|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M110616200 on January 10, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 12, 9911-9919, March 22, 2002
The E2F Family of Transcription Factors from Arabidopsis
thaliana
NOVEL AND CONSERVED COMPONENTS OF THE RETINOBLASTOMA/E2F PATHWAY
IN PLANTS*
Luisa
Mariconti ,
Barbara
Pellegrini ,
Rita
Cantoni ,
Rebecca
Stevens§,
Catherine
Bergounioux§,
Rino
Cella , and
Diego
Albani¶
From the Department of Genetics and Microbiology,
University of Pavia, Via Ferrata 1, 27100 Pavia, Italy, the
§ Institute of Plant Biotechnology, University of Paris-XI,
91400 Orsay, France, and the ¶ Department of Botany and Plant
Ecology, University of Sassari, Via Muroni 25, 07100 Sassari, Italy
Received for publication, November 5, 2001, and in revised form, December 20, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
The E2F transcription factors are key components
of the cyclin D/retinoblastoma/E2F pathway. Here we demonstrate that
Arabidopsis thaliana contains six functional AtE2F genes
that are all expressed in cell suspension culture but show different
patterns of expression during cell cycle progression. According to
their structural and functional features, the six AtE2Fs can be divided
into two distinct groups; although the three members of the first
group, AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb and AtE2Fc, possess all the conserved domains
found in other plant and animal E2Fs, the remaining AtE2Fs are novel
proteins, which reveal a duplication of the DNA binding domain but lack any other conserved region. Furthermore, the AtE2Fs of the first group
are functional transcription factors that in association with AtDP
proteins can recognize specifically an E2F cis-element and
can transactivate an E2F-responsive reporter gene in plant cells. In
contrast, the AtE2Fs of the second group can bind specifically the E2F
site without interacting with DP partners but cannot activate gene
expression and, instead, are able to inhibit E2F-dependent activation of gene expression in Arabidopsis cells. These
findings suggest distinctive roles for the plant E2F proteins
and point to a complex concerted regulation of
E2F-dependent gene expression in plant cells.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Recent studies have shown that the basic regulatory circuits
governing cell cycle progression in animal cells are remarkably conserved in higher plants. In particular, plant cells possess all the
key components of the cyclin D/retinoblastoma/E2F pathway, which in
animal cells is a major regulator of cell proliferation and is part of
a critical checkpoint controlling the progression from G1
to S phase of the cell cycle (1). The cyclin D-cdk2 or cyclin D-cdk4
complexes regulate the activity of the
pRB1 tumor suppressor protein
and the related p107/p130 pocket proteins, which in their
hypophosphorylated state bind to the E2F family of transcription
factors and block their transactivating potential (2-4). Furthermore,
the pocket proteins have been shown to recruit to the E2Fs chromatin
remodeling activities, such as histone deacetylases, histone
methyltransferase, or SWI·SNF complexes, which once tethered to the
DNA can actively repress the transcription of E2F-regulated genes by
blocking the access of other transcription factors in the proximity of
the E2F binding sites (5-9). It is now widely believed that in
quiescent cell or during the early G1 phase of the cell
cycle the E2Fs are mainly involved in the repression of several cell
cycle-regulated promoters, whereas during the transition from
G1 to S phase the release of transcriptionally active E2Fs,
resulting from the phosphorylation of the pocket proteins, leads to an
E2F-dependent activation of several genes coding for
regulatory proteins and for enzymes involved in nucleotide and DNA
synthesis. This dual function of the E2F complexes clearly explains why
these transcription factors, depending on the cellular and
developmental context, can be either positive or negative regulators of
cell proliferation and can act as both oncogenes and tumor suppressors
(2, 4). Moreover, highlighting the remarkable functional complexity of
animal E2Fs, in Drosophila the DmE2F1 protein has been shown
to affect directly the localization and the DNA-replicating activity of
the origin replication complex (10) and in animal cells this family of
proteins is believed to participate in the regulation of several
cellular processes (3). Indeed, according to the broad range of
mammalian genes, which change their expression in response to the
activation of some of the E2Fs, these transcription factors have been
shown to be involved in the control of differentiation, development, proliferation, and apoptosis (11). In mammalian cells some E2Fs have been actually shown to induce apoptosis through the regulation of
p53 activity as well as in a p53-independent pathway (3, 4).
The various E2F proteins can recognize specific DNA
cis-elements forming heterodimers with partially related
proteins called DP. So far, six E2Fs and two DPs have been found in
human cells, and, according to a comparative analysis of the genome of
Arabidopsis thaliana, at least six putative E2F genes and
two DP genes appear to be present in Arabidopsis cells as
well. Plant E2F genes have been described in carrot, tobacco, and wheat
(12-14), and three of the Arabidopsis E2Fs have been
recently described (15, 16), whereas DP homologues have been reported
in wheat and Arabidopsis (15, 17). All the E2F proteins
described so far possess a highly conserved DNA-binding domain, forming
a winged helix motif, which is flanked toward the C-terminal side by a
DP dimerization domain containing a leucine heptad repeat. Next to the
dimerization domain, all the E2Fs possess another conserved region
called marked box, which in human cells is recognized by the adenovirus
E4 protein and may be involved in heterodimerization and DNA bending
(18, 19). Based on their primary structures and on their functional features, the six mammalian E2Fs can be divided into three groups. E2F1, E2F2, and E2F3, which belong to the first group, possess a
conserved cyclin A-binding domain in their N-terminal region and a
transactivating domain, overlapping a conserved pRB-binding region, at
their C-terminal end. These three E2Fs are believed to be direct
activators of S phase genes; accordingly, their expression is not
detectable in quiescent cells but it is strongly up-regulated during
G1/S transition. In contrast, E2F4 and E2F5, the members of
the second group, are expressed in quiescent cells as well as
throughout the cell cycle and lack the cyclin-A-binding domains but
possess pRB-binding and transactivating C-terminal regions. E2F6, the
last known member of the mammalian E2F family, lacks the N-terminal
cyclin-A binding domain as well as the transactivating C-terminal
region and it has been shown to bind directly polycomb group proteins
and to act as a repressor of E2F-dependent transcriptional activation (20). The plant E2Fs described so far, do not possess evident cyclin A-binding domains in the N-terminal region but show a
conserved pRB-binding domain in their C-terminal region. In this
respect, wheat, tobacco, and Arabidopsis E2Fs have been shown to interact with plant pRBR proteins (13, 14, 16) and the carrot
E2F factor has been shown to be a transcriptional activator that,
heterodimerizing with a DP partner, can bind a consensus E2F
cis-element and can transactivate a synthetic E2F-responsive promoter in both plant and animal cells (12). In this work we report on
the isolation and functional characterization of the cDNA clones of
all six E2Fs of A. thaliana. Although the previously described AtE2F sequences show the typical features of other plant and
animal E2F proteins, the three remaining clones reveal unique structural features and possess duplicated conserved DNA-binding domains but lack any of the additional regions which are conserved in
other plant and animal E2Fs. These Arabidopsis E2F genes are all expressed in cell suspension culture but show different patterns of
expression during cell cycle progression. Furthermore, DNA binding
assays and transactivation experiments suggest distinctive roles for
these plant E2F proteins pointing to a complex concerted regulation of
E2F-dependent gene expression in plant cells.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Plant Materials--
Arabidopsis plants (ecotype
Columbia) and two different cell lines were used as a source of plant
material. For protoplast preparation and transient expression
studies, a habituated cell suspension line was grown at 23 °C
under continuous light in Murashige and Skoog pH 5.8 medium
(Duchefa) supplemented with 3% sucrose and was subcultured weekly by
transferring a 2-ml packed cell volume inoculum to 50 ml of
fresh medium. For synchronization experiments the cell line T87 of
Arabidopsis (21) was maintained at 23 °C with a 16-h
photoperiod in B5 Gamborg's medium (Sigma), pH 5.8, supplemented with
30 g/liter sucrose and 1 µM NAA, and was subcultured
weekly transferring 4 ml into 40 ml of fresh medium. Suspension cells
were synchronized by a 24-h treatment with 20 µg/ml aphidicolin as
previously described (22). At different time points, the cells were
harvested and quickly frozen in liquid nitrogen before isolation of
total RNA.
