA polymerase
(16). The potassium phosphate salts, NaCl, KCl, Tris, MgCl2, sodium salts of cAMP, cGMP, and cIMP,
mercaptoethanol, polyacrylamide, bromphenol blue, and urea were reagent
grade from Sigma. The DTT was Ultrapure brand from Life
Technologies, Inc. The sodium salt of EDTA was from Serva Co. The HCl
and glycerol were reagent grade from Mallinckrodt.
The synlac operon was obtained from a 203-base pair fragment
isolated by agarose gel electrophoresis as an EcoRI (from
Roche Molecular Biochemicals) digestion product of plasmid pHW104,
kindly supplied by Dr. K. Severinov. The syncon and
syngal promoters were obtained as the products of polymerase
chain reaction amplification, where the 203-bp synlac operon
was used as the template. In the polymerase chain reaction
amplification, the 5' 44-base primer starting at
84, upstream from
P1, was complementary to either the consensus DNA sequence or the
syngal CRP binding site sequence, while the 3' 33-base
primer sequence starting at 68, downstream from P1, was always
complementary to the synlac promoter strand. Conversion of
the CRP binding site from the sequence in the synlac promoter to the sequence found in the gal promoter required
10 base mutations, while conversion to the consensus sequence required only seven mutations in the 44-base primer sequence. The amplified products were, thus, shorter 152-bp promoters with the same sequence except for the mutations at the CRP binding site.
The syncon promoter used in the ITC measurements was only
104 bp long, from
82 to +22 in Fig. 1,
so that it contained the CRP and RNA polymerase binding site sequences.
Each complementary strand of the 104-bp promoter was synthesized at the
micromolar level on a DNA synthesizer and purified by gel
electrophoresis. The complementary sequences were annealed by heating
equal amounts of each strand in 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer
containing 1 mM MgCl2 and 0.5 M
NaCl at pH 7.4 up to 95 °C followed by slow cooling down to room
temperature. A mutated 104-bp syncon promoter with mutations
at
10 to G and
13 to C in the RNA polymerase binding region was
also prepared, purified, and annealed using the same procedure. The
concentration of the 104-bp syncon promoter was determined
from OD measurements at 260 nm using an extinction coefficient of
1.3 × 106 cm
1
M
1 based on an OD of 1 for a 50 ng µl
1 solution (17) and a molecular mass
of 65,000 g mol
1.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Sequence of the syncon
promoter. Boldface letters represent the
CRP binding site sequence. The broken line is the
sequence of the 104-bp promoter used in the ITC measurements.
|
|
In Vitro Transcription Assays--
The in vitro assay
followed the protocol described by Zhang et al. (13).
Twenty-five-µl reaction mixtures containing an 80 nM
concentration of the CRP/mutant, 0.5 nM operon, 40 nM RNA polymerase, 50 nM
[
-32P]UTP (from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), and 200 µM cNMP were preequilibrated for 10 min at 37 °C. The
high concentration of cNMP ensured that at least 90% of the CRP/mutant
was complexed with the cNMP. The buffer was 40 mM Tris-HCl
at pH 8 with 100 mM KCl, 10 mM
MgCl2, 2 mM mercaptoethanol, and 5% glycerol.
Reactions were initiated by the addition of ApA to make up a 0.25 mM ApA reaction mixture and were allowed to proceed for 15 min at 37 °C. The transcription was then terminated by the addition
of 25 µl of formamide loading buffer (80% formamide, 1× TBE
(89 mM Tris, 89 mM boric acid, 2 mM
EDTA), 0.05% bromphenol blue, 0.05% xylene cyanol) to the reaction
mixture. The reaction product, 32P-AAUU, was resolved by
electrophoresis on a 20% polyacrylamide, 8 M urea gel. The
amount of product was quantitized in units of product volume by using a
storage phosphor autoradiography method in conjunction with a Molecular
Dynamics 300 E PhosphorImager equipped with ImageQuant software. The
linear range of the imager was ascertained by the linear response
between the sample volume from 5 to 25 µl and the measured volume
count of the product band.
