Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M202729200 on May 6, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 29, 25920-25928, July 19, 2002
Mutational Analysis of the Transcription Factor IIIB-DNA Target
of Ty3 Retroelement Integration*
Lynn
Yieh
§¶,
Heather
Hatzis**§,
George
Kassavetis
, and
Suzanne B.
Sandmeyer
**
From the Departments of
Microbiology and Molecular
Genetics and ** Biological Chemistry, University of
California, Irvine, California 92697-1700 and the
Division of
Biology and Center for Molecular Genetics, University of California,
San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093
Received for publication, March 21, 2002, and in revised form, April 22, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The Ty3 retrovirus-like element inserts
preferentially at the transcription initiation sites of genes
transcribed by RNA polymerase III. The requirements for
transcription factor (TF) IIIC and TFIIIB in Ty3 integration
into the two initiation sites of the U6 gene carried on pU6LboxB were
previously examined. Ty3 integrates at low but detectable frequencies
in the presence of TFIIIB subunits Brf1 and TATA-binding protein.
Integration increases in the presence of the third subunit, Bdp1.
TFIIIC is not essential, but the presence of TFIIIC specifies an
orientation of TFIIIB for transcriptional initiation and directs
integration to the U6 gene-proximal initiation site. In the current
study, recombinant wild type TATA-binding protein, wild type and mutant
Brf1, and Bdp1 proteins and highly purified TFIIIC were used to
investigate the roles of specific protein domains in Ty3 integration.
The amino-terminal half of Brf1, which contains a TFIIB-like repeat,
contributed more strongly than the carboxyl-terminal half of Brf1 to
Ty3 targeting. Each half of Bdp1 split at amino acid 352 enhanced
integration. In the presence of TFIIIB and TFIIIC, the pattern of
integration extended downstream by several base pairs compared with the
pattern observed in vitro in the absence of TFIIIC and
in vivo, suggesting that TFIIIC may not be present on genes
targeted by Ty3 in vivo. Mutations in Bdp1 that affect its
interaction with TFIIIC resulted in TFIIIC-independent patterns of Ty3
integration. Brf1 zinc ribbon and Bdp1 internal deletion mutants that
are competent for polymerase III recruitment but defective in promoter
opening were competent for Ty3 integration irrespective of the state of
DNA supercoiling. These results extend the similarities between the
TFIIIB domains required for transcription and Ty3 integration and also
reveal requirements that are specific to transcription.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Ty3 is a gypsy-like retroelement in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae (1). Despite similarities between the proteins encoded
by Ty3 and other gypsy-like elements and retroviruses, Ty3 has the unusual property of inserting within a few nucleotides of the transcription start site of genes transcribed by pol
III,1 including the tRNA, U6,
and 5 S RNA genes. Mutations in the box A and box B promoter elements
of the tRNA and U6 RNA genes that interfere with transcription also
diminish transposition in vivo, suggesting that active
targets in vivo must be able to bind pol III transcription
factors (2).
Formation of the pol III transcription initiation complex (reviewed in
Refs. 3-5) and Ty3 integration occur in close proximity to one another
on DNA (2). The box A and box B promoter elements of the tRNA and
SNR6 genes serve to bind transcription factor (TF) IIIC
through sequence-specific interactions with two of the six TFIIIC
subunits. The TFIIIC complex acts in turn to load the transcription
initiation factor TFIIIB (6-8). TFIIIB is comprised of three subunits:
Brf1 (TFIIB-related factor 1), TBP,
and Bdp1 (previously referred to as "B" and now designated Bdp1 for
consistency with gene nomenclature (9)). In vitro, as
described in more detail below, TFIIIB can bind to SNR6
independently of TFIIIC (10, 11). The positions of the TFIIIC and
TFIIIB subunits in promoter complexes have been mapped downstream and
upstream, respectively, of the initiation site by cross-linking
analysis (12, 13). Ty3 strand transfer occurs at a site that is located between the positions occupied by the TFIIIC 120-kDa subunit (Tfc4) on
the downstream side and by the TFIIIB Bdp1 and Brf1 subunits on the
upstream side. The strand transfer of the Ty3 3' end to the transcribed
strand is typically between bp +1 and
1, whereas the strand
transfer on the non-transcribed strand is between bp
5 and
6 (14,
15), within the DNA segment that is strand-separated in the pol III
open promoter complex (16).
The in vitro requirements for Ty3 integration into tRNA
genes have been probed using TFIIIC and TFIIIB. In the in
vitro integration reaction, virus-like particles formed in yeast
cells overexpressing Ty3 act as the source of integrase and
full-length, extrachromosomal Ty3 DNA (17). The level of Ty3
integration into a plasmid-borne target in the presence of various test
proteins is monitored by PCR. Transposition into a tRNA gene
type target was shown to require TFIIIC and TFIIIB. Integration was
negatively affected by pol III, indicating that Ty3 might resemble pol
III in its requirements for target access but that transcription
initiation per se is not required (18).
The promoter structure of the U6 RNA gene SNR6 differs from
that of most tRNA genes in that it contains an upstream TATA element (7, 19). Although SNR6 expression in vivo
requires TFIIIC, in vitro the strong SNR6 TATA
box can directly mediate binding of TFIIIB through its TBP subunit.
SNR6 can then be transcribed by pol III, independently of
TFIIIC (11, 20). In the latter context, TFIIIB binds to the nearly
symmetric SNR6 TATA element in either orientation, and this
can be monitored by transcription of a plasmid construct containing
divergent transcription units (21, 22). When TFIIIB and TFIIIC are
present together, TFIIIC orients TFIIIB so that initiation occurs
predominantly at the SNR6-proximal site. Using a
modification of the in vitro integration assay described
above, it was shown that, similar to what is observed for transcription
initiation, TFIIIB is sufficient to support Ty3 integration at the
SNR6 transcription initiation site. In the presence of
TFIIIC, Ty3 integration is specified by the predominant TFIIIB
orientation (23).