Isolation of AtE2F and AtDP cDNAs--
To amplify the
cDNA sequences of the various E2F and DP genes,
poly(A)+ RNA was isolated from Arabidopsis
suspension cells and from plants at the flowering stage using oligo(dT)
cellulose (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) following a standard batch
procedure (23). The RNA was then reverse transcribed using an anchored
oligo(dT) primer or oligonucleotides derived from the putative
3'-untranslated region of each gene. The RT primers were:
ATCCGTCGACATCGATAATACGACTColigo(dT) (R0R1 primer),
TCCTAGTAATTGGGAATTTGA (AtE2Fc/RT primer), GAGAATTGAAGTTACGCC (AtE2Fd/RT primer), CTGAAATTTGTTCAGAAA (AtE2Fe/ RT
primer), CTGTTTTAACAACATTTTTCA (AtE2Ff/RT primer),
AGAATTTGGGAATAGAAGCTC (AtDPa/RT primer), and CTTTACAGTTTTACAGAA
(AtDPb/RT primer). The reverse transcription reactions were
performed for 1 h at 45 °C using 400 ng of poly(A)+
RNA in 20 µl of reaction containing 10 pmol of each primer, 40 units
of RNasin ribonuclease inhibitor (Promega), 0.5 mM dNTPs, and 200 units of Moloney murine leukemia virus reverse transcriptase (Promega). The resulting cDNA samples were then used as templates for PCR reactions, which were performed with the RT primers coupled with the following oligonucleotides derived from the known AtE2Fb upstream region, as determined by 5'-rapid amplification of cDNA ends, or from the putative 5'-untranslated region of the other genes:
TCGACTCTCGCTTCACTACGA (AtE2Fa/1 primer), TTTCGATTCGCCGATCTC (AtE2Fb/1 primer), TCTCTACCACCGGAGATA (AtE2Fc/1 primer),
ATATCTTTTGTTGTCTCC (AtE2Fd/1 primer), AATCGCAGACATCGTTTG (AtE2Fe/1
primer), AAATTTCTCGTCCTCTTT (AtE2Ff/1 primer), CGTGTAGCTAACTTTGTTAA
(AtDPa/1 primer), and AGAATGACAACTACTGGGTCTA (AtDPb/1primer). Nested
PCR reactions were performed using a second set of gene-specific
primers with the following sequences: CTAGGATCCATGTCCGGTGTC
(AtE2Fa/5Bam primer), TGTGAATTCAGAAGTTGAGAAGTGT (AtE2Fa/3Eco
primer), GGGGGATCCTTATCGAGATTCGTTCT (ATE2Fb/5Bam primer),
TATCTCGAGATATATGGTGGTGCTTGTA (AtE2Fb/3Xho primer),
ACCGGATCCACACCGCCGTTACATGGC (AtE2Fc/5Bam primer),
GAACTCGAGGTTTCAAACAACTTTGTT (AtE2Fc/3Xho primer),
GTTGGATCCACCCACCCCACCCAGGT (AtE2Fd/5Bam primer),
CCCCTCGAGTTAATCTACCTGATGATT (AtE2Fd/3Xho primer),
AAGGGATCCAAATGGTTGGGCTTGATG (AtE2Fe/5Bam primer),
GAACTCGAGTTAATTTCATAGCAATAT (AtE2Fe/3Xho primer),
TTCGGATCCTCTTTCTCTGTTTTTTGT (AtE2Ff/5Bam primer),
AAACTCGAGTTATGTTTTATAATCAGA (AtE2Ff/3Xho primer),
TGTCTCGAGAAGGATGAGTATGGAG (AtDPa/5Xho primer), TAGGAATTCGGTCAGCGAGTATCAATGG (AtDPa/3Eco primer),
TGGCTCGAGAATGACAACTACTGGG (AtDPb/5Xho primer), an
GGGGAATTCATACGTGTTTCAATT (AtDPb/3Eco primer). As shown in
italic letters, the 5' end AtE2F oligonucleotides contained an anchored
BamHI site and the 3' end primers contained an
EcoRI or a XhoI cloning site, whereas the DP
oligonucleotide sequences included a XhoI and an
EcoRI cloning site. After electrophoretic analysis of the
nested reactions, the resulting PCR fragments were either digested with
the suitable restriction enzymes and ligated into the pBluescriptII KS+
plasmid (Stratagene), in the case of the AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb, AE2Fd, and
AtE2Fe cDNAs, or directly cloned into the pGEM-T-Easy vector
(Promega). All the clones were sequenced using the Big Dye terminator
cycle sequencing on an ABI sequencer (PerkinElmer Applied Biosystems).
Expression Studies by Semiquantitative RT-PCR
Analysis--
After disrupting the synchronized Arabidopsis
cells in a mortar, total RNA was isolated using TRIzol reagent
(Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. For the
RT-PCR reactions, oligo(dT)-primed first-strand cDNA was
synthesized from 5 µg of total RNA using SuperscriptII RNase
H Reverse Transcriptase (Invitrogen) following the
manufacturer's protocol and aliquots of 2.5 µl of the cDNA were
then used for each PCR reaction. 20 cycles of PCR amplification were
performed in a final volume of 20 µl with 25 pmol of the following
gene-specific primers: CCATGTCCGGTGTCGTACGATC and CCTGAGCTAGAAGCAATAGGC
for AtE2Fa, ATTAACAAGCTTGAGTGAGGA and GCTACCTGTAGGTGATCTCG for AtE2Fb, CTGGGAGATCAAATTTCTAG and TCCTAGTAATTGGGAATTTGA for AtE2Fc,
GATTCATTGATGGTTCTGC and GAGAATTGAAGTTACGCC for AtE2Fd,
TACAATGGTGAGCCTACTTT and CTGAAATTTGTTCAGAAACAG for AtE2Fe,
CCAAATTTCTGAAATTGATTA and CTGTTTTAACAACATTTTTCA for AtE2Ff,
CAAATGGTTGTGAAGACTCAA and AGAATTTGGGAATAGAAGCTC for AtDPa, GCACTTATATAGCTCAGGAA and AGTAACGTTGTTAGTCTCAG for AtDPb,
CCAAGCCTGCGATCCGAAGATTGGC and CGCTACCGCAAACTGAACGCCAAACCC for histone
H4, and CTAAGCTCTCAAGATCAAAGGCTTA and TTAACATTGCAAAGAGTTTCAAGGT for the
actin transcripts. The PCR products were resolved on a 1% agarose gel
and transferred onto a Hybond N+ membrane (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.).
Hybridization was carried out overnight at 62 °C with
32P-labeled probes corresponding to the coding regions of
the specific genes. The membranes were washed twice at 62 °C in 1×
SSC containing 1% SDS and once in 0.1×SSC containing 1% SDS and then autoradiographed.