The enhancement factors were determined from the amount of product in
the gel electrophoresis measurements. A background volume count of the
gel at the product band position (B) was determined from a
sample of the assay mixture with just the RNA polymerase and the
ribonucleotides present. Then a volume count was taken of the product
band with just the RNA polymerase, ribonucleotides, and the promoter
present to determine the amount of RNA transcribed in the absence of
the cNMP-ligated CRP/mutants (RNA (0)). This was compared with
the product volume count determined in the presence of the cNMP-ligated
CRP/mutant complex (RNA (cNMP-ligated CRP/mutant)). The enhancement of
transcription by CRP, the transcription factor (
), was then
determined as follows.
|
(Eq. 1)
|
|
|
ITC Measurements--
The binding affinity of the cAMP-ligated
CRP/mutants to the 104 bp syncon promoter-RNA polymerase
complex was determined by ITC using a Microcal, Inc. VP Titration
Calorimeter. The VP titration calorimeter consists of a matched pair of
sample and reference vessels (1.409 ml) enclosed in an adiabatic
enclosure and a rotating stirrer-syringe for titrating ligand solutions
into the sample vessel. The ITC measurements were performed at
25.0 °C. The sample vessel contained either the RNA polymerase, the
RNA polymerase-104-bp syncon promoter complex, or the
promoter alone in the phosphate buffer, while the reference vessel
contained just the buffer solution. The phosphate buffer solution was
50 mM K3PO4 and contained 1 mM cAMP, 0.2 mM DTT, 0.2 mM EDTA,
and 0.15 mM KCl at pH 7.0. (The 1 mM cAMP
concentration in the buffer ensured that the CRP/mutant was all
complexed with the cAMP.) First, 2-4-µl aliquots of the 0.03-0.1
mM promoter solution were titrated 3-4 min apart into the
1-3 µM RNA polymerase sample solution until the binding
was saturated as evident by the lack of a heat exchange signal. Then, 10-µl aliquots of a 0.03-0.06 mM cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant
solution were titrated into the promoter-RNA polymerase complex
solution. In a separate titration, the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant solution was titrated into the sample vessel containing just a 1-3
µM promoter solution. For each of the titrations, the
additions were continued for 2-3 times past saturation so that a heat
of dilution of the titrant could be determined from these additional
peak areas. For the promoter into RNA polymerase titrations, these
extra additions amounted to about a 7% excess of the promoter to RNA
polymerase concentration. Some of the heats of dilution, particularly
the large values, were checked by titrating the titrant directly into the buffer solution. The heats of dilution were then subtracted from
the heats obtained during the titration prior to analysis of the data.
A nonlinear, least square minimization software program from Microcal,
Inc., Origin 5.0 (18), was used to fit the incremental heat of the
ith titration (
Q(i)) of the total
heat, Qt, to the total titrant concentration,
Xt, according to the equations,
|
(Eq. 2)
|
and
|
(Eq. 3)
|
where Ct is the total RNA polymerase or
promoter concentration in the sample vessel, V is the volume
of the sample vessel, and n is the stoichiometry of the
binding reaction, to yield values of Kb,
Hb0, and n. In this
investigation, only the pertinent values for the binding constant are
reported, and the other thermodynamic quantities of the binding
enthalpy and entropy will be reported in a subsequent paper on the
thermodynamics of transcription.
 |
RESULTS |
In Vitro Transcription Results--
Typical gel electrophoresis
results from transcription assays are shown in Fig.
2. The results are from an
abortive initiation in vitro transcription assay performed
with the syncon and with the synlac promoters.
The higher molecular mass bands are the radioactive labeled pApApU*pU*
transcripts. The intensities of the bands were quantified in terms of a
volume count of radiolabeled product by scanning the bands on the
PhosphorImager. By sampling the reaction mixture at 5-min intervals, it
was observed that the volume count of the transcript product increased
linearly with reaction time up to 20 min, as shown in Fig.
3. Thus, the 15-min reaction time used in
the assays was within the linear range of transcription and
below any saturation limit of product formation. The enhancement
factors determined from the product volume counts generated by the 36 combinations of cNMP-ligated CRP/mutants and the three promoters are
presented in Table I. Each enhancement
factor is averaged from at least two separate transcription assays
performed with the cNMP-ligated CRP/mutant-promoter complex. Although
the volume counts of product varied from run to run, they were always
compared with the results of the synlac promoter
transcription assays performed at the same time with the same samples
of UTP* and analyzed in the same electrophoresis gel. In this
way, the product yields were normalized for variations in the
determinations due to different levels of UTP* activity and different
electrophoresis gel conditions. The uncertainties in the enhancement
factors reflected the imprecision in the results from the different
transcription assays. Additional transcription assays were performed
with cAMP-ligated CRP and the three promoters at the same time, and the
product yields were compared on the same gel. These results yielded
enhancement factors in agreement with the enhancement factors in Table
I. The enhancement factors cover a range from 1.0 (no enhancement of
the activation) to 13.1 ± 1.0 for cAMP-ligated CRP binding to the
syncon promoter in Table I. Malan et al. (12)
determined from a kinetic analysis of the activation of transcription
by CRP an enhancement factor of 22 for the 203-bp lacUV5
promoter, while in Table I the enhancement factor for the
synlac promoter, a 152-bp lacUV5 promoter, is
7.6 ± 0.4 at the 80 nM CRP concentration used in this
assay.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Gel electrophoresis results of the in
vitro activation of transcription for the syncon
and the synlac promoter by cNMP-ligated
CRP/mutant complexes. The cNMP and CRP/mutants present in the
transcription assay mixture are indicated above the product
band. A, cAMP; G, cGMP; I, cIMP;
C, CRP; S, the S128A mutant. B, the
background from the transcription assay mixture without the promoter
and the CRP/mutants.
|
|

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
The dependence of AAUU product yield in
arbitrary units of volume count on the reaction time of the in
vitro transcription assay. O, the
synlac promoter; A, the syncon
promoter; M, the syngal promoter. The
empty symbols are the 15-min background volume
counts for each promoter.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Comparison of the enhancement factors of cNMP-ligated CRP/mutants
The uncertainties are standard uncertainties resulting from uncertainty
in the concentration of the reactants in the assay and from uncertainty
in the measurement of the yield of AAUU.
|
|
In Table I, the in vitro enhancement factors with the
cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants and cGMP-ligated T127L are almost the same for
each promoter and average 12.3 ± 0.5 for the syncon
promoter, 7.2 ± 0.7 for the synlac promoter, and
6.3 ± 1.4 for the syngal promoter. Since enhancement
factors are also observed with cGMP-ligated CRP (5.79 ± 0.03),
cGMP-ligated S128A (4.63 ± 0.04), cIMP-ligated S128A (4.81 ± 0.04), and cGMP-ligated CRP* (8.84 ± 0.01), the enhancement of
transcription of the syncon promoter is less specific with
regard to the CRP mutation than are the synlac and
syngal promoters. With regard to the activator complex, the
cNMP-ligated Thr127
Leu mutated CRP complexes exhibit
less specificity in their enhancement factors than do the cNMP-ligated
CRP and S128A complexes. Enhancement factors for the syncon
promoter are observed even with unligated T127L and CRP* and for the
synlac promoter with unligated CRP*. This shows that CRP*
can also be substantially activated in the absence of the cNMP and
belongs to a class of mutants called the CRP* mutants. For the
synlac and syngal promoters, enhancement of
transcription is also observed with cIMP-ligated CRP* in addition to
cGMP-ligated T127L. This is in contrast to the CRP and S128A activators
where enhancement factors are observed for the synlac and
syngal promoters only with the cAMP-ligated complexes. Thus,
the enhancement factors can be categorized into those belonging to the
Thr127
Leu mutated CRP complexes and those belonging to
the non-Thr127
Leu mutated CRP complexes, CRP and S128A.
