|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 6, 4525-4531, February 11, 2000
Binding of Octamer Factors to a Novel 3'-Positive Regulatory
Element in the Mouse Interleukin-5 Gene*
Mônica Senna
Salerno,
Viatcheslav A.
Mordvinov, and
Colin J.
Sanderson
From the Molecular Immunology Group, School of Biomedical Sciences,
Curtin University of Technology, Perth 6000, Australia
 |
ABSTRACT |
The development of eosinophilia is regulated by
interleukin (IL)-5. The biological specificity of eosinophilia suggests
a tight and independent regulation of IL-5 expression. A number of
regulatory regions in the 5'-end of the IL-5 gene have been described;
many of them are involved in the regulation of other genes, and it is
not clear how the specific expression of IL-5 is regulated. In this
study, we report the finding of a novel 3'-regulatory element. Data
base analysis of a 2-kilobase fragment of the 3'-end of the mouse IL-5
gene revealed the presence of a 40-base pair-long repetitive sequence
that consists of four direct repeats of ATGAATGA distributed in a
symmetrical manner. This sequence, named mouse downstream regulatory
element-1 (mDRE1), was shown to be protected in DNase I footprinting
assays in vitro. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays
using specific antibodies identified the transcription factors Oct-1
and Oct-2 as responsible for the formation of the specific complexes
with mDRE1 and nuclear extracts from both EL4 and primary T-cells.
Competition electrophoretic mobility shift assays with oligonucleotides
containing different numbers of ATGAATGA repeats showed that Oct-1 and
Oct-2 bind to different motifs in the mDRE1 sequence. Deletion of mDRE1
from a 9.5-kilobase IL-5 gene construct significantly decreased the expression of the luciferase reporter gene, suggesting that it plays a
positive role in the expression of the IL-5 gene.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Eosinophilia is a unique specific phenomenon regulated by
interleukin (IL)1-5 that
involves increases in eosinophil numbers and activation state, without
any changes in other cell types. Besides their role in the immune
response against helminths (1-3), eosinophils are the principal cause
of tissue damage that leads to the symptoms of asthma and other
allergic diseases (4). IL-5 controls the production of eosinophils from
the bone marrow and is also involved in their differentiation and
activation. It is a cytokine produced mainly by Th2 cells, but mast
cells and eosinophils are also known to produce it (5-7). The
expression of IL-5 is tightly regulated and tissue-specific, and it is
present in all cases of eosinophilia (8).
Like the majority of cytokines, the expression of IL-5 is regulated at
the transcriptional level (9, 10). As most of the research on the
regulation of IL-5 expression targets the promoter region of the gene,
all known elements that regulate its expression are located in that
region. However, transcription regulatory elements can be present in
the 3'-end of genes. The 3'-untranslated region silencer present in the
spi2.3 gene inhibits the basal promoter activity of this
gene as well as its expression in response to growth hormone (11). The
3'-flanking region of the CD2 gene contains an enhancer that provides
T-cell-specific expression to this gene or any other to which it is
attached (12). In cytokine genes, the tumor necrosis
factor- -responsive element renders tissue-specific tumor necrosis
factor- -induced expression to the tumor necrosis factor- gene in
cells of the central nervous system, but not in mononuclear cells (13).
In the case of the IL-4 gene, a silencer region present in the
3'-flanking region of the gene renders Th2 specificity to IL-4
expression through the binding of STAT6. As Th1 cells are not capable
of nuclear expression of STAT6, these cells cannot overcome the
3'-silencer activity and therefore are not able to express IL-4
(14).
Previous studies in this laboratory demonstrated that the
3'-untranslated region has little or no effect on the
post-transcriptional control of IL-5 expression (10). In this study, we
investigated the role of elements present in the 3'-flanking region of
the IL-5 gene and show that they are involved in the transcriptional control of the gene. We identified a new regulatory element located in
the 3'-flanking region of the mIL-5 gene. This murine downstream regulatory element-1 (mDRE1) is 40 bp long, consists of four direct repeats of ATGAATGA distributed in a symmetrical manner, and was shown
to be protected in DNase I footprinting assays. Deletion of this
sequence from a 9.5-kb construct containing the whole mIL-5 gene
decreased the promoter activity upon PMA/cAMP stimulation by 3.5-fold,
suggesting that this part of the 3'-untranslated region is involved in
the positive regulation of the gene. Using nuclear extracts from the
thymoma-derived EL4 cell line and primary T-cells, we have shown that
transcription factors Oct-1 and Oct-2 bind to the mDRE1 sequence.
