![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 12, 10410-10419, March 22, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Max-Planck-Institut für Molekulare Genetik, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
Received for publication, December 10, 2001, and in revised form, January 9, 2002
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Escherichia coli prophage N15
exists as a linear DNA molecule with covalently closed ends. Purified
N15 protelomerase TelN is the only protein required to convert circular
DNA substrates to the linear form with hairpin termini. Within the
center of the telomerase occupancy site tos, the target for
TelN is the 56-bp telRL consisting of the central 22-bp
palindrome telO and two 14-bp flanking inverted sequence
repetitions. DNase I footprinting of TelN-telRL complexes
shows a segment of ~50 bp protected by TelN. Surface plasmon
resonance studies demonstrate that this extended footprint is caused by
two TelN molecules bound to telRL. Stable TelN-target DNA
complexes are achieved with telRL; however, the additional
sequences of tos stabilize the TelN-target complexes. TelO alone is not sufficient for specific stable complex
formation. However, processing can occur, i.e. generation
of the linear covalently closed DNA. Within the context of
telRL, sequences of telO are involved in
specific TelN-telRL complex formation, in processing itself, and/or in recognition of the processing site. The sequence of
the central (CG)3 within telO that is part of a
14-bp stretch proposed to have Z-DNA conformation is essential for
processing but not for formation of specific TelN-telRL
complexes. The concerted action of both TelN molecules at the target
site is the basis for telomere resolution. Capturing of reaction
intermediates demonstrates that TelN binds covalently to the
3'-phosphoryl of the cleaved strands.
N15 is a lambdoid, temperate Escherichia coli phage
that has double-stranded DNA with cohesive ends packaged in the virion (1). The complete nucleotide sequence of the 46-kb genome is known (2).
Upon infection of E. coli, the DNA circularizes via the
cos ends. In contrast to other temperate phages, N15 does not integrate into the host genome. Lysogeny is established by processing the telomere resolution site telRL to form a
linear genome with covalently closed, hairpin-like ends telL
and telR (see "Discussion"). The proposed telomerase
occupancy site tos (1) contains a series of inverted repeats
centered on the 56-bp palindromic telRL. This palindrome or
part of it could form a potential cruciform structure that may function
as the real substrate of the telomerase TelN. In vivo
replication of linear N15 plasmids requires three N15-derived
components as follows: the origin of replication ori, the
replication initiation protein RepA, and TelN protein for resolution of
the replicated telomeres (3). Ori probably is located
immediately upstream of repA. repA is essential in N15 lytic
replication and for maintenance of the linear prophage. Both lytic and
lysogenic replication is independent of at least dnaA,
dnaJ, dnaK, grpE, and recA
(1, 4, 5). For telomere resolution, in vitro purified TelN
and a telRL substrate are sufficient (6). In contrast to
eukaryotic telomerases, TelN seems to be purely proteinaceous, lacking
DNA synthesizing activity. The cleaving-joining activity of TelN
resembles a specialized type of integrase that uses the same DNA
molecule as donor and as acceptor.
Phage N15 belongs to the small group of systems known to replicate as
linear DNA with hairpin ends. Such linear genomes are generally of
eukaryotic origin, but a few from eubacteria are known:
Yersinia bacteriophage
PY541; a
Klebsiella plasmid (7); the plasmids and genomes of
Borrelia (8, 9) and Agrobacterium tumefaciens
(10, 11); poxviruses (e.g. vaccinia virus (12)),
iridopoxvirus (e.g. African swine fever virus (13)), and
parvovirus (e.g. minute virus of mice (14)); and the genomes
and certain plasmids of mitochondria and plastids (15-17). In none of
these cases is replication clearly understood. However, several models
for replication of linear DNA with hairpin ends exist (18). In one
group, initiation of replication occurs at the hairpin ends by
site-specific cleavage of one strand within the hairpin ends. The
3'-hydroxyls are then used as primers for strand displacement DNA
synthesis. The other group contains an internal ori where
N15 serves as a model system to study replication of linear DNA with
hairpin ends that allows the use of E. coli extracts circumventing pathogenic organisms or cells that are difficult to grow.
This is the first report describing the architecture of the complex of
a telomere resolvase with the cognate telomere resolution site, the
nucleotide sequence requirements for target recognition and processing,
and the properties of a captured reaction intermediate. We unravel
binding of the protelomerase TelN to the target using fragment
retention on gels and DNase I footprinting combined with surface
plasmon resonance and mutagenesis studies.
Bacterial Strains and Plasmids--
E. coli
SCS1 (recA1, endA1, gyrA96, thi-1, hsdR17(rK Overexpression and Purification of Proteins--
TelN wild type
protein was overproduced and purified using the procedure described
previously (6). The same procedure was used to purify TelN Y424F to
near-homogeneity. In both cases fraction V (6) was used.
DNA Techniques--
Standard techniques for DNA manipulation
were used (21). The nucleotide sequence of recombinant DNA was verified
by the dideoxynucleotide chain termination method (22).
Construction of Plasmids--
By using synthetic
oligonucleotides, we constructed the plasmids pJD105R-sym,
pJD105A20TT21A, pJD105AT-sym, pJD105(TA)7,
pJD105(CG)7, pJD105S, pJD105 Transmission Electron Microscopy--
For mapping the binding
sites of TelN by electron microscopy, the plasmids containing various
TelN targets, pJD104 (harboring tos), pJD105
(telRL), or pJD106 (telO) (6), were linearized with either AatII or AseI. In the case of pJD104
SphI was used instead of AseI. The linearized DNA
was purified by electrophoresis on 0.7% agarose gels and subsequent
gel extraction. 0.1 pmol of the plasmid was then incubated with 1-3
pmol of TelN Y424F protein in 10 µl of buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 25 mM potassium glutamate, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol for
30 min at 30 °C. For direct adsorption to mica (24), the complexes
were cross-linked for 10 min with 0.2% glutaraldehyde. 1 µl was
diluted 30-fold in 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 10 mM MgCl2. Micrographs were taken with a Philips
EM400. DNA molecules with protein bound were traced on 16-fold enlarged
negatives on a LM4 digitizer (Brühl, Nürnberg, Germany).
The protein binding positions were determined as described (25).
