|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M104354200 on June 18, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 35, 33257-33264, August 31, 2001
The N-terminal and C-terminal Domains of RAP1 Are Dispensable for
Chromatin Opening and GCN4-mediated HIS4 Activation in
Budding Yeast*
Liuning
Yu ,
Nevin
Sabet§,
Alistair
Chambers¶, and
Randall
H.
Morse §
From the Department of Biomedical Sciences, State
University of New York at Albany School of Public Health, Albany, New
York 12201-2002, the § Laboratory of Developmental
Genetics, Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health,
Albany, New York 12201-2002, and the ¶ Division of Genetics,
University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Center, Nottingham NG7 2UH,
United Kingdom
Received for publication, May 14, 2001, and in revised form, June 14, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
Repressor activator protein 1 (RAP1) assists
GCN4-mediated HIS4 activation by overcoming some repressive
aspect of chromatin structure to facilitate GCN4 binding. RAP1 also
participates in other nuclear processes, and discrete domains of RAP1
have been shown to have specific properties including DNA binding, DNA
bending, transcriptional activation, and silencing and telomere
functions. To investigate whether specific domains of RAP1 are
required to "open" chromatin and help GCN4 to activate the
HIS4 gene, we examined the abilities of different truncated
RAP1 proteins to perturb positioned nucleosomes via a nucleosomal RAP1
site in a yeast episome in vivo, and we tested
HIS4 activation in yeast strains harboring truncated RAP1
mutants. We found that neither the DNA bending domain nor the putative
activation domain of RAP1 is required for its ability to perturb the
chromatin structure of a plasmid containing a RAP1 site. Similarly,
neither the putative activation domain nor the N-terminal DNA-bending
domain was required for GCN4-mediated activation of HIS4.
We also used a rap1ts mutant to show that
continuous occupancy of the HIS4 promoter by RAP1 is
required for GCN4-mediated gene activation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Repressor activator protein 1 (RAP1)1 is an essential
protein in yeast. Binding sites for RAP1 have been found in promoters, silencers, and telomeres, and correspondingly, RAP1 participates in
gene transcription, silencing, and telomere maintenance (1). RAP1 has
been implicated in transcriptional activation of many genes including
the mating-type genes MAT 1 and MAT 2,
ribosomal protein genes, and glycolytic genes. RAP1 also contributes to a meiotic recombination at the HIS4 locus (2), and a cluster of RAP1 binding sites from the TEF1 promoter has
recently been shown to function as a boundary element that can prevent
the spread of silent chromatin (3).
The ability of RAP1 to play such disparate roles in yeast depends in
part on its ability to interact with a variety of other proteins. In
many cases, the sites of interaction have been mapped, and a domain
structure for RAP1 has been constructed based on these and other
findings (Fig. 1). The central part of
this 827-amino acid protein contains the DNA-binding domain, and the C
terminus contains domains that interact with the SIR and RIF
proteins, which are important for silencing and telomeric length
control (4). Also, within this C-terminal part, amino acids 630-695 function as an activation domain in a hybrid GAL4-RAP1 fusion protein
(5). The N terminus of RAP1 is a large region that is not essential for
cell viability, although it may be involved in regulating the activity
of RAP1 through a putative BRCT domain (6). It has also been
shown to potentiate DNA bending by RAP1 in vitro (7). RAP1
also contributes to the transcription of glycolytic enzyme genes via
cooperative interactions with the activator GCR1, and in this
case, in vitro experiments have shown that either the
N-terminal or the C-terminal moiety of RAP1 together with the
DNA-binding domain suffices to assist GCR1 binding, although the
DNA-binding domain alone does not (8).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A, schematic depiction of functional
regions within RAP1. B, schematic depiction of truncated
RAP1 mutants used in this study.
|
|
A property of RAP1 that is likely to contribute to its function in
disparate processes is a potent ability to perturb chromatin structure
in a way that increases access by DNA-binding proteins and nucleases, a
property we refer to as "chromatin opening" (9, 10). This property
most clearly contributes to RAP1 function at the HIS4
promoter where a RAP1 binding site is required to overcome the
repressive effect of chromatin structure and allow GCN4 to bind and
activate transcription in response to conditions of amino acid
starvation (10, 11). When HIS4 activation is made to depend
on other activators with a better ability to outcompete histones for
binding to DNA, the RAP1 site becomes dispensable, indicating that the
RAP1 requirement is a consequence of the poor ability of GCN4 to bind
to chromatin under physiological conditions (10), More recently, we
have used chromatin immunoprecipitation to show directly that GCN4
binding to the HIS4 promoter is reduced when the RAP1
binding site is
mutated.2 The ability
of RAP1 to open chromatin can also be assessed by placing a RAP1 site
into a stable episome that serves as a chromatin reporter in yeast
cells. An introduction of a mutant RAP1 site allows a positioned
nucleosome to form that incorporates the mutant site, whereas a
wild-type RAP1 binding site (the same one present in the
HIS4 promoter) prevents nucleosome positioning in its near vicinity (10).
Nucleosome perturbation via a GAL4 site near the center of a positioned
nucleosome or via a PHO4 binding site just outside a positioned
nucleosome requires the binding protein to have a functional activation
domain (12-14). Therefore, it was natural to imagine that the ability
of RAP1 to open chromatin and to contribute to HIS4
activation and perhaps the activation of other genes might likewise
require its putative activation domain. To determine whether the
putative activation domain or other domains of RAP1 are required for it
to open chromatin, we used a series of yeast strains expressing
truncated derivatives of RAP1 to examine the abilities of these
derivatives to perturb positioned nucleosomes containing RAP1 binding
sites and to contribute to the expression of HIS4 mediated
by GCN4. We also used a strain expressing a RAP1 mutant that is
conditional for DNA binding to examine whether RAP1 binding is required
for continuous expression of HIS4 or only for the initial
chromatin opening event that allows GCN4 to bind.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plasmids--
TAR/GCN1 80 and TARmut/GCN1 80
were introduced into yeast as described previously (10).
