|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M108491200 on December 31, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 10, 8702-8707, March 8, 2002
Differential Modulation of DNA Conformation by Estrogen Receptors
and *
Jennifer R.
Schultz §,
Margaret A.
Loven ,
Vida M. Senkus
Melvin¶,
Dean P.
Edwards¶ , and
Ann M.
Nardulli **
From the Department of Molecular and Integrative
Physiology, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801, and the
¶ Molecular Biology Program and the Department of
Pathology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado 80262
Received for publication, September 4, 2001, and in revised form, December 14, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
The human estrogen receptor (ER) induces
transcription of estrogen-responsive genes upon binding to estrogen and
the estrogen response element (ERE). To determine whether
receptor-induced changes in DNA structure are related to
transactivation, we compared the abilities of ER and ER to
activate transcription and induce distortion and bending in DNA. ER
induced higher levels of transcription than ER in the presence of
17 -estradiol. In circular permutation experiments ER induced
greater distortion in DNA fragments containing the consensus ERE
sequence than ER . Phasing analysis indicated that ER induced a
bend directed toward the major groove of the DNA helix but that ER
failed to induce a directed DNA bend. Likewise, the ER DNA binding
domain (DBD) and hinge region induced a bend directed toward the major
groove of the DNA helix, but the ER DBD and hinge region failed to
bend ERE-containing DNA fragments. Using receptor chimeras we
demonstrated that the ER DBD C-terminal extension is required for
directed DNA bending. Transient transfection assays revealed that
appropriately oriented DNA bending enhances receptor-mediated
transactivation. The different abilities of ER and ER to induce
change in DNA structure could foster or inhibit the interaction of
regulatory proteins with the receptor and other transcription factors
and help to explain how estrogen-responsive genes are differentially
regulated by these two receptors.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Estrogen is a hormone of critical importance in
regulating the development, growth, and maintenance of reproductive
tissues and also influences cardiovascular, neural, and skeletal cell function (1-6). The effects of estrogen are mediated through interaction of the estrogen receptor
(ER)1 with estrogen response
elements (EREs) residing in target genes. Because the ER-ERE
interaction plays such a crucial role in gene expression, there has
been and continues to be great interest in understanding how this
interaction leads to changes in transcription.
With the recent revelation that two ER subtypes exist, the previously
identified ER (7-10) and the more recently cloned ER (11-14),
our vision of how estrogen brings about its effects in target cells
must now be reevaluated and take into consideration the actions of both
receptor subtypes. Although the amino acid sequence in the DNA and
hormone binding domains of ER and ER is highly conserved, other
regions of the two receptors are more varied (15). These differences in
amino acid sequence affect the affinities of ER and ER for
various ligands and ERE sequences, influence the association of the
receptors with coactivator proteins, and thereby alter the abilities of
these two receptors to modulate gene expression (13, 14, 16-25).
A number of thermodynamic and structural studies have demonstrated that
specific contacts between protein and DNA are often accompanied by
conformational changes in protein, DNA, or both (26-31). We and others
have demonstrated that binding of ER to ERE-containing DNA fragments
induces conformational changes in DNA structure suggesting that the
ability of ER to induce changes in DNA structure may be related to
its ability to activate transcription (32-40). To determine whether
ER was capable of altering DNA conformation and whether ER - and
ER -induced transcription activation might be related to the
abilities of these two receptors to induce conformational changes in
DNA structure, we have compared the abilities of ER and ER to
activate transcription and induce flexibility and directed bending in
ERE-containing DNA fragments and determined the effects of DNA bending
on transcription activation.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Transient Transfections--
Transient cotransfections carried
out with Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells utilized 3 µg of the CAT
reporter plasmid, ERE TATA-CAT (41), which contains an ERE in the
BglII site of ATC0, 200 ng of the -galactosidase
expression vector pCH110 (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.), and 5 ng
of the human ER expression vector pCMV5 hER (42) or the human ER
expression vector pCMV5 hER (43). Transient transfections carried
out in U2 osteosarcoma (U2-OS) cells utilized 25 ng of ER or ER
expression vector and 3 µg of a CAT reporter plasmid containing an
ERE in the SalI site of ATC0 (ATC1, Ref. 44) alone or in
combination with an intrinsically bent DNA sequence (ATC1-OP and
ATC1-IP, previously described as 3A6/ERE3-CAT and
3A6/ERE3.4-CAT, Ref. 36). Cells were transfected with
Lipofectin (Life Technologies, Inc.) as described (25). CAT
activity was quantitated as described (24). -galactosidase activity
was determined (45) and used to normalize for transfection efficiency.
Construction of ER CD Expression Vector and Preparation
of DNA Probes--
To construct the CD expression vector,
nucleotides encoding amino acids 134-260 of the ER (DBD and hinge
regions) were PCR amplified using the hER expression vector
pCMV5hER and primers with 5'-NheI and
3'-HindIII compatible sites (forward primer: 5'-GCTATGGCTAGCCCTGTTACTGGTCCA-3' and reverse primer:
5'-GAGTCTAAGCTTTACTACAGCAGCAGCTCCCGCAC-3'). Oligonucleotides encoding
the FLAG epitope (MDYKDDDK) with 5'-NdeI and
3'-NheI restriction enzyme sites (forward oligo:
5'-TATGGACTACAAGGACGACGATGACAAGG-3' and reverse oligo:
5'-CTAGCCTTGTCATCGTCGTCCTTGTAGTCCA-3') were annealed and ligated to
NheI and HindIII-digested PCR product. The
resulting fragment (flag:hER DBD) was ligated to the
NdeI/HindIII-cut pET-28a(+) and used to transform
the DH5 strain of Escherichia coli. Plasmids were checked
for insertion of the flag:hER DBD fragment by digestion with
RsaI, and the junctions of the pET-28a(+):flag:hER DBD plasmid were verified by DNA sequencing.