Preparation of Radiolabeled DNA Fragments--
The sources for
the TelN target fragments were plasmids pJD104, pJD105, pJD105
A20TT21A, pJD106, and pBR329
Fragments for DNase I footprint analyses were prepared by PCR
amplification of fragments containing telRL. To achieve
selective labeling of only one strand, one of the two primers (Table
II) was 32P-5'-labeled. Plasmids pJD105 or pJD105A20TT21A
(Table I) served as templates for generating a 159-bp fragment (pJD105
base pairs 212-370) that carry the wild type telRL sequence
or telRL A20TT21A, respectively. Reaction mixtures for PCR
contained 50 pmol of each the labeled and the unlabeled primers (Table
II), 0.05 pmol of template, and 2 units of Deep Vent polymerase. The
PCR fragments were purified by phenol extraction and ethanol precipitation.
Fragment Retention on Gels--
In 20 µl of buffer containing
20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 0.05 mg/ml bovine serum albumin, 5 mM MgCl2, 2-5 nM DNA fragments
were incubated at 37 °C for 30 min with 0-5 µM TelN
Y424F. The reaction products were analyzed by electrophoresis on a
3.5% non-denaturing polyacrylamide gel as described previously (26).
The gel was autoradiographed using the phosphor storage technology
(27). The resulting image was documented using an Amersham Biosciences Storm PhosphorImager 820 and quantified by the use of the ImageQuant software version 5.0 (Amersham Biosciences).
DNase I Footprint Analysis--
In 10 µl of buffer containing
20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.6), 0.05 mg/ml bovine serum albumin,
80 µM spermine, 5 mM CaCl2, 25 mM potassium glutamate, 0.1 mM EDTA, and 1 mM dithiothreitol, 5 pmol of PCR fragment was incubated
with 0-50 pmol of TelN protein for 30 min at 30 °C. DNase I
cleavage reactions were performed essentially as described (28, 29).
1.5 µl of DNase I (0.0015 units, RNase-free, Roche Molecular
Biochemicals) was added to the TelN-DNA complexes. Following 10 min at
37 °C, the DNase I was inactivated by adding 50 µl of a mixture of
1% SDS, 200 mM NaCl, 20 mM EDTA (pH 8.0), 25 ng/µl salmon sperm DNA. The reaction products were phenol-extracted and precipitated with ethanol containing 100 µg/ml glycogen. The pellet was dissolved in 5 µl of buffer (40 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 8.8), 2 mM EDTA), mixed with 2 µl of formamide/dye
solution, heated for 3 min at 95 °C, and loaded onto a 6% (w/v)
polyacrylamide-urea sequencing gel (30). The cleavage pattern was
visualized by autoradiography as described for the fragment retention
assay. To generate a fragment pattern for the nucleotide sequence,
dideoxy cycle sequencing was performed using the same conditions,
templates, and radiolabeled primers as for the generation of the PCR
fragments, except that Vent (exo Surface Plasmon Resonance Studies--
Surface plasmon resonance
was determined using a Biacore 2000 instrument (Biacore AB). Two DNA
fragments were formed using synthetic oligonucleotides (Table II). One
fragment consists of telRL within the original N15
nucleotide context, whereas the sequence of the other one was random.
To differentiate between target-specific and nonspecific binding of
TelN, 173 RU2 of each
fragment biotinylated at one end was immobilized at the streptavidin
matrix in separate chambers of an SA sensor chip according to the
manufacturer's recommendations. 250 µl of TelN Y424F in various
concentrations in buffer consisting of 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH
7.6), 5 mM MgCl2, 50 µg/ml bovine serum
albumin, 0.005% P20 surfactant (Biacore) with or without calf thymus
DNA were injected for 375 s over the immobilized DNA. Then the
complexes formed were washed with 120 µl of the same buffer for
180 s to allow for dissociation. The flow rate always was 40 µl/min. All runs were performed at 25 °C. Changes in plasmon
resonance correspond to a change in mass bound to the chip and are
measured in resonance units (1 RU corresponds to 1 ng/mm2
for proteins). Resonance response for protein is higher than that
observed for DNA (32). For double-stranded DNA it was reported that
RUprotein = 0.73 RUdsDNA (33). Therefore, the
values measured were corrected using this factor. Data were evaluated
according to Ref. 33 using the BIAevaluate software version 3.0 (Biacore AB).
The TelN-binding Site in tos Is telRL--
Telomere resolution
requires recognition and binding to the target DNA by TelN before
processing via transesterification could take place. To study the
recognition and binding step separated from telomere resolution, it was
necessary to uncouple binding and transesterification. Hence, if not
otherwise stated, for all protein-DNA binding studies a mutant TelN
protein was used, in which the proposed active site Tyr-424 was
replaced by a phenylalanine (6). TelNY424F has lost its
transesterification activity but retained its specific DNA binding
ability. To locate the binding site of TelN on the DNA, complex
formation with three substrates, tos, telRL, and
telO, was followed by electron microscopy. Tos (telomerase occupancy site) has a
size of 310 bp and is defined by the inverted sequence repetitions
R1/L1 and R2/L2 flanking telRL (1). The repeats R3/L3
enclose the palindromic telomere resolution site
telO forming telRL (56 bp). The tos
substrate used here consists of 563 bp including neighboring
N15-derived base pairs (6) (Table I).
Knobs on the DNA indicate likely representative examples of complexes
of TelN with tos (Fig. 1). Plotting the positions of the knobs versus the contour
length of the DNA yielded histograms demonstrating the specificity of binding. As indicated by the peak positions in the histograms, site-specific complex formation was detected with tos and
telRL only (Fig. 2,
A and B). The positions of the dots in
TelN-telO complexes were scattered randomly along the DNA
and did not map preferentially to a unique region showing that these
complexes arose from non-sequence specific binding (Fig.
2C). From these data we conclude that tos has a
unique binding site for TelN. Because telRL (56 bp) alone is
sufficient for binding and the positions of the peaks on tos
and telRL match perfectly, this binding site is telRL.
TelRL consists of two inverted sequence repetitions, R3 and L3 (14 bp each), and the central palindrome telO (22 bp). The data
on TelN-telRL (Fig. 2B) and TelN-telO
(Fig. 2C) complexes show in addition that the sequences R3
and L3 are essential for specific complex formation, because
telO alone failed to yield specific complexes. To learn more
on the specificity of binding, the complex formation was studied by
fragment retention in gel electrophoresis.