Production of Recombinant E2F and DP Proteins--
To produce
recombinant AtE2F proteins, the cDNA fragments of five AtE2Fs
clones (AtE2Fa, AtE2Fc, AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff) were isolated after
digestion with BamHI and KpnI and were inserted into the polylinker of suitable pRSET vectors (Invitrogen). pRSETA was
used for AtE2Fa and AtE2Fd; pRSETB for AtE2Fb, AtE2Fc, and AtE2Fe; and
pRSETC for AtE2Ff. The resulting plasmids were introduced into
Escherichia coli BL21(DE3) or BL21(DE3)pLysE, and the
corresponding proteins carrying a histidine-tagged N-terminal extension
(His-AtE2Fa, His-AtE2Fc, His-AtE2Fd, His-AtE2Fe, His-AtE2Ff) were
purified under nondenaturing conditions by metal affinity
chromatography on nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid resin (Qiagen) as
previously reported (24). Because a similar approach was unsuccessful
for AtE2Fb, the recombinant protein was produced as a GST-AtE2Fb fusion
by ligating into the SmaI site of the pGEX-4T-2 vector
(Amersham Biosciences, Inc.) the blunt-ended fragment isolated after
digestion of the AtE2Fb cDNA clone with XhoI and
NotI. Similarly, to obtain recombinant AtDP proteins, the
relative cDNA fragments, isolated after digestion of the clones
with XhoI and NotI, were cloned into the
corresponding sites of the pGEX-4T-3 vector and pGEX-6P-1 vector
respectively. The resulting plasmids were introduced into E. coli XL1-blue cells, and the GST-AtDPa, GST-AtDPb, and GST-AtE2Fb recombinant proteins were purified by chromatography on
glutathione-agarose (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.) according to
the manufacturer's instructions. Electrophoretic analysis of the
eluted proteins confirmed the purification and the expected size of the
recombinant proteins.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assays--
Electrophoretic
mobility assays were performed essentially as previously described
(12). The DNA binding reactions of the purified recombinant AtE2F and
AtDP factors were conducted incubating 50-300 ng of recombinant
proteins with 50,000 cpm of radiolabeled canonical EC probe
(5'-aattcTTTTCCCGCGCTTTTgaatt-3') in 15 µl of 25 mM
Hepes, pH 7.5, 100 mM KCl, 1 mM
MgCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 5% glycerol, and 10 mM dithiothreitol for 30 min at room temperature. For the
competition experiments, increasing amounts of annealed unlabeled
canonical EC probe or unlabeled mutated EM probe
(5'-aattcTTTTCCATCGCTTTTgaatt-3') were included in the reactions. The
protein-DNA complexes were electrophoresed for 3 h at 4 °C on
4% polyacrylamide gels in 0.5× TBE.
Transactivation Assays--
For the construction of the effector
plasmids, the various AtE2F and AtDP cDNA fragments were isolated
after digestion with BamHI and XhoI and were
ligated into a BamHI/SalI-digested pFF19 plasmid
(25) to give rise to the p35S-AtE2Fa, p35S-AtE2Fb, p35S-AtE2Fc, p35S-AtE2Fd, p35S-AtE2Fe, p35S-AtE2Ff, p35S-AtDPa, and p35S-AtDPb plasmids. The pBI221-E2F reporter gene used for these assays has been
described previously (12). The transactivation experiments were
conducted with protoplast isolated from 3-day-old
Arabidopsis cell suspension cultures. The cells were
incubated for 3 h with 1% cellulase and 0.2% pectinase in
protoplast isolation solution (27.2 mg/liter KH2PO4, 101 mg/liter KNO3, 1.4 g/liter CaCl2, 246 mg/liter
MgSO4, 0.16 mg/liter KI, 0.025 mg/liter CuSO4,
10 mM MES, and 0.7 M sorbitol, pH 5.5) and the
resulting protoplasts were pelleted, washed three times in the same
solution without enzymes, and then resuspended at a density of 0.5 × 106 protoplasts ml 1. After incubation for
2 h at room temperature under dim light, the protoplasts were
pelleted again, resuspended at a density of 1 × 106
protoplasts ml 1 in W5 solution (154 mM NaCl,
125 mM CaCl2, 5 mM KCl, 5 mM sucrose, pH 5.8), and left for 20 min at room
temperature. After this incubation, the protoplasts were finally
pelleted, resuspended at a density of 1.66 × 106
protoplasts ml 1 in MaMg solution (0.5 M
mannitol, 15 mM MgCl2, 5 mM MES, pH
5.6), and divided into aliquots of 0.3 ml. For the transactivations, each aliquot of the protoplast suspension was mixed with 10 µg of
each test plasmid and with sonicated calf thymus DNA, included to bring
the total DNA content to 50 µg. After adding 300 µl of PEG solution
(40% polyethylene glycol 6000, 0.1 M
Ca(NO3)2, 0.4 M mannitol, pH 9),
the samples were incubated at room temperature for 20 min; then 5 ml of
F solution (140 mM NaCl, 125 mM
CaCl2, 5 mm KCl, 0.75 mM
Na2HPO4, 5 mM sucrose, pH 7.2) were
added to each aliquot, and the reactions were incubated at room
temperature for an additional 20 min. The protoplasts were finally
pelleted, resuspended in 6 ml of culture medium (Gamborg's B5 medium
supplemented with 300 mg/liter CaCl2, 825 mg/liter
NH4NO3, 100 mg/liter sodium pyruvate, 200 mg/liter malic acid, 200 mg/liter citric acid, 300 mg/liter
casaminoacids, 200 mg/liter yeast extract, 20 g/liter saccharose, 76 g/liter mannitol, 0.1 mg/liter 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, 0.2 mg/liter benzylaminopurine, 10 6 M NAA,
5 × 10 7 M zeatin riboside, pH 5.6) and
incubated for 40 h in the dark at 25 °C. GUS activity was
measured as described by Gallie et al. (26).
 |
RESULTS |
The Arabidopsis E2F Family Is Composed of Three Typical E2Fs and of
Three Distinctive Members with Unique Structural Features--
The
recent isolation of plant E2F homologues has revealed the striking
conservation of a portion of the DNA-binding domain in plant and animal
E2Fs. Computer searches on the A. thaliana genomic sequences
in the GenBankTM data base have revealed the presence of at least six
putative E2F-like genes: one each on chromosome 1 and 2, two on
chromosome 3, and two on chromosome 5. For one gene, corresponding to
the recently described AtE2Fb and AtE2F1 clones (15, 16), the sequence
of the 5' region was missing in the data base and 5'-rapid
amplification of cDNA ends experiments were performed to obtain the
full coding region. For the remaining genes, complete genomic sequences
were available and, following a predictive analysis of the putative
open reading frames, specific primers were selected and used to isolate
the corresponding cDNAs by RT-PCR. Bearing in mind the possibility that some of the AtE2F genes could be expressed only in specific cell
types or during particular developmental stages, the RT-PCR reactions
were conducted using pooled mRNA isolated from an actively dividing
Arabidopsis cell culture as well as from entire flowering plants. These reactions led to the isolation of cDNA clones
corresponding to the transcripts of all six AtE2F genes. In agreement
with the nomenclature already proposed for the two recently reported
AtE2Fa and AtE2Fb clones (15), we named the four remaining AtE2F genes with letters from c to f. Fig.
1A shows the alignment of the
six AtE2F proteins, derived from the translated cDNA sequences, and reveals the existence of two different groups of E2F-like members in
Arabidopsis. The AtE2Fa and AtE2Fb cDNAs, which confirm
the reported clones, code for proteins of 485 and 469 amino acids, respectively, with predicted molecular masses of 52.8 and 51.7 kDa. The
highly related AtE2Fc cDNA, which belongs to the same group, codes
for a smaller product of 396 amino acids with a putative molecular mass
of 44.5 kDa. The sequence of these three cDNA is identical to the
recently reported AtE2F3, AtE2F1, and AtE2F2 clones, respectively (16).