Expression and Purification of Wild Type and Truncated ER and
ER Proteins--
FLAG-tagged ER and ER were expressed and
purified as previously described (23, 24). Protein purity was assayed
by Coomassie blue-stained SDS-PAGE. ER concentration was determined
using a hydroxyapatite binding assay (24).
CD , which contained the DBD and hinge region of ER , was expressed
using the expression vector pET-21b(+):flag:hER DBD (39) kindly
provided by David J. Shapiro (University of Illinois, Urbana, IL).
CD was constructed as described above to encode the region of ER
(amino acids 134-260) corresponding to the region included in the
ER construct (amino acids 166-307). 500-ml cultures of transformed
BL21DE3plysS cells were induced with 1 mM
isopropyl-1-thio- -d-galactopyranosideisopropyl-1-thio- -D-galactopyranoside. 10 µM ZnCl2 was added to help stabilize the
DBD zinc fingers. Induced cultures were incubated for 3 h with
shaking at 37 °C and then chilled on ice for 5 min and pelleted at
4700 × g for 5 min at 4 °C. Cells were lysed with
one freeze/thaw cycle. 5 ml of TEGDZ (50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0, 10% glycerol, 5 mM
dithiothreitol, 50 µM ZnCl2, 25 µg/ml
aprotinin, 5 µg/ml phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 50 µg/ml
leupeptin, 1 µg/ml pepstatin) with 0.5% Triton X-100 was added to
the cell lysate and incubated with rotation for 30 min at 4 °C. The
lysate was centrifuged at 142,000 × g for 30 min at
4 °C, and the pellet was discarded. Polyethyleneimine was added
dropwise to the supernatant to 0.1%, incubated on ice for 10 min, and
centrifuged at 142,000 × g for 30 min at 4 °C. The
extract was diluted with 2 ml of TEGDZ and incubated with anti-FLAG M2
agarose (A1205, Sigma) with rotation for 4 h at 4 °C. The
CD-antibody complexes were washed and eluted as described for the
full-length receptors (23, 24), except that the wash and elution
buffers for CD contained 400 mM NaCl.
Plasmids encoding CD / (amino acids 189-250 of ER and 219-256
of ER ) and CD / (amino acids 148-218 of ER and 251-288 of
ER ) GST fusion proteins were cloned, expressed, and purified as
described (46). The GST moiety was removed by overnight digestion with
0.02 units/µl thrombin.
Protein purity of CD , CD , CD / , and CD / was assessed
on Coomassie blue-stained SDS-PAGE. Protein concentrations were determined using the Bio-Rad protein assay (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) with
bovine serum albumin as a standard.
Preparation of DNA Probes--
Circular permutation experiments
were carried out with 427-bp DNA fragments isolated from the DNA
bending vector B3ConsERE (41). B3ConsERE was digested with
EcoRI, HindIII, EcoRV,
NheI, or BamHI to produce DNA fragments
containing a consensus ERE near the 3' end, at an intermediate 3'
position, in the middle of the fragment, at an intermediate 5'
position, or near the 5' end, respectively. All DNA fragments were
composed of identical nucleotide sequence and differed only in the
location of the ERE. The DNA fragments were isolated and
32P labeled as described (32).
Phasing analysis experiments were carried out with 280-290-bp DNA
fragments containing an ERE 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, or 36-bp upstream of an
intrinsic DNA bend. The DNA fragments were labeled as described (36).
Vectors for DNA bending standards (47), were kindly provided by A. Landy (Brown University, Providence, RI). DNA bending standards were
prepared as described (32, 33).
Gel Mobility Shift Assays--
For circular permutation
analysis, gel mobility shift assays were performed with 50 fmol of
purified baculovirus-expressed ER or ER and 5000 cpm of
32P-labeled ERE containing DNA fragments in binding buffer
(10% glycerol, 2 µg of bovine serum albumin, 4 mM
dithiothreitol, 15 mM Tris, pH 7.9, 0.2 mM
EDTA, pH 8.0) with 20 mM KCl, 50 ng of polydeoxyinosine-polydeoxycytidine poly (dI/dC), and 50 nM
E2.
For phasing analysis, gel mobility shift assays were performed with
10,000 cpm of 32P-labeled DNA fragments containing an ERE
and an intrinsic DNA bend in binding buffer with 50 µM
ZnCl2. Full-length receptor assays used 100 fmol of
purified baculovirus-expressed ER or ER and included 50 ng of
poly(dI/dC), 20 mM KCl, and 50 nM
E2 in the binding reaction buffer. Assays with truncated
DBD-hinge proteins used 350 or 600 fmol of purified, bacterially
expressed CD or CD , respectively, and included 100 ng of
poly(dI/dC) and 50 mM KCl (CD ) or no additional KCl
(CD ) in the binding buffer. Assays with chimeric DBD-CTE proteins
utilized 50 or 10 fmol of purified, bacterially expressed CD / or
CD / , respectively, and included 100 ng of poly (dI/dC) and 50 mM or 10 mM KCl in the binding buffer.
Reactions were incubated for 10-15 min at room temperature prior to
fractionation on low ionic strength polyacrylamide gels (48) at 4 °C
with buffer recirculation. 2500 cpm each of NheI- or
BamHI-digested bending standards were included on each gel.
The migration distances of the ER-DNA complexes, free probe, and DNA
bending standards were determined using a Molecular Dynamics PhosphorImager and ImageQuant software (Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale, CA).
Calculation of DNA Distortion and Bending Angles--
The
magnitude of each ER-induced distortion angle was determined from
circular permutation experiments using two methods. The magnitude of
the distortion angle was determined graphically by plotting the
relative mobilities of the DNA bending standards (47) as a function of
their known DNA bend angles. Polynomial regression analysis was used to
determine the distortion angles induced by ER and ER . Distortion
angles were also determined using the empirical equation
µm/µe = cos (k /2),
where µm is the relative mobility when the DNA bend is at
the middle of the fragment and µe is the relative
mobility when the bend is at the end of the fragment (47). A
k value of 1.130 was determined by comparing the relative
mobility of the DNA bending standards with the known bend angles as
described (37). Calculations of DNA distortion angles are presented as
the mean ± S.E. from four (ER ) or six (ER ) independent experiments.