Tos Is the Most Efficient Binding Substrate for TelN--
A
mixture of equimolar amounts of restriction fragments was incubated
with increasing amounts of TelNY424F and subsequently electrophoresed
on a polyacrylamide gel. Representative images of the fragment
retention experiments (Fig.
3A) show that the target
fragment D containing tos or telRL was bound
specifically by TelN, because in the presence of TelN the amount of
fragment D at its original position in the gel was reduced.
Simultaneously, a new band migrating much slower appeared just below
the wells of the gel. This band most likely represents the newly formed protein-DNA complexes. No such specific retention of fragment D devoid
of any N15 DNA was observed with the vector DNA (Fig. 3A,
lanes m-o). Also for telO no specific binding
was detected (Fig. 3A, lanes j-l) confirming the
data obtained by electron microscopy (Fig. 2C). The clear
indication for nonspecific binding in the telO and vector
experiment is that the Kd(app) values of
fragment D with and without telO are identical (1300 nM; Fig. 3B and Table III). Furthermore, the
largest band alters its position first, and upon increase of the
protein amount each of the fragments migrates slower. To answer the
question if binding of wild type and mutant TelN is comparable, we used
a non-processed telRL derivative (telRLA20TT21A,
Fig. 3A, lanes g-i). The almost identical
dissociation constants of 290 and 310 nM (Fig.
3B and Table III) demonstrate that both proteins TelN and
TelNY424F bind telRLA20TT21A with similar affinities
indicating that the TelN Tyr to Phe mutation does not influence binding
dramatically. Interestingly, a more than 2-fold difference of the
Kd(app) values was observed in
comparison to telRL. The TelN-telRL complex was
apparently more stable than TelN/telRLA20TT21A. Thus the
difference in stability is probably because of the AT to TA mutation.
The most stable complexes were formed with tos
(Kd(app) = 28 nM). There is
an almost 5-fold increase in stability of the TelN-tos
complexes compared with telRL complexes
(Kd(app) = 130 nM, Table III) suggesting that the additional invert sequence repetitions, R1/L1
and R2/L2 present in tos considerably contribute to this effect. It should be kept in mind that TelN has a high affinity to DNA
in general, i.e. it binds DNA in a non-sequence-specific fashion. To obtain preliminary data on the protein-complex architecture we used DNase I footprinting.
TelN Covers a 50-bp Stretch of telRL--
DNase I footprints on
TelN-telRL complexes demonstrate that a large stretch of
nucleotides is protected against nuclease attack on both strands (Fig.
4). The protection pattern suggests that ~50 bp are inaccessible to DNase I cleavage. The protection pattern shows one hypersensitive band on each strand. The footprint of the
upper strand is divided in alternating stronger and weaker protected
segments. This pattern is only rudimentary on the lower strand. Mapping
the data onto the telRL sequence demonstrates a mirror
symmetric arrangement of the hypersensitive bands (Fig. 5) separating two regions, one of 52 bp
and another of 6 bp. To determine the binding stoichiometry of
TelN-telRL complexes that might partially explain the
extended binding pattern, we used the surface plasmon resonance
technique.
Two TelN Monomers Interact with the Telomere Resolution
Site--
Previous studies (6) by glycerol gradient centrifugation
indicated that TelN protein is likely to exist as a monomer in solution. To verify this result by a different approach, we used surface plasmon resonance. TelN protein was covalently bound to a B1
chip designed for protein attachment. After extensive washing at high
salt concentration (1 M NaCl) to dissociate eventually the
present oligomers, the TelN solution was passed over the TelN-loaded chip. Almost no mass increase was detected indicating that TelN/TelN interaction does not take place under the conditions used (data not
shown). This finding confirms that TelN indeed is monomeric in
solution. Hence the question was asked what happens to the stoichiometry of TelN binding if the target DNA telRL is
present. The telRL DNA used in the binding experiments was
97 bp long, i.e. the 56-bp sequence of telRL was
flanked by 18/23 nucleotides of N15 DNA to facilitate access of TelN to
its target. A random DNA sequence of the same length served as
reference for base-line adjustment. The highest value determined was
450 RU corresponding to 1.64 TelN molecules per telRL target
(Fig. 6A). In the presence of
competitor DNA the value decreased to 1.46 TelN molecules per telRL target (Fig. 6B). We interpret the data
that average two molecules of TelN bound to one telRL
molecule. To analyze which region in the target sequence determines
TelN binding and processing specificity, we have generated mutant
substrates.
Affinity of telRL for TelN Is Modulated by the Repeats
R3/L3--
Reduction in binding affinity was already observed
when tos (Table III, Kd(app) = 28 nM) was truncated to telRL
(Kd(app) = 130 nM) by the
removal of R1/L1 and R2/L2. Symmetric stepwise reduction of the length
of the 56-bp telRL sequence led to a gradual loss of the
specific DNA binding ability. At the substrate size of 36-bp specific
binding was no longer observed (data not shown). The complete removal
of one arm (R3) of the invert sequence repetition also abolished the
sequence-specific interaction of this truncated telRL
substrate (Fig. 7, pDB105 TelO Is Sufficient for Telomere Resolution--
Binding of
telO by TelN occurs at the level of nonspecific interactions
(Fig. 2C, Table III, and Fig. 7). Therefore, no telomere resolution was detected at TelN concentrations applied for
telRL processing. However, at TelN concentrations of
~50-fold higher than used for telRL, the telO
substrate (pJD106) is processed weakly indicating that telO
contains all sequence requirements needed for telomere resolution
in vitro. Because of the lack of specific binding of
telO the question of what is needed for telO recognition and processing in terms of nucleotide sequence was addressed by using mutations within telO in the context of
telRL (Fig. 7).
TelO Is Essential for Specific Recognition and
Processing--
Binding and processing studies were initiated with
telRLA20TT21A, a target mutation containing an asymmetric
sequence situation in telO (see above and Fig. 7). This
derivative formed less stable complexes with wild type TelN than wild
type telRL (Table III), and processing could not take place
anymore (Fig. 7). These data already indicated that the sequence
in the central palindrome is of major importance in telomere
resolution. Restoring symmetry in the A20TT21A mutation, by introducing
A36TT37A, reduced specific binding further indicating that
telO apparently is involved in recognition and binding.