As shown in Fig. 1A, these three AtE2F proteins possess all
the typical conserved domains, including the marked box and the
pRBR-binding region, previously found also in other plant E2Fs. On the
other hand, AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff, which are the members of the
second group of proteins, code for unique E2F-like products that, as
highlighted in Fig. 1B, possess two E2F-like DNA-binding
domains but none of the other conserved regions. The AtE2Fd and AtE2Fe
cDNAs code for larger products of 359 and 379 amino acids,
respectively, with putative molecular masses of 40.6 and 42.4 kDa. In
contrast, the AtE2Ff cDNA sequence retained a predicted intron that
introduces a stop codon at amino acid position 201 and gives rise to a
putative translation product of 22.4 kDa truncated in the middle of the
second E2F-like DNA-binding domain. As shown in Fig. 1A, the
AtE2Fa protein possesses a putative nuclear localization signal (NLS)
of the SV40 large T antigen type at position 92 in its N terminus but
this sequence (PSRKRK) is only partially conserved in the AtE2Fb and
AtE2Fc proteins and is not observed in the AtE2Fs of the second group.
However, both AtE2Fd and AtE2Fe possess a homologous bipartite NLS
sequence in their C-terminal region, starting at position 241 and 270, respectively, and in the AtE2Fd protein this putative NLS is
additionally overlapped by a SV40 large T antigen type NLS (PKKR)
located at position 239. The AtE2Ff protein, being truncated in the
second DNA-binding domain, does not possess any of these sequences, and other putative NLS sequences cannot be defined. Overall, it is clear
that the AtE2F family of Arabidopsis comprises two distinct types of E2F-like proteins, and, although the members of the first group closely resemble the plant and animal E2Fs so far reported, the
second group of AtE2Fs possess remarkable structural features that
distinguish them from all the E2F proteins so far described.

View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Amino acid sequence of the AtE2F
proteins. A, alignment of the six amino acid sequences
and identification of conserved functional domains. Identical residues
are written in white letters on a
black background, whereas amino acid similarities
are shown with a gray background. The highly
homologous DNA-binding domain, which is repeated twice in the AtE2Fd,
AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff proteins, and the conserved regions, which are found
only in the AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb, and AtE2Fc proteins, are indicated along
with the putative NLS regions. B, amino acid alignment of
the two DNA-binding domains of the AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff proteins.
The conserved residues are highlighted as above, and the
amino acid position of the first residue of each repeated domain is
shown on the left of the sequence.
|
|
The Arabidopsis E2F and DP Genes Are Differentially Expressed
during Cell Cycle Progression--
Because the RT-PCR reactions that
led to the isolation of the various cDNA clones were conducted
using pooled mRNA isolated from both flowering plants and
proliferating cell culture, it was not clear whether all six AtE2F
genes could be expressed in suspension cells. However, a preliminary
Northern blot analysis with mRNA isolated from an
Arabidopsis cell culture in exponential growth revealed
that, although to different extents, the AtE2F genes are all expressed
in proliferating cells (data not shown). Consequently, it was
particularly interesting to verify whether some of them could be
differentially regulated during cell cycle progression. For this
purpose, we performed semiquantitative RT-PCR reactions to detect the
expression of the AtE2F transcripts in an Arabidopsis cell
culture partially synchronized by treatment with aphidicolin, an
inhibitor of DNA polymerase that blocks the cell cycle at the
G1/S boundary. Similar analyses were conducted for the
AtDPa and AtDPb transcripts, as well as for histone H4 and actin
transcripts. The expression of histone H4 transcripts allowed us to
verify the efficiency of synchronization and to monitor the passage
through S phase, whereas the expression of actin transcripts, which are
believed to be constitutive, was analyzed to verify the uniformity of
the various mRNA samples. The efficiency of synchronization of
plant cells and its extension in time are cell
culture-dependent and, based on our experience with several
independent experiments, only 40-50% of the cells of our
Arabidopsis cell culture can acquire synchronization (data not shown). Nevertheless, as reported in Fig.
2, in our partially synchronized cell
culture the steady state levels of histone H4 transcripts are low
immediately after the release from block and increase in the following
hours, marking a clear peak of S phase 8-10 h after release. Histone
H4 expression then decreases after 12 h, suggesting that most of
the synchronized Arabidopsis cells have moved into
G2 by that time. Even though our synchronized cells move
into S phase only several hours after the release from block, possibly
because of the relatively high concentration of aphidicolin used to
obtain a good synchronization, it is clear that the expression of the
various AtE2F and AtDP genes is strongly regulated during cell cycle
progression from G1 to G2. Furthermore, as
fully described in Fig. 2, the various genes show very distinctive patterns of expression. The AtE2Fa gene is maximally expressed shortly
before the peak of S phase, and its expression decreases remarkably
during the passage into G2, whereas the AtE2Fb transcripts accumulate maximally at the G1/S transition and show a
lower but constant steady state level in the following phases. The
AtE2Fc and AtE2Fd genes, which code for proteins of the two different AtE2F groups, are expressed in a similar way, and their transcripts are
not detectable at the G1/S transition, but their steady
state levels increase during the progression into S phase and peak
after the passage into G2. On the other hand, AtE2Fe and
AtE2Ff, the other members of the second group of AtE2Fs, are expressed
at both the G1/S and S/G2 boundaries, but their
transcripts are not detectable during early S phase. As additionally
described in Fig. 2, the two AtDP genes also show different patterns of
expression in relation to cell cycle progression. The AtDPa transcripts
appear to accumulate constitutively throughout the various phases from G1 to G2, whereas the AtDPb gene shows very low
expression at the G1/S boundary and increases considerably
its expression during the progression into S phase reaching a peak
after passage into G2.

View larger version (89K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Expression of the AtE2F and AtDP genes during
progression from late G1 to early G2 phase of
the cell cycle in Arabidopsis cells partially
synchronized by treatment with aphidicolin. The steady state
levels of the various transcripts at different time points after
removal of the inhibitor were evaluated by semiquantitative PCR
analysis, followed by hybridization of the resulting PCR products with
specific oligolabeled probes. Each sample contained approximately the
same amount of RNA as revealed by the nearly homogeneous amplification
of constitutive actin transcripts. The expression of the histone H4
gene was verified as a marker of S phase.
|
|
All the Arabidopsis E2F Proteins Recognize Canonical E2F
cis-Elements, but the Two Groups of Proteins Have Different DNA Binding
Requirements--
Although the AtE2Fa and AtE2Fb proteins have been
shown to interact in vitro and in vivo with both
AtDPs (15) and AtE2Fb has been recently shown to be able to recognize
E2F cis-elements forming a complex together with a
recombinant human DP1 partner (16), the DNA binding features of AtE2Fa
and AtE2Fc have not yet been described. Furthermore, in view of the
remarkable difference in primary structure between the two groups of
AtE2F proteins, it was particularly interesting to investigate whether
all of these Arabidopsis proteins can specifically recognize
a canonical E2F cis-element and whether, as already reported
for AtE2Fb, formation of heterodimers with DP partners is required also
by the other AtE2Fs to achieve high DNA binding affinity. To perform
these analyses, we produced recombinant N-tagged versions of all the AtE2F and AtDP proteins in E. coli. Histidine tags were
fused to all the recombinant AtE2F proteins with the exception of
AtE2Fb, which like the two AtDP proteins was fused to a GST tag. The
recombinant proteins were purified and tested in gel shift assays to
verify their heterodimerizing specificities and DNA binding
capabilities. Various combinations of the recombinant proteins were
incubated with a labeled DNA probe containing the canonical E2F binding sequence 5'-TTTCCCGCGC-3', as previously described in the case of the
carrot DcE2F protein (12). Competition experiments with an excess of
unlabeled canonical or mutated probes (5'-TTTCCATCGC-3') were performed
to verify the specificity of DNA binding. The overall results, which
are reported in Fig. 3, revealed that
recombinant AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb, and AtE2Fc cannot bind to the DNA by
themselves but can recognize specifically the canonical E2F DNA probe
if the GST-AtDPb protein is included in the assay (Fig. 3,
A-C). Moreover, as also shown in Fig. 3 (A and
C), even though GST-AtDPa can apparently bind the DNA probe
by itself with lower efficiency, the addition of His-AtE2Fa or
His-AtE2Fc proteins strongly increases the specific binding of protein
complexes to the E2F site, indicating that these AtE2Fs can bind the
DNA forming heterodimers with AtDPa. Surprisingly, we were not able to
obtain a clear evidence of DNA binding by GST-AtE2Fb together with
GST-AtDPa (data not shown). However, the result of these analyses
in vitro does not rule out the possibility that heterodimers
between these two Arabidopsis factors could form and bind
DNA in vivo.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
DNA binding features of the AtE2F
proteins. All the EMSAs show the specific binding of the AtE2Fs to
a canonical E2F binding site (EC), which is not competed by
a 30-200-fold excess of unlabeled mutated probe (EM) as
reported. The presence and the relative amount of the recombinant
proteins included in the various samples are indicated schematically by
bars on the top of each panel.
A, His-E2Fa binds specifically the E2F site only in the
presence of either GST-AtDPa (left panel) or
GST-AtDPb (right panel). The DNA binding capacity
of the His-E2Fa·GST-AtDPa complex increases with higher amounts of
the AtE2Fa protein, and, conversely, the binding of the
His-E2Fa·GST-AtDPb complex is dependent on the amount of GST-AtDPb
included in the sample. B, GST-AtE2Fb binds specifically the
E2F site together with GST-AtDPb. C, His-AtE2Fc needs the
presence of either one of the GST-AtDP proteins to bind specifically
the canonical E2F site. D and E, His-AtE2Fd and
His-AtE2Fe proteins bind specifically and efficiently the E2F
cis-element by themselves in the absence of GST-AtDP
proteins. F, AtE2Ff binds specifically the canonical probe
and also GST-AtDPa alone can bind the E2F site with low efficiency,
giving rise to a protein-DNA complex with slower mobility. Inclusion of
both His-AtE2Ff and GST-AtDP proteins in the same samples does not form
a protein-DNA complex of intermediate mobility, thus confirming the
independent binding of His-AtE2Ff to the canonical DNA sequence.
|
|
Overall, it is clear that the three AtE2F proteins of the first class
need to interact with an AtDP partner to bind efficiently to the E2F
site. On the other hand, the presence of two conserved DNA-binding
domains and the lack of any obvious heterodimerization domain in the
AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff proteins, prompted us to investigate whether
these unique plant E2Fs could bind to the canonical E2F DNA site
without interacting with DP partners. As shown in Fig. 3 (D
and E), the results of these EMSA analyses revealed that
His-AtE2Fd and His-AtE2Fe can specifically and efficiently recognize
the canonical E2F probe in the absence of DP proteins. Moreover,
addition of recombinant AtDPs did not affect the efficiency of DNA
binding or the relative mobility of the AtE2Fd or AtE2Fe protein-DNA
complexes (data not shown), suggesting that an interaction between
these unique AtE2Fs and the AtDP proteins is unlikely to occur. This
possibility is further supported by the results of EMSAs performed with
recombinant AtE2Ff, which was tested together with an excess of AtDP
proteins. As shown in Fig. 3F, despite being truncated in
the middle of the second DNA-binding domain, the His-AtE2Ff protein can
still bind to the E2F probe by itself and addition of both GST-AtDPa or
GST-AtDPb does not affect its DNA binding efficiency. Moreover, as
mentioned before, recombinant AtDPa alone gives rise to protein-DNA
complexes of slower mobility if compared with those obtained with
His-AtE2Ff and coincubation of GST-AtDPa and His-AtE2Ff does not
generate new complexes of intermediate mobility, further ruling out the
formation of heterodimers between these proteins. As seen in Fig. 3, in
several of these EMSAs multiple retarded DNA-protein complexes are
formed, which could indicate either the binding of multimeric protein
complexes or the presence of truncated isoforms of the recombinant
proteins. To verify this point, the purified AtE2F proteins produced in E. coli were subjected to Western blot analyses performed
with anti-histidine tag antibodies. Although all the samples contained a major recombinant protein of the expected molecular mass, minor amounts of truncated products were also detected (data not shown) and
it is likely that they could form smaller protein-DNA complexes. From
the overall results, it is clear, therefore, that the two groups of
Arabidopsis E2Fs show distinctive DNA binding requirements and, whereas the members of the first group must heterodimerize with
the AtDPs to recognize efficiently a canonical E2F site, the unique
AtE2Fs of the second group can bind to the E2F site without the
contribution of DP partners.
The E2F Family of Arabidopsis Includes Both Activators and
Inhibitors of E2F-dependent Gene Expression--
Having
established the distinctive DNA binding requirements of the two groups
of AtE2F proteins, it was interesting to verify whether any of these
transcription factors could act as a transcriptional activator in plant
cells. For this analysis, effector plasmids expressing the various
AtE2F and AtDP proteins were obtained by placing the corresponding
cDNA sequences under the control of the double 35 S gene promoter
of cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) in the expression plasmid pFF19
(25). As previously described for the characterization of the DcE2F
protein, the pBI221-E2F reporter gene used for these assays consisted
of the GUS gene placed under the control of a minimal 67 bp CaMV 35 S
promoter fused to an upstream DNA fragment containing six consecutive
canonical E2F cis-elements (12). Arabidopsis
protoplasts obtained from a suspension cell culture were transiently
transformed with the E2F-responsive GUS construct alone or in
combination with the various AtE2F and AtDP effectors and at least five
independent experiments were performed for each sample combination. In
contrast to the results previously observed with carrot protoplasts
isolated from somatic embryos, the transient expression in
Arabidopsis protoplasts of the pBI221-E2F reporter gene
alone yielded a moderate level of GUS expression, which suggests that
endogenous E2F activities in these plant cells are sufficient to
activate the minimal promoter containing the six E2F binding sites
(data not shown). In each experiment, the GUS activity measured after
cotransfection of the pBI221-E2F reporter gene together with the
various combinations of effectors was then directly compared with the
background GUS activity of the pBI221-E2F construct alone and the
cumulative results, expressed as average -fold activation, are
described in Fig. 4A. These
data show that transient expression of AtE2Fb, either alone or together
with the AtDPs, can give the strongest transactivation of the
pBI221-E2F construct. Cotransfection of just the AtE2Fb effector is
sufficient to increase GUS expression approximately 3-fold, but
coexpression with AtDPa or AtDPb transactivates the E2F-responsive gene
over 5-fold on average. On the other hand, expression of AtE2Fa and
AtE2Fc gives weaker transactivation and, surprisingly, in the case of
AtE2Fa this seems to occur only when AtDPa is also expressed. Transient
expression of AtE2Fc together with either AtDPs can transactivate the
E2F-responsive construct by ~3-fold on average, whereas AtE2Fa with
AtDPa can yield only a nearly 2-fold transactivation. Nevertheless, the
overall results show that the three members of the first group of AtE2F
proteins, although with different efficiencies, can transactivate the
E2F-responsive promoter in our transient assay and their activity is
strongly dependent on the presence of at least one of the AtDP
partners. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 4A,
cotransfection of Arabidopsis protoplasts with the AtE2Fd,
AtE2Fe, or AtE2Ff effectors, either alone or in combination with the
AtDPa or AtDPb effectors, cannot transactivate the pBI221-E2F construct
but, in contrast, it appears to lower the level of the background GUS
activity. These results suggest that the three members of the second
group of AtE2F proteins are unlikely to possess activation domains but
can be targeted in vivo to the E2F-responsive promoter,
where they are able to compete with the endogenous E2F activities for
DNA binding. To further confirm this hypothesis, the AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe,
and AtE2Ff effectors were coexpressed with AtE2Fb, the strongest
activator, either alone or together with AtDPs, to verify whether they
can compete with this factor for DNA binding and transactivation. As
shown in Fig. 4B, coexpression of these AtE2Fs together with AtE2Fb lowers the transactivating potential of this transcription factor in Arabidopsis protoplasts, and this effect, which is
particularly marked with AtE2Fd, demonstrates that these novel AtE2Fs
can inhibit E2F-dependent activation of gene expression in
plant cells.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Transactivating potential of AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb,
or AtE2Fc and inhibiting activity of AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, or AtE2Ff proteins
in Arabidopsis protoplasts. A,
transactivation of the E2F-responsive GUS construct pBI221-E2F by the
various AtE2Fs alone ( AtDPs) or together with the AtDPs
(+AtDPa or +AtDPb). The results of at least five
independent transfections are expressed as the average -fold activation
relative to the background activity of the pBI221-E2F reporter
construct alone (control, AtDPs). B, inhibition of the
AtE2Fb transactivating activity by coexpression of the AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe,
or AtE2Ff effectors, with or without AtDP effectors. The results of at
least six independent experiments are reported as in A. Error bars indicate the standard deviation.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The discovery of at least six E2F genes in A. thaliana,