The magnitude of the directed DNA bend was determined from phasing
analysis experiments by comparing the relative mobility of each ER-DNA
complex with the relative mobility of the DNA bending standards. The
magnitude of the directed bend angle ( B) was determined using the equation tan (k B/2) = (APH/2)/(tan(k C/2))
where C is the intrinsic bend (49). The k
value of 1.154 was determined as described for circular permutation
analysis. The relative mobility of each ER-DNA complex was calculated
by dividing the mobility of the ER-DNA complex by the mobility of the
corresponding uncomplexed DNA fragment. Interexperimental variation was
eliminated by dividing the relative mobility of the ER-DNA complex by
the average relative mobility to obtain the normalized relative
mobility (µ). The amplitude of phasing, APH,
was calculated by subtracting µmin from
µmax. The fragment that migrated the farthest was
determined using the greatest normalized relative mobility
(µmax). Calculations for directed bend angles are
presented as the mean ± S.E. from 4 (ER ), 10 (ER ), 11 (CD ), 8 (CD ), or 6 (CD / and CD / ) independent experiments.
 |
RESULTS |
ER and ER Activate Transcription to Different
Extents--
Transient transfection assays were used to examine the
ability of ER and ER to activate transcription of a CAT reporter vector containing a single consensus ERE. CHO cells were transiently transfected with an ER or ER expression vector, a CAT reporter plasmid containing a consensus ERE upstream of a TATA box, and a
-galactosidase control vector. Both receptors significantly induced
transcription in the presence of 10 nM E2 when
compared with an ethanol vehicle (Fig. 1,
p < 0.0001). ER and ER induced 19- and 11-fold
increases in transcription, respectively. Similar results were obtained
in U2-OS cells.2 Thus, ER
was a more potent activator of transcription than ER .

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
ER - and ER -mediated transcription.
CHO cells were transiently transfected with a human ER or ER
expression vector, the ERE-containing reporter plasmid, ERE TATA-CAT,
and a -galactosidase control vector using Lipofectin and treated
with vehicle (open bars) or 10 nM E2
(closed bars). Data from three independent experiments
were combined and are expressed as the mean ± S.E. Student's
t tests were used to determine whether statistical
differences between ethanol and E2-treated groups existed.
Asterisks (*) indicate significant differences in CAT activity in the
ethanol- and E2-treated cells (p < 0.0001).
|
|
ER and ER Induce Distortion in ERE-containing DNA
Fragments--
Previous studies from our laboratory have demonstrated
that binding of ER to ERE-containing DNA fragments induces
distortion and directed DNA bending (32-39). These studies and others
suggest that the ability of a protein to induce conformational changes in DNA structure may be related to its ability to enhance transcription (50-52). To determine whether ER induces distortion in
ERE-containing DNA fragments and whether the magnitude of distortion
might be related to the ability of ER and ER to activate
transcription, circular permutation analysis was carried out with ER
and ER . Circular permutation assays assess the migration of
protein-DNA complexes through a native acrylamide gel to determine the
magnitude of protein-induced DNA distortion. Because the geometry of a
DNA fragment affects its migration through an acrylamide gel, a DNA fragment with a distortion near the end will migrate farther through the gel matrix than a DNA fragment with a distortion in the middle.
427-bp 32P-labeled DNA fragments containing a consensus ERE
near the end, in the middle, or at an intermediate position in the DNA
fragment were incubated with purified, baculovirus-expressed ER or
ER and fractionated on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel. DNA
bending standards, which contained 54, 72, or 90 ° intrinsic DNA
bends (53, 54) were also included on all gels. As seen in Fig.
2A, distinct differences in
the migration of the ER-bound DNA fragments were observed with both
ER and ER . The migration of the receptor-DNA complexes was
dependent on the location of the ERE in the DNA fragment. When the ERE
was near the end of the DNA fragment (R, B), the
ER-DNA complex migrated farther than when the ERE was present at an
intermediate position in the DNA fragment (H, N).
When the ERE was at the middle of the DNA fragment (V), the
ER-DNA complex migrated even more slowly indicating that both ER and
ER induced distortion in DNA structure. The magnitude of distortion
was determined from four (ER ) or six (ER ) independent experiments
using two methods. Graphical analysis, which compares the relative
mobilities of the receptor-DNA complexes with the relative mobilities
of the DNA bending standards (Fig. 2B), indicated that ER
and ER induced distortion angles of 74.6 ± 4.1° and 63.9 ± 0.9°, respectively. Using the empirical equation
µm/µe = cos (k /2) (47),
similar distortion angles were obtained for ER (76.0 ± 4.3°)
and ER (64.5 ± 1.0°). Thus, both ER and ER induce
distortion in ERE-containing DNA fragments, but ER induces a larger
distortion angle than ER (p < 0.05 comparing ER
to ER by Student's t test).

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
ER - and
ER -induced DNA distortion. A,
32P-labeled DNA fragments containing a single consensus ERE
at the 3' (R) or 5' (B) end, at an intermediate
3' (H) or 5' (N) position, or in the middle
(V) were incubated with purified, baculovirus-expressed
ER or ER and fractionated on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel.