Not surprisingly, the nucleotide sequence also determines whether
processing could occur or not. The telO core sequence (20 bp) most likely lies between bases pairs 19 and 38 because derivative
pJD105
Processing of the circular (TA)7 substrate by TelN yielded
several diffuse bands upon agarose gel electrophoresis, the characters of which were not readily interpreted. Inspection of the sample by
electron microscopy indicated that the majority of the DNA consisted of
circular molecules decorated with at least one dot, each most likely
representing a covalently attached TelN molecule. The TelN-DNA
molecules may represent intermediates of the resolution reaction (data
not shown). Processing of linear (TA)7 substrate, i.e. linearized by cleavage with the restriction enzyme
NruI prior to the TelN reaction, yielded two clear sharp
bands of the expected size when treated with proteinase K before
electrophoresis (data not shown). The finding indicated that processing
of the (TA)7 substrate occurred at or around the predicted
telomere resolution site. The larger of the two fragments was selected
for further analysis by end labeling.
TelN Binds Covalently to the 3'-Ends of the Telomere Resolution
Site--
Labeling of the 3'-end or the 5'-end demonstrates free
accessibility, i.e. a protein bound to the respective end
would prevent attachment of the label. Linearization of the
(TA)7 substrate pJD105(TA)7 and subsequent
processing with TelN yielded two fragments. The longer one (3239 bp)
was isolated and 32P-labeled at the 3'-ends or the 5'-ends.
If TelN is attached to the 3'-end, only one side of this fragment is
expected to be 3'-labeled, whereas both 5'-ends should carry the label
(Fig. 8A). Further cleavage
with a second restriction enzyme resulted in two fragments of 2227 and
1012 bp, only the longer one being detectable by autoradiography following separation by gel electrophoresis (Fig. 8B).
3'-Labeling showed that only one of the fragment ends carried the
label, i.e. the other end was blocked most likely by
covalent attachment of TelN (Fig. 8B).
5'-32P-labeling indicated that both 5'-ends were accessible
to the label (data not shown). These observations demonstrate that
telomere resolution for the (TA)7 substrate went as far as
the first cleavage reaction that yielded the covalent adduct of DNA and
TelN as the important reaction intermediate. No covalently closed
hairpin ends were detected by alkaline gel electrophoresis (data not
shown). Obviously this finding provides a way of dissecting the
transesterification reactions in telomere resolution.
Our results demonstrate that the inverted sequence repetitions R1/L1 to
R3/L3 are required for formation and stabilization of specific
TelN-target DNA complexes but are dispensable for DNA processing. The
sequence of the central 6-bp segment of telO is essential
for recognition of the DNA processing site and/or processing, but it
apparently does not contribute to specific binding
(pJD105[TA]7, Fig. 7). However, sequences flanking these central 6 bp add to the formation of specific TelN-target DNA complexes
and are essential for recognition of the processing site. Therefore,
the nucleotide sequence of telO determines (i) specific
binding leading to stable complexes and (ii) recognition of the
processing site where cleavage takes place.
The 56-bp telRL located within tos is the
binding site for TelN, because the protein forms specific and stable
complexes with telRL (Figs. 2 and 3). Because
telO, the central 22-bp palindrome of telRL (Fig.
5), is no target for stable complex formation, the pair of inverted
sequence repetitions R3/L3 flanking telO may provide
essential recognition sequences for the protein. In line with this
interpretation, it is also possible that R3/L3 alters the DNA geometry
of telO slightly so extended protein-DNA contacts may result
in stable complex formation. telO is located in the center
of tos (310 bp) and flanked by three sets of inverted repeats R1/L1 to R3/L3 (1). The apparent dissociation constant determined for tos-TelN complexes is approximately 5-fold
lower than obtained for telRL-TelN complexes (Fig.
2A and Table III). How could
this difference be explained?
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-type replication initiates bidirectionally resulting in
circular head-to-head and tail-to-tail dimers. These intermediates
would then be processed by a cleaving-joining reaction, the telomere
resolution, to regenerate covalently closed hairpin ends in the progeny
molecules. Recently, telomere resolution was demonstrated in
vivo for the linear Borrelia burgdorferi plasmid lp17
using telomere substrates (19). For phage N15, even in vivo
circular dimeric replication intermediates, resolution of these
molecules via TelN telomerase activity was described (3). This
demonstrates that one completed round of replication results in two
progeny molecules as is the case for most replication mechanisms except
the rolling circle type.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
mK+), supE44, relA1, Stratagene) was used as the host for the telN overexpression plasmids and the
telRL target structures (6). SURE 2 (e14
(McrA
),
(mcrCB-hsdSMR-mrr)171,
endA1, supE44, thi-1, gyrA96, relA1, lac, recB, recJ, sbcC,
umuC::Tn5(Kmr), uvrC (F'
proAB,
lacIqZ
(M15Tn10(Tcr)),
Amy+, Cmr), Stratagene) was used for
maintaining the substrate containing the complete TelN target sequence
tos (6). Recombinant plasmids used in this study are
described in Table I. Cells were grown as described previously (20).
When appropriate, antibiotics were added to the following
concentrations: ampicillin (sodium salt, 100 µg/ml),
tetracycline·HCl (10 µg/ml), or kanamycin sulfate (30 µg/ml).
8, pJD105
8.1,
pJD105
8.2 and pJD105
8.7, which all carry a telRL
derivative (Table II). The oligonucleotides were annealed to form the
telRL region with the desired mutation or deletion and
HindIII and BamHI restriction sites at the
fragment ends. The resulting double-stranded fragment was inserted as
HindIII-BamHI fragment into pBR329 that had been
prepared accordingly (6). The pBR329 vector fragment was also
religated without any insert, to form pBR329
1. The plasmid
pJD101Y424F was constructed using PCR-based mutagenesis as described
(23) with synthetic primers (Table II) and pJD101 as template. The
construction of several plasmids used in this study was described
previously (Table I). The nucleotide sequence of all DNA fragments
inserted into vector plasmids was confirmed (see above).
1. The latter served as a control.
Plasmids except pJD104 were digested with the restriction endonucleases
DraI and AccI. pJD104 was digested by
DraI, BamHI, and SphI. From each of
the plasmids except pJD104 five fragments were obtained. The fragment
labeled D in Fig. 3A contained the TelN target
telRL. pJD104 yielded seven fragments, with fragment D (Fig.