ITC Results--
Despite large changes in the promoter binding
site affinities of the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant complexes,
e.g. 6.6 × 106
M
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP
versus 1.2 × 106
M
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP* to the
consensus binding site sequence (5), the enhancement factors for the
syncon promoter are almost the same. This is true for the
synlac promoter and to a lesser extent for the
syngal promoter. To determine if the promoter binding affinities to the consensus sequence are altered by the presence of
bound RNA polymerase, which would account for the constancy of the
enhancement factors, the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant binding affinities to
the promoter-RNA polymerase complex were determined from ITC
measurements. Typical ITC results are shown in Fig.
4, where 0.06 mM cAMP-ligated
CRP was titrated into a 3.0 µM concentration of
the 104-bp syncon promoter with bound RNA polymerase. The
binding reaction is endothermic with a binding constant of 2.0 × 10 7 M
1, a value
higher than that of 6.6 × 10 6 M
1, which is observed for binding
of 40-bp DNA duplexes containing the 22-bp consensus sequence to
cAMP-ligated CRP (5).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
a, ITC titration of 5-µl aliquots of
0.060 mM cAMP-ligated CRP into 0.003 mM 104-bp
syncon promoter complexed with RNA polymerase in 50 mM potassium phosphate, 0.15 mM KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 0.2 mM DTT, 1.0 mM cAMP
buffer at pH 7.0 and 25.0 °C. The molar ratio is the ratio of the
number of moles of cAMP-ligated CRP to the number of moles of the
syncon promoter-RNA polymerase complex in the cell.
b, the binding isotherm for the titration in a,
where the solid line represents the fit of the
data to the binding model described by Equations 2 and 3.
|
|
Prior to the titration, a slight excess (~7%) of promoter was
titrated into the RNA polymerase solution to saturate the binding of
promoter to the RNA polymerase as evident by the decrease of heat
exchanged between the sample and reference vessels with each addition
of the promoter. This is shown in Fig. 5,
for a titration of a 0.153 mM 104-bp syncon
promoter solution into a 1.5 µM RNA polymerase solution,
which exhibits exothermic binding to the RNA polymerase with a binding
constant of 2.1 ± 0.5 × 107
M
1 and a binding enthalpy of
150 ± 30 kJ mol
1. This is in contrast
to the endothermic binding of the cAMP-ligated CRP to the promoter-RNA
polymerase complex as well as to the promoter alone, described below.
This difference may be attributed to large endothermic contributions
from the bending of the promoter (1, 9) by the CRP and from
conformational changes in the CRP upon promoter binding (19) to the CRP
binding enthalpy. The binding constant is lower than the literature
value of 6.9 × 109
M
1 determined from a ratio of the
kinetic on and off rates of a shorter 70-bp lacUV5 promoter
binding to RNA polymerase at 37 °C in a 10 mM Tris
buffer containing 10 mM MgCl2 and 5% glycerol, 0.1 mM EDTA, 0.1 mM DTT, and 120 mM
KCl (20). The presence of the glycerol, MgCl2, and lower
ionic strength may affect the binding constant. At the 1.5 µM concentration of RNA polymerase and promoter, about
90% of the promoter is bound to the RNA polymerase, and, thus, the
observed binding of the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant is mainly to the
complex. There is undoubtedly some contribution to the binding reaction
from binding to a small concentration of the free promoter (10% of the
RNA polymerase concentration), which is 2-10 times weaker than the
binding affinity with bound RNA polymerase as shown in Table
II. The titration results are presented in Table II along with those obtained from titrating the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants into the 104-bp syncon promoter in the absence
of RNA polymerase. As shown in Table II, the binding constants of the
cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants to the promoter alone were in agreement with
those determined earlier from ITC measurements on the binding of 40-bp
consensus DNA to the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants (5). The binding
constants to the promoter, however, increase by factors of 2 (cAMP-ligated CRP) to 10 (cAMP-ligated S128A) with bound RNA polymerase
and are due to the interaction of the bound RNA polymerase with the
CRP/mutants on the promoter. These results show that the enhancement
factors for the syncon promoter are about the same because
the concentration of the ternary CRP/mutant-promoter-RNA polymerase is
the same with the different cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant activators. To
determine if the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants exhibited the same high
binding affinity to the promoter site with unbound RNA polymerase
present in solution, separate titrations were performed with
cAMP-ligated CRP and cAMP-ligated T127L titrated into a solution of RNA
polymerase with the mutated 104-bp syncon promoter that binds weakly to RNA polymerase promoter. This promoter had the same CRP
binding site sequence, but mutations at
10 to G and
13 to C in the
RNA polymerase binding region of the syncon promoter (Fig.
1) reduced its RNA polymerase binding affinity by a factor of 10-20 so
that less than 30% of this mutated promoter is complexed with RNA
polymerase. Both cAMP-ligated CRP and cAMP-ligated T127L exhibited
lower binding constants, 6 ± 2 × 106
M
1 and 5 ± 1 × 106 M
1, respectively,
close to those for binding to the promoter alone. These measurements
show that, although the RNA polymerase is present in solution, binding
of the CRP/mutant to the syncon promoter is only enhanced
with RNA polymerase bound to an adjacent site. Some
CRP/mutant binding may occur to the unbound RNA polymerase as observed
in fluorescence polarization measurements with fluorescein-labeled CRP,
but the binding affinity is 1 order of magnitude weaker (3.3 × 105 M
1 (21)) than
binding to the promoter alone. ITC measurements on the binding of
cGMP-ligated T127L, which also exhibits a high enhancement factor
(Table I), were unsuccessful because of the low heat exchange of the
binding reaction.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
a, ITC titration of 2-µl aliquots of
0.15 mM 104-bp syncon promoter into 0.0015 mM RNA polymerase in 50 mM potassium phosphate,
0.15 KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 0.2 mM DTT buffer at pH
7.0 and 25.0 °C. The molar ratio is the ratio of the number of moles
of the syncon promoter to the number of moles of RNA
polymerase in the cell. b, the binding isotherm for the
titration in a, where the solid line
represents the fit of the data to the binding model described by
Equations 2 and 3.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Comparison of the enhancement factors with the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant
binding affinities to the 104-bp syncon promoter with and without bound
RNA polymerase and to a 44-bp consensus duplex at 25 °C
The binding constants were determined from ITC measurements on the
binding of the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant to the 104-bp syncon
promoter with bound RNA polymerase (Kb (104 bp + RNAP), on the binding of the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant to the syncon
promoter alone Kb (104 bp), and on the binding of
the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant to a 40-bp consensus DNA duplex
Kb (40 bp). The Kb (40 bp) values
are from Ref. 5.
|
|
The enhancement factors in Table I were determined at a CRP/mutant
concentration of 80 nM, and the range of binding affinities in Table II from 0.8 ± 0.2 × 107
M
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP* to
1.8 ± 0.3 × 107
M
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP indicates
that the enhancement factor may be more dependent on the CRP*
concentration than on the CRP concentration. Thus, additional assays
were performed with cAMP-ligated CRP and cAMP-ligated CRP* over the
concentration range from 10 to 160 nM. The range of
concentrations was restricted by the large error in the RNA product
yield below 10 nM and the rapid saturation of product
formation above 160 nM. The results are presented in Table
III and show that the enhancement factor
does increase with the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutant concentration over this
range of concentrations. Because of the large experimental error, it is
difficult to determine if the enhancement factor is more dependent on
the cAMP-ligated CRP* concentration than on the cAMP-ligated CRP
concentration. It is also difficult to determine the relative binding
affinities from these assays because of errors in the concentration of
reactants as well as in the enhancement factors. However, the results
do confirm that the cAMP-ligated CRP and CRP* binding affinities to the
promoter-RNA polymerase complex are the same order of magnitude.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Tagami and Aiba have shown that cAMP-ligated CRP is not required
for the processes of RNA elongation and termination (22). This is also
indicated for the cAMP-ligated CRP and T127L and S128A mutants by a
nearly constant ratio (2.2 ± 0.4) of the syncon promoter in vitro enhancement factors to the corresponding
in vivo enhancement factors determined with plasmids
carrying the CRP binding site construct. The in vivo
enhancement factors are from Moore (2) and were determined from the
amount of
-galactosidase activity in CA8445 cells transformed with
plasmids carrying a syncon promoter construct and a plasmid
to express either CRP, T127L, or S128A and grown in the presence and
absence of cNMP in the culture. Any additional effect of the CRP
mutants on the elongation and termination process of the RNA transcript
would alter the in vivo enhancement factors, where
initiation, elongation, and termination processes are involved,
relative to the in vitro enhancement factors where just the
initiation of transcription is monitored.