32P-labeled DNA bending standards containing
A6-tracts with 54, 72, or 90 ° bends in the
middle (upper bands) or end (lower bands) of the
DNA fragment were included on the same gel. B, a standard
curve was developed by plotting the relative mobilities of the bending
standards against their corresponding distortion angles. The distortion
angles induced by ER and ER were determined by plotting the
relative mobilities of the ER - or ER -DNA complexes on the
standard curve.
|
|
ER , but Not ER , Induces a DNA Bend toward the Major Groove of
the DNA Helix--
Circular permutation analysis can be used to
determine the degree of distortion or flexibility induced by protein
binding, but it does not provide information about the orientation of a DNA bend. To determine the magnitude and direction of receptor-induced DNA bending, phasing analysis was carried out. This assay utilizes DNA
fragments with an ERE 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, or 36 bp upstream of an
intrinsic DNA bend so that the orientation of the ER-induced and the
intrinsic DNA bends are incrementally varied over one turn of the DNA
helix. At some point the ER-induced and intrinsic DNA bends will be in
phase, a larger DNA bend will be produced, and the migration of the
ER-DNA complex through the gel matrix will be inhibited. Likewise, at
some point the ER-induced and intrinsic DNA bends will be out of phase,
the DNA fragment will have a smaller overall bend, and the ER-DNA
complex will migrate more rapidly through the gel. By monitoring the
migration of the ER-DNA complexes, it is possible to determine the
magnitude and direction of an ER-induced DNA bend.
32P-labeled DNA fragments containing an ERE and an
intrinsic DNA bend were incubated with purified, baculovirus-expressed
ER or ER and separated on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel.
When the DNA fragment contained an ERE 32 bp upstream of the intrinsic DNA bend, the ER -DNA complex migrated more rapidly (Fig.
3). This 32-bp spacing places the ERE and
intrinsic DNA bend on the same side of the DNA helix. The rapid
migration of the ER -DNA complex indicates that the ER -induced and
intrinsic DNA bends must be out of phase. Since we know that the
intrinsic DNA bend is oriented toward the minor groove of the DNA helix
(55), the ER -induced DNA bend must be directed toward the major
groove of the DNA helix. Combined data from four independent
experiments indicated that the ER -directed DNA bend was 11.0 ± 1.6°. These findings are in good agreement with earlier work
examining ER -induced DNA bending (37). Surprisingly, when ER was
incubated with these same DNA fragments, none of the ER -bound DNA
fragments consistently migrated farther than the others in 10 independent experiments, demonstrating that ER does not induce a
directed bend in ERE-containing DNA fragments. Only ER was capable
of inducing a directed bend in these ERE-containing DNA fragments and
that bend was directed toward the major groove of the DNA helix. Thus,
our results with ER are in stark contrast to our previous studies of
11 different wild type and mutant ER proteins, each of which induced
a DNA bend directed toward the major groove of the DNA helix (36, 37,
56).2

View larger version (70K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
ER-induced DNA bending.
32P-labeled DNA fragments containing 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, or 36 bp upstream of an intrinsic DNA bend were incubated with
purified, baculovirus-expressed ER or ER and fractionated on
a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel. 32P- Labeled DNA
bending standards were run on the same gel.
|
|
The DNA Binding Domain and Hinge Region of ER , but Not ER ,
Induce a Directed Bend in ERE-containing DNA Fragments--
We have
previously demonstrated that wild type, truncated, and mutant ER s
induce a DNA bend toward the major groove of the DNA helix (36-38, 56)
and were quite surprised that full-length ER was incapable of
inducing a directed DNA bend. To determine how this difference in
ER-induced DNA bending might occur, we carried out phasing analysis
with the region of the ER responsible for specific binding, the DBD.
Because the DBD alone has a low affinity for the ERE (46, 57), the
hinge region (domain D) was also included. The DBD and hinge region of
ER (CD ) or ER (CD ) shown in Fig.
4 were expressed and purified. When the
32P-labeled DNA phasing probes were combined with purified
CD , the complex containing DNA fragments with 32 bp between the ERE and intrinsic DNA bend migrated the farthest (Fig.
5A). These findings
demonstrate that CD , like wild type, truncated, and mutant ER s
from our previous studies (36-38, 56), induced a bend directed toward
the major groove of the DNA helix. Data from 11 independent experiments
demonstrated that the magnitude of the CD -directed DNA bend was
6.7 ± 0.6°. In contrast, the migration of the CD -DNA
complexes did not differ consistently, but followed the same pattern of
migration as the free DNA indicating that CD was incapable of
inducing a directed DNA bend. These findings demonstrate that CD
could induce a bend toward the major groove of the DNA helix in
ERE-containing DNA fragments, but CD could not.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Schematic representation of full-length and
truncated ER proteins. The domains (A-F) present in full-length
ER , ER , CD , CD , CD / , and CD / are schematically
drawn. The locations of the N terminus, the DNA binding domain
(DBD), the hinge region, and the ligand binding domain
(LBD) are shown. Amino acid residues in ER and ER are
numbered. The truncated hinge regions in CD / and CD / define
the boundaries of each C-terminal extension.
|
|

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Determination of DBD-induced directed DNA
bends. A, 32P-labeled ERE-containing DNA
fragments were incubated with purified, bacterially expressed CD or
CD and fractionated on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel.
B, 32P-labeled ERE-containing DNA fragments were
incubated with purified, bacterially expressed CD / or CD /
and fractionated on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel.
|
|
The amino acids that comprise the ER and ER DBDs are nearly
identical. However, the hinge regions of these receptors vary significantly in amino acid sequence. Thus, we suspected that the hinge
region of these two receptors might account for the difference in
receptor-induced DNA bending we observed. Previous studies with the
Type II and orphan nuclear receptors have defined a region C-terminal
to the DBD, the CTE, which has been implicated in stabilizing the
DBD-DNA interaction (58-60). This region has also been implicated in
stabilizing ER-DNA binding (46, 57). To determine whether the CTE of
ER and ER played a role in DNA bending, chimeric proteins were
expressed, purified, and used in phasing analysis experiments (Fig. 4).
These proteins contained the ER DBD and the ER CTE (CD / ) or
the ER DBD and the ER CTE (CD / ). When these proteins were
combined with the 32P-labeled DNA fragments containing an
ERE and an intrinsic DNA bend, the migration of complexes containing
CD / chimera varied when the orientation of the CD / -induced
and intrinsic DNA bends was altered. The complex containing 34 bp
between the ERE and intrinsic DNA bend consistently migrated more
rapidly than the other CD / -containing complexes (Fig.