3A) carrying tos. The fragments obtained were
treated with shrimp alkaline phosphatase and 5'-labeled using T4
polynucleotide kinase and [
-32P]ATP as described
(21).
) polymerase was applied
as described (31).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
Plasmids and substrate DNA used in this study

View larger version (53K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
TelN-tos
complexes were visualized by electron microscopy.
Representative micrographs of pJD104-TelN Y424F complexes were prepared
as described under "Experimental Procedures." pJD104, which
contains tos, was linearized with SphI. The
bar represents 500 bp.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
The binding site of TelN within
tos is telRL. Each of the
plasmids applied was linearized in separate experiments with two
restriction enzymes, each cutting the DNA only once. For electron
microscopy, the protein-DNA complexes were formed as given under
"Experimental Procedures." TelN Y424F was used. The histograms were
generated by determining the frequency of distribution of TelN protein
bound (DNA/protein = 1:37) over 1000 equidistant points on the
target DNA, counting all protein complexes bound within a 2% (~80
bp) window centered on each point. To show that TelN has only one
unique binding site, the DNA restriction maps of the plasmids were
matched and superimposed on each other. The vertical
hatched line depicts the symmetry center of the
tos, telRL, and telO. The
lines (red and blue) above
each histogram represent the whole length of the plasmid for each type
of linearization. Relevant restriction sites are marked. The
black box within the histogram represents the N15 insert.
A depicts pJD104 (4374 bp) linearized with SphI
(blue, 114 molecules with protein bound were analyzed and
aligned) and AatII (red, 178 molecules).
B, pJD105 (3867 bp) linearized with AseI (297 molecules) and AatII (198 molecules). C, pJD106
(3831 bp) with AseI (164) and AatII (111 molecules). The left and the right axes of the
panels both give the number of the complexes measured. The
bar represents 500 bp.

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
A, representative autoradiographs of DNA
fragment retention on gels demonstrate specific binding of
tos and telRL by TelN Y424F. The experiments were
carried out as described under "Experimental Procedures."
Fragment D contains the TelN target structure.
The other fragments serve as competitor DNA. Lanes a-c
contain fragments from pJD104 (fragment D, tos,
510 bp) incubated at 0, 0.05, and 0.15 µM protein;
lanes d-f, pJD105 (fragment D, telRL,
517 bp; 0, 0.1, and 0.2 µM TelN); lanes g-i,
pJD105 A20TT21A (fragment D, telRL A20TT21A, 517 bp; 0, 0.4, and 0.6 µM TelN); lanes 10-12,
pJD106 (fragment D, telO, 483 bp; 0, 0.9, and 1.8 µM TelN); lanes j-l: pBR329
1
(fragment A, no N15 DNA, 461 bp; 0, 1.0, and 1.8 µM TelN). B, equilibrium binding of
tos, telRL, and telO to TelN Y424F.
Fragment D from A was quantified as described under
"Experimental Procedures." TelN concentrations from 0 to 2.5 µM were used. For each of the plasmids, the values
plotted were averaged from at least two independent experiments. The
apparent equilibrium dissociation constant
Kd(app) for telRL A20TT21A
was determined using both TelN wt protein and TelN Y424F,
respectively.

View larger version (64K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
DNase I footprinting analysis of
telRL-TelN complexes. Generation of the
telRL containing 159-bp fragments by PCR, complex formation
with TelN Y424F, and subsequent digestion with DNase I are outlined
under "Experimental Procedures." To obtain the respective footprint
of the upper and the lower strand (according to Fig. 5), the
appropriate PCR primer was 32P-labeled at the 5'-end.
Lanes a-j, upper strand; lanes k-t, lower
strand. The lanes contain the following amounts of TelN concentrations:
lanes c, d, k, and l, 0 µM; lanes e and m, 0.5 µM; lanes f and n, 1.5 µM; lanes g and o, 2.5 µM; lanes h and p, 3.5 µM; lanes i and j and lanes
q and r, 5 µM. Lanes a and
b contain the dideoxy cycle-sequencing reaction for the
upper strand with ddA and ddG, respectively; lanes s and
t contain the corresponding reactions for the lower strand.
Primers were those used for generating the telRL-containing
fragment used for footprinting. The numbers to the
left and right give the nucleotide positions of
telRL in accordance to Fig. 5.
![]()
View larger version (11K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Schematic representation of TelN-protected
nucleotides of telRL. The nucleotide sequence of
telRL and the flanking regions is shown. Brackets
denote nucleotides protected from DNase I attack. Vertical
lines above and below the sequence indicate nucleotide positions
whose 5'-phosphodiester bonds are hypersensitive to DNase I cleavage.
The inverted repeat R3/L3 of telRL is marked by
arrows, and the inner palindrome telO is
indicated by a double arrow. Numbers correspond to the
length of telRL (56 bp). The symmetry center is given by a
vertical line within the sequence.

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Two TelN molecules bind specifically to
telRL. TelN Y424F was passed over short stretches
of double-stranded DNA containing either telRL or a random
nucleotide sequence (Table II) immobilized in different chambers of the
sensor chip. After injection of 250 µl of TelN Y424F at a flow rate
of 40 µl/s, the chip was washed with 120 µl of buffer to allow for
dissociation of the telRL-TelN complexes. For details see
"Experimental Procedures." Overlays of representative sensorgrams
obtained for a variety of TelN concentrations are shown. The protein
concentrations used are given at right-hand side of both
panels. A, sensorgrams of TelN Y424F without competitor DNA.
B, sensorgrams of TelN Y424F with calf thymus DNA added as
competitor DNA. The ratio TelN:competitor is identical for each of the
protein concentrations used.
8). These
observations indicate that the inverted repeats R1/L1, R2/L2, and also
R3/L3 are responsible for increasing the binding affinity to the
telomere resolution site telO. The introduction of symmetry
into telRL (pJD105R-sym) outside of telO at the 4 bp (15, 17, 40, and 42, see Fig. 5), which are the basis for the
original asymmetry in the otherwise palindromic telRL
sequence, does not have any significant influence on binding or
processing (Fig. 7). Consequently, further analysis concentrated on the
substrate properties of telO.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Mutational analysis of sequence requirements
of the TelN target telRL. The nucleotide sequence
of telRL is shown. Nucleotide positions deviating from
perfect 2-fold symmetry are given in gray letters. The
inverted repeat R3/L3, the inner palindrome telO, and both
arms telR and telL are indicated.