all of which are differentially expressed during cell cycle
progression, suggests that, in plant cells, like in mammalian cells,
the activity of the pRB/E2F pathway relies on the concerted regulation
of several E2F members. Furthermore, according to their structural and
functional characteristics, these six AtE2Fs can be divided into two
distinctive groups. The AtE2Fa, AtE2Fb, and AtE2Fc proteins possess all
the typical regions that are conserved in other plant E2Fs and are able
to bind efficiently to a E2F site forming heterodimers with AtDP
proteins. Additionally, as previously described for carrot DcE2F (12),
these three AtE2Fs can transactivate a synthetic E2F-responsive
promoter in plant cells, confirming their ability to act as positive
regulators of gene expression. However, these studies have shown that
the three members of the first group possess different transactivating
capabilities. Even though AtE2Fa is able to bind canonical DNA target
sites interacting in vitro with either AtDPa or AtDPb, it
can transactivate slightly the E2F-responsive reporter gene only when
it is coexpressed with AtDPa. In this respect, it is known that in
human cells the activity of E2F4 and E2F5, which lack NLS sequences, is
regulated at the level of subcellular localization. Coexpression of
E2F4 together with human DP2, which possess a functional NLS, but not
with DP1, has been shown to enable its nuclear translocation (27, 28)
and its transactivation of a E2F-responsive reporter construct (29, 30). Concerning the Arabidopsis E2F·DP complexes, it is
not known whether the activity of the various AtE2F and AtDP proteins is regulated at the level of their subcellular localization but it is
interesting to note that whereas AtE2Fa possesses a putative nuclear
localization signal in its N terminus, this sequence is only partially
conserved in the AtE2Fb and AtE2Fc proteins. It remains to be confirmed
whether this region is actually involved in the nuclear targeting of
these proteins.
In this study we have also demonstrated that Arabidopsis
cells possess three novel and remarkable E2F members, called AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff, that contain duplicated DNA-binding domains. This
feature enables these proteins to recognize a consensus E2F site
independently of a DP partner, and their DNA binding specificity proves
that these factors are actual components of the Arabidopsis pRB/E2F pathway. However, although they are likely to be targeted to
the nucleus, these AtE2Fs cannot activate gene expression; instead,
they appear to be able to interfere with the activity of the other
AtE2F members, possibly by competing for the same DNA target sites.
This effect is particularly clear with the AtE2Fd effector and is less
pronounced with AtE2Ff. The latter factor, however, lacks part of the
second DNA-binding domain, and EMSA analyses indicated that it binds
less efficiently to the canonical E2F site. Furthermore, AtE2Ff lacks
also the putative NLS sequence, which is located near the C terminus of
both AtE2Fd and AtE2Fe, and its translocation to the nucleus could
occur differently.
In mammalian cells, depending on their interaction with pocket
proteins, the various E2Fs can behave as activators or as repressors of
gene transcription. The remarkably different pattern of expression of
the various AtE2F genes during the passage from the G1 to
the G2 phase of cell cycle indicates that also in
Arabidopsis cells at least some of the E2F activities are
likely to be involved in both activation or repression of S
phase-specific gene expression. This possibility has been already
suggested for the carrot DcE2F protein, which is expressed ubiquitously
in all plant tissues (12). A dual function of the plant E2F activities
has also been suggested by the recent studies of two plant
E2F-regulated promoters. In both the tobacco RNR2 promoter
and the Nicotiana benthamiana PCNA
promoter, two distinct E2F binding sites have been identified, and in
both promoters the functional disruption of the downstream site has
been shown to increase the transcriptional activity in either cycling
cells or in mature leaves, respectively (31, 32).
The three AtE2Fs of the first group are good candidates for pocket
protein-mediated control of E2F activity because they possess a
conserved pRBR-binding region in their C terminus. In this context, AtE2Fa and AtE2Fb have been recently shown to interact with pRBR proteins in a yeast two-hybrid system (16). Additionally, wheat TmE2F
and tobacco NtE2F have been shown to bind plant pocket proteins and, in
the case of the wheat factor, this interaction is strictly dependent on
the presence of the conserved C-terminal region (13, 14). These
findings contribute to link the activity of the plant E2Fs to the mode
of action of plant DNA viruses, which encode proteins that interact
with pRBR proteins (33). On the other hand, the AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and
AtE2Ff proteins lack the pRBR-binding domain and therefore are unlikely
to be subjected to a control by pocket proteins. A similar situation is
seen with the mammalian E2F6 protein, which is also not regulated by
pocket proteins. However, unlike the three AtE2Fs of the second group,
E2F6 binds a DP partner and requires this interaction to recognize
efficiently E2F consensus sites. Moreover, E2F6 has been shown to
actively repress gene expression by interacting directly with polycomb group proteins, which recognize specifically its marked box region (20). The AtE2Fd, AtE2Fe, and AtE2Ff proteins do not contain a marked
box region, and, although the first two members of this group possess
discrete C-terminal regions that could potentially harbor unknown
functional domains, the AtE2Ff protein is truncated in the second
DNA-binding domain and does not appear to possess other discrete
regions outside those potentially involved in DNA recognition. Hence,
the AtE2Ff protein and possibly the other AtE2Fs of the second group
might not be able to recruit repressing activities to the E2F-regulated
promoters, as in the case of human E2F6, but could act as dominant
inhibitors of E2F-dependent gene activation by simply
blocking the access of other AtE2Fs to shared DNA target sites.
Although the distribution of the various AtE2F proteins in
Arabidopsis cells remains to be verified, considering their
functional features and in view of the expression pattern of their
transcripts, we can envision a cascade of events that could contribute
to the regulation of the pRB/E2F pathway during the cell cycle in
plants. More specifically, the peak of accumulation of the AtE2Fb
transcripts at the G1/S transition and their constitutive
distribution during cell cycle progression suggest that this factor,
similarly to the mammalian E2F4 and E2F5 proteins, could be a key
target of the pRBR proteins in early G1. Its eventual
release, following the phosphorylation of the pocket proteins, could
lead to the subsequent activation of the AtE2Fa gene, which is
maximally expressed in early S phase. On the other hand, we speculate
that AtE2Fa, like the mammalian E2F1, E2F2, and E2F3 factors, could be
a direct and specific activator of S phase genes, whereas AtE2Fc could have important regulatory functions during both the S phase and the
following G2 phase. Finally, the AtE2F members of the
second group are clearly adding a new level of complexity to the
control of E2F-dependent gene expression by possibly
inhibiting, in different phases of the plant cell cycle, the DNA
binding capacity of the first group of AtE2Fs. In this respect, it is
worth noting that in mammalian cells overexpression of a partial E2F
protein containing only the DNA-binding domain or introduction of
peptides that antagonize E2F DNA binding have been shown to trigger
apoptosis in a p53-independent manner (34-36). Whether or not any of
the AtE2F members is involved in the control of apoptosis in plants, it
is evident, from the data obtained so far, that they are likely to be
complex regulators of the plant cell cycle. Future investigations will
help to verify the proposed model of AtE2F activity and will reveal
whether in plants, like in animals, these transcription factors are
involved in the control of other cellular processes and/or can regulate unique plant developmental programs.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful to Fiorella Lo Schiavo
(Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy)
for supplying the Arabidopsis cell culture used in the
transactivation experiments. We thank Linda Hanley-Bowdoin for critical
reading of the manuscript and for helpful discussion.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by grants "Programmi di Ricerca
Scientifica di Interesse Nazionale" from the Ministero
dell'Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica and
"Progetto di Ricerca di Ateneo" from the University of Pavia.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.
The nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EBI Data Bank with accession number(s) AJ417834-AJ417837.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
39-79-228645; Fax: 39-79-233600; E-mail: albani@ssmain.uniss.it.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, January 10, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M110616200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
pRB, retinoblastoma
protein;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay;
NAA, -naphthaleneacetic acid;
MES, 4-morpholineethanesulfonic acid;
GUS, -glucuronidase;
CaMV, cauliflower mosaic virus;
NLS, nuclear localization signal;
RT, reverse
transcription.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Stals, H.,
and Inzé, D.
(2001)
Trends Plant Science
6,
359-364[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Black, A. R.,
and Azizkhan-Clifford, J.
(1999)
Gene (Amst.)
237,
281-302[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Harbour, J. W.,
and Dean, D. C.
(2000)
Genes Dev.
14,
2393-2409[Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Muller, H.,
and Helin, K.
(2000)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1470,
M1-M12[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Luo, R. X.,
Postigo, A. A.,
and Dean, D. C.
(1998)
Cell
92,
463-473[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Ferreira, R.,
Magnaghi-Jaulin, L.,
Robin, P.,
Harel-Bellan, A.,
and Trouche, D.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
10493-10498[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Vandel, L.,
Nicolas, E.,
Vaute, O.,
Ferreira, R.,
Ait-Si-Ali, S.,
and Trouche, D.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
6484-6494[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Trouche, D., Le,
Chalony, C.,
Muchardt, C.,
Yaniv, M.,
and Kouzarides, T.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11268-11273[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Zhang, H. S.,
Gavin, M.,
Dahiya, A.,
Postigo, A. A., Ma, D.,
Luo, R. X.,
Harbour, J. W.,
and Dean, D. C.
(2000)
Cell
101,
79-89[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Bosco, G., Du, W.,
and Orr-Weaver, T. L.
(2001)
Nat. Cell Biol.
3,
289-295[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Muller, H.,
Bracken, A. P.,
Vernell, R.,
Moroni, M. C.,
Christians, F.,
Grassilli, E.,
Prosperini, E.,
Vigo, E.,
Oliner, J. D.,
and Helin, K.
(2001)
Genes Dev.
15,
267-285[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Albani, D.,
Mariconti, L.,
Ricagno, S.,
Pitto, L.,
Moroni, C.,
Helin, K.,
and Cella, R.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
19258-19267[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Ramirez-Parra, E.,
Xie, Q.,
Boniotti, M. B.,
and Gutierrez, C.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
3527-3533[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Sekine, M.,
Ito, M.,
Uemukai, K.,
Maeda, Y.,
Nakagami, H.,
and Shinmyo, A.
(1999)
FEBS Lett.
460,
117-122[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Magyar, Z.,
Atanassova, A., De,
Veylder, L.,
Rombauts, S.,
and Inzé, D.
(2000)
FEBS Lett.
486,
79-87[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
de Jager, S. M.,
Menges, M.,
Bauer, U. M.,
and Murray, J. A.
(2001)
Plant Mol. Biol.
47,
555-568[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Ramirez-Parra, E.,
and Gutierrez, C.
(2000)
FEBS Lett.
486,
73-78[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Vidal, M.,
Braun, P.,
Chen, E.,
Boeke, J. D.,
and Harlow, E.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
10321-10326[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Cress, W. D.,
and Nevins, J. R.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
2119-2127[Abstract]
|
| 20.
|
Trimarchi, J. M.,
Fairchild, B.,
Wen, J.,
and Lees, J. A.
(2001)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
98,
1519-1524[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Axelos, M.,
Curie, C.,
Mazzolini, L.,
Bardet, C.,
and Lescure, B.
(1992)
Plant Physiol. Biochem.
30,
123-128
|
| 22.
|
Doutriaux, M. P.,
Couteau, F.,
Bergounioux, C.,
and White, C.
(1998)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
257,
283-291[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Bartels, D.,
and Thompson, R. D.
(1993)
Nucleic Acids Res.
11,
2961-2978[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Albani, D.,
Hammond-Kosack, M. C. U.,
Smith, C.,
Conlan, S.,
Colot, V.,
Holdsworth, M.,
and Bevan, M. W.
(1997)
Plant Cell
9,
171-184[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Timmermans, M. C.,
Maliga, P.,
Vieira, J.,
and Messing, J.
(1990)
J. Biotechnol.
14,
333-344[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Gallie, D. R.,
Lucas, W. J.,
and Walbot, V.
(1989)
Plant Cell
1,
301-311[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Magae, J., Wu, C. L.,
Illenye, S.,
Harlow, E.,
and Heintz, N. H.
(1996)
J. Cell Sci.
109,
1717-1726[Abstract]
|
| 28.
|
de la Luna, S.,
Burden, M. J.,
Lee, C. W.,
and La Thangue, N. B.
(1996)
J. Cell Sci.
109,
2443-2452[Abstract]
|
| 29.
|
Lindeman, G. J.,
Gaubatz, S.,
Livingston, D. M.,
and Ginsberg, D.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
5095-5100[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Verona, R.,
Moberg, K.,
Estes, S.,
Starz, M.,
Vernon, J. P.,
and Lees, J. A.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
7268-7282[Abstract]
|
| 31.
|
Chaboute, M. E.,
Clement, B.,
Sekine, M.,
Philipps, G.,
and Chaubet-Gigot, N.
(2000)
Plant Cell
12,
1987-2000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Egelkrout, E. M.,
Robertson, D.,
and Hanley-Bowdoin, L.
(2001)
Plant Cell
13,
1437-1452[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Gutierrez, C.
(2000)
Plant Mol. Biol.
43,
763-772[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Hsieh, J. K.,
Fredersdorf, S.,
Kouzarides, T.,
Martin, K.,
and Lu, X.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
1840-1852[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Phillips, A. C.,
Bates, S.,
Ryan, K. M.,
Helin, K.,
and Vousden, K. H.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
1853-1863[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Bandara, L. R.,
Girling, R.,
and La Thangue, N. B.
(1997)
Nat. Biotechnol.