5B). Assuming 10.5 nucleotides per DNA turn, CD / , like
the full-length ER and CD , induced a DNA bend directed toward the
major groove of the DNA helix. Using data from six independent
experiments, we determined that the magnitude of the CD / -induced
DNA bend was 5.6 ± 0.7°. In contrast, when CD / was
utilized, the migration of protein-bound phasing probes mimicked the
migration of unbound probes indicating that CD / was unable to
alter DNA conformation. Thus, the ER CTE plays an important role in
directed DNA bending.
DNA Bending Influences ER-mediated Transactivation--
Our
in vitro binding assays demonstrated that ER , CD , and
CD / induced DNA bending directed toward the major groove of the
DNA helix, but that ER , CD , and CD / failed to induce a directed DNA bend. To determine whether receptor-induced DNA bending might play a role in E2-mediated transactivation, another
set of transfection assays was carried out. Reporter plasmids that contained an ERE alone or in combination with an intrinsic DNA bend
directed toward the minor groove of the DNA helix were tested for their
abilities to enhance ER-mediated transcription activation. When the
reporter plasmid contained a single ERE (Fig.
6, ATC1), ER significantly
increased CAT activity in the presence of E2. The magnitude
of the increase was less than observed in Fig. 1, however, because the
ATC1 reporter plasmid contained a less potent promoter than ERE
TATA-CAT used in those experiments. When the reporter plasmid contained
a promoter with the centers of the intrinsic and ER -induced DNA
bends on the same sides of the DNA helix so that the intrinsic and
induced DNA bends were out of phase (ATC1-OP), the level of
E2-induced CAT activity was similar to the level observed
with ATC1. When the reporter plasmid contained a promoter with the
centers of the intrinsic and ER -induced DNA bends on opposite sides
of the DNA helix so that the intrinsic and induced DNA bends were in
phase (ATC1-IP), the level of E2-induced CAT
activity was greater than the level observed with ATC1 or ATC1-OP.
These data suggest that orienting an intrinsic DNA bend so that it
complements an ER -induced DNA bend enhances ER -mediated transcription.

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Influence of an intrinsic DNA bend on
ER - and ER -mediated
transcription. Cells were transiently transfected with a human
ER or ER expression vector, a reporter plasmid containing an ERE
(ATC1) alone or in combination with an intrinsic DNA bend
that is out of phase (ATC1-OP) or in phase
(ATC1-IP) with the ER -induced DNA bend, and a
-galactosidase control vector and treated with ethanol vehicle
(open bars) or 10 nM E2
(shaded bars). Data from three independent experiments were
combined and are expressed as the mean ± S.E. Student's t
tests were used to determine whether statistical differences between
ethanol- and E2-treated groups existed. Asterisks (*)
indicate significant differences in CAT activity in the ethanol- and
E2-treated cells (p < 0.05).
|
|
When the ER expression plasmid was utilized in transfection assays,
no increase in CAT activity was observed with ATC1, again reflecting
the decreased potency of the ATC1 promoter compared with the ERE
TATA-CAT promoter (Fig. 1). When ATC1-OP was utilized, ER was still
transcriptionally inert. However, when ATC1-IP was utilized, ER was
capable of substantially increasing CAT activity in the presence of
E2. These combined experiments are consistent with previous
studies carried out with ER in CHO cells (36) and highlight the
importance of DNA bending and the orientation of that bend in
E2-mediated transactivation.
 |
DISCUSSION |
We have demonstrated that ER and ER have different abilities
to activate transcription and alter DNA structure. Although both ER
and ER can distort DNA structure, only ER can induce a directed
DNA bend. Taken together with earlier studies, we have now demonstrated
that wild type ER and 10 different ER mutants induce directed DNA
bending (36, 37, 56).2 These 11 ER proteins all
contained the CTE, and all induced a bend directed toward the major
groove of the DNA helix. Even the smallest ER construct utilized,
which included the ER DBD and hinge region (CD ), was capable of
inducing a bend directed toward the major groove of the DNA helix.
However, when the ER DBD was combined with the ER CTE
(CD / ), the chimeric protein failed to bend ERE-containing DNA
fragments. Neither full-length ER nor the DBD and hinge region of
ER (CD ) was capable of inducing a directed DNA bend. However, if
the ER DBD was combined with the ER CTE (CD / ), this
chimeric protein gained the ability to bend ERE-containing DNA
fragments. Thus, replacing the ER CTE with the ER CTE resulted in
a gain-of-function and replacing the ER CTE with the ER CTE
resulted in a loss-of-function. Taken together, these combined
experiments highlight the importance of the ER CTE in
receptor-induced DNA bending.
The amino acids that comprise the human ER and ER DBDs are 96%
conserved and differ by only two amino acids (12, 61). However the CTE
adjacent to the DBD varies substantially in amino acid sequence. Our
experiments demonstrate that the ER CTE plays a critical role in
receptor-induced DNA bending. It is unclear at this point whether the
entire ER CTE or a specific domain within the ER CTE is required
for inducing these structural changes in ERE-containing DNA fragments.
Interestingly, the type II thyroid hormone and retinoid X receptors
and the orphan receptor RevErb contain ordered structures in the
CTE that interact with the minor groove of the DNA helix and stabilize
the protein-DNA interaction (58-60). Of particular interest is the
Grip-box in the RevErb CTE, which forms direct contacts with bases in
the minor groove. In contrast to these nuclear receptors, the ER CTE
is unstructured. However, it is possible that a region in the ER CTE
plays a similar role in stabilizing the receptor-DNA interaction and
fostering structural changes in ERE-containing DNA fragments.