The ability to assemble TFIIIB sequentially on the SNR6
gene, together with knowledge of the TBP-DNA crystal structure and the
availability of recombinant wild type and mutant proteins, has made it
possible to delineate the roles of specific TFIIIB domains in pol III
transcription initiation. TBP binds through sequence-specific
interactions, sharply kinking DNA at both ends of its binding site (24,
25). Amino- and carboxyl-terminal halves of Brf1 interact with the
carboxyl- and amino-terminal lobes of TBP, respectively, and contact
the DNA on either side of the TBP-binding site to form the B' complex
(26-29). Bdp1 binds primarily through contacts with the
carboxyl-terminal half of Brf1, stabilizes the complex, and probably
brings DNA segments flanking the TATA element into closer proximity of
one another. In the case of templates bound by TFIIIC, evidence
suggests that both Brf1 and Bdp1 interact with TFIIIC (3, 13, 30, 31). Brf1 and Bdp1 each contact pol III, although the primary specific contacts appear to occur through Brf1 (32-35). The apparently
secondary role of Bdp1 is underscored by the observation that minimal
transcription complexes supporting pol III initiation can be formed
from TBP and Brf1 alone on DNA that is premelted at the initiation site (36). These results support the model that Bdp1 plays a primarily post-recruitment role in formation of the open transcription complex. Indeed, pol III transcription initiation complexes formed with certain
Bdp1 mutants are defective at the promoter opening step (4, 37). Using
the in vitro integration system, it was previously shown
that detectable SNR6 transposition targeting occurs with B'
alone but that the level of transposition is significantly increased by
the addition of Bdp1 (23). Whether Bdp1 plays a significant role by
stabilizing the transcription complex for targeting or by producing a
local DNA structure that is conducive to integration was not determined.
Insights concerning the roles of specific TFIIIB subunits and domains
in pol III transcription provide a useful backdrop for designing
experiments to probe the mechanism of the Ty3 integration reaction and
explore the extent to which it resembles pol III recruitment and
transcription initiation. The current study was undertaken using
SNR6, highly purified TFIIIC, and recombinant wild type and
mutant TFIIIB subunits to address the following questions: Are the same
domains in Brf1 and Bdp1 required for integration and transcription? Is
the Bdp1 post-recruitment function in promoter opening required for Ty3
integration? How do interactions between TFIIIB and TFIIIC affect the
pattern of Ty3 integration sites in vitro? The results of
these studies extend the similarities in protein-DNA complex
requirements between Ty3 integration and pol III transcription
initiation but identify interesting distinctions as well.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Strains and Growth Conditions--
Standard methods were used
for culturing and transforming Escherichia coli and S. cerevisiae (38). All plasmids were amplified in and prepared from
E. coli HB101 (F
hsdS20
(rB
mB
) recA13 leuB6 ara-14
proA2 lacY1 galK2 rpsL20 (smr) xyl-5 mtl-1
supE44
). Ty3 was expressed in S. cerevisiae, NOY384, a gift from M. Nomura (University of
California, Irvine) and transformed with the high copy
galactose-inducible plasmid, pEGTy3-1 (39).
Plasmid Constructions--
Recombinant DNA constructions and
methods followed standard procedures (38). Plasmid pEGTy3-1 was used
for galactose-inducible expression of Ty3 (39). Plasmid pLY1855 (23)
was the target for Ty3 integration in vitro. Plasmids
pDLC370 (2) and pLY1842 (23) served as PCR controls for integration
into r-U6 and l-U6, respectively. Plasmid pDLC370 contains a Ty3
insertion upstream of SNR6 at r-U6, and plasmid pLY1842 is a
clone containing an amplified fragment templated from a Ty3 insertion
at l-U6.
Supercoiled target DNA was prepared by centrifugation twice over cesium
chloride density gradients, followed by chromatography over Sepharose
CL2B. DNA was extracted with isopropanol saturated with cesium chloride
followed by precipitation using standard methods. Linear integration
targets were prepared by digesting pLY1855 (purified as described
above) with the restriction endonuclease HindIII. Digested
DNA was extracted with phenol:chloroform and precipitated. DNA was
resuspended in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, and 1 mM
EDTA. Linear DNA was checked for complete digestion with agarose gel electrophoresis.
Protein Preparations--
Ty3 virus-like particles were
prepared as described from yeast strain NOY384 transformed with
pEGTy3-1 (40). Highly purified TFIIIC (oligobox B+ fraction) and pol
III (MonoQ fraction) were purified as described (6). Purified wild
type, recombinant proteins were quantified as active molecules in
specifically initiating transcription (pol III) or specific DNA binding
(TBP, Brf1, Bdp1, and TFIIIC) as described or referenced (41). TBP and
Bdp1 were fully active; Brf1 was ~20% active. Amounts of Brf1 refer
to total protein. The recombinant split Brf1 and Bdp1 used in these
experiments were shown to have transcription activities on supercoiled
and linear templates singly and in combination as previously reported or as indicated under "Results" (data not shown).
Wild type and internally deleted Bdp1 proteins were carboxyl-terminally
His6-tagged and purified under native conditions through nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid-agarose, Bio-Rex 70, and Superose 12 as
described previously for Bdp1(138-596) by Kumar et al.
(33). Bdp1(224-487), Bdp1(1-352), and Bdp1(352-594) were
amino-terminally His6-tagged and purified under
native conditions through the nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid-agarose
step. Wild type Brf1 (amino- and carboxyl-terminally His6-tagged) and Brf1 deletion proteins (amino-terminally
His6- or His7-tagged) were purified under
denaturing conditions on nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid-agarose (and on
Superose 6 for Brf1(1-282) and Brf1(284-596)), followed by stepwise
dialysis out of urea as specified in Refs. 36 and 41. TBP was purified
and quantified as described (11). Quantities of mutant Brf1 and Bdp1
are specified as fmol of protein determined by Coomassie staining
against bovine serum albumin standards on gels.
In Vitro Integration into SNR6 Targets--
In vitro
integration with wild type proteins was performed as described
previously (23) except where noted otherwise. Where added, TFIIIC (100 fmol) was complexed with 150 fmol of target DNA for 10 min in
integration reaction buffer prior to addition of TFIIIB (50, 180, and
75 fmol of TBP, Brf1, and Bdp1 protein, respectively). The reaction
volumes were 25 or 50 µl as noted. TFIIIB components were allowed to
form complexes with target DNA for 60 min at 23 °C. At the end of
this time, components were shifted to 15 °C, 2.2 or 5 µg (protein)
of Ty3 virus-like particle fraction (depending on activity) were added,
and the incubation was allowed to proceed for 10-15 min. The reaction
samples were treated with proteinase K and extracted with
phenol:chloroform. DNA was precipitated with ethanol.
PCR with primer 242, which anneals within the SNR6 gene, and
with primer 411, which anneals at the downstream end of the internal domain of Ty3, was used to amplify diagnostic fragments from one-fifth of the integration reaction volume (23). The reactions were initiated
with a 95 °C polymerase activation step for 12 min, followed by 40 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 62 °C for 30 s, and 72 °C
for 60 s. The 72 °C elongation step was extended by 3 s/cycle. The reaction was terminated with a 72 °C incubation for 5 min, after
which the sample was brought to 4 °C. To control for consistent DNA
recovery from the integration reaction and for consistent operation of
the above PCR, primers 679 and 680 (23) were used to amplify the
-lactamase gene carried by the target plasmid (data not shown). This
PCR amplification was performed with 0.03% of the content of each
integration reaction and with 200 ng of each primer for 19 cycles of
polymerization. PCR products were resolved by electrophoresis on a
nondenaturing 8% polyacrylamide gel and visualized by staining with
ethidium bromide.