Results from early investigations (23, 24) in the in vitro
initiation of transcription by RNA polymerase (RNAP) has lead to the
development of the following two-step model for the activation of
transcription,
|
(Eq. 4)
|
where P is the promoter, and the initial RNA polymerase-promoter
complex (RNAP·P)c is in a "closed" form and then isomerizes to an "open" form, which, in the presence of
ribonucleotides, leads to the synthesis of the short AAUU transcript.
Although it had been shown earlier that the enhancement of
transcription by CRP arises from an increase in the RNA polymerase
binding affinity to the promoter,
k1/k
1 (24), more
recently the main effect of CRP has been attributed to increasing the
isomerization rate constant, k2 (25), from the
closed to the open form. The enhancement factors result from the
interaction between the CRP/mutants and the bound RNA polymerase on the
promoter, and, thus, the initiation of transcription is enhanced by an
increase in the k1/k
1 constant in Equation 4, i.e. an increase in the RNA
polymerase binding affinity through additional bonds to bound CRP on
the promoter. These results still do not necessarily rule out the enhancement of the initiation of transcription through an increase in
the isomerization rate constant k2. Leu et
al. have shown that the rate of open complex formation is indeed
affected by the mutation at Thr127, since the cAMP-ligated
T127C CRP mutant forms the open complex more rapidly than the
cAMP-ligated T127I and T127S CRP mutants (10). The CRP-RNA polymerase
interaction also increases binding of the CRP/mutant to the promoter so
that all of the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants bind to the promoter-RNA
polymerase complex with almost the same affinity. Thus, under the
concentration conditions of the assay, the concentrations of all the
CRP-syncon promoter-RNA polymerase ternary complexes are
nearly the same for all the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants, despite
differences in their CRP binding site affinities on the promoter. If
the enhancement factors are exclusively dependent on the concentration
of the ternary complexes, they would be expected to be nearly the same
for the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants, as is indeed observed in Table I. A
similar constancy of enhancement factors is also observed for the
synlac and syngal promoters under the assay
conditions and may now be attributed to a constancy of the CRP/mutant
interaction with these promoter-RNA polymerase complexes.
The interaction between bound CRP and RNA polymerase, which involves a
loop consisting of Ala156 to Gly164 on
the surface of CRP (8, 26), would be expected to be the same for the
different mutants, since the Thr127
Leu and
Ser128
Ala mutations are at the subunit interface of
CRP. However, as shown in Table II, the interaction energy,
Gb0(CRP-RNAP), which is the
difference in the free energy of CRP binding to the promoter alone
(
39.6 to
35.4 kJ mol
1) and to the
promoter with bound RNA polymerase (
42 to
39.4 kJ
mol
1), ranges from
4.6 kJ
mol
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP* to
1.8 kJ
mol
1 for cAMP-ligated CRP. Since the
protein-protein interaction between the RNA polymerase and the CRP is
expected to be hydrophobic and using an effective hydrophobicity of 150 J mol
1
Å
2,2 an
interactive surface area from 31 to 5 Å
2 can be
determined for the interaction, which is reasonable for the interaction
of residues Ala156 to Gly164 on the CRP loop
with the RNA polymerase. This interaction would involve residues
including and near Arg265, Glu261, and
Val287 on the surface of the RNA polymerase
subunit
C-terminal domain (27). It is not clear why the interaction between the
bound RNA polymerase and cAMP-ligated CRP* of
4.6 kJ
mol
1 is less than between bound RNA
polymerase and cAMP-ligated CRP of
1.8 kJ
mol
1. This may be attributed to a competition
between binding of the CRP mutant to the promoter and binding to the
bound RNA polymerase. For example, cAMP-ligated CRP, which exhibits a
stronger binding affinity to the promoter than cAMP-ligated CRP*,
exhibits a weaker binding interaction with the bound RNA polymerase,
whereas cAMP-ligated CRP* exhibits a stronger binding interaction with
the RNA polymerase. This is also evident with the synlac and
syngal promoters, which bind with correspondingly weaker