Together, these data suggest that mDRE1 is a new regulatory element
involved in the regulation of IL-5 expression and that its activity may
be regulated by octamer factors.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture and Stimulation--
EL4 and primary murine cells
were grown in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 100 µM
minimal Eagle's medium nonessential amino acid solution (Life
Technologies, Inc.), 1 mM sodium pyruvate, 2 mM
L-glutamine, 75 µM monothioglycerol (Sigma),
and 10 mM Hepes. 5% fetal calf serum was added to EL4 cell
medium. Primary murine cell cultures were supplemented with 10% fetal
calf serum and 100 units/ml recombinant human IL-2. EL4 cells were
stimulated with 10 ng/ml PMA and 1 mM cAMP. Primary T-cells
were stimulated with 5 µg/ml concanavalin A (ConA).
DNase I Footprinting Assay--
The 220-bp fragment of the mIL-5
gene (+4958 to +5178) was subcloned into the
XbaI/SacI sites of the pSP72 vector (Promega). The resulting construct was subsequently digested with restriction enzymes XhoI and HpaI, for labeling of the coding
strand, or with BglII and PvuII, for labeling of
the noncoding strand. The fragments were treated with shrimp alkaline
phosphatase for dephosphorylation of the 5' terminus and end-labeled
with [ -32P]ATP.
The DNase I footprinting assays were carried out using the DNase I
footprinting system supplied by Life Technologies, Inc. The protection
protocol followed the instructions supplied with the kit. Nuclear
extracts from unstimulated EL4 cells were used as the source of
proteins, and the incubation was carried out at room temperature for 20 min in 20 mM Hepes, pH 7.9, 0.1 M KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 20% glycerol, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 8 mM MgCl2, and 0.5 µg of poly(dI·dC).
Plasmids and Site-directed Mutagenesis--
A 9.5-kb fragment of
the murine IL-5 gene (from positions 3861 to +5612) was cloned into
the p-Poly-III expression vector (15), and the luciferase reporter gene
was inserted at position +33. Site-directed mutagenesis was carried out
using the TransformerTM site-directed mutagenesis kit
supplied by CLONTECH (Palo Alto, CA). The
mutagenesis protocols followed the instructions supplied with the kit.
The oligonucleotides used in the mutagenesis reaction were as follows:
mutagenic primer, 5'-GGC TCA GGG TGA ACA GGA GAG GCG CTC CAT TAA TAA
AGT GCT TGC-3'; and selection primer, 5'-CGA TAA GGA TCC GCC GAC CGA
TGC CC-3'.
Transient Transfection and Luciferase Assay--
EL4 cells were
transfected with 10 µg of the IL-5/luciferase constructs by
electrophoresis as described previously (16). Each experiment was
performed in duplicate. After transfection, the cells were either left
unstimulated or stimulated with 10 ng/ml PMA and 1 mM cAMP
for 12 h. The luciferase assay was performed as described (17).
The background obtained from the lysis buffer was subtracted from each
sample. Errors represent S.D. The magnitude of the luciferase activity
varied greatly between experiments. The mean of the activity of the
mutant construct is expressed as the ratio of the mutant to the wild
type with an S.D. calculated over five experiments.
Preparation of Nuclear Extracts and EMSA--
Nuclear extracts
used in EMSA were prepared following the method described by Schreiber
et al. (18) with the following modifications. Protease
inhibitor mixture, 1 mM Na3VO4, and
0.5 mM dithiothreitol were added to the reaction buffers
just prior to lysis. Protein concentration was determined using the
Bio-Rad protein assay. Standard binding reactions contained 5 µg of
nuclear extracts, 60 mM KCl, 8 mM
MgCl2, 12 mM Hepes, pH 7.9, 0.1 mM
EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.5 µg of poly(dI·dC), 12%
glycerol, and 25 fmol of 32P-end-labeled oligonucleotide
probe. Probe preparation, DNA-protein binding reactions, and
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis were performed as described by
Karlen and Beard (19).