Numbers correspond to the length of telRL (56 bp).
telRL mutants are represented by bars, base pairs
exchanged are in red letters within the bars. Supercoiled
substrate (right column) was incubated with TelN and
analyzed by agarose gel electrophoresis as described before (6). 0.15 pmol of each plasmid was treated with 100 pmol (7700 units) of TelN
protein. Substrate processing was considered to take place, if any
linear product could be observed (column P). TelN binding
was considered to occur specifically, if TelN Y424F bound to the
substrate with a Kd(app) at least 2-fold
below that observed for pBR329
1 (column B). + or
,
suitable or not suitable, respectively, for binding or processing. (+),
reduced amount of bound or processed substrate.
8 still was processed but pJD105
8.1, 1 bp shorter on each
side, was not. Replacement of part of the core sequence, proposed to
have Z-DNA conformation (1) by a symmetric but otherwise random
sequence (pJD105S, Table II) was inert in
binding and processing. Extension of the central (CG)3 to (CG)7 by symmetric replacement of the flanking TATA
region by CGCG also proved to behave inertly in binding, recognition, and processing (pJD105[CG]7; see Fig. 7). Surprisingly,
the replacement of the central (CG)3 by TATATA
(pJD105[TA]7) retained full binding capacity, but
processing of this derivative was considerably altered.
Oligonucleotides used for the molecular cloning of telRL
derivatives, telN mutagenesis, TelN footprint analyses, and surface
plasmon resonance studies

View larger version (8K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
End labeling of TelN-generated products.
A, schematic outline of the experiment. The mutant plasmid
substrate carrying a central (TA)7 instead of
TATA(CG)3TATA in telRL (I) was
linearized with NruI (II), processed with TelN
(III), and treated with proteinase K. The 3239-bp fragment
was isolated (IV) and 32P-labeled either at the
5'-end using T4 polynucleotide kinase and [
-32P]ATP or
at the 3'-end using calf thymus terminal transferase and
[
-32P]dATP (V). The location of the label
is marked by an asterisk. Following cleavage with
AatII, the products of 2227 and 1012 bp were separated by
agarose gel electrophoresis (VI). B, gel
electrophoresis of 3'-end-labeled fragments. The lanes are as follows:
1, DNA after cleavage with AatII (VI);
2, DNA before cleavage (V). The
32P-labeled fragments were stained with ethidium bromide.
1*, 2*, autoradiograph of 1 and 2. M,
size marker (1-kb DNA ladder).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
Apparent equilibrium dissociation constants of TelN-DNA-complexes
The central problem that specific DNA-binding proteins have to solve is how to overcome the kinetic barrier of finding the cognate binding site among a large excess of nonspecific DNA. One solution to greatly facilitate this task is one-dimensional diffusion along the DNA until the target sequence is reached (34). The high unspecific DNA binding ability observed for TelN (Table III) supports the idea of binding to DNA randomly and then sliding along the double strand until the specific site has been recognized. In addition, the repeats R1/L1 and R2/L2 embedding telRL might serve as association points where the protein preferably but loosely binds and slides along the DNA until it hits telRL, where stable complex formation takes place. These repeats located in the nearest vicinity of the telomere resolution site are unique on the 46-kb N15 chromosome, where tos occupies much less than 1%.
Furthermore, the sets of sequence repetitions within tos may favor a locally limited structural alteration at telRL that consequently improves DNA-TelN interactions at the telomere resolution site to yield more stable complexes. If the stabilization of TelN-tos complexes we observed using a linear DNA fragment is actually caused by such conformational changes, telomere resolution in a supercoiled target may even be more favorable. Which of the two possibilities is most conceivable?
A convincing model for replication of linear genomes with covalently
closed ends proposes the existence of circular head-to-head (telLL') and tail-to-tail (telRR') dimers as
replication intermediates. These replicated telomeres telLL'
and telRR' are completely symmetrical. The circular
intermediates would then be processed by a cleaving-joining reaction,
the telomere resolution, to regenerate covalently closed hairpin ends
in the progeny molecules (18, 35). Recently telomere resolution using
such a substrate containing the replicated telLL' was
demonstrated in vivo for the linear B. burgdorferi plasmid lp17 (19). Ravin et al. (3)
demonstrated that a linear N15 mini-plasmid with covalently closed ends
replicates in vivo via a dimeric circular intermediate,
which then TelN resolves into two monomeric progeny molecules. N15
lysogens strictly replicate as a linear plasmid. The current knowledge
of the N15 lifecycle is summarized schematically in Fig.
9.
|
In the cell, the preferred conformation of circular double-stranded DNA is a negatively supercoiled form I (F I). In the last replication step telomere resolution at both telLL' and telRR' results in two single linear DNA molecules with covalently closed hairpin ends telR and telL. Therefore, it is likely that structural alteration in a superhelical substrate would allow establishment of a specific DNA-TelN complex with the most suitable geometry for the cleaving-joining reaction. Such alterations might consist in cruciform extrusions, establishment of Z-conformation, or local topological changes, for instance local unwinding.
The 56-bp telRL sequence contains 2 bp flanking the central 22-bp palindrome telO on each side, which interrupt the 2-fold rotational symmetry (see Fig. 5). This asymmetry allowing differentiation between telR and telL is obviously dispensable for telomere resolution in vivo for N15 (3) and for the Borrelia linear plasmid lp17 (19) and also in vitro for N15 (Fig. 7, see below). In line with the N15 telRL, telomeres from Borrelia (chromosome and linear plasmid) also contain such slight asymmetries (see e.g. Ref. 9), whereas the telomere resolution site of the Yersinia enterocolitica phage PY54 is completely symmetric.1
Cleavage in telO occurs either in a staggered way or directly in the middle of the 22-bp sequence (Fig. 5), the latter option being rather unlikely for sterical reasons (6). Two TelN molecules are bound to telRL as demonstrated by using surface plasmon resonance (Fig. 6). Hence, one TelN molecule is supposed to bind to and occupy each arm of telRL, the region that contains both ends of the strands destined to be connected. The frictional ratio of 1.8 suggests an overall elliptic shape of TelN that may explain the extended footprint covering the complete telRL target site (Fig. 5). Telomere resolution within the 22-bp telO would not per se require TelN to cover additionally the flanking repeats R3/L3. If cleaving-joining occurs in a staggered way, each of the bound TelN molecules probably stabilizes the cleaved strands to fix the acceptor ends on the complementary strand for executing the joining reaction. However, even when we applied a telO containing plasmid substrate for the TelN-mediated telomere resolution under a variety of conditions, we never detected any intermediate. The cleaving-joining reaction proceeded fast to completion in the presence of either telRL or telO. Because the TelN concentration required for processing telO is about 50-fold higher than for telRL, we hypothesize that in the cell the biological function of the repeats R3/L3 of telRL is to capture TelN to obtain the local enzyme concentration required for telomere resolution.