binding affinities, at least 1 order of magnitude weaker, to the
cNMP-ligated CRP/mutants (5) but exhibit enhancement factors that are
lower than those of the syncon promoter by only a factor of
2. The results also show that CRP/mutant binding to the promoter
enhances the binding of RNA polymerase to the promoter by introducing
additional interactions between the RNA polymerase and the
promoter-bound CRP. This would enhance the activation of transcription
by increasing k1/k
1 in
the transcription mechanism represented by Equation 4. Ryu et
al. (9) observed a 40% increase in the amount of protein-bound lac promoter in a solution of RNA polymerase and
cAMP-ligated CRP relative to the amount of protein-bound lac
promoter in the absence of RNA polymerase. As they inferred from these
results, this would correspond to an increase in the binding affinity
of cAMP-ligated CRP to the synlac promoter in the presence
of bound RNA polymerase.
The results of this investigation show that the enhancement factors for
the syncon, synlac, and to a certain extent
syngal promoters with the cAMP-ligated CRP/mutants are
nearly the same because of the interaction of the CRP/mutants with
bound RNA polymerase on the promoter. This results in nearly the same
binding affinity within experimental error, 0.80 ± 0.20 to
2.2 ± 1.2 × 107
M
1, of the cAMP-ligated
CRP/mutants to the syncon promoter-RNA polymerase complex.
Since the syncon promoter-RNA polymerase complex binding affinity to cAMP-ligated CRP* is slightly lower than to the
cAMP-ligated CRP complex, the enhancement factor for cAMP-ligated CRP*
is lower, but this is difficult to assess as shown in Table III because
of the large experimental error. Leu et al. (10) have shown
that although the CRP binding affinities to the promoter alone may be
affected by the mutation at Thr127, they have little or no
effect on the interaction with RNA polymerase. In this investigation,
the results show that there is a tendency for the cAMP-ligated T127L,
S128A, and CRP* mutants to compensate for a weak binding affinity to
the promoter with a strong binding affinity to the bound RNA
polymerase. This may be a general property for those CRP/mutants that
activate transcription with a specific promoter. ITC measurements on
the binding of cAMP-ligated CRP to a shorter 113-bp synlac
promoter with bound RNA polymerase were unsuccessful. However, other
measurement efforts are under way to determine these binding affinities
and confirm this compensatory effect between the promoter and RNA
polymerase binding interactions of cAMP-ligated CRP, T127L, S128A, and
CRP* with the synlac and syngal promoters. In
addition, just how specific mutations in CRP affect its interaction
with bound RNA polymerase awaits further investigation.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We thank Dr. Arkaday Mustev (Public Health
Research Institute, New York) for advice on the transcription assays.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Science Foundation Grant
MCB-9722884 (to F. P. S.).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.
Present address: Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, NIH NICHD,
Bethesda, MD 20892.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Center for Advanced
Research in Biotechnology/National Institute of Standards and
Technology, 9600 Gudelsky Dr., Rockville, MD 20850. E-mail: fred@carb.nist.gov.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 8, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M004877200
2
E. J. Sundberg, M. Urrutia, B. C. Braden, J. Isern, D. Tsuchiya, B. A. Fields, J. Tormo, F. P. Schwarz, and R. A. Mariuzza, submitted for publication.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
CRP, cAMP
receptor protein;
CRP*, CRP with Thr127
Leu and
Ser128
Ala mutations;
DTT, dithiothreitol;
ITC, isothermal titration calorimetry;
bp, base pair(s);
syncon
promoter, 152-bp lacUV5 promoter with the 22-bp CRP binding
site at
61.5 mutated to a consensus binding site sequence;
synlac promoter, 152-bp lacUV5 promoter;
syngal promoter, 152-bp lacUV5 promoter
with the 22-bp CRP binding site at
61.5 mutated to a sequence similar
to that in the gal promoter.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Schultz, S. C.,
Shields, G. C.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1991)
Science
253,
1001-1007
|
| 2.
|
Moore, J. L.