The following oligonucleotides were used as probes or competitors (one
strand shown). The wild-type oligonucleotide for mDRE1, spanning
nucleotides +4539 to +4579 of the mIL-5 gene, was 5'-ATG AAT GAG AGG
ATG AAT GAA TGA ATG AAT AAA TGA ATG AA TGG GAG-3'. The mDRE1 deletion,
substitution, and insertion mutants are given in Tables II and III. All
oligonucleotides were synthesized using standard phosphoramidite
chemistry by Macromolecular Resources (Colorado State University).
Other competitor oligonucleotides included the AP1 consensus
oligonucleotide (5'-CGC TTG ATG AGT CAG CCG GAA-3'), the Oct-1
consensus oligonucleotide (5'-TGT CGA ATG CAA ATC ACT AGA A-3'), the
AP2 consensus oligonucleotide (5'-GAT CGA ACT GAC CGC CCG CGG CCC
GT-3') (all obtained from Promega), the c-Ets consensus oligonucleotide
(5-GGG CTG CTT GAG GAA GTA TAA GAA T-3'), and the GATA consensus
oligonucleotide (5'-CAC TTG ATA ACA GAA AGT GAT AAC TCT-3') (both
obtained from Santa Cruz Biotechnology). In supershift experiments,
polyclonal antibodies to Jun/AP1 (reactive with all Jun members),
Oct-1, Oct-2, Ets1/2, and c-Myb (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) were added
to the reaction mixture and incubated for 1 h on ice prior to the
addition of the probe.
 |
RESULTS |
Palindromic and repetitive sequences are well known to display
regulatory activities in the expression of a number of genes. To
identify potential regulatory elements in the mIL-5 gene, a pattern
recognition search was performed in the first 2 kb of the IL-5
3'-untranslated region, commencing at the stop codon (+3772). An
interesting pattern of direct repeats was found downstream of the
polyadenylation site. This sequence is 40 bp long (from positions +4539
to +4578) and consists of four direct repeats of ATGAATGA (Fig.
1A). The first and last pairs
of repeats are separated from the core by four nucleotides, so the
whole structure is symmetrical. Using the program TFSEARCH (20), this
sequence showed homology to the binding motifs of AP1, Oct-1, GATA1/2, and c-Ets (Fig. 1A). Interestingly, all these transcription
factors have been described to be involved in the regulation of IL-5
(16, 21-23, 32).

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A, a sequence consisting of four direct
repeats of ATGAATGA distributed symmetrically is present in the
3'-flanking region of the mIL-5 gene. The repeats are boxed.
Putative binding sites for known transcription factors were obtained
using the TFSEARCH program (20). The sequences of sites I and III are
shown. B, shown are the results from a DNase I footprinting
assay with nuclear extracts from unstimulated EL4 cells. The probe
corresponds to the coding strand of the 220-bp fragment of the mIL-5
gene. The protected sites (sites I and II) are indicated. C,
shown is the probe corresponding to the noncoding strand of the mIL-5
gene. The protected sites (sites III and IV) are indicated.
|
|
DNase I Footprinting Assay--
To determine if nuclear proteins
were able to bind to the repetitive sequence, a 220-bp fragment (from
positions +4958 to +5178) was cloned into the pSP72 vector and used as
template in DNase I protection assays with nuclear extracts from the
murine T-cell line EL4. This cell line was used in the original
characterization of IL-5 and has been widely used to study gene
regulation (31). Four protected regions (sites I-IV) were observed in
the IL-5 sequence in experiments with unstimulated EL4 cells (Fig. 1,
B and C). Alignment of protected regions from
coding and noncoding strands indicated that sites I and III are
complementary and cover 47 bp, including the repetitive ATGAATGA
sequence in its entirety (Fig. 1A). In contrast, sites II
and IV are not complementary to each other. In addition, site II
overlaps part of the vector sequence and was shown to be nonspecific.
This indicates that the repetitive motif (sites I/III) is involved in
protein binding.
Repetitive Motif Regulates the IL-5 Gene--
A 9.5-kb fragment of
the mIL-5 gene (from positions 3861 to +5612) (Fig.
2) was cloned into the p-Poly-III plasmid
with the luciferase reporter gene inserted immediately downstream of
the IL-5 cap site. The protected 47 base pairs were deleted by
site-directed mutagenesis from this construct, and both wild-type and
deletion constructs were transiently transfected into EL4 cells.