Integration Reactions Using SNR6 Targets and Mutant TFIIIB
Proteins--
For integration reactions with the split Brf1 proteins
and Brf1
1-68
383-424, Brf1
383-424, wild type Brf1 (1 pmol), TBP (200 fmol), and Bdp1 (200 fmol) were used in 25-µl
reactions. Each of the mutant Brf1 proteins was used at 200 fmol.
Integration reactions containing Bdp1 half proteins were
performed with 150 fmol of Bdp1, 200 fmol of TBP, and 1 pmol of
wild type Brf1 in a 25-µl reaction. For Bdp1 internal deletion
proteins and Bdp1(224-487), 25 or 50 fmol of mutant protein
were used, as indicated for specific experiments, in combination
with 50 fmol of TBP and 180 fmol of Brf1 in a 25-µl reaction.
Integration Ladder--
In vitro integration
events into a SNR6 target plasmid were amplified as
described above using primers 242 and 411. PCR reaction product
DNA was digested with restriction enzymes XhoI and
NruI for 1 h at 37 °C. XhoI cleaves
within Ty3, 19 bp upstream of the site of integration on the
non-transcribed strand; NruI cleaves within
SNR6, 5 bp downstream of the start site of transcription. Integration downstream of bp +3 on the non-transcribed strand would not be monitored in this assay. Following digestion,
reaction mixtures were extracted with phenol:chloroform:isoamyl
alcohol (25:24:1) and precipitated with ethanol. DNA pellets
were resuspended in buffered formamide containing tracking dyes.
One-third and two-thirds of the sample were used to examine the
l-U6 and the r-U6 integration target sites, respectively.
A sequencing ladder was generated using the method of Sanger
et al. (42) with
5'-32P-end-labeled primer 242 and pLY1855 or pU6LboxB template. Digested DNA from PCR
reactions and the sequence ladder fragments were resolved on an
8% 8 M urea sequencing gel. Regions of the gel containing the digested integration products were transferred to
nitrocellulose membrane using a semi-dry transfer apparatus and
UV cross-linked, and the PCR products were visualized by
hybridization with 5' end-labeled oligonucleotide 451, which is
complementary to the plus strand at the downstream (U5) end of
the Ty3 element and exposed to a phosphorimaging screen.
The length of the hybridized fragment estimated from the
sequencing ladder allowed inference of the distance of the Ty3
strand transfer position on the non-transcribed strand from the
transcription initiation site.
 |
RESULTS |
The Amino-terminal Half of Brf1 Contains Primary Determinants of
Ty3 Integration into the SNR6 Gene--
B', comprised of the TFIIIB
subunits Brf1 and TBP, was previously shown to be sufficient to mediate
a low level of specific Ty3 integration. Of these two subunits, only
Brf1 is specific to the pol III transcription initiation complex,
suggesting that it may contribute directly to Ty3 targeting. In the
case of pol III transcription on the SNR6 template pU6LboxB,
it has been shown that the amino-terminal half of Brf1(1-282) supports
transcription in the context of TFIIIB on supercoiled but not linear
templates (37). In contrast, the carboxyl-terminal half of Brf1 forms stable TFIIIB-DNA complexes but is transcriptionally nearly inactive on
supercoiled DNA (41). The amino-terminal and carboxyl-terminal Brf1
half proteins together reconstitute transcription of linear and
supercoiled DNA. To better define the domains of Brf1 involved in Ty3
targeting, integration reactions were performed using half Brf1
proteins in which the TFIIB-like and conserved carboxyl-terminal domains could be evaluated separately. Complete recombinant Brf1 and
combinations of proteins representing the amino-terminal segments of
Brf1(1-282 or 1-383) and carboxyl-terminal segments (284-596 or
425-596) were used alone or as combined amino- and carboxyl-terminal parts. Supercoiled and linear target DNAs were evaluated. Incubation of
supercoiled target DNA with TFIIIB for 60 min at 23 °C followed by
addition of virus-like particles and 10 min of incubation at 15 °C
left 50% of the DNA supercoiled DNA (data not shown). Because Ty3
integration in the absence of Bdp1 is significantly less efficient, these reactions were performed in the presence of Bdp1. Accordingly, these experiments address the relative contributions of different Brf1
domains but not the minimum requirements for Ty3 integration.
Reaction mixtures contained recombinant TBP, Bdp1, mutant Brf1, and
plasmid pLY1855. The pLY1855 plasmid is a derivative of pU6LboxB (23)
that contains a modified SNR6 gene with altered flanking
sequence and a gene-internal boxB promoter element optimally placed for
TFIIIC binding. In this construct the TATA box is inverted. Although
both the l-U6 and r-U6 initiation sites are used, TBP is preferentially
bound in the orientation that supports leftward transcription (22).
After completion of the incubation, the reaction samples were extracted
and processed for PCR, using primers to amplify target DNA containing
Ty3 insertions. The products of the PCR reaction were fractionated by
gel electrophoresis in nondenaturing polyacrylamide gels, stained with
ethidium, and photographed (Fig. 1). As
noted previously (23), two TFIIIB-dependent PCR products
were generated on this template (Fig. 1, compare lanes 2 and
12 with lanes lacking one or more components necessary for
de novo integration (lanes 1, 9-11,
19, and 20)). The upper and
lower bands represent integration into the l-U6 and r-U6
initiation sites, respectively. Although the relative yield of PCR
product between reactions of a given experiment was reproducible, this assay should be considered semi-quantitative, because it was not possible to accurately estimate the relative specific activities of the
mutant proteins. In the absence of either Brf1 or TFIIIB, a somewhat
random and dispersed background of integration events was observed
(Fig. 1, lanes 1, 10, and 11).
Brf1(1-282) and Brf1(1-383) supported specific integration on
supercoiled DNA and a greater amount of specific integration on linear
DNA targets (Fig. 1, lanes 3, 6, 13,
and 16; this is most readily apparent at the l-U6 initiation
site, which is less obscured by the TFIIIB-independent background). The
Brf1(284-596) and Brf1(425-596) carboxyl-terminal segments failed to
support specific integration on supercoiled targets (Fig. 1,
lanes 4 and 7) at a level significantly above background, but they greatly enhanced integration when combined with
Brf1(1-282) and Brf1(1-383), respectively (Fig. 1, lanes 5 and 8). Brf1(425-596) likewise failed to support
significant specific integration on a linear target (lane
17), but integration above background was detected with
Brf1(284-596) (lane 14). Thus, the portion of Brf1
containing the TFIIB-related putative zinc ribbon, two TFIIB-like
repeats, and the primary pol III interaction domain bears a major
determinant for position-specific integration in a reaction also
containing TBP, Bdp1, and DNA. The Brf1 segment from amino acids 284 to
424, which contains fungal homology region l may also contain a
determinant for specific integration.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
The amino-terminal half of Brf1 contains
important determinants for Ty3 specific integration into supercoiled
and linearized target DNA. Integration reactions were performed
with full-length Brf1 (wild type (WT)) or with split
Brf1(1-282, 284-596, 1-383, and 425-596) into supercoiled
(lanes 1-10) and linearized (lanes 11-20)
SNR6 target pLY1855 as indicated above each
lane. The presence of wild type TBP, Bdp1, and DNA is also
indicated. PCR-amplified integration products separated on a
nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel and stained with ethidium bromide are
shown. l-U6 and r-U6 integration-templated PCR fragments are
labeled on the right with arrowheads. Lane
P, products of a positive control PCR reaction using a mixture of
plasmids containing Ty3 insertions at l-U6 and r-U6; lane N,
negative control containing target plasmid pLY1855 alone.
|
|
The Zinc Ribbon Domain of Brf1 Is Not Required for Ty3 Integration
into SNR6--
Two motifs in the amino-terminal domain of Brf1
contribute to initiation of transcription: a putative amino-terminal
zinc ribbon domain and the two TFIIB-related imperfect repeats.
Disruption or removal of the zinc ribbon domain of Brf1 generates
TFIIIB-DNA complexes that recruit pol III to relaxed DNA templates but
display a severe defect in open complex formation. Combination with
promoter opening-defective Bdp1 deletions eliminates transcription on
supercoiled DNA templates as well (5, 43, 44). The amino-terminal zinc ribbon also appears to be essential for transcription in the minimal pol III transcription system consisting of pol III, Brf1, TBP, and a
"preopened" promoter template (36). The
383-424 deletion, which
removes sequence that is not present among fungal homologues, improves
the transcriptional activity of Brf1 in vitro (36). To
determine whether Ty3 integration is sensitive to the function provided
by the zinc ribbon, recombinant Brf1 lacking the amino-terminal 68 amino acids containing the zinc ribbon and amino acids 383-424 (N
68,
383-424) and Brf1 lacking only the internal
domain (
383-424) were tested for the ability to support
integration (Fig. 2). Integration was
supported by both of these deletion proteins to comparable extents on
supercoiled and linear DNA (Fig. 2, compare lanes 2 and
5 with lanes 3 and 6).

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
The amino-terminal 68 amino acids of Brf1
containing a putative zinc ribbon domain are dispensable for specific
integration. Integration was performed with wild type
(WT) Bdp1 or TBP, and Brf1 383-424, or Brf1 N 68
383-424 as indicated above each lane. The
amplified products of specific integration are marked on the
right with arrowheads. Lanes N and
P are as described in the Fig. 1 legend.
|
|
Bdp1 Halves Are Redundant for Enhancement of Ty3 Integration into a
TFIIIB-DNA Target--
The role of Bdp1 in transcription complex
formation appears to include a scaffolding function that locks the
complex together (4, 33). Binding of Bdp1 to the B'-DNA complex is
accompanied by an upstream extension of the DNase I footprint, the
introduction of an additional bend between the TATA box and the
initiation site, and stabilization of the protein-DNA complex.
Nevertheless, deletion analysis has so far failed to identify any
specific portion of the protein that is essential for the extended
footprint (33). Although B' alone is sufficient to support Ty3
integration at SNR6 at a low level, the addition of Bdp1
increases integration, suggesting that Bdp1 introduces additional
contacts for the Ty3 preintegration complex, stabilizes the target
complex, or changes its conformation (23).
To more specifically define the requirement for Bdp1, recombinant
Bdp1(1-352) and Bdp1(352-594) were tested together and separately for
activity in Ty3 integration. These proteins support transcription of
supercoiled SNR6 templates together and
separately.2 Bdp1(1-352) and
Bdp1(352-594) both supported integration into supercoiled DNA (Fig.
3, compare lanes 3 and
4 with lane 1). In addition, Bdp1 split proteins
were tested in reactions with linear DNA. These reactions showed that
on linear DNA the half and combined proteins also performed in a manner
comparable with that of the wild type Bdp1 (Fig. 3, compare lanes
10 and 11 with lane 9). These results
suggest that Ty3 integration, similar to pol III transcription, is not
dependent upon Bdp1 for a single contact. Either Bdp1 must have a
structural role that does not involve specific contacts, or each part
of Bdp1 individually provides a contact that makes the other part
nonessential.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Split Bdp1 in Ty3 integration. Wild type
(WT) and split Bdp1 proteins (1-352 and 352-594) were used
for integration assays with wild type Brf1 and TBP on supercoiled
(lanes 1-7) and linear plasmid DNA (lanes
8-14), as indicated above each lane.
Lanes N and P correspond to negative and positive
controls, as described in the legend to Fig. 1. Specific integration
events are indicated on the right.
|
|
TFIIIC Interacts with B' and Bdp1 to Influence Ty3 Integration Site
Selection--
TFIIIC is required for SNR6 transcription
and Ty3 integration in vivo (2, 19, 46). Although TFIIIC is
dispensable for SNR6 transcription in vitro with
purified components, TFIIIC-mediated assembly of TFIIIB onto the
SNR6 TATA box specifies a single orientation of TFIIIB for
transcription (22). Analysis of Bdp1 function in vitro has
shown that TFIIIC-dependent transcription exhibits greater
dependence upon functions in Bdp1 not required for
TFIIIC-independent transcription (33). In particular, certain Bdp1
deletion mutants that are permissive for TFIIIC-independent
transcription of supercoiled DNA assemble aberrant TFIIIB-TFIIIC-DNA
complexes on TFIIIC-dependent promoters that are
transcriptionally deficient or fail (entirely) to assemble these
complexes. The experiments that are described next used supercoiled and
linear DNA to explore the effect of TFIIIC on Ty3 integration at
SNR6 directed by B' and also by TFIIIB constituted with wild
type Bdp1 or internal deletion mutants of Bdp1.
The effect of TFIIIC on Ty3 integration directed by B' and TFIIIB was
examined first (Fig. 4). There was no
major difference in the distribution of integration sites between
supercoiled and linear templates (Fig. 4A, compare
lanes 1-4 with lanes 5-8). As previously
observed (23), integration in the presence of B' alone was primarily
into the l-U6 initiation site (Fig. 4A, lanes 1 and 5), whereas integration in the presence of TFIIIB was
more evenly distributed between the l-U6 and r-U6 sites (Fig. 4A, lanes 3 and 7). This difference
has been ascribed to weaker DNA binding of the B' complex, which allows
equilibration toward the optimum orientation of the B' complex at the
TATA box, whereas entry of Bdp1 into the B' complex prevents
dissociation, trapping the initial orientation of the B' complex. As
previously shown (23), integration in the presence of TFIIIC and TFIIIB
showed a dramatic shift to the r-U6 initiation site (Fig.
4A, lanes 4 and 8), consistent with TFIIIC
orienting TFIIIB to favor initiation of r-U6 transcription into the U6
gene. In contrast, integration in the presence of TFIIIC and B'
generated a small decrease in l-U6 integration on the supercoiled
template and greater decrease in integration on the linear template but
did not show the dramatic increase in r-U6 integration shown in the
presence of Bdp1 (compare Fig. 4A, lanes 1 and
5 with lanes 2 and 6). This result
could be interpreted to suggest that TFIIIC does not affect the
orientation of B' in the absence of Bdp1, but because entry of Bdp1 is
dependent on the prior formation of the B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex (47),
this is unlikely. The presence of significant integration at l-U6 may indicate that not all of the templates contain B' and TFIIIC. The
absence of integration at r-U6 could stem from the fact that DNA
surrounding the start site of transcription in B'-TFIIIC-DNA complexes
is occluded by TFIIIC from attack by integrase; in the case of
transcription, Bdp1 is required to lift TFIIIC from this site for
transcription initiation to occur (47). The additional decrease in l-U6
integration observed here in the presence of Bdp1 (Fig. 4A,
compare lanes 2 and 6 with lanes 4 and
8) could reflect the greater stability of the TFIIIB-TFIIIC
complex compared with the B'-TFIIIC complex, trapping more of the
target in this form.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
TFIIIC shifts the pattern of Ty3
integration. A, integration reactions contained TFIIIC,
B', and TFIIIB, as indicated above each lane,
with supercoiled (lanes 1-4) or linearized (lanes
5-8) plasmid DNA targets. l-U6 and r-U6 integration products are
indicated with arrowheads. B, the sequence shown
represents the integration region at the U6-l and U6-r transcription
initiation sites on pLY1855. Integration reaction DNA was amplified by
primers in Ty3 and SNR6 (not shown), cleaved with
XhoI and NruI, and fractionated together with a
sequencing ladder by gel electrophoresis as described under
"Materials and Methods." The plus strand (top) was
visualized by probing with a radioactive minus strand oligonucleotide.
The length of the plus strand fragment was determined by comparison
with a sequencing ladder and used to infer the positions of integration
indicated in C and D. C and
D, Southern blots of restriction endonuclease-cleaved PCR
products corresponding to positions of integration at l-U6
(C) and r-U6 (D). Lanes 1-8 and
lanes P and N correspond to the samples analyzed
in A. Negative (N) and positive (P)
controls are described in the Fig. 1 legend. The correspondence between
PCR product size and sites of Ty3 strand transfer is shown on the
right. The unlabeled lanes are sequencing ladders
(described under "Materials and Methods") used to determine the
sizes of hybridizing fragments.
|
|
The site of Ty3 integration in vivo is precisely defined. It
was of interest to determine whether the specificity of integration was
conserved in vitro in the context of minimal integration
targets. To gain information concerning the overall distribution of
integration sites, PCR products were digested with XhoI and
NruI to remove both DNA ends, leaving an internal fragment
the size of which was proportional to the distance of the integration
site from the duplicated SNR6 transcription initiation sites
(see "Materials and Methods"). These fragments were fractionated by
electrophoresis on sequencing gels, transferred to nitrocellulose (48),
and probed with a 32P-labeled oligonucleotide that anneals
to the end of the Ty3 element to visualize only one DNA strand. The PCR
products of integration into the l-U6 and r-U6 transcriptional
initiation sites separated into more slowly (l-U6) and more quickly
(r-U6) migrating sets of fragments. The locations of integration sites
were deduced from sequencing ladders and from parallel experiments with
positive control plasmids pDLC370 and pLY1842, containing sequenced
sites of integration at l-U6 and r-U6 (Fig. 4B). The results
of this analysis showed that integration in the presence of B' or
TFIIIB occurred at one major site for l-U6 (Fig. 4C,
lanes 1-8) and at two sites for r-U6 (Fig. 4D,
lanes 1-3 and 5-7). (Note that the relative
amounts of l-U6 and r-U6 radioactivity do not reflect the distribution
of integration events, because different amounts of PCR product were
loaded on each gel to obtain nearly equivalent radioactive signals.)
Fragments generated in the restriction digestion of the PCR reaction
were offset by one nucleotide from the major in vivo site of
integration on the positive control r-U6 plasmid, but corresponded to
sites that are also used in vivo. Integration sites were
also mapped to identify the effects of TFIIIC on Ty3 integration site
usage in the presence of B' and TFIIIB (Fig. 4, C and
D). There was no redistribution of residual integration sites at l-U6 caused by TFIIIC. TFIIIC also had no effect on the pattern of integration at r-U6 in the presence of B'. However, the
pattern of integration at r-U6 in the presence of TFIIIC and TFIIIB was
dramatically different from that of TFIIIB alone, with integration
sites spread downstream into SNR6, from
7/
3 to
1/+4 (non-transcribed/transcribed strands). This pattern contrasted with the positions of sites observed in vivo (predominantly
at positions
6/
2 and
7/
3).
Mutations in Bdp1 That Affect Open Complex Formation Do Not Affect
Ty3 Integration--
The roles of specific Bdp1 domains in
TFIIIC-dependent and TFIIIC-independent integration can be
further defined using Bdp1 internal deletion mutants. Analysis of the
effect of a set of such mutants on pol III transcription in
vitro (4, 33, 44) identified an internal segment defined by
mutants Bdp1
355-372,
372-387,
388-409, and
409-421,
within which deletions do not eliminate the ability of TFIIIB to
recruit polymerase but do interfere with formation of the open promoter
complex. This domain is thus implicated either in isomerization of the
polymerase or in DNA duplex destabilization (37). DNA structure has
been found to affect integration activity of retroviral integrases
(49-51). Thus, Bdp1 containing a deletion within this defined region
offered an interesting in vitro test of the potential role
of Bdp1 in creating a specific structure required by the Ty3 integrase
for activity. Bdp1
355-372 was tested on linear and supercoiled
SNR6 targets. It stimulated integration well over the levels
observed with B' alone on both templates, with no significant change in distribution between l-U6 and r-U6 initiation sites (Fig.
5, lanes 4 and 12 relative to lanes 1 and 9).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Integration reactions mediated by TFIIIB
reconstituted with mutant Bdp1 proteins. The reactions contained
wild type (WT) Bdp1 (75 fmol), Bdp1 272-292 (50 fmol),
Bdp1 355-372 (25 fmol), Bdp1 424-438 (25 fmol), or Bdp1(224-487)
(50 fmol) with wild type Brf1 and TBP, as listed above each
lane. Integration into supercoiled (lanes 1-8)
and linear (lanes 9-16) target plasmid pLY1855 was tested.
The arrowheads indicate integration products at the l-U6 and
r-U6 target sites. Lanes P and N are the positive
and negative controls as described in the Fig. 1 legend.
|
|
Two domains of Bdp1 (I and II) are protected from hydroxyl radicals
upon entry into theTFIIIB-SUP4 complex (33). Interactions involving domains I and II are required on an either/or basis for
TFIIIC-independent transcription, but both are required for TFIIIC-dependent transcription. Bdp1 deletions in these
domains were used to test whether domain I or II was required for the Bdp1 enhancement of specific integration over activity of B' alone in
the absence of TFIIIC. Bdp1
272-292 and Bdp1
424-438,
representing deletions in regions II and I, respectively, were shown to
be as active as wild type Bdp1 for TFIIIC-independent integration into
linear and supercoiled SNR6 gene targets (Fig. 5, compare lanes 3 and 5 with lane 2 and lanes 11 and 13 with lane 10). The finding that domains I
and II of Bdp1 were not individually required for TFIIIC-independent
integration is congruent with prior analysis of transcription.
Bdp1
424-438 fails in TFIIIC-dependent transcription
because it does not assemble into the B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex.
Bdp1
272-292 assembles into the B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex but fails in
TFIIIC-dependent transcription because it does not displace
TFIIIC from the initiation site so as to allow pol III access (33). The
effects of wild type Bdp1, Bdp1
424-438, and Bdp1
272-292 on Ty3
integration in the presence of TFIIIC were compared in order to
determine whether TFIIIC would prevent integration by virtue of start
site occlusion or whether the presence of Bdp1 in the TFIIIB complex
and integrase together would suffice for TFIIIC displacement (Fig.
6). Integration in the presence of wild
type TFIIIB alone produced more integration into the l-U6 than into the
r-U6 initiation site (Fig. 6A, lane 1). As
expected, TFIIIC redistributed this pattern to favor the r-U6
initiation site with new sites of integration downstream (Fig. 6,
A and B, lanes 2). Redistribution did
not occur in reactions containing Bdp1
272-292, which assembles into
the B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex (lanes 3) or, as expected,
in the presence of Bdp1
424-438 (lanes 5), which does not
assemble into a B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex. The core amino acid 224-487
fragment, which retains competence for TFIIIC-dependent
transcription (33), yielded less integration but significantly
redistributed integration sites in response to TFIIIC (Fig.
6B, compare lanes 1 and 6).

View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
TFIIIC-dependent integration into
supercoiled pLY1855 in the presence of Bdp1 mutant proteins.
A, integration reactions mediated by combinations of mutant
Bdp1 and TFIIIC. All reaction mixtures contain wild type
(WT) TBP and Brf1; Bdp1 mutant proteins are indicated
above each lane. B, analysis of
restriction enzyme-cleaved PCR products showing the distribution of
integration events in the r-U6 target region at the nucleotide level.
The lane numbers and reactions correspond with those shown
in A. Lanes P and N are positive and
negative controls, as described in the Fig. 1 legend. The
unlabeled lanes show the sequencing ladder used to determine
the sizes of hybridizing fragments.
|
|
The observation that the presence of TFIIIC generates unique sites of
integration at r-U6 (Fig. 4D) clarifies the analysis of
TFIIIC effects on integration (Fig. 6B), because it
substitutes a qualitative effect for a quantitative assessment that is
burdened with a substantial background. TFIIIC generated downstream
integration events with TFIIIB-DNA complexes containing wild type Bdp1,
Bdp1
355-372, and Bdp1(224-487) (Fig. 6B, compare
lanes 2, 4, and 6 with lane 1) but not with TFIIIB-DNA complexes containing
Bdp1
272-292 (lane 3) or Bdp1
424-438 (lane
5). These results imply a requirement for Bdp1-mediated
displacement of TFIIIC from the site of Ty3 integration.
 |
DISCUSSION |
These experiments define the roles of Bdp1 and B' domains in
position-specific integration of Ty3 and extend the parallels between
Ty3 targeting and recruitment to the stable transcription initiation
complex. Distinctions are identified between requirements for pol III
transcription initiation and Ty3 integration for the first time.
Unexpectedly, our findings suggest that in vitro
interactions between TFIIIB and TFIIIC lead to a characteristic pattern
of Ty3 integration extending just downstream of the initiation site. This pattern is not observed in vivo or in the absence of
TFIIIC in vitro. The findings are summarized in Table
I, and the implications are discussed
below.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
TFIIIC-independent transcription from and integration activity at
the l-U6 and r-U6 initiation sites on supercoiled and linear DNA
templates
Txn, transcription; Int, integration; , <2% of wild type TFIIIB
activity; ND, not determined. The transcription activity was determined
previously (Refs. 33, 37, 41, and 52 and G. Kassavetis, A. Kumar, and S. Shah, unpublished data).
|
|
Requirements for Ty3 Integration Resemble Those for pol III
Recruitment--
The location of Ty3 integration sites and the protein
requirements of Ty3 targeting resemble those for pol III recruitment to
the promoter. Initiation of transcription at position +1 follows the
sequential stages of promoter opening that unpair a DNA segment extending from bp
9 to bp +7 (52). Ty3 strand transfer occurs on the
transcribed strand between +1 and
1 and on the non-transcribed strand
between
5 and
6 (14), within the DNA segment that is eventually
unwound by pol III. Previous work identified the B'-DNA complex as the
minimal target for Ty3 integration at SNR6 in
vitro. The observation that pol III is actually inhibitory to Ty3
integration in vitro (18) suggested that some of the
contacts in Brf1 used in recruitment of pol III might also be used in
Ty3 targeting. Thus, it was of interest to investigate the extent to
which pol III transcription initiation complex and Ty3 strand transfer
share determinants at the resolution level of specific protein domains.
In the work described here, mutant Brf1 and Bdp1 proteins, previously
characterized for pol III transcription, and highly purified TFIIIC
were used to define protein domains required for Ty3 integration and to
better understand the contributions of TFIIIB and TFIIIC to targeting.
Analysis of the Ty3 targeting activity at SNR6 of two pairs
of Brf1 amino- and carboxyl-terminal fragments (1-282, 284-596,
1-383, and 425-596) in the context of TFIIIB showed that the
amino-terminal portions of Brf1 supported significant amounts of
TFIIIB-dependent integration on the supercoiled target but
that the carboxyl-terminal portion activity was difficult to
distinguish from background. On the linear target, Brf1(1-282) and
Brf1(1-383) amino-terminal domains were clearly more effective for
TFIIIB-dependent integration, but the Brf1(284-596)
carboxyl-terminal domain also supported detectable levels of
TFIIIB-dependent integration. Brf1(425-596), which
contains the major sites of interaction with TBP and Bdp1, remained
inactive for integration into linear DNA. Removal of the zinc ribbon of
Brf1 was also shown not to have any effect on Ty3 integration directed
by TFIIIB.
These findings point to similarities in the targeting of pol III and
Ty3 integrase to the TFIIIB complex. First, in the context of TFIIIB,
there is a redundancy for sites of interaction with pol III and Ty3
integrase. The amino-terminal TFIIB-related half of Brf1 is the major
determinant of transcription activity (41) and integration activity
(Fig. 1), but weaker transcription activity (41, 52) and integration
activity (Fig. 1) is retained with the carboxyl-terminal half of
Brf1(284-596). Second, Brf1 and TBP suffice as the minimal
target for pol III and integrase (23, 36). Third, the zinc ribbon
region is not absolutely essential for transcription or integration. It
is apparent, however, that the zinc ribbon region plays a major role in
transcription and targeting of pol III but not in integration. Removal
of the amino-terminal 68 amino acids of Brf1 greatly destabilizes
the pol III-TFIIIB-DNA complex, generates a 2-fold decrease in
the transcription of supercoiled DNA templates, and abolishes
transcription of linear DNA templates (52). In contrast, the same
deletion has no effect on integration on supercoiled or linear plasmid
DNA (Fig. 2). The amino-terminal half of Brf1 has been shown to
interact with the carboxyl-terminal lobe of TBP, partially overlapping
with the domain contacted by TFIIB (27, 41). Brf1 also interacts with
the 34- and 17-kDa subunits of pol III (35). Similarities between the
primary sequences of these polymerase subunits and the Ty3
integrase are not readily apparent, so it is not yet possible to
specify the relationship between the determinants for Brf1 interaction.
Despite the ability of B' to support minimal levels of Ty3 integration
and pol III transcription on specialized templates (36), Bdp1 enhances
both processes. In the case of transcription, Bdp1 has roles in both
recruitment and pol III isomerization. On fully duplex DNA the presence
of Bdp1 is essential for bringing pol III to the start site of
transcription; even transient assembly of pol III (as measured by
protein-DNA photochemical cross-linking) could not be detected in the
absence of Bdp1 (37). This suggests that Bdp1 either contributes
directly to binding pol III or to displaying essential pol III
interaction sites on Brf1. In addition, two observations suggest that
Bdp1 plays a post-recruitment role in the initiation of transcription
by pol III; first, transcription can be made Bdp1-independent through
the introduction of heteroduplex bubbles at the site of open complex
formation (36), and second, Bdp1 mutants with short deletions within
the region of the amino acid 355-421 segment of the wild type protein
bind pol III but do not allow promoter opening (37).
Comparison of the Bdp1 domain requirements for pol III transcription
and Ty3 integration provides additional insight into what constitutes
the Ty3 target. In particular, it was of interest to consider
separately how domains implicated in the structural and implied
DNA-flexing functions of Bdp1 related to the Bdp1 domain requirements
for integration. It was previously shown that the positive effect of
Bdp1 on Ty3 integration is consistent with a model involving
stabilization of B' binding (23). In this work, it has been shown that
the amino- and carboxyl-terminal halves of Bdp1 separately support
equivalent, elevated levels of integration into SNR6
templates. Therefore, no single region of Bdp1 is absolutely required
for Bdp1 enhancement of integration, just as no single region of Bdp1
is absolutely required for SNR6 transcription. This is
similar to what has been interpreted as the scaffolding role of Bdp1 in
pol III recruitment.
A Bdp1 internal deletion mutant, Bdp1(
355-372) was used to test
whether the post-recruitment function of Bdp1 contributes to Ty3
integration. This assay showed that a mutant capable of supporting pol
III open complex formation on a supercoiled but not a linear template
(37) was equivalently active for integration into both types of DNA. If
the role of Bdp1 in promoter opening that is lost in Bdp1
355-372
involves DNA flexure or altering the path of DNA so as to facilitate
strand opening by pol III, this function is not required for
Bdp1-enhanced integration. We suggest instead that Bdp1 plays a
relatively nonspecific scaffolding role in Ty3 integration, acting
primarily to stabilize the B' complex on the DNA rather than providing
specific structures at the initiation site.
Although TFIIIC is not essential for in vitro integration at
SNR6, it directs the orientation of TFIIIB and therefore the choice of transcription initiation sites used by Ty3. In this study, in
which the pattern of Ty3 strand transfers at a particular site was
mapped, a more striking TFIIIC effect has surfaced. In the absence of
TFIIIC, the predominant sites of strand transfer of the Ty3 3' ends to
the target DNA at r-U6 were flanking positions
7/
3 and
6/
2,
similar to what is observed in vivo (primarily
5/
1). In
the presence of TFIIIC, the sites used extended from
7/
3 to
1/+4.
This pattern of integration in vitro in the presence of
TFIIIB and TFIIIC is not as precise as that observed in
vivo, suggesting that the integration site is differently exposed
in vivo, perhaps because TFIIIC is not present at the time
of integration. Because pol III competes with Ty3 in the in
vitro integration reaction, it is assumed that it also does not
occupy the initiation site during integration. Genomic footprinting of
the SUP53 tRNA and SNR6 genes indicates that
occupancy of the boxA and boxB promoter elements, presumably by TFIIIC,
is considerably lower than occupancy of upstream DNA, presumably by
TFIIIB (21, 53). However, a recently identified mutant with a truncated
TFIIIC 95-kDa subunit displays only a subtle effect on transcription,
but a relatively dramatic effect on Ty3 integration at a tRNA gene
target (54). The phenotype of this mutant may support the alternative
interpretation that TFIIIC is present when integration occurs but that
there are differences between target presentation in vitro
and in vivo.
TBP can bind to the nearly symmetric SNR6 TATA box in either
orientation both in the presence and in the absence of Brf1. In the
presence of TFIIIC a single orientation of B' over the TATA box is
obtained because of the interaction of the TFIIIC
120 subunit with
Brf1. Paradoxically, TFIIIC has relatively little effect on
B'-dependent integration site selection in the presence of
B' alone (Fig. 4). Bdp1
272-292 is competent for stimulating integration and is competent to enter the B'-TFIIIC-DNA complex; yet
there is no effect of TFIIIC on the orientation of TFIIIB assembled
with Bdp1
272-292, as assayed by Ty3 integration. Amino acids
272-292 of Bdp1 lie in very close proximity to DNA upstream of the
TATA box (45), and this interaction appears to be required in order for
Bdp1 to lift TFIIIC away from the start site of transcription (33).
This suggests a simple (and plausible) explanation for the paradox;
B'-TFIIIC-DNA complexes are not a substrate for Ty3 integration because
of start site occlusion. Integration is only observed in those B'-DNA
complexes that have not been assembled by TFIIIC.
The experiments presented here extend the parallels between the
requirements of pol III and Ty3 preintegration complexes for target
gene docking. Those results underscore the specific role of the
TFIIB-like domain of Brf1 and the apparent structural role of Bdp1 in
both processes. Although TFIIIC is known to contact Brf1, the current
study showed that Bdp1 is required to produce the
TFIIIC-dependent pattern of Ty3 integration. Finally, the current results argue that despite the congruence of the region of DNA
melting in the pol III transcription initiation open complex and the
positions of Ty3 strand transfer, Ty3 integration does not depend upon
a Bdp1-imposed structure at the initiation site. Overall, these results
support in some detail the model that the Ty3 preintegration complex
mimics pol III in the mechanism of recruitment to its target.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Garth Letts and Sandra Trinidad for
technical assistance and E. Peter Geiduschek for advice as well as
editorial assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by United States Public Health
Service Grants GM33281 (at University of California, Irvine) and
GM18386 (at University of California, San Diego) from the National
Institutes of Health.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.
§
These authors contributed equally to this work.
¶
Supported by a University of California Biotechnology Research
and Education Training Grant. Present address: R. W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute, 3210 Merryfield Row, San Diego, CA 92121.

To whom correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: sbsandme@uci.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 6, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M202729200
2
A. Kumar and G. Kassavetis, unpublished
data
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
pol III, RNA
polymerase III;
TF, transcription factor;
TBP, TATA-binding protein;
r-, rightward;
l-, leftward.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Sandmeyer, S. B.,
and Menees, T. M.
(1996)
Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.
214,
261-296[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Chalker, D. L.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(1992)
Genes Dev.
6,
117-128[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Chedin, S.,
Ferri, M. L.,
Peyroche, G.,
Andrau, J. C.,
Jourdain, S.,
Lefebvre, O.,
Werner, M.,
Carles, C.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1998)
Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol.
63,
381-389[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Kumar, A.,
Grove, A.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1998)
Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol.
63,
121-129[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Geiduschek, E. P.,
and Kassavetis, G. A.
(2001)
J. Mol. Biol.
310,
1-26[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Braun, B. R.,
Nguyen, L. H.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1990)
Cell
60,
235-245[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Eschenlauer, J. B.,
Kaiser, M. W.,
Gerlach, V. L.,
and Brow, D. A.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
3015-3026[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Burnol, A.-F.,
Margottin, F.,
Schultz, P.,
Marsolier, M.-C.,
Oudet, P.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1993)
J. Mol. Biol.
233,
644-658[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Grove, A.,
Adessa, M. S.,
Geiduschek, E. P.,
and Kassavetis, G. A.
(2002)
EMBO J.
21,
704-714[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Moenne, A.,
Camier, S.,
Anderson, G.,
Margottin, F.,
Beggs, J.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
271-277[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Joazeiro, C. A. P.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
2798-2808[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Bartholomew, B.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Braun, B. R.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
2197-2205[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Bartholomew, B.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
5181-5189[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Sandmeyer, S. B.,
and Olson, M. V.
(1983)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
79,
7674-7678
|
| 15.
|
Sandmeyer, S. B.,
Bilanchone, V. W.,
Clark, D. J.,
Morcos, P.,
Carle, G. F.,
and Brodeur, G. M.
(1988)
Nucleic Acids Res.
16,
1499-1515[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Kassavetis, G. S.,
Blanco, J. A.,
Johnson, T. E.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1992)
J. Mol. Biol.
226,
47-58[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Kirchner, J.,
Connolly, C. M.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(1995)
Science
267,
1488-1491[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Connolly, C. M.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
405,
305-311[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Brow, D. A.,
and Guthrie, C.
(1990)
Genes Dev.
4,
1345-1356[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Margottin, F.,
Dujardin, G.,
Gerard, M.,
Egly, J.-M.,
Huet, J.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1991)
Science
251,
424-426[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Gerlach, V. L.,
Whitehall, S. K.,
Geiduschek, E. P.,
and Brow, D. A.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
1455-1466[Abstract]
|
| 22.
|
Whitehall, S. K.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
2974-2985[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Yieh, L.,
Kassavetis, G.,
Geiduschek, E. P.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
29800-29807[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Kim, J. L.,
Nikolov, D. B.,
and Burley, S. K.
(1993)
Nature
365,
520-527[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Kim, Y.,
Geiger, J. H.,
Hahn, S.,
and Sigler, P. B.
(1993)
Nature
365,
512-520[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Khoo, B.,
Brophy, B.,
and Jackson, S. P.
(1994)
Genes Dev.
8,
2879-2890[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Shen, Y.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Bryant, G. O.,
and Berk, A. J.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
1692-1700[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Colbert, T.,
and Hahn, S.
(1992)
Genes Dev.
6,
1940-1949[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Andrau, J.-C.,
Sentenac, A.,
and Werner, M.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
288,
511-520[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Chaussivert, N.,
Conesa, C.,
Shaaban, S.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
15353-15358[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Dumay-Odelot, H.,
Acker, J.,
Arrebola, R.,
Sentenac, A.,
and Marck, C.
(2002)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
22,
298-308[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Werner, M.,
Chaussivert, N.,
Willis, I. M.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
20721-20724[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Kumar, A.,
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Geiduschek, E. P.,
Hambalko, M.,
and Brent, C. J.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1868-1880[Abstract]
|
| 34.
|
Deprez, E.,
Arrebola, R.,
Conesa, C.,
and Sentenac, A.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
8042-8051[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Ferri, M. L.,
Peyroche, G.,
Siaut, M.,
Lefebvre, O.,
Carles, C.,
Conesa, C.,
and Sentenac, A.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
488-495[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Letts, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
5042-5051[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Kumar, A.,
Letts, G. A.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9196-9201[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Ausubel, F. M.,
Brent, R.,
Kingston, R. E.,
Moore, D. D.,
Seidman, J. G.,
Smith, J. A.,
and Struhl, K.
(1999)
Current Protocols in Molecular Biology
, Greene Publishing Associates/Wiley-Interscience, New York
|
| 39.
|
Hansen, L. J.,
Chalker, D. L.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
5245-5256[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Hansen, L. J.,
Chalker, D. L.,
Orlinsky, K. J.,
and Sandmeyer, S. B.
(1992)
J. Virol.
66,
1414-1424[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Kumar, A.,
Ramirez, E.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
5587-5599[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Sanger, F.,
Nicklen, S.,
and Coulson, A. R.
(1977)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
74,
5463-5467[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Hahn, S.,
and Roberts, S.
(2000)
Genes Dev.
14,
719-730[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Kassavetis, G. A.,
Bardeleben, C.,
Kumar, A.,
Ramirez, E.,
and Geiduschek, E. P.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
5299-5306 |