(1993)
The Mechanism of Activation of the Escherichia coli Cyclic AMP Receptor Protein by Cyclic AMPPh.D. thesis
, The George Washington University, Washington, D. C.
|
| 3.
|
Lee, E. J.,
Glasgow, J.,
Leu, S.,
Belduz, A. O.,
and Harman, J. G.
(1994)
Nucleic Acids Res.
22,
2894-2901
|
| 4.
|
Moore, J. L.,
Gorshkova, I.,
Brown, J. W.,
McKenney, K. H.,
and Schwarz, F. P.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
21273-21278
|
| 5.
|
Shi, Y.,
Wang, S.,
and Schwarz, F. P.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
6946-6956
|
| 6.
|
Heyduk, T.,
Lee, J. C.,
Ebright, Y. W.,
Blatter, E. E.,
Zhou, Y.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1993)
Nature
364,
548-549
|
| 7.
|
Chen, Y.,
Ebright, Y. W.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1994)
Science
265,
90-92
|
| 8.
|
Bell, A.,
Gaston, K.,
Williams, R.,
Chapman, K.,
Kolb, A.,
Buc, H.,
Minchin, S.,
Williams, J.,
and Busby, S.
(1990)
Nucleic Acids Res.
18,
7243-7250
|
| 9.
|
Ryu, S.,
Garges, S.,
and Adhya, S.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
8582-8586
|
| 10.
|
Leu, S. F.,
Baker, C. H.,
Lee, E. J.,
and Harman, J. G.
(1999)
Biochemistry
38,
6222-6230
|
| 11.
|
Malan, T. P.,
and McClure, W. R.
(1984)
Cell
39,
173-180
|
| 12.
|
Malan, P.,
Kolb, A.,
Buc, H.,
and McClure, W. R.
(1984)
J. Mol. Biol.
180,
881-909
|
| 13.
|
Zhang, X.,
Zhou, Y.,
Ebright, Y.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
8136-8139
|
| 14.
|
Anderson, W.,
Schneider, A. B.,
Emmer, M.,
Perlman, R.,
and Pastan, I.
(1971)
J. Biol. Chem.
246,
5926-5937
|
| 15.
|
Lowe, P. A.,
Hager, D. A.,
and Burgess, R. R.
(1979)
Biochemistry
18,
1344-1352
|
| 16.
|
Burgess, R. R.,
and Jendrisak, J. J.
(1975)
Biochemistry
14,
4634-4638
|
| 17.
|
Sambrook, J.,
Fritsch, E. F.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1989)
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Mannual
, 2nd Ed.
, p. E5, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 18.
|
Yang, C. P.
(1990)
Microcal Data in Origin
, p. 66, Microcal Inc., Northampton, MA
|
| 19.
|
Baichoo, N.,
and Heyduk, T.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
290,
37-48
|
| 20.
|
Brunner, M.,
and Bujard, H.
(1987)
EMBO J.
6,
3139-3144
|
| 21.
|
Pinkney, M.,
and Hoggett, J. G.
(1988)
Biochem. J.
250,
897-902
|
| 22.
|
Tagami, H.,
and Aiba, H.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
599-605
|
| 23.
|
Chamberlin, M. J.
(1974)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
43,
721-775
|
| 24.
|
McClure, W. R.
(1980)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
72,
5634-5638
|
| 25.
|
Straney, D. C.,
Straney, S. B.,
and Crothers, D. M.
(1989)
J. Mol. Biol.
206,
41-57
|
| 26.
|
Zhou, S.,
Zhang, X.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1993)
Natl. Acad. Sci U. S. A.
90,
6081-6085
|
| 27.
|
Busby, S.,
and Ebright, R. H.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
293,
199-213
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.