Luciferase activity levels produced in unstimulated cells transfected
with wild-type or mutant constructs were not significantly different from background levels. However, following cell stimulation with PMA/cAMP, a combination known to induce optimal levels of IL-5 in EL4
cells (24), the mean of the expressed activity of the mutant construct
relative to the wild-type construct in five independent experiments
(Table I) was 29.85 ± 1.4%. This
suggests that the deleted sequence (mDRE1) is important for
PMA/cAMP-induced expression of the IL-5 gene and functions as a
positive regulatory element.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Map of the mIL-5 gene. The
HindIII (H)/BamHI (B)
fragment of the mIL-5 gene is shown in Ref. 30. The 5'- and 3'-flanking
regions and the exons are indicated along with the Alu-like element
insert. Important 5'- and 3'-transcription elements are shown. Positive
regulatory elements are conserved lymphokine element-0
(CLE0), mouse positive regulatory element-1
(mPRE1), IL-5 promoter (IL5-P), IL-5 positive
regulatory element (IL5 PRE), mouse positive regulatory
element-2 (mPRE2), CTF/nuclear factor-1 (NF1),
and mDRE1. Negative regulatory element are negative regulatory elements
I (NREI) and II (NREII) (31). The ATGAATGA
repeats are boxed.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Luciferase activity levels produced in PMA/cAMP-stimulated EL4 cells
transfected with the wild-type or mutant construct in five
independent experiments
|
|
Formation of Specific Complexes with mDRE1--
EMSA utilizing a
double-stranded radiolabeled oligonucleotide corresponding to the mDRE1
sequence was performed with nuclear extracts from unstimulated EL4
cells. Four complexes were identified, three of which (C1, C2, and C3)
were competed with excess unlabeled mDRE1 (Fig.
3A, lanes 2-4),
but not with an unrelated AP2 consensus sequence (Fig. 3A,
lanes 5-7), suggesting specific binding. The formation of
complexes C1 and C3 was reproducible in all experiments; however, the
major complex, C2, seemed to be accompanied by a second, faster
migrating band that was competed with unlabeled mDRE1, but not with
AP2. This complex was not present in all EMSAs, and its intensity was
weak and variable; so it is not further discussed. The intensity of
complex C2 varied in the different assays, but it was always present.
Although C1, C2, and C3 were constitutively expressed in EL4 cells, the
bands increased in intensity following stimulation (Fig.
4A), but no additional
complexes were formed.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
EMSA with an oligonucleotide corresponding to
the mDRE1 sequence and nuclear extracts from unstimulated EL4 cells
(A) and unstimulated or stimulated primary T-cells
(B). A, four DNA-protein complexes (C1, C2,
C3, and C4) were formed. Unlabeled mDRE1 (lanes
2-4) and AP2 (lanes 5-7)
oligonucleotides were used as competitors at 10-, 50-, and 100-fold
molar excess. B, no complex was formed with nuclear extracts
from unstimulated cells (UNSTM; lanes
1-3). Stimulated cell extracts formed four
DNA-protein-specific complexes (C1, C2, C3, and C4) with the same
migration pattern as those formed with EL4 nuclear extracts. mDRE1 and
AP2 oligonucleotides were used as competitors at a 100-fold molar
excess.
|
|

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Competition EMSA with the mDRE1
oligonucleotide. A, the consensus sequence
for Oct-1 competed for the formation of complexes C1, C2, and C3 with mDRE1 and nuclear extracts
from both unstimulated (UNSTM; lane 2) and
PMA/cAMP-stimulated (lane 6) EL4 cells. The AP1 consensus
sequence competed for the formation of only complex C2
(lanes 3 and 7), and the c-Ets
consensus sequence did not interfere with complex formation
(lanes 4 and 8). B, GATA
and AP2 consensus sequences did not interfere with complex formation
with mDRE1 and nuclear extracts from PMA/cAMP-stimulated EL4 cells. All
competitors were present at a 100-fold molar excess. C, the
consensus sequence for Oct-1 competed for the formation of complexes
C1, C2, and C3 with nuclear extracts from ConA/IL-2-stimulated primary
T-cells. The Oct-1 consensus oligonucleotide was used at a 100-fold
molar excess.
|
|
Nuclear extracts from unstimulated primary T-cells did not form any
complexes with mDRE1 (Fig. 3B, lanes 1-3).