The ability of a protein to induce conformational changes in DNA
structure is not limited to ER and . A number of nuclear receptors induce DNA bending upon binding to their cognate response elements including the retinoid X receptor, thyroid hormone receptor, glucocorticoid, and progesterone receptors (62-66). Proteins involved in the formation of transcription complexes also induce DNA bending. Crystal structure analysis has revealed that T7 RNA polymerase induces
a 63o bend (67). This polymerase-induced DNA bending has
been implicated in lowering the DNA melting point to allow for
separation of the DNA strands and initiation of transcription. Fos/Jun
heterodimers and Jun/Jun homodimers induce bends oriented in opposite
directions (54), which may influence their abilities to recruit and
interact with different transcription factors. LEF1- and SRY-induced
DNA bending appears to play a role in formation of higher order
transcription complexes (68-70). The C-terminal zinc finger of the
GATA-1 transcription factor induces a DNA bend that allows for
homodimerization and stable DNA binding (71). Prokaryotic transcription
factors, including the Borrelia burgdorferi Hbb protein,
which is thought to be important in bacterial DNA replication (72),
numerous cytosine-5 methyltransferases (73), and the E. coli catabolite activator protein CAP (74) cause
conformational changes in their cognate DNA recognition sequences.
Thus, the modification of DNA structure by proteins involved in DNA
replication, modification, and transcription activation is widely used
in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic systems.
Our laboratory and others have documented the enhanced ability of ER
to activate transcription of reporter plasmids in transient transfection experiments compared with ER (11, 12, 20, 23, 43, 75).
We have now demonstrated that full-length ER , CD , and a CD /
chimera induce directed DNA bending but that full-length ER , CD ,
and a CD / chimera cannot. The ability of an appropriately aligned
DNA bend to enhance E2-mediated transcription provides
evidence that changes in DNA structure can influence ER -mediated
transactivation. Furthermore, the fact that an appropriately positioned
intrinsic DNA bend is able to help establish ER -mediated estrogen
responsiveness substantiates the role of DNA bending in ER -mediated
transactivation. It seems possible that the decreased ability of ER
to activate transcription may in part be due to its limited ability to
induce changes in DNA flexibility and directed bending. ER-induced
changes in DNA architecture could provide structural motifs required
for recruitment of transcription factors or the scaffolding required
for assembly of a basal transcription complex. Alternatively, DNA
bending could help stabilize DNA loop formation and foster binding and
interaction of multiple DNA-bound transcription factors. Our combined
studies suggest that DNA bending influences the ability of ER and
ER to activate transcription and that intrinsic and protein-induced
changes in DNA structure could play an important role in regulating
expression of estrogen-responsive genes in target cells.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank James Kadonaga and Lee Kraus for
viral stock used in producing ER , Arthur Landy for DNA bending
standards, Sietse Mosselman for the ER expression vector, David
Shapiro for the pET-21b(+):flag:hER DBD expression plasmid, and
Jennifer Wood and Lawrence Petz for providing valuable insight and advice.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
Grant DK 53884 (to A. M. N.).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.
§
Supported by National Institutes of Health Cell and Molecular
Biology Training Grant (T32 GM07283).
**
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular and
Integrative Physiology, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 524 Burrill Hall, 407 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801. Tel.: 217-244-5679; Fax: 217-333-1133; E-mail: anardull@life.uiuc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, December 31, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M108491200
2
J. R. Schultz and A. M. Nardulli,
unpublished data.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
ER, estrogen
receptor;
ERE, estrogen response element;
CHO, Chinese hamster ovary;
CD, DNA binding and hinge domains;
DBD, DNA binding domain;
E2, 17 -estradiol;
CTE, C-terminal extension.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Korach, K. S.
(1994)
Science
266,
1524-1527[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Hess, R. A.,
Bunick, D.,
Lee, K.-H.,
Bahr, J.,
Taylor, J. A.,
Korach, K. S.,
and Lubahn, D. B.
(1997)
Nature
390,
509-512[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Subbiah, M. T. R.
(1998)
Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med.
217,
23-29[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Mendelsohn, M. E.,
and Karas, R. H.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Cardiol.
9,
619-626[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Toran-Allerand, C. D.
(1996)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
56,
169-178[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Turner, R. T.,
Riggs, B. L.,
and Spelsberg, T. C.
(1994)
Endocr. Rev.
15,
275-300[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Walter, P.,
Green, S.,
Greene, G.,
Krust, A.,
Bornert, J.-M.,
Jeltsch, J.-M.,
Staub, A.,
Jensen, E.,
Scrace, G.,
Waterfield, M.,
and Chambon, P.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
7889-7893[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Krust, A.,
Green, S.,
Argos, P.,
Kumar, V.,
Walter, P.,
Bornert, J.-M.,
and Chambon, P.
(1986)
EMBO J.
5,
891-897[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
White, R.,
Lees, J. A.,
Needham, M.,
Ham, J.,
and Parker, M.
(1987)
Mol. Endocrinol.
1,
735-744[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Maxwell, B. L.,
McDonnell, D. P.,
Conneely, O. M.,
Schulz, T. Z.,
Greene, G. L.,
and O'Malley, B. W.
(1987)
Mol. Endocrinol.
1,
25-35[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Kuiper, G. G. J. M.,
Enmark, E.,
Pelto-Huikko, M.,
Nilsson, S.,
and Gustafsson, J.-A.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
5925-5930[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Mosselman, S.,
Polman, J.,
and Dijkema, R.
(1996)
FEBS Lett.
392,
49-53[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Tremblay, G. B.,
Tremblay, A.,
Copeland, N.,
Gilbert, D. J.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
Labrie, F.,
and Giguere, V.
(1997)
Mol. Endocrinol.
11,
353-365[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Ogawa, S.,
Inoue, S.,
Watanabe, T.,
Hiroi, H.,
Orimo, A.,
Hosoi, T.,
Ouchi, Y.,
and Muramatsu, M.