15,
896-901[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Tojo, K. Tsuda, T. Yoshizumi, A. Ikeda, J. Yamaguchi, M. Matsui, and K.-i. Yamazaki
Arabidopsis MBF1s Control Leaf Cell Cycle and its Expansion
Plant Cell Physiol.,
February 1, 2009;
50(2):
254 - 264.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. C. Day, R. P. Herridge, B. A. Ambrose, and R. C. Macknight
Transcriptome Analysis of Proliferating Arabidopsis Endosperm Reveals Biological Implications for the Control of Syncytial Division, Cytokinin Signaling, and Gene Expression Regulation
Plant Physiology,
December 1, 2008;
148(4):
1964 - 1984.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. T. Ascencio-Ibanez, R. Sozzani, T.-J. Lee, T.-M. Chu, R. D. Wolfinger, R. Cella, and L. Hanley-Bowdoin
Global Analysis of Arabidopsis Gene Expression Uncovers a Complex Array of Changes Impacting Pathogen Response and Cell Cycle during Geminivirus Infection
Plant Physiology,
September 1, 2008;
148(1):
436 - 454.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Yoshizumi, Y. Tsumoto, T. Takiguchi, N. Nagata, Y. Y. Yamamoto, M. Kawashima, T. Ichikawa, M. Nakazawa, N. Yamamoto, and M. Matsui
INCREASED LEVEL OF POLYPLOIDY1, a Conserved Repressor of CYCLINA2 Transcription, Controls Endoreduplication in Arabidopsis
PLANT CELL,
October 1, 2006;
18(10):
2452 - 2468.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. del Pozo, S. Diaz-Trivino, N. Cisneros, and C. Gutierrez
The Balance between Cell Division and Endoreplication Depends on E2FC-DPB, Transcription Factors Regulated by the Ubiquitin-SCFSKP2A Pathway in Arabidopsis
PLANT CELL,
September 1, 2006;
18(9):
2224 - 2235.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Sozzani, C. Maggio, S. Varotto, S. Canova, C. Bergounioux, D. Albani, and R. Cella
Interplay between Arabidopsis Activating Factors E2Fb and E2Fa in Cell Cycle Progression and Development
Plant Physiology,
April 1, 2006;
140(4):
1355 - 1366.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. K. Imai, Y. Ohashi, T. Tsuge, T. Yoshizumi, M. Matsui, A. Oka, and T. Aoyama
The A-Type Cyclin CYCA2;3 Is a Key Regulator of Ploidy Levels in Arabidopsis Endoreduplication
PLANT CELL,
February 1, 2006;
18(2):
382 - 396.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Diaz-Trivino, M. del Mar Castellano, M. de la Paz Sanchez, E. Ramirez-Parra, B. Desvoyes, and C. Gutierrez
The genes encoding Arabidopsis ORC subunits are E2F targets and the two ORC1 genes are differently expressed in proliferating and endoreplicating cells
Nucleic Acids Res.,
September 22, 2005;
33(17):
5404 - 5414.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. A. Sabelli, R. A. Dante, J. T. Leiva-Neto, R. Jung, W. J. Gordon-Kamm, and B. A. Larkins
Inaugural Article: RBR3, a member of the retinoblastoma-related family from maize, is regulated by the RBR1/E2F pathway
PNAS,
September 13, 2005;
102(37):
13005 - 13012.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Z. Magyar, L. De Veylder, A. Atanassova, L. Bako, D. Inze, and L. Bogre
The Role of the Arabidopsis E2FB Transcription Factor in Regulating Auxin-Dependent Cell Division
PLANT CELL,
September 1, 2005;
17(9):
2527 - 2541.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Vandepoele, K. Vlieghe, K. Florquin, L. Hennig, G. T.S. Beemster, W. Gruissem, Y. Van de Peer, D. Inze, and L. De Veylder
Genome-Wide Identification of Potential Plant E2F Target Genes
Plant Physiology,
September 1, 2005;
139(1):
316 - 328.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Pina, F. Pinto, J. A. Feijo, and J. D. Becker
Gene Family Analysis of the Arabidopsis Pollen Transcriptome Reveals Biological Implications for Cell Growth, Division Control, and Gene Expression Regulation
Plant Physiology,
June 1, 2005;
138(2):
744 - 756.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Maiti, J. Li, A. de Bruin, F. Gordon, C. Timmers, R. Opavsky, K. Patil, J. Tuttle, W. Cleghorn, and G. Leone
Cloning and Characterization of Mouse E2F8, a Novel Mammalian E2F Family Member Capable of Blocking Cellular Proliferation
J. Biol. Chem.,
May 6, 2005;
280(18):
18211 - 18220.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Demidov, D. Van Damme, D. Geelen, F. R. Blattner, and A. Houben
Identification and Dynamics of Two Classes of Aurora-Like Kinases in Arabidopsis and Other Plants
PLANT CELL,
March 1, 2005;
17(3):
836 - 848.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Bisova, D. M. Krylov, and J. G. Umen
Genome-Wide Annotation and Expression Profiling of Cell Cycle Regulatory Genes in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Plant Physiology,
February 1, 2005;
137(2):
475 - 491.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Ramirez-Parra, M. A. Lopez-Matas, C. Frundt, and C. Gutierrez
Role of an Atypical E2F Transcription Factor in the Control of Arabidopsis Cell Growth and Differentiation
PLANT CELL,
September 1, 2004;
16(9):
2350 - 2363.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. Wang and X. Chen
HUA ENHANCER3 reveals a role for a cyclin-dependent protein kinase in the specification of floral organ identity in Arabidopsis
Development,
July 1, 2004;
131(13):
3147 - 3156.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. Lincker, G. Philipps, and M.-E. Chaboute
UV-C response of the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit involves both E2F-mediated gene transcriptional regulation and protein subcellular relocalization in tobacco cells
Nucleic Acids Res.,
February 27, 2004;
32(4):
1430 - 1438.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Stevens, M. Grelon, D. Vezon, J. Oh, P. Meyer, C. Perennes, S. Domenichini, and C. Bergounioux
A CDC45 Homolog in Arabidopsis Is Essential for Meiosis, as Shown by RNA Interference-Induced Gene Silencing
PLANT CELL,
January 1, 2004;
16(1):
99 - 113.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. de Bruin, B. Maiti, L. Jakoi, C. Timmers, R. Buerki, and G. Leone
Identification and Characterization of E2F7, a Novel Mammalian E2F Family Member Capable of Blocking Cellular Proliferation
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 24, 2003;
278(43):
42041 - 42049.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Vlieghe, M. Vuylsteke, K. Florquin, S. Rombauts, S. Maes, S. Ormenese, P. Van Hummelen, Y. Van de Peer, D. Inze, and L. De Veylder
Microarray analysis of E2Fa-DPa-overexpressing plants uncovers a cross-talking genetic network between DNA replication and nitrogen assimilation
J. Cell Sci.,
October 15, 2003;
116(20):
4249 - 4259.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Kosugi and Y. Ohashi
Constitutive E2F Expression in Tobacco Plants Exhibits Altered Cell Cycle Control and Morphological Change in a Cell Type-Specific Manner
Plant Physiology,
August 1, 2003;
132(4):
2012 - 2022.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. Dewitte, C. Riou-Khamlichi, S. Scofield, J. M. S. Healy, A. Jacqmard, N. J. Kilby, and J. A. H. Murray
Altered Cell Cycle Distribution, Hyperplasia, and Inhibited Differentiation in Arabidopsis Caused by the D-Type Cyclin CYCD3
PLANT CELL,
January 1, 2003;
15(1):
79 - 92.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. A. Eckardt
Ins and Outs of E2Fs
PLANT CELL,
December 1, 2002;
14(12):
2977 - 2980.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. del Pozo, M. B. Boniotti, and C. Gutierrez
Arabidopsis E2Fc Functions in Cell Division and Is Degraded by the Ubiquitin-SCFAtSKP2 Pathway in Response to Light
PLANT CELL,
December 1, 2002;
14(12):
3057 - 3071.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. M. Egelkrout, L. Mariconti, S. B. Settlage, R. Cella, D. Robertson, and L. Hanley-Bowdoin
Two E2F Elements Regulate the Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen Promoter Differently during Leaf Development
PLANT CELL,
December 1, 2002;
14(12):
3225 - 3236.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Stevens, L. Mariconti, P. Rossignol, C. Perennes, R. Cella, and C. Bergounioux
Two E2F Sites in the Arabidopsis MCM3 Promoter Have Different Roles in Cell Cycle Activation and Meristematic Expression
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 30, 2002;
277(36):
32978 - 32984.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|