telO, the palindromic central part of telRL, contains the site for telomere resolution. Which portion of telO is required for the cleaving-joining reaction catalyzed by TelN? Analysis of telRL deletion derivatives indicate that nucleotides 19-38 (see Fig. 7) are essential for TelN to bind the substrate, cleave both strands, form the hypothetical transient TelN-DNA intermediate which conserves part of the chemical energy, and complete the telomere resolution by the second transesterification yielding a linear molecule with covalently closed ends. Our results support the idea that one TelN molecule interacts with each half of telRL or telO indicative for a concerted action of both protein molecules in binding to the telomere resolution side and/or telomere resolution. However, the direct interaction of two TelN molecules on the target remains to be elucidated.
What are the main determinants of telO for telomere
resolution? A telRL plasmid substrate in which the perfect
symmetry of telO is disturbed by the exchange of two
nucleotides at positions 20 and 21 (A20TT21A) was still able to complex
specifically with TelN, albeit with reduced stability (Table III).
However, telomere resolution was abolished completely (Fig. 7).
Restoring symmetry by complementary nucleotide exchange in the second
arm of telO reduced stability of the complexes and the
ability to process remained abolished. Hence, not only the sequence is
important but also substrate symmetry in this region of telO
is an additional determinant for telomere resolution. The
telRL derivative carrying a central (CG)7
instead of TATA(CG)3TATA was no longer a substrate for
binding or processing (Fig. 7). The TATA tetra-nucleotides therefore
are recognized by TelN to locate the precise cleavage site or to
position the enzyme in the appropriate geometry. Interestingly, replacement of (CG)3 by (TA)3 that yielded a
(TA)7 stretch retained wild type binding capacity, but
processing of the previously linearized substrate (Fig. 8) was altered
toward the accumulation of homogeneous reaction intermediates,
i.e. cleaved substrate with covalently attached TelN. Hence
it is clear that the central hexamer (CG)3 plays its major
role in substrate processing, especially in the second
transesterification, because the first one being the cleavage reaction
still occurs in (TA)7. The symmetrical intermediate
carrying one TelN molecule at each half of the telomere resolution site further promotes the hypothesis of a concerted action of two TelN molecules (see above). The notion of the concerted action is further supported by the finding that reactions on substrate halves (pJD
8.7) or on substrates with one inactivated arm (pJD105A20TT21A) did not take
place (Fig. 7).
In the (TA)7 intermediate, TelN was bound to the 3'-end of
the cleaved strands (Fig. 8), indicating that the enzyme exhibits mechanistic similarities to
integrase and Flp recombinase. These enzymes belonging to the integrase family of site-specific recombinases (36) bind covalently to the 3'-phosphoryl of the cleaved strand via a
phosphotyrosyl linkage (37, 38). Three short motifs named box A, B, and
C conserved in these proteins (36) are also present in TelN. The
mutation Y424F in the proposed catalytic domain box C
(VXXEXLGHXXXXTXXHYK) is
inert in telomere resolution indicating that Tyr-424 might indeed
function as the key residue in catalysis. As the study of reaction
intermediates is often complicated by virtue of their transient and
unstable nature, our (TA)7 mutant will serve as a highly
potent tool to address this question, because the intermediates could
be isolated in sufficient amounts to determine the corresponding
phosphoaminoacyl residue. The (TA)7 substrate will also
help to precisely locate between which nucleotides both strands are cleaved.
Because the TelNY424F mutant protein is inert in processing but retains
the specific binding capacity, we suspect that the protein consists of
distinct domains, one of them being responsible for DNA binding. For
the reasons mentioned above TelN most likely functions as a specialized
tyrosine recombinase for which donor and acceptor strands reside in the
same DNA molecule.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Hans Lehrach for generous support. The expert technical assistance of Marianne Schlicht is greatly appreciated. We thank Gerhild Lüder for preparing the electron micrographs and Franca Bläsing for initial help with the BIAcore equipment.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by Grant LA 672/3-4 from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Max-Planck-Institut
für Molekulare Genetik, Abteilung Lehrach, Ihnestrasse 73, Dahlem, D-14195 Berlin, Germany. Tel.: 49-30-8413-1696; Fax:
49-30-8413-1130; E-mail: lanka@molgen.mpg.de.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, January 11, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.111769200
1 S. Hertwig, I. Klein, R. Lurz, E. Lanka, and B. Appel, unpublished data.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviation used is: RU, resonance units.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Rybchin, V. N.,
and Svarchevsky, A. N.
(1999)
Mol. Microbiol.
33,
895-903[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. |
Ravin, V.,
Ravin, N.,
Casjens, S.,
Ford, M. E.,
Hatfull, G. F.,
and Hendrix, R. W.
(2000)
J. Mol. Biol.
299,
53-73[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. |
Ravin, N.,
Strakhova, T.,
and Kuprianov, V.
(2001)
J. Mol. Biol.
312,
899-906[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. | Svarchevsky, A. N. (1986) Plasmid N15: The Particularities of Genetics and DNA StructurePh.D. thesis , The Leningrad State University, Leningrad, Russia |
| 5. |
Vostrov, A. A.,
Malinin, A. Y.,
Rybchin, V. N.,
and Svarchevsky, A. N.
(1992)
Genetika
28,
186-188[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. |
Deneke, J.,
Ziegelin, G.,
Lurz, R.,
and Lanka, E.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
7721-7726 |
| 7. |
Stoppel, R. D.,
Meyer, M.,
and Schlegel, H. G.