(1998)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
243,
122-126[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Ogawa, Y.,
Aizawa, S.,
Shirakawa, H.,
and Yoshida, M.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
9272-9280[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Kuiper, G. G. J. M.,
Carlsson, B.,
Grandien, K.,
Enmark, E.,
Haggblad, J.,
Nilsson, S.,
and Gustafsson, J.-A.
(1997)
Endocrinology
138,
863-870[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Couse, J. F.,
Lindzey, J.,
Grandien, K.,
Gustafsson, J.-A.,
and Korach, K. S.
(1997)
Endocrinology
138,
4613-4621[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Onoe, Y.,
Miyaura, C.,
Ohta, H.,
Nozawa, S.,
and Suda, T.
(1997)
Endocrinology
138,
4509-4512[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Dotzlaw, H.,
Leygue, E.,
Watson, P. H.,
and Murphy, L. C.
(1996)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
82,
2371-2374[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Cowley, S. M.,
Hoare, S.,
Mosselman, S.,
and Parker, M. G.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
19858-19862[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Tremblay, G. B.,
Tremblay, A.,
Labrie, F.,
and Giguere, V.
(1998)
Cancer Res.
58,
877-881[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Wood, J. R.,
Greene, G. L.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
1927-1934[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Loven, M. A.,
Wood, J. A.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
181,
151-163[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Wood, J. R.,
Likhite, V. S.,
Loven, M. A.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(2001)
Mol. Endocrinol.
15,
1114-1126[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Loven, M. A.,
Likhite, V. S.,
Choi, I.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
45282-45288[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Steitz, T. A.
(1990)
Q. Rev. Biophys.
23,
205-280[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Frankel, A. D.,
and Kim, P. S.
(1991)
Cell
65,
717-719[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Pabo, C. O.,
and Sauer, R. T.
(1992)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
61,
1053-1095[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Alber, T.
(1993)
Curr. Biol.
3,
182-184
|
| 30.
|
von Hippel, P. H.
(1994)
Science
263,
769-770[Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Spolar, R. S.,
and Record, M. T.
(1994)
Science
263,
777-784[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Nardulli, A. M.,
and Shapiro, D. J.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
2037-2042[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Nardulli, A. M.,
and Shapiro, D. J.
(1993)
Receptor
3,
247-255[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Nardulli, A. M.,
Greene, G. L.,
and Shapiro, D. J.
(1993)
Mol. Endocrinol.
7,
331-340[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Shapiro, D. J.,
Greene, G. L.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(1993)
in
Steroid Hormone Receptors: Basic and Clinical Aspects
(Moudgil, V. K., ed)
, pp. 75-105, Birkhauser, Boston, MA
|
| 36.
|
Nardulli, A. M.,
Grobner, C.,
and Cotter, D.
(1995)
Mol. Endocrinol.
9,
1064-1076[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Potthoff, S. J.,
Romine, L. E.,
and Nardulli, A. M.
(1996)
Mol. Endocrinol.
10,
1095-1106[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Landel, C. C.,
Potthoff, S. J.,
Nardulli, A. M.,
Kushner, P. J.,
and Greene, G. L.
(1997)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
63,
59-73[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Kim, J.,
de Haan, G.,
Nardulli, A. M.,
and Shapiro, D. J.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
3173-3180[Abstract]
|
| 40.
|
Sabbah, M., Le,
Ricousse, S.,
Redeuilh, G.,
and Baulieu, E.-E.
(1992)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
185,
944-952[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 41.
|
Nardulli, A. M.,
Romine, L. E.,
Carpo, C.,
Greene, G. L.,
and Rainish, B.
(1996)
Mol. Endocrinol.
10,
694-704[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Reese, J. C.,
and Katzenellenbogen, B. S.
(1991)
Nucleic Acids Res.
19,
6595-6602[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
McInerney, E. M.,
Weis, K. E.,
Sun, J.,
Mosselman, S.,
and Katzenellenbogen, B. S.
(1998)
Endocrinology
139,
4513-4522[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Chang, T.-C.,
Nardulli, A. M.,
Lew, D.,
and Shapiro, D. J.
(1992)
Mol. Endocrinol.
6,
346-354[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Herbomel, P.,
Bourachot, B.,
and Yaniv, M.
(1984)
Cell
39,
653-662[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 46.
| Melvin, V. M. S., and Edwards, D. P. (2001)
Proceedings, 83rd Annual Endocrine Society Meeting, June
20-23, Denver, CO, June, The Endocrine Society, p. 100
|
| 47.
|
Thompson, J. F.,
and Landy, A.
(1988)
Nucleic Acids Res.
16,
9687-9705[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Chodosh, L. A.,
and Buratowski, S.
(1989)
in
Current Protocols in Molecular Biology
(Ausubel, F. M.
, Brent, R.
, Kingston, R. E.
, Moore, D. D.
, Seidman, J. G.
, Smith, J. A.
, and Struhl, K., eds), Vol. 2
, pp. 12.2.1-12.2.10, Greene Publishing Associates and Wiley Interscience, New York
|
| 49.
|
Kerppola, T. K.,
and Curran, T.
(1991)
Science
254,
1210-1214[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Wolffe, A. P.
(1994)
Science
264,
1100-1101[Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
van der Vliet, P. C.,
and Verrijzer, C. P.
(1993)
Bioessays
15,
25-32[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Werner, M. H.,
Gronenborn, A. M.,
and Clore, G. M.
(1996)
Science
271,
778-784[Abstract]
|
| 53.
|
Crothers, D. M.,
Haran, T. E.,
and Nadeau, J. G.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
7093-7096[Free Full Text]
|
| 54.
|
Kerppola, T. K.,
and Curran, T.
(1994)
in
Nucleic Acids and Molecular Biology
(Eckstein, F.
, and Lilley, D., eds), Vol. 7
, pp. 70-105, Springer, New York
|
| 55.
|
Zinkel, S. S.,
and Crothers, D. M.
(1987)
Nature
328,
178-181[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 56.
|
Lazennec, G.,
Ediger, T.,
Petz, L.,
Nardulli, A.,
and Katzenellenbogen, B.