However, extracts from ConA/IL-2-stimulated primary cells formed three
specific complexes with similar gel migration patterns obtained with
extracts from EL4 cells (Fig. 3B, lanes 4-6).
The intensity of complex C1 varied, but was consistently present in all
EMSAs. These results show that the nuclear factors binding to mDRE1 are
constitutively expressed in EL4 cells and increase after stimulation,
whereas in primary T-cells, there is no detectable constitutive
expression, but they are strongly induced after cell activation.
Oct-1 and Oct-2 Bind to mDRE1--
As described above, a series of
possible binding sites for known transcription factors were present in
the mDRE1 sequence. To determine, if any of these were forming the
specific complexes with mDRE1, consensus sequences were tested for the
ability to inhibit complex formation in EMSA.
As shown in Fig. 4A (lanes 2 and 6),
only the Oct-1 consensus sequence was able to compete for the binding
of the specific complexes C1, C2, and C3 from both unstimulated and
PMA/cAMP-stimulated EL4 cells. The AP1 consensus oligonucleotide was
able to compete for the binding of complex C2 (Fig. 4A,
lanes 2 and 7), whereas c-Ets
(lanes 4 and 8) and GATA (Fig.
4B, lane 2) did not compete for any of the
complexes. When extracts from ConA/IL-2-stimulated primary T-cells were
tested, the Oct-1 consensus sequence competed for the binding of C1,
C2, and C3 (Fig. 4C).
To further characterize the proteins that bind to mDRE1, we performed
supershift assays. Addition of anti-Oct-1 antibody clearly abolished
the formation of only complex C1 with nuclear extracts from either
stimulatory condition (Fig.
5A, lanes
2 and 8). Anti-Oct-2 antibody eliminated only the
C3 band (Fig. 5A, lanes 3 and
9), whereas anti-Jun antibody interfered with the
formation of complex C2, but did not totally abolish it. Antibodies
against Ets1/2 and c-Myb had no effect (Fig. 5A,
lanes 4-6 and 10-12). These results
indicate that Oct-1 forms C1, Jun forms C2, and Oct-2 forms C3.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
A, supershift EMSA performed with the
mDRE1 oligonucleotide and nuclear extracts from unstimulated
(UNSTM; lanes 1-6) and
PMA/cAMP-stimulated (lanes 7-12) EL4 cells;
B, supershift EMSA performed with nuclear extracts from
ConA/IL-2-stimulated primary T-cells. Extracts were incubated for
1 h with antibodies specific for the transcription factors
indicated, prior to addition of the labeled mDRE1 probe.
|
|
Similar results were obtained when nuclear extracts from
ConA/IL-2-stimulated primary T-cells were used. As shown in Fig. 5B, anti-Oct-1 and anti-Oct-2 antibodies interfered with the
binding of only complexes C1 and C3, respectively, confirming that the same proteins form complexes with mDRE1 in both the cell line and
primary T-cells.
Oct-2 Binds to the Central Repeats of the mDRE1 Sequence--
To
determine if the Oct-1 and Oct-2 transcription factors were binding to
the same motifs in the mDRE1 sequence, oligonucleotides containing
different numbers of repeats (Table II),
with or without a flanking sequence, were used as competitors in EMSA
against labeled mDRE1. The results (Fig.
6A) show that the minimal
sequence necessary for competition with complex C3·Oct-2 contains two
ATGAATGA repeats and that a flanking sequence is also necessary
(Oligo5). This sequence was called the "minimal binding sequence"
(MBS). The nature of the flanking sequence is probably unimportant, as an oligonucleotide containing the same flanking sequence, but one copy
of ATGAATGA (Oligo3), could not compete for the formation of any of the
complexes (data not shown). None of the oligonucleotides were able to
compete for the formation of complex C1·Oct-1 with labeled mDRE1,
showing that Oct-1 and Oct-2 bind to different motifs in the mDRE1
sequence.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Competitor oligonucleotides
Oligonucleotides containing different numbers of ATGAATGA repeats, with
or without flanking sequences, were used as competitors in EMSAs. The
ATGAATGA repeats are underlined.
|
|

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
A, competition EMSA performed with the
mDRE1 oligonucleotide and nuclear extracts from PMA/cAMP-stimulated EL4
cells. Nuclear extracts were preincubated with Oligo5 (lanes
2-4) or Oligo1 (lanes 5-7) at 10-, 50-, and 100-fold molar excess. B, EMSA performed with the
MBS oligonucleotide and nuclear extracts from PMA/cAMP-stimulated EL4
cells. Nuclear extracts were preincubated with the mut1 oligonucleotide
(lanes 2-4), the mut9 oligonucleotide
(lanes 6-8), or mut12 (lanes
10 and 11) at 10-, 50-, and 100-fold molar
excess. The sequences for the mutant competitor oligonucleotides are
given in Table II. C, the distribution of nucleotide
residues important for protein binding to the MBS. The nucleotides
important for the formation of complex C3·Oct-2 are
boxed.
|
|
To determine which nucleotides were important for formation of the
major complex C3·Oct-2, substitution mutations were generated within
the MBS. These mutants (Table III) were
used as competitors in EMSA using radiolabeled mDRE1 as probe. The
substitution of TG for CT in mut1 totally abolished the capacity of the
oligonucleotide to compete for complex C3·Oct-2 (Fig. 6B,
lanes 2-4). Similarly, the substitution of TG
for CT in mut4 also abolished the capacity of the oligonucleotide to
compete for complex C3·Oct-2 (data not shown). The same substitution
on mut9 (Fig. 6B, lanes 6-8) and mut3
(data not shown), however, did not interfere with the ability of the
sequence to compete for C3·Oct-2. As shown in Fig. 6B
(lanes 6-8), mut9 was able to compete for the
formation of complex C1·Oct-1 with mDRE1. A computer analysis of this
sequence showed that an 80% homologous Oct-1-binding motif had been
created in this mutant, which probably explains its capacity to compete
for complex C1·Oct-1. The substitution of a pair of AA for CT in
mut7, mut8, and mut10 also abolished the capacity of these mutants to
compete for binding of complex C3·Oct-2, whereas the same
substitutions in mut11 had no effect (data not shown).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table III
Mutant oligonucleotides used in EMSA
Boldface letters indicate substitutions (mut1 to mut11) or insertions
(mut12 to mut14).
|
|
Taken together, these results suggest that the important nucleotides
for protein recognition are symmetrically distributed within the
sequence (Fig. 6C) and that the substitution of only two of
them is enough to interfere with protein binding. The nature of the
flanking sequence is unimportant, as mutations in this region did not
alter the capacity to compete for formation of complex C3·Oct-2 (data
not shown).
To determine if the spacing between the repeats was important for
complex formation, oligonucleotides with two, four, or six thymidines
inserted between the central repeats (Table III) were produced.
Insertion of two nucleotides between the repeats (mut12) was enough to
interfere with protein binding to the sequence, as the mutant was not
able to compete for formation of complex C3·Oct-2 with labeled mDRE1
(Fig. 6B, lanes 9-11). The same was true with insertion mutants mut13 and mut14. These results show that
spacing between the repeats is of importance for protein recognition of
the element, as any disruption of its continuity abolishes the capacity
of the mutants to form complex C3·Oct-2.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The expression of cytokine genes is regulated at the
transcriptional level. Although the best known transcription regulatory elements are present in the 5'-flanking region, a series of regulatory elements have been described in the 3'-end of genes. The work presented
here describes the finding of a novel 3'-flanking element (mDRE1) that
plays a positive role in the regulation of the murine IL-5 gene.
Data base analysis of a 2-kb fragment of the 3'-flanking region of the
mIL-5 gene revealed the presence of a 40-bp-long repetitive sequence
that consists of four direct repeats of ATGAATGA distributed in a
symmetrical manner. This sequence was shown to be protected in in
vitro DNase I footprinting assays with nuclear extracts from EL4
cells. When the sequence corresponding to mDRE1 was deleted from the
complete 9.5-kb mIL-5 gene, the expression of the luciferase reporter
gene was significantly decreased in comparison with the wild-type
construct when expressed in EL4 cells. This indicates that mDRE1 plays
a positive role in the expression of mIL-5.
EMSAs using oligonucleotides corresponding to the mDRE1 sequence showed
the formation of at least four complexes, three of which (C1, C2, and
C3) were specific and consistently formed. Competition analysis
indicated that complexes C1 and C3 belong to the octamer family of
transcription factors, and supershift assays showed that Oct-1 and
Oct-2 were forming complexes C1 and C3, respectively. The formation of
complex C2 could be competed with both Oct and AP1 consensus sequences,
and the addition of anti-Jun antibody interfered with, but did not
abolish, the formation of this complex. Thus, some of the proteins
forming complex C2 may belong to the Jun family.
Although Oct-1 and Oct-2 are not present in nuclear extracts from
unstimulated primary T-cells, they are constitutively expressed at a
low level in EL4 cells as described previously (25, 26). In both cases,
they are induced after stimulation. Nuclear extracts from stimulated
primary T-cells displayed the same pattern of complex formation as
those from EL4 cells, and competition and supershift assays indicated
that Oct-1 and Oct-2 formed complexes C1 and C3, respectively.
Competition with oligonucleotides containing different numbers of
ATGAATGA repeats indicated that Oct-1 and Oct-2 bind to different
motifs in mDRE1. Oct-2 binds to the central repeats, whereas Oct-1
appears to bind to the flanking region. Mutations in the MBS showed
that the nucleotides important for protein recognition are distributed
symmetrically in the sequence and that spacing between the repeats is
critical for protein binding, as any disruption of its continuity
interfered with the capacity of the mutants to compete for formation of
the Oct-2 complex.
Recent data from our laboratory revealed that the Oct-1 and Oct-2
transcription factors also bind to the conserved lymphokine element-0
sequence located in the 5'-flanking region of the IL-5 gene.2 The fact that octamer
factors, and in particular Oct-2, can be found to bind to sequences in
the 5'- and 3'-flanking regions of the IL-5 gene suggests the
possibility that they might work together, in the context of the whole
IL-5 gene, to regulate the expression of the gene. One possibility is
that the octamer factors play a role in the remodeling of the chromatin
in the IL-5 locus in a similar way as STAT6 binds to both the promoter
(27) and the 3'-flanking region of the IL-4 gene (14). In this case, it
has been proposed that the binding of STAT6 is necessary for long-range
remodeling of the IL-4 locus during Th2 differentiation (28).
In conclusion, this work describes the finding of a novel downstream
regulatory element (mDRE1) that plays a positive role in the regulation
of the IL-5 gene. The activity of mDRE1 seems to be regulated by
octamer factors. Thus, further investigation is necessary to determine
the mechanisms of action of these factors in the regulation of the IL-5 gene.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Molecular Immunology
Group, Level 5, MRF Bldg., Rear 50 Murray St., Perth 6000, Australia.
Tel.: 618-9224-0357; Fax: 618-9224-0360; E-mail:
colin@cyllene.uwa.edu.au.
2
M. Senna Salerno, G. Schwenger, C. J. Sanderson, and V. A. Mordvinov, submitted for publication.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
IL, interleukin;
mIL-5, mouse interleukin-5;
mDRE1, mouse downstream regulatory
element-1;
bp, base pair(s);
kb, kilobase(s);
PMA, phorbol 12-myristate
13-acetate;
ConA, concanavalin A;
EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift
assay;
AP, activator protein;
MBS, minimal binding sequence.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Butterworth, A. E.,
Sturrock, R. F.,
Houba, V.,
Mahmoud, A. A.,
Sher, A.,
and Rees, P. H.
(1975)
Nature
256,
727-729[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Butterworth, A. E.
(1984)
Adv. Parasitol.
23,
143-235[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Coffman, R. L.,
Seymour, B. W.,
Hudak, S.,
Jackson, J.,
and Rennick, D.
(1989)
Science
245,
308-310[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
De Monchy, J. G.,
Kauffman, H. F.,
Venge, P.,
Koeter, G. H.,
Jansen, H. M.,
Sluiter, H. J.,
and De Vries, K.
(1985)
Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
131,
373-376[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Barata, L. T.,
Ying, S.,
Meng, Q.,
Barkans, J.,
Rajakulasingam, K.,
Durham, S. R.,
and Kay, A. B.
(1998)
J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.
101,
222-230[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Csonga, R.,
Prieschl, E. E.,
Jaksche, D.,
Novotny, V.,
and Baumruker, T.
(1998)
J. Immunol.
160,
273-283[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Warren, H. S.,
Kinnear, B. F.,
Phillips, J. H.,
and Lanier, L. L.
(1995)
J. Immunol.
154,
5144-5152[Abstract]
|
| 8.
|
Sanderson, C. J.
(1992)
Blood
79,
3101-3109[Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Naora, H.,
and Young, I. G.
(1994)
Blood
83,
3620-3628[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Thomas, M. A.,
Karlen, S.,
D'Ercole, M.,
and Sanderson, C. J.
(1999)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1444,
61-68[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Le Cam, A.,
and Legraverend, C.
(1995)
Eur. J. Biochem.
231,
620-627[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Greaves, D. R.,
Wilson, F. D.,
Lang, G.,
and Kioussis, D.
(1989)
Cell
56,
979-986[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Kwon, J.,
Lee, S. J.,
and Benveniste, E. N.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
22383-22390[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Kubo, M.,
Ransom, J.,
Webb, D.,
Hashimoto, Y.,
Tada, T.,
and Nakayama, T.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
4007-4020[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Lathe, R.,
Vilotte, J. L.,
and Clark, A. J.
(1987)
Gene (Amst.)
57,
193-201[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Karlen, S.,
D'Ercole, M.,
and Sanderson, C. J.
(1996)
Blood
88,
211-221[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Todd, M. D.,
Grusby, M. J.,
Lederer, J. A.,
Lacy, E.,
Lichtman, A. H.,
and Glimcher, L. H.
(1993)
J. Exp. Med.
177,
1663-1674[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Schreiber, E.,
Matthias, P.,
Mueller, M. M.,
and Schaffner, W.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
6419[Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Karlen, S.,
and Beard, P.
(1993)
J. Virol.
67,
4296-4306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Heinemeyer, T.,
Wingender, E.,
Reuter, I.,
Hermjakob, H.,
Kel, A. E.,
Kel, O. V.,
Ignatieva, E. V.,
Ananko, E. A.,
Podkolodnaya, O. A.,
Kolpakov, F. A.,
Podkolodny, N. L.,
and Kolchanov, N. A.
(1998)
Nucleic Acids Res.
26,
362-367[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Gruart-Gouilleux, V.,
Engels, P.,
and Sullivan, M.
(1995)
Eur. J. Immunol.
25,
1431-1435[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Yamagata, T.,
Nishida, J.,
Sakai, R.,
Tanaka, T.,
Honda, H.,
Hirano, N.,
Mano, H.,
Yazaki, Y.,
and Hirai, H.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
3830-3839[Abstract]
|
| 23.
|
Blumenthal, S. G.,
Aichele, G.,
Wirth, T.,
Czernilofsky, A. P.,
Nordheim, A.,
and Dittmer, J.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
12910-12916[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Lee, H. J.,
Koyano-Nakagawa, N.,
Naito, Y.,
Nishida, J.,
Arai, N.,
Arai, K.,
and Yokota, T.
(1993)
J. Immunol.
151,
6135-6142[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Staudt, L. M.,
Clerc, R. G.,
Singh, H.,
LeBowitz, J. H.,
Sharp, P. A.,
and Baltimore, D.
(1988)
Science
241,
577-580[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Kamps, M. P.,
Corcoran, L.,
LeBowitz, J. H.,
and Baltimore, D.
(1990)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10,
5464-5472[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Lederer, J. A.,
Perez, V. L.,
DesRoches, L.,
Kim, S. M.,
Abbas, A. K.,
and Lichtman, A. H.
(1996)
J. Exp. Med.
184,
397-406[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Agarwal, S.,
and Rao, A.
(1998)
Immunity
9,
765-775[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
| Deleted in proof
|
| 30.
|
Campbell, H. D.,
Sanderson, C. J.,
Wang, Y.,
Hort, Y.,
Martinson, M. E.,
Tucker, W. Q.,
Stellwagen, A.,
Strath, M.,
and Young, I. G.
(1988)
Eur. J. Biochem.
174,
345-352[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Schwenger, G. T.,
and Sanderson, C. J.
(1998)
Leuk. Lymphoma
28,
443-450[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Thomas, M. A.,
Mordvinov, V. A.,
and Sanderson, J. C.
(1999)
Eur. J. Biochem.
265,
300-307[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|