Strains and Media--
The Saccharomyces cerevisiae
strains used in this study are listed in Table
I. Yeast cells were grown at 30 °C
unless stated otherwise in complete synthetic dropout media (CSM) (Bio
101) containing 2% glucose. Cell transformations were performed using a standard lithium acetate method (15). To create the
sir4 ::HIS3 strain LYY276, the
plasmid pJR276 (a gift from Dr. Susan Gasser) was cut with
PvuII, and the ~4-kilobase fragment containing part of the
SIR4-coding sequence flanking the HIS3 gene was
purified and transformed into YDS2 cells (Table I).
His+ cells were selected, and the deletion of
SIR4 was confirmed by Southern blot analyses.
For the -factor arrest experiment of Fig. 7, cells were grown
overnight at 25 °C to a density of approximately 0.5 at 600 nm.
Yeast -factor (Sigma) was added to 0.5 µM, and cells
continued to shake at 25 °C for 3 h before shifting temperature
and commencing RNA isolation.
Northern Analysis--
Yeast was grown in appropriate medium at
30 °C. GCN4 was induced by adding 1 mM
5-methyltryptophan into tryptophan-lacking medium, and the cells were
allowed to grow for 2.5-3 h before RNA was harvested. For Northern
analysis involving temperature shift (Figs. 6 and 7), cells were grown
at 25 °C overnight. The cultures were mixed with equal amounts of
fresh medium preequilibrated to 25 °C for analyzing cells
grown at 25 °C, or 50 °C for analyzing cells shifted to 37 °C
(Fig. 6). Alternatively, cultures grown at 25 °C were warmed
to 37 °C for 10 min in a shaking water bath and then transferred to
a shaking incubator set to 37 °C (Fig. 7). RNA was extracted from
yeast cells, and approximately 5 µg were electrophoresed on
agarose/formaldehyde gels. Gels were blotted onto nylon membranes in
10× SSC, UV-cross-linked, and hybridized with probes labeled by random
priming. Blots were stripped by boiling membranes in 0.015 M NaCl, 0.1× SSC, 1% SDS before hybridization with
another probe. Northern blots were quantitated using scanned images on
a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager. The EcoRI fragment of
pDN42 (a gift of Dr. D. Nag) containing most of the HIS4
sequence was used as a HIS4 DNA probe. The BglII
fragment of pGEM-PYK1 was used as a PYK1 DNA probe (a gift
of Dr. J. Curcio).
Analysis of Chromatin Structure--
Yeast cells were grown at
30 °C to a density at 600 nm between 0.6 and 1.6. Yeast nuclei (16)
or spheroplast lysates (17) were prepared and digested with micrococcal
nuclease (MNase) as described previously (10). At least two independent
transformants of each strain were tested. For the chromatin mapping of
TAR/GCN1 80 in rap1ts cells and the
corresponding wild-type strain, samples were handled differently. Cells
were grown at 25 °C overnight. Cells were harvested and reinoculated
into fresh medium prewarmed to 25 °C or 37 °C. For nuclei
from cells grown at 25 °C, cells were spun down at 4 °C, the
zymolyase treatment was done at 30 °C, and the MNase digestion was
done at 37 °C. For nuclei harvested from cells grown at 37 °C,
the cells were spun down at room temperature or at 37 °C, the
zymolyase treatment was done at 37 °C, and the MNase digestion was
done at 37 °C.
 |
RESULTS |
Both the N-terminal and the C-terminal Domains of RAP1, Including
the Putative Activation Domain, Are Dispensable for Its Ability to
Perturb a Positioned Nucleosome in Vivo--
Full-length RAP1 has a
strong ability to perturb nucleosome positioning (10). In the assay
used to demonstrate this property of RAP1, the chromatin structures of
two yeast episomes, TAR/GCN1 80 and TARmut/GCN1 80, are
compared (Fig. 2A). These two
episomes were constructed by placing a wild-type or mutant RAP1 binding site, respectively, into the parent plasmid TAR/GCN1 80. This parent
plasmid has a GCN4 binding site in a strongly positioned nucleosome,
and GCN4 perturbs this nucleosome very little at normal physiological
levels under either uninduced or induced conditions. The introduction
of the mutant RAP1 binding site results in a mild perturbation of the
chromatin structure in yeast, but a positioned nucleosome that
incorporates the mutant RAP1 binding site remains clearly evident. In
contrast, an introduction of the wild-type RAP1 binding site abolishes
any trace of nucleosome positioning in its vicinity with the pattern of
micrococcal nuclease cleavage sites being identical in TAR/GCN1 80
for chromatin and naked DNA (10).

View larger version (73K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
The ability of RAP1 to perturb nucleosome
positioning in vivo does not depend on its silencing
domain. A, schematic depiction of TAR/GCN1 80 and
TARmut/GCN1 80. B, indirect end-label analysis
of TAR/GCN1 80 in rap1 662 cells. Naked DNA (lanes
1-2) or chromatin (lanes 3-7) was isolated from cells
harboring TAR/GCN1 80 and digested using 0 unit/ml (lane
3), 2.5 units/ml (lane 4), 4 units/ml (lane
1), 5 units/ml (lane 5), 10 units/ml (lanes
2 and 6), or 25 units/ml (lane 7) of MNase.
MNase cleavage sites were mapped relative to the EcoRV site.
C, indirect end-label analysis of
TARmut/GCN1 80 in rap1 662 cells. Chromatin
samples were digested with 2.5 units/ml (lane 3), 5 units/ml
(lane 4), 10 units/ml (lane 5), 25 units/ml
(lane 6), or 50 units/ml (lane 7) of MNase, and
DNA was digested with 4 units/ml or 10 units/ml of MNase (lanes
1 and 2). D, indirect end-label analysis of
TAR/GCN1 80 in sir4 cells. Samples were digested with 0 units/ml (lane 3), 2 units/ml (lane 4), 4 units/ml (lane 1), 5 units/ml (lane 5), or 10 units/ml of (lanes 2 and 6) of MNase. The
stars indicate strong cleavages in naked DNA that are
protected by nucleosomes I and II in chromatin, and the filled
circles indicate the edges of nucleosomes I and II, which are
present in TARmut/GCN1 80 but not TAR/GCN1 80.
|
|
To determine which domains of RAP1 are needed for its ability to
perturb positioned nucleosomes in vivo, we tested the
abilities of different truncated derivatives of RAP1 to perturb the
chromatin structure of TAR/GCN1 80 relative to
TARmut/GCN1 80 in yeast. The chromatin structure of
TAR/GCN1 80 and TARmut/GCN1 80 was examined by MNase
cleavage followed by indirect-end labeling (18, 19). Fig. 2 shows the
results for rap1 662 cells in which the silencing domain
of RAP1 and a part of the putative transactivation domain are absent.
The MNase digestion pattern of TAR/GCN1 80 chromatin is very similar
to that of the naked DNA (Fig. 2B, lanes 3-7
compared with lane 1) as reported previously in cells
expressing full-length RAP1 (10) with the positioning of nucleosomes I and II essentially abolished. In contrast, the cleavage pattern characteristic of positioned nucleosomes I and II is largely retained in TARmut/GCN1 80 (Fig. 2C, note the two
cleavages indicated by stars that are present in naked DNA
and are reduced or absent in the chromatin samples as well as the
enhanced cleavage at the "upper" border of nucleosome II). This
finding suggests that the C-terminal domain of RAP1 that is important
for its functions at silencers and telomeres is not required for its
strong ability to perturb chromatin structure. Consistent with this
result, an absence of SIR4, which is part of the telomeric complex that
includes RAP1 (20, 21), does not impair the ability of RAP1 to perturb nucleosome positioning (Fig. 2D).
In rap1 628 cells in which the entire putative
transactivation domain of RAP1 is missing, the cleavage pattern of
TAR/GCN1 80 chromatin was again similar to that of naked DNA (Fig.
3A). RAP1 lacking the
N-terminal domain also retained its ability to perturb TAR/GCN1 80
chromatin (Fig. 3B). Changes in MNase cleavages,
characteristic of positioned nucleosomes I and II, were still observed
in TARmut/GCN1 80 in these mutant rap1
backgrounds (data not shown). Thus, the DNA-bending domain, the
silencing domain, and the putative activation domain of RAP1 are
dispensable for its ability to perturb a positioned nucleosome in
vivo.

View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
The ability of RAP1 to perturb nucleosome
positioning in vivo does not depend on its putative
activation domain or its N-terminal, DNA-bending domain.
A, indirect end-label analysis of TAR/GCN1 80 from
rap1 628 yeast cells. Naked DNA (lanes 1-2 and
9) or chromatin (lanes 3-8) was isolated from
cells harboring TAR/GCN1 80 and digested using 0 unit/ml (lane
3), 2 units/ml (lane 4), 4 units/ml (lanes 1 and 9), 5 units/ml (lane 5), 10 unit/ml
(lanes 2 and 6), 25 units/ml (lane 7),
or 50 units/ml (lane 8) of MNase. B, indirect
end-label analysis of TAR/GCN1 80 from JLG1-25A
(rap1 44-274) yeast cells. Naked DNA (lane 5)
or chromatin (lanes 1-4) was isolated from cells harboring
either TAR/GCN1 80 and digested using 0 units/ml MNase (lane
1), 4 units/ml (lane 5), 5 units/ml (lane
2), 10 units/ml (lane 3), or 25 units/ml (lane
4) of MNase. The stars indicate strong cleavages in
naked DNA that are protected by nucleosomes I and II when these are
present, and the dots indicate the edges of the same two
predicted nucleosomes.
|
|
Both the N-terminal and C-terminal Domains of RAP1 Are Dispensable
for GCN4-mediated HIS4 Activation--
RAP1 opens up the chromatin
structure at the HIS4 promoter to facilitate GCN4-mediated
activation (10, 11). If perturbing chromatin structure for other
activators is the only function of RAP1 at the HIS4
promoter, we would predict that if a particular truncated RAP1
maintains its ability to perturb chromatin structure in
vivo, its ability to help GCN4 to activate HIS4 should
also be maintained. To test this hypothesis, we examined mRNA
levels of HIS4 in the same rap1 mutant strains
used to analyze the perturbation of nucleosome positioning in the
preceding section.
We examined levels of HIS4 mRNA in wild-type yeast and
in yeast harboring the rap1 662, rap1 628, and
rap1 N mutations treated with 5-methyltryptophan. This
approach necessitated using TRP+ cells, so we first transformed strains
with TRP1-containing plasmids. The uninduced levels of
HIS4 mRNA in these strains were fairly high, most
probably because all four strains are his (22). As shown
in Fig. 4, the observed levels of
HIS4 expression normalized to ACT1
mRNA levels were essentially identical in wild-type cells and the
three mutant strains. We conclude that GCN4-mediated HIS4 expression is not substantially affected by the deletion of the N-terminal DNA-bending domain or the C-terminal silencing domain or
putative activation domain. We also found that HIS4
expression was not affected by the deletion of SIR4,
consistent with the finding that the silencing domain of RAP1 is
unimportant for HIS4 regulation (data not shown).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Neither the DNA-bending domain nor the
putative activation domain of RAP1 is required for GCN4-mediated
HIS4 activation. Total RNA was harvested from
JLG1-25A cells (rap1 44-274, designated as
N), JLG1-45D wild-type cells, rap1 628, and
rap1 662 cells grown in CSM-Trp media with or
without induction (for 2.5 h) by 1 mM
5-methyltryptophan (all strains were first transformed to tryptophan
prototrophy). The resulting Northern blot was hybridized with probes
specific for HIS4 and ACT1 mRNA as indicated,
and the signals quantitated by PhosphorImager analysis. Ratios of
HIS4 to ACT1 mRNA are indicated with the
wild-type ratio being assigned a value of 1.0.
|
|
Continuous RAP1 Binding to DNA Is Not Required for Perturbation of
Nucleosome Positioning in TAR/GCN1 80--
RAP1 is needed at the
HIS4 promoter to facilitate activator binding by overcoming
the repressive effects of the chromatin structure. We were interested
in determining whether RAP1 was required only for the establishment of
an open chromatin structure or for its maintenance even after
transcriptional activation had begun. In the former case, RAP1 should
be dispensable after the induction of transcription. In the latter
case, RAP1 would be required for continued transcription after induction.
We first examined whether the effects on chromatin structure caused by
the binding of RAP1 would persist after a loss of RAP1. To address this
question, we used the rap1-2ts mutant that is
temperature sensitive for binding to DNA both in vitro
and in vivo (23, 24). We introduced TAR/GCN1 80 and TARmut/ GCN1 80 into yeast harboring the
rap1-2ts allele and monitored the chromatin
structure at the permissive temperature and at various times after a
shift to nonpermissive temperatures. The results of such an experiment
are shown in Fig. 5. When cells were
grown at 25 °C, the permissive temperature, the chromatin structure
of TAR/GCN1 80 was affected by RAP1 binding as we have seen before
(Fig. 5A, lanes 1-3). At 2 and 4 h after the cells were shifted to 37 °C, no significant change of MNase accessibility was seen in this plasmid (Fig. 5, lanes 4 and
5). Only after 6 h after the shift to nonpermissive
temperature was a significant chromatin structure change detected in
the vicinity of nucleosomes I and II (Fig. 5A, lane
6, note the protection against the cleavage in the region of
nucleosome I is most easily visualized in the densitometric scan of
Fig. 5C). As a control, we monitored the chromatin structure
of TARmut/GCN1 80 in a similar experiment and found no
change in its chromatin structure during 6 h at 37 °C (Fig. 5,
B and C).

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Persistence of RAP1-dependent
chromatin structure of TAR/GCN1 80 after loss
of RAP1 binding. A, indirect end-label analysis of
TAR/GCN1 80 in a rap1-2ts strain before and
after shift to nonpermissive temperature. Chromatin was prepared before
(0 h), and 2 h, 4 h, and 6 h after shifting from
25 °C to 37 °C. TAR/GCN1 80, schematized at the top,
was mapped clockwise from the EcoRV site as indicated.
Cleavage sites were mapped in naked DNA (lanes 1-2) or in
chromatin (lanes 3-6) digested with 4 units/ml (lane
1), 5 units/ml (lanes 3, 5, and 6), or 10 units/ml (lanes 2 and 4) of MNase. B
indirect end-label analysis of TARmut/GCN1 80 in
rap1-2ts cells before and after shift to
nonpermissive temperature. Chromatin was prepared as in A
and digested with 4 units/ml (lane 1), 5 units/ml
(lanes 3-6), or 10 units/ml (lane 2) of MNase.
The locations of positioned nucleosomes I and II are indicated by
ellipses. The star indicates the strong cleavage
in naked DNA that is protected by nucleosome II in chromatin. The
dots indicate the edges of the two predicted nucleosomes.
C, densitometric scans of the regions encompassing
nucleosomes I and II from A and B as indicated.
The vertical arrow indicates the MNase cleavage site in the
region of nucleosome I that is cleaved in the plasmid having the
wild-type RAP1 site under conditions of RAP1 binding (e.g.
t = 0) but protected in the plasmid having the mutated
RAP1 binding site.
|
|
Because dimethyl sulfate footprinting experiments have shown
that the RAP1-2ts protein is lost from the
TPI promoter within 30 min of the shift to a
nonpermissive temperature (24), these results suggest that the
chromatin structure of TAR/GCN1 80 resulting from RAP1 binding is
maintained long after RAP1 is lost from the plasmid. Furthermore, although RAP1 is an essential protein, the survival rate of the rap1-2ts strain 8 h after being shifted to
a nonpermissive temperature is about 70% of its wild-type counterpart
(23). This finding implies that the majority of the cells are still
viable even 6 h after the temperature shift, so that the failure
to recover nucleosome positioning in TAR/GCN1 80 after a loss of RAP1
is not because of cell death. The alterations seen 6 h after the temperature shift provide strong evidence that the chromatin structure of TAR/GCN1 80 is indeed dictated by RAP1 binding, that RAP1 is lost
upon temperature shift, and that chromatin remodeling is not prevented
by the failure of basic cellular processes at the nonpermissive
temperature. These results indicate that the chromatin structure
dictated by RAP1 binding to TAR/GCN1 80 persists for considerable
time after RAP1 is lost from the DNA.
Continuous RAP1 Binding Is Required for GCN4-mediated HIS4
Activation--
To test whether continuous binding of RAP1 at the
HIS4 promoter is required to maintain GCN4-mediated
HIS4 activation, we examined the mRNA level of
HIS4 in a rap1-2ts yeast strain
before and after shifting the cells from permissive temperature to a
nonpermissive temperature. To simplify the experiment, GCN4 was
constitutively expressed from the DED1 promoter in a single
copy plasmid. Either the DED1-GCN4 plasmid or an empty vector was transformed into the rap1-2ts strain
and its wild-type counterpart. Cells were grown in media having
suboptimal levels of histidine for strains containing the DED1-GCN4 plasmid or in media containing histidine for cells
containing the empty vector at 25 °C overnight until they reached
the log phase, and then they were inoculated into fresh medium
preequilibrated to the appropriate temperature and grown at either
25 °C or 37 °C. We then harvested mRNA from the cells at
different time points. Because the half-life of HIS4
mRNA is approximately 17 min (25), we chose our first time point
for mRNA sampling at 1.5 h after the temperature shift to
allow ample time for the decay of preexisting HIS4 mRNA.
As shown in Fig. 6A,
constitutive expression of GCN4 from the DED1 promoter in
RAP1 wild-type cells resulted in an elevated HIS4 expression
at both 25 °C and 37 °C. The increase in HIS4 mRNA
levels at later time points is probably because of the gradual depletion of exogenous histidine in the medium. Thus, the temperature shift per se does not have a significant effect on
HIS4 transcription mediated by GCN4. In contrast to cells
expressing wild-type RAP1, the levels of HIS4 mRNA in
rap1-2ts cells containing the GCN4 expression
plasmid dropped significantly after the cells were shifted from
25 °C to 37 °C (Fig. 6B). As in cells
expressing wild-type RAP1, HIS4 expression depended on the
expression of GCN4. As an additional control we measured in an
independent experiment levels of HIS3, HIS4, and
PYK1 mRNA; HIS3 does not contain binding
sites for RAP1 but does depend on GCN4 for its expression. The results
showed that HIS4 levels declined at 37 °C only in the
rap1-2ts strain, whereas HIS3 levels
were unaffected (Fig. 6C, and data not shown). These
experiments also confirmed that PYK1 expression was not
affected by the temperature shift despite its promoter having a binding
site for RAP1 (26, 27). Thus, RAP1 binding is required for the
maintenance of ongoing transactivation of HIS4 that is
mediated by GCN4.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Continuous RAP1 binding is required for
efficient HIS4 activation. Total RNA was
harvested from wild-type (A) and
rap1-2ts (B) cells. Cells were grown
in media containing histidine for the cells containing only an empty
vector or in media containing half the optimal concentration of
histidine for the cells containing a GCN4 expression plasmid. The cells
were grown at either 25 °C or 37 °C, and RNA was collected at
different time points. The RNA blot was hybridized with probes specific
for HIS4 and PYK1 mRNA, and the signals were
quantitated by PhosphorImager analysis. C, the results from
an independent experiment in which HIS4 and HIS3
mRNAs were quantitated as described above. PYK1 mRNA
was also measured in this experiment, and HIS4/PYK1 ratios
were consistent with the experiments of A and
B.
|
|
Because of the relatively long half-life (17 min) of
HIS4 mRNA (25), as stated above, we first sampled
mRNA 1.5 h after the temperature shift to 37 °C. Although
we did not examine the replication status of the
rap1-2ts cells after the shift to 37 °C, it
seemed possible that many cells would have undergone replication in the
time before first sampling the mRNA. If the HIS4 locus
replicated after a loss of RAP1 in a high proportion of the cells, it
could reassemble into a chromatin structure that was refractory to GCN4
binding and fail to be transcribed. To examine this possibility, we
first arrested rap1-2ts cells with -factor
at the permissive temperature and then shifted cells to the
nonpermissive temperature (or kept them at the permissive temperature
as a control) and monitored HIS4 expression 45 and 90 min
later, respectively. The results of two such experiments are averaged
in Fig. 7 and show that after 90 min,
rap1ts cells show clearly diminished amounts of
HIS4 mRNA at 37 °C but not at 25 °C. Similar
results were obtained in a separate experiment in which HIS4
mRNA levels were normalized to HIS3 mRNA (data not shown). We conclude that RAP1 is required for ongoing HIS4
transcription mediated by GCN4, even in nonreplicating cells.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Continuous RAP1 binding is required for
efficient HIS4 activation in nonreplicating
cells. Wild-type and rap1-2ts cells were
arrested with -factor at 25 °C and then shifted to 37 °C for
various times before harvesting RNA as schematized at the
top. Northern blots were hybridized with probes specific for
HIS4 and PYK1 mRNA, and the signals were
quantitated by PhosphorImager analysis. Average values from two
independent experiments are shown.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Dispensability of the C-terminal and N-terminal Domains of RAP1 for
Chromatin Perturbation and HIS4 Activation--
We have examined the
ability of truncated versions of RAP1, lacking different of its known
functional domains, to perturb chromatin structure via a nucleosomal
RAP1 binding site, and we find that neither the C-terminal part
containing the silencing domain and the putative activation domain nor
the N-terminal portion that is required for DNA bending by RAP1 is
needed for RAP1-mediated chromatin perturbation. Chromatin opening by
RAP1 is essential to GCN4-mediated HIS4 activation, and
consistent with the results using the artificially engineered RAP1 site
in a positioned nucleosome, we also find that HIS4 can be
activated to wild-type levels in yeast lacking either the C-terminal or
N-terminal domains of RAP1. Although we have not been able to test
derivatives of RAP1 lacking both C-terminal and N-terminal domains, the
simplest interpretation of our findings is that the ability of RAP1 to
perturb chromatin and to participate in HIS4 activation
resides in its DNA-binding domain alone.
In our in vivo experiments, the RAP1 binding site in
TAR/GCN1 80 is located at a DNA sequence that is near the center of a positioned nucleosome in TARmut/GCN1 80 in which the RAP1
binding site is mutated. Interestingly, a recent in vitro
study shows that although RAP1 can bind to a site located near the edge
of a nucleosome and somewhat less well to a site located approximately 40 base pairs from the edge, binding to a site near the dyad (or center) was essentially inhibited completely (28). Furthermore, binding
to the less centrally located sites was considerably reduced if only
the DNA-binding domain of RAP1 was used as compared with the
full-length protein. These results contrast strikingly with our
findings. One possible explanation for this difference is that
chromatin may be more dynamic in vivo than it is in
vitro. Another contributing factor may be the differences in
behavior between the histones used for in vitro
reconstitution and those of S. cerevisiae, as yeast
nucleosomes have been shown by physical methods to have a looser
structure than those from higher eukaryotes (29-32).
We were somewhat surprised that neither the partial loss of the
putative activation domain (in the 662 mutant) nor a
complete loss (in the 628 mutant) affected the ability of
RAP1 to open chromatin in the nucleosome-positioning assay (Fig. 3) or
to contribute to HIS4 activation (Fig. 4). Previous work by
us and others has shown that the GAL4 and PHO4 activators perturb
chromatin in vivo in an activation
domain-dependent manner (12-14, 33). In particular, the
perturbation of nucleosomes I and II of TA17 80, which is identical
to the chromatin reporter plasmid TAR/GCN1 80 used in this work save
for the presence of a single 17-base pair GAL4 binding site in place of
the RAP1 and GCN4 binding sites, requires activating GAL4 or related
derivatives (12). Similar results have been observed with the
related chromatin reporter plasmid TALS (14, 34). We have
recently found that the perturbation of nucleosome positioning in TALS
by GAL4-ER-VP16 is greatly reduced in gcn5 yeast,
consistent with the idea that the activation domains may recruit other
activities that contribute to chromatin perturbation via nucleosomal
binding sites in vivo (35). Thus, it seemed reasonable that
RAP1 might also require an activation domain to recruit chromatin
remodeling or modification enzymes to open chromatin, but as stated
above, it apparently does not. However, RAP1 has recently been shown to
recruit the histone acetyltransferase Esa1p to the promoters of some
genes in yeast (36). Perhaps this recruitment occurs through some
domain of RAP1 other than its putative transactivation domain and
contributes to the ability of RAP1 to remodel chromatin and/or activate
HIS4. Future experiments will be aimed at testing this possibility.
We also did not see any effect of loss of the putative activation
domain of RAP1 on induced levels of HIS4 mRNA. This
observation is in contrast to a report in which the abilities of
different domains of RAP1 fused to the GAL4 DNA-binding domain to
activate HIS4 transcription were assessed using a modified
HIS4 promoter containing two GAL4 binding sites (37). In
this work, a GAL4 fusion protein containing the activation domain of
RAP1 allowed the growth of cells on plates lacking histidine, whereas
the fusion of the GAL4 DNA-binding domain to the silencing
domain of RAP1 alone or together with a substantial part of the
DNA-binding domain did not. The modified HIS4 promoter used
in these experiments lacked a RAP1 binding site.
We suggest that the high affinity of the RAP1 DNA-binding domain for
its cognate site (38) makes the contribution made by activation domains
of more weakly binding proteins, such as GAL4, unnecessary for RAP1 to
bind to sites in chromatin. Although the affinity of GAL4 for its
binding site is fairly high, it is nonetheless approximately 50-fold
lower than that of RAP1 (38, 39). Furthermore, Western analysis of
hemagglutinin-tagged GAL4(1-147) expressed from the
ADH1 promoter in yeast, which perturbs TA17 80
chromatin only slightly (12), indicates that it is present at over
100,000 molecules/cell (data not shown), which is much more abundant
than RAP1 (40). Hence, the requirement for an activation domain for nucleosome perturbation by GAL4 in contrast to our results for RAP1
cannot be explained by the relative abundance of these proteins.
Our model suggests that the function of RAP1 at the HIS4
promoter is strictly to open the chromatin to allow access of the weakly binding activator GCN4 to the promoter. RAP1 alone does not
suffice for activating HIS4. A true activator such as GCN4 is needed in addition to recruit the transcriptional machinery (41). At
the modified HIS4 promoter used in the experiments of
Kirkpatrick et al. (37), no additional activation domain is
brought to the promoter, because the normal upstream-activating sequences have been removed. Thus, an activation domain must be fused to the GAL4 DNA-binding domain to allow activation. Previous work
has shown that the RAP1 putative activation domain is important at some
promoters at which RAP1 functions but not at other promoters, consistent with the results presented here (42). Certainly, this domain
of RAP1 contributes to some of its important functions, as yeast
bearing the 628 mutation of RAP1 are much sicker than those bearing the 662 mutation (42); however,
more work will be required to determine where the RAP1 putative
activation domain exerts its critical function.
Continuous Binding of RAP1 Required for HIS4 Activation--
We
used a RAP1 mutant that is temperature-sensitive for DNA binding to
show that RAP1 binding is needed for ongoing transcriptional activation
of HIS4. Interestingly, chromatin remodeling by the SWI·SNF complex at the SUC2 promoter is
needed similarly for ongoing transcriptional activation and not just
for the establishment of the competent state (43, 44). In contrast, the
binding of the RAP1-related protein ABF1 to its site in the
SPT15 promoter is not needed to maintain
transcription of that gene (45). It may be a general property of
chromatin in living cells that a reversion to a nonpermissive
transcriptional state is fairly rapid in the absence of proteins
specialized for perturbing the chromatin structure and/or in the
presence of repressor proteins (46), but this issue has not received
sufficient attention to draw conclusions at present.
Curiously, in contrast to the relatively rapid inactivation of
HIS4 transcription after the shift to restrictive
temperature, the perturbed chromatin structure of TAR/GCN1 80
persists for up to 4 h following this shift. One possible
explanation for this result is that transient RAP1 binding may still
occur at the restrictive temperature, and that this transient binding,
although not sufficient to maintain HIS4 activation, does
prevent nucleosome positioning in TAR/GCN1 80. Alternatively, it may
be that the repressive chromatin structure at HIS4 that
forms in the absence of RAP1 is of a different type than the positioned
nucleosomes of our chromatin reporters and therefore differs in its
kinetic properties. Either explanation suggests that the plasmid
chromatin reporters, which we have used to examine RAP1 binding to
chromatin directly, are not in some respects accurate models for the
HIS4 promoter. This finding seems probable despite the use
of these chromatin reporters in assessing the ability of various
transcription factors to bind to nucleosomal sites (10, 12, 14, 47,
48), as we and others have not found the HIS4 promoter to be
packaged into strongly positioned nucleosomes
(49).3
Chromatin is folded into higher order structures beyond the level of
the nucleosome in vivo. It may be that the HIS4
promoter in the absence of RAP1 binding is repressed by a higher order folding that inhibits binding by GCN4. The transition to such a
repressed configuration could be relatively rapid after a loss of RAP1
binding, which is consistent with the results presented here.
Furthermore, we have found that the loss of the histone H3 N terminus
suppresses the requirement for RAP1 at the HIS4 promoter
without substantially affecting nucleosome
positioning.4 The histone N
termini and particularly that of histone H3 have been reported to
contribute to a higher order folding of chromatin in vitro
(50-52). Future studies will be aimed at examining more closely the
mechanism by which chromatin represses HIS4 expression in
the absence of RAP1 binding.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are particularly grateful to Dr. Susan
Gasser for a helpful dinnertime discussion at Cold Spring Harbor and
for providing several yeast strains. We also thank D. Shore, D. Nag, J. Curcio, and R. Zitomer for generously providing plasmids and yeast
strains, G. Stafford and S. Hanes for helpful discussions, and the
Wadsworth Center Molecular Genetics Core Facility for DNA sequencing
and oligonucleotide synthesis.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Grant GM51993 from the National
Institutes of Health (to R. H. M.).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.
This paper is dedicated to the memory of a good friend, Alan Wolffe.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
518-486-3116; Fax: 518-474-3181; E-mail:
Randall.Morse@wadsworth.org.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 18, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M104354200
2
L. Yu, J. P. Madigan, and R. H. Morse, unpublished results.
3
L. Yu and R. H. Morse, unpublished results.
4
L. Yu, M. M. Smith, and R. H. Morse,
unpublished results.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
RAP, repressor activator protein;
HIS, histidine;
MNase, micrococcal
nuclease;
CSM, complete synthetic medium.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Shore, D.
(1994)
Trends Genet.
10,
408-412
|
| 2.
|
White, M. A.,
Wierdl, M.,
Detloff, P.,
and Petes, T. D.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
9755-9759
|
| 3.
|
Bi, X.,
and Broach, J. R.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
1089-1101
|
| 4.
|
Hardy, C. F. J.,
Sussel, L.,
and Shore, D.
(1992)
Genes Dev.
6,
801-814
|
| 5.
|
Hardy, C. F. J.,
Sussel, L.,
and Shore, D.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
1209-1217
|
| 6.
|
Callebaut, I.,
and Mornon, J. P.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
400,
25-30
|
| 7.
|
Muller, T.,
Gilson, E.,
Schmidt, R.,
Giraldo, R.,
Sogo, J.,
Gross, H.,
and Gasser, S. M.
(1994)
J. Struct. Biol.
113,
1-12
|
| 8.
|
Lopez, M. C.,
Smerage, J. B.,
and Baker, H. V.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
14112-14117
|
| 9.
|
Morse, R. H.
(2000)
Trends Genet.
16,
51-53
|
| 10.
|
Yu, L.,
and Morse, R. H.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
5279-5288
|
| 11.
|
Devlin, C.,
Tice-Baldwin, K.,
Shore, D.,
and Arndt, K. T.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
3642-3651
|
| 12.
|
Morse, R. H.
(1993)
Science
262,
1563-1566
|
| 13.
|
Svaren, J.,
Schmitz, J.,
and Horz, W.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
4856-4862
|
| 14.
|
Stafford, G. A.,
and Morse, R. H.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
11526-11534
|
| 15.
|
Hill, J.,
Donald, K. A.,
Griffiths, D. E.,
and Donald, G.
(1991)
Nucleic Acids Res.
19,
5791
|
| 16.
|
Shimizu, M.,
Roth, S. Y.,
Szent-Gyorgyi, C.,
and Simpson, R. T.
(1991)
EMBO J.
10,
3033-3041
|
| 17.
|
Kent, N. A.,
Bird, L. E.,
and Mellor, J.
(1993)
Nucleic Acids Res.
21,
4653-4654
|
| 18.
|
Nedospasov, S. A.,
and Georgiev, G. P.
(1980)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
92,
532-539
|
| 19.
|
Wu, C.
(1980)
Nature
286,
854-860
|
| 20.
|
Moretti, P.,
Freeman, K.,
Coodly, L.,
and Shore, D.
(1994)
Genes Dev.
8,
2257-2269
|
| 21.
|
Cockell, M.,
Palladino, F.,
Laroche, T.,
Kyrion, G.,
Liu, C.,
Lustig, A. J.,
and Gasser, S. M.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
129,
909-924
|
| 22.
|
Marton, M. J.,
DeRisi, J. L.,
Bennett, H. A.,
Iyer, V. R.,
Meyer, M. R.,
Roberts, C. J.,
Stoughton, R.,
Burchard, J.,
Slade, D.,
Dai, H.,
Bassett, D. E., Jr.,
Hartwell, L. H.,
Brown, P. O.,
and Friend, S. H.
(1998)
Nat. Med.
4,
1293-1301
|
| 23.
|
Kurtz, S.,
and Shore, D.
(1991)
Genes Dev.
5,
616-628
|
| 24.
|
Drazinic, C. M.,
Smerage, J. B.,
Lopez, M. C.,
and Baker, H. V.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
3187-3196
|
| 25.
|
Leeds, P.,
Peltz, S. W.,
Jacobson, A.,
and Culbertson, M. R.
(1991)
Genes Dev.
5,
2303-2314
|
| 26.
|
Wyrick, J. J.,
Holstege, F. C.,
Jennings, E. G.,
Causton, H. C.,
Shore, D.,
Grunstein, M.,
Lander, E. S.,
and Young, R. A.
(1999)
Nature
402,
418-421
|
| 27.
|
McNeil, J. B.,
Dykshoorn, P.,
Huy, J. N.,
and Small, S.
(1990)
Curr. Genet.
18,
405-412
|
| 28.
|
Rossetti, L.,
Cacchione, S.,
De Menna, A.,
Chapman, L.,
Rhodes, D.,
and Savino, M.
(2001)
J. Mol. Biol.
306,
903-913
|
| 29.
|
Morse, R. H.,
Pederson, D. S.,
Dean, A.,
and Simpson, R. T.
(1987)
Nucleic Acids Res.
15,
10311-10330
|
| 30.
|
Saavedra, R. A.,
and Huberman, J. A.
(1986)
Cell
45,
65-70
|
| 31.
|
Lee, K. P.,
Baxter, H. J.,
Guillemette, J. G.,
Lawford, H. G.,
and Lewis, P. N.
(1982)
Can. J. Biochem.
60,
379-388
|
| 32.
|
Pineiro, M.,
Puerta, C.,
and Palacian, E.
(1991)
Biochemistry
30,
5805-5810
|
| 33.
|
Axelrod, J. D.,
Reagan, M. S.,
and Majors, J.
(1993)
Genes Dev.
7,
857-869
|
| 34.
|
Stafford, G. A.,
and Morse, R. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
34240-34246
|
| 35.
|
Stafford, G. A.,
and Morse, R. H.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
4568-4578
|
| 36.
|
Reid, J. L.,
Iyer, V. R.,
Brown, P. O.,
and Struhl, K.
(2000)
Mol. Cell
6,
1297-1307
|
| 37.
|
Kirkpatrick, D. T.,
Fan, Q.,
and Petes, T. D.
(1999)
Genetics
152,
101-115
|
| 38.
|
Vignais, M. L.,
Huet, J.,
Buhler, J. M.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
14669-14674
|
| 39.
|
Reece, R. J.,
and Ptashne, M.
(1993)
Science
261,
909-911
|
| 40.
|
Gilson, E.,
and Gasser, S. M.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Mol. Biol.
9,
308-327
|
| 41.
|
Ryan, M. P.,
Stafford, G. A., Yu, L.,
and Morse, R. H.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
5847-5857
|
| 42.
|
Graham, I. R.,
Haw, R. A.,
Spink, K. G.,
Halden, K. A.,
and Chambers, A.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
7481-7490
|
| 43.
|
Biggar, S. R.,
and Crabtree, G. R.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
2254-2264
|
| 44.
|
Sudarsanam, P.,
Cao, Y.,
Wu, L.,
Laurent, B. C.,
and Winston, F.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
3101-3106
|
| 45.
|
Schroeder, S. C.,
and Weil, P. A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
19884-19891
|
| 46.
|
Cavalli, G.,
and Thoma, F.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
4603-4613
|
| 47.
|
Morse, R. H.,
Roth, S. Y.,
and Simpson, R. T.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
4015-4025
|
| 48.
|
Balasubramanian, B.,
and Morse, R. H.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
2977-2985
|
| 49.
|
Jiang, Y. W.,
and Stillman, D. J.
(1995)
Genetics
140,
103-114
|
| 50.
|
Garcia-Ramirez, M.,
Dong, F.,
and Ausio, J.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
19587-19595
|
| 51.
|
Fletcher, T. M.,
and Hansen, J. C.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
25359-25362
|
| 52.
|
Leuba, S. H.,
Bustamante, C.,
van Holde, K.,
and Zlatanova, J.
(1998)
Biophys. J.
74,
2830-2839
|
Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Yarragudi, T. Miyake, R. Li, and R. H. Morse
Comparison of ABF1 and RAP1 in Chromatin Opening and Transactivator Potentiation in the Budding Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
October 15, 2004;
24(20):
9152 - 9164.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. A. Miller and J. Widom
Collaborative Competition Mechanism for Gene Activation In Vivo
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
March 1, 2003;
23(5):
1623 - 1632.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|