(1997)
Mol. Endocrinol.
11,
1375-1386[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 57.
|
Mader, S.,
Chambon, P.,
and White, J. H.
(1993)
Nucleic Acids Res.
21,
1125-1132[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 58.
|
Lee, M. S.,
Kliewer, S. A.,
Provencal, J.,
Wright, P. E.,
and Evans, R. M.
(1993)
Science
260,
1117-1121[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 59.
|
Rastinejad, F.,
Perlmann, T.,
Evans, R. M.,
and Sigler, P. B.
(1995)
Nature
375,
203-211[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 60.
|
Zhao, Q.,
Khorasanizadeh, S.,
Miyoshi, Y.,
Lazar, M. A.,
and Rastinejad, F.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
1,
849-861[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 61.
|
Greene, G. L.,
Gilna, P.,
Waterfield, M.,
Baker, A.,
Hort, Y.,
and Shine, J.
(1986)
Science
231,
1150-1154[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 62.
|
Lu, X. P.,
Eberhardt, N. L.,
and Pfahl, M.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6509-6519[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 63.
|
Shulemovich, K.,
Dimaculangan, D. D.,
Katz, D.,
and Lazar, M. A.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
811-818[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 64.
|
Leidig, F.,
Shepard, A. R.,
Zhang, W.,
Stelter, A.,
Cattini, P. A.,
Baxter, J. D.,
and Eberhardt, N. L.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
913-921[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 65.
|
Prendergast, P.,
Pan, Z.,
and Edwards, D. P.
(1996)
Mol. Endocrinol.
10,
393-407[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 66.
|
Petz, L.,
Nardulli, A.,
Kim, J.,
Horwitz, K.,
Freedman, L.,
and Shapiro, D.
(1997)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
60,
31-41[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 67.
|
Ujvari, A.,
and Martin, C. T.
(2000)
J. Mol. Biol.
295,
1173-1184[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 68.
|
Giese, K.,
Amsterdam, A.,
and Grosschedl, R.
(1991)
Genes Dev.
5,
2567-2578[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 69.
|
Giese, K.,
Cox, J.,
and Grosschedl, R.
(1992)
Cell
69,
185-195[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 70.
|
Love, J. J., Li, X.,
Case, D. A.,
Giese, K.,
Grosschedl, R.,
and Wright, P. E.
(1995)
Nature
376,
791-795[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 71.
|
Ghirlando, R.,
and Trainor, C. D.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
28152-28156[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 72.
|
Kobryn, K.,
Naigamwalla, D. Z.,
and Chaconas, G.
(2000)
Mol. Microbiol.
37,
145-155[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 73.
|
Rasko, T.,
Finta, C.,
and Kiss, A.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
3083-3091[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 74.
|
Schultz, S. C.,
Shields, G. C.,
and Steitz, T. A.
(1991)
Science
253,
1001-1007[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 75.
|
Jones, P. S.,
Parrott, E.,
and White, I. N. H.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
32008-32014[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

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

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Schultz-Norton, V. A. Gabisi, Y. S. Ziegler, I. X. McLeod, J. R. Yates, and A. M. Nardulli
Interaction of estrogen receptor {alpha} with proliferating cell nuclear antigen
Nucleic Acids Res.,
August 1, 2007;
35(15):
5028 - 5038.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Schultz-Norton, K. A. Walt, Y. S. Ziegler, I. X. McLeod, J. R. Yates, L. T. Raetzman, and A. M. Nardulli
The Deoxyribonucleic Acid Repair Protein Flap Endonuclease-1 Modulates Estrogen-Responsive Gene Expression
Mol. Endocrinol.,
July 1, 2007;
21(7):
1569 - 1580.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Kawai, A. Ishii, K. Washiya, T. Konno, H. Kon, C. Yamaya, I. Ono, Y. Minamiya, and J. Ogawa
Estrogen Receptor {alpha} and {beta} are Prognostic Factors in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res.,
July 15, 2005;
11(14):
5084 - 5089.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M.B Hawkins, J Godwin, D Crews, and P Thomas
The distributions of the duplicate oestrogen receptors ER-{beta}a and ER-{beta}b in the forebrain of the Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus): evidence for subfunctionalization after gene duplication
Proc R Soc B,
March 22, 2005;
272(1563):
633 - 641.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. X. Jin, Y.-W. Leu, S. Liyanarachchi, H. Sun, M. Fan, K. P. Nephew, T. H.-M. Huang, and R. V. Davuluri
Identifying estrogen receptor {alpha} target genes using integrated computational genomics and chromatin immunoprecipitation microarray
Nucleic Acids Res.,
December 17, 2004;
32(22):
6627 - 6635.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. E. Mysiak, C. Wyman, P. E. Holthuizen, and P. C. van der Vliet
NFI and Oct-1 bend the Ad5 origin in the same direction leading to optimal DNA replication
Nucleic Acids Res.,
December 1, 2004;
32(21):
6218 - 6225.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A.G.B. Hurst, D.W. Goad, M. Mohan, and J.R. Malayer
Independent Downstream Gene Expression Profiles in the Presence of Estrogen Receptor {alpha} or {beta}
Biol Reprod,
October 1, 2004;
71(4):
1252 - 1261.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. A. Carr, J. Mead, and A. K. Vershon
{alpha}1-induced DNA bending is required for transcriptional activation by the Mcm1-{alpha}1 complex
Nucleic Acids Res.,
April 26, 2004;
32(8):
2298 - 2305.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. S. Melvin, C. Harrell, J. S. Adelman, W. L. Kraus, M. Churchill, and D. P. Edwards
The Role of the C-terminal Extension (CTE) of the Estrogen Receptor {alpha} and {beta} DNA Binding Domain in DNA Binding and Interaction with HMGB
J. Biol. Chem.,
April 9, 2004;
279(15):
14763 - 14771.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|