(1995)
Biometals
8,
70-79[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. |
Hinnebusch, J.,
and Barbour, A. G.
(1991)
J. Bacteriol.
173,
7233-7239 |
| 9. |
Fraser, C. M.,
Casjens, S.,
Huang, W. M.,
Sutton, G. G.,
Clayton, R.,
Lathigra, R.,
White, O.,
Ketchum, K. A.,
Dodson, R.,
Hickey, E. K.,
Gwinn, M.,
Dougherty, B.,
Tomb, J. F.,
Fleischmann, R. D.,
Richardson, D.,
Peterson, J.,
Kerlavage, A. R.,
Quackenbush, J.,
Salzberg, S.,
Hanson, M.,
van Vugt, R.,
Palmer, N.,
Adams, M. D.,
Gocayne, J.,
Weidman, J.,
Utterback, T.,
Watthey, L.,
McDonald, L.,
Artiach, P.,
Bowman, C.,
Garland, S.,
Fuji, C.,
Cotton, M. D.,
Horst, K.,
Roberts, K.,
Hatch, B.,
Smith, H. O.,
and Venter, J. C.
(1997)
Nature
390,
580-586[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 10. |
Jumas-Bilak, E.,
Michaux-Charachon, S.,
Bourg, G.,
Ramuz, M.,
and Allardet-Servent, A.
(1998)
J. Bacteriol.
180,
2749-2755 |
| 11. |
Goodner, B.,
Hinkle, G.,
Gattung, S.,
Miller, N.,
Blanchard, M.,
Qurollo, B.,
Goldman, B. S.,
Cao, Y.,
Askenazi, M.,
Halling, C.,
Mullin, L.,
Houmiel, K.,
Gordon, J.,
Vaudin, M.,
Iartchouk, O.,
Epp, A.,
Liu, F.,
Wollam, C.,
Allinger, M.,
Doughty, D.,
Scott, C.,
Lappas, C.,
Markelz, B.,
Flanagan, C.,
Crowell, C.,
Gurson, J.,
Lomo, C.,
Sear, C.,
Strub, G.,
Cielo, C.,
and Slater, S.
(2001)
Science
294,
2323-2328 |
| 12. |
Baroudy, B. M.,
Venkatesan, S.,
and Moss, B.
(1982)
Cell
28,
315-324[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Gonzalez, A.,
Talavera, A.,
Almendral, J. M.,
and Vinuela, E.
(1986)
Nucleic Acids Res.
14,
6835-6844 |
| 14. |
Cotmore, S. F.,
and Tattersall, P.
(1987)
Adv. Virus Res.
33,
91-174[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Morin, G. B.,
and Cech, T. R.
(1986)
Cell
46,
873-883[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. |
Cummings, D. J.
(1992)
Int. Rev. Cytol.
141,
1-64[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. |
Dinouel, N.,
Drissi, R.,
Miyakawa, I.,
Sor, F.,
Rousset, S.,
and Fukuhara, H.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
2315-2323 |
| 18. |
Casjens, S.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Microbiol.
2,
529-534[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 19. |
Chaconas, G.,
Stewart, P. E.,
Tilly, K.,
Bono, J. L.,
and Rosa, P.
(2001)
EMBO J.
20,
3229-3237[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. |
Ziegelin, G.,
Linderoth, N. A.,
Calendar, R.,
and Lanka, E.
(1995)
J. Bacteriol.
177,
4333-4341 |
| 21. | Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E. T., and Maniatis, T. (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual , 2nd Ed , Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY |
| 22. |
Sanger, F.,
Nicklen, S.,
and Coulson, A. R.
(1977)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
74,
5463-5467 |
| 23. |
Weiner, M. P.,
Costa, G. L.,
Schoettlin, W.,
Cline, J.,
Mathur, E.,
and Bauer, J. C.
(1994)
Gene (Amst.)
151,
119-123[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 24. | Spiess, E., and Lurz, R. (1988) Methods Microbiol. 20, 293-323 |
| 25. |
Lurz, R.,
Heisig, A.,
Velleman, M.,
Dobrinski, B.,
and Schuster, H.
(1987)
J. Biol. Chem.
262,
16575-16579 |
| 26. |
Ziegelin, G.,
Scherzinger, E.,
Lurz, R.,
and Lanka, E.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
3703-3708[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 27. |
Johnston, R. F.,
Pickett, S. C.,
and Barker, D. L.
(1990)
Electrophoresis
11,
355-360[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 28. |
Galas, D. J.,
and Schmitz, A.
(1978)
Nucleic Acids Res.
5,
3157-3170 |
| 29. |
Ziegelin, G.,
Fürste, J. P.,
and Lanka, E.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
11989-11994 |
| 30. |
Garoff, H.,
and Ansorge, W.
(1981)
Anal. Biochem.
115,
450-457[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. |
Sears, L. E.,
Moran, L. S.,
Kissinger, C.,
Creasey, T.,
Perry-O'Keefe, H.,
Roskey, M.,
Sutherland, E.,
and Slatko, B. E.
(1992)
BioTechniques
13,
626-633[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 32. |
Fischer, P.,
Leu, S. J. C.,
Yang, Y. Y.,
and Chen, P. P.
(1994)
BioTechniques
16,
828-828[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 33. |
Speck, C.,
Weigel, C.,
and Messer, W.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
6169-6176[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 34. |
Bustamante, C.,
Guthold, M.,
Zhu, X.,
and Yang, G.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
16665-16668 |
| 35. |
Kobryn, K.,
and Chaconas, G.
(2001)
Curr. Opin. Microbiol.
4,
558-564[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. |
Esposito, D.,
and Scocca, J. J.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
3605-3614 |
| 37. |
Pargellis, C. A.,
Nunes-Duby, S. E.,
de Vargas, L. M.,
and Landy, A.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
7678-7685 |
| 38. |
Gronostajski, R. M.,
and Sadowski, P. D.
(1985)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5,
3274-3279 |
| 39. |
Balzer, D.,
Ziegelin, G.,
Pansegrau, W.,
Kruft, V.,
and Lanka, E.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
1851-1858 |
| 40. |
Covarrubias, L.,
and Bolivar, F.
(1982)
Gene (Amst.)
17,
79-89[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |