Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M204278200 on June 5, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 33, 30055-30065, August 16, 2002
Functional Domains and DNA-binding Sequences of
RFLAT-1/KLF13, a Krüppel-like Transcription Factor of
Activated T Lymphocytes*
An
Song
§,
Anita
Patel
¶,
Kimberlee
Thamatrakoln
,
Chian
Liu
,
Dongdong
Feng
,
Carol
Clayberger
**, and
Alan M.
Krensky

From the Departments of
Pediatrics and
** Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University School of
Medicine, Stanford, California 94305-5164
Received for publication, May 2, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
RFLAT-1/KLF13, a member of the
Krüppel-like family of transcription factors, was identified as a
transcription factor expressed 3-5 days after T lymphocyte activation.
It binds to the promoter of the chemokine gene RANTES (regulated on
activation normal T cell expressed and secreted) and regulates its
"late" expression in activated T-cells. In this study, a series
of experiments to define the functional domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13 were
undertaken to further advance the understanding of the molecular
mechanisms underlying transcriptional regulation by this factor. Using
the GAL4 fusion system, distinct transcriptional activation and
repression domains were identified. The RFLAT-1 minimum activation
domain is localized to amino acids 1-35, whereas the repression domain resides in amino acids 67-168. Deletion analysis on the RFLAT-1 protein further supports these domain functions. The RFLAT-1 activation domain is similar to that of its closest family member, basic transcription element-binding protein 1. This domain is highly hydrophobic, and site-directed mutagenesis demonstrated that both negatively charged and hydrophobic residues are important for transactivation. The nuclear localization signal of RFLAT-1 was also
identified using the RFLAT-1/green fluorescence protein fusion approach. RFLAT-1 contains two potent, independent nuclear localization signals; one is immediately upstream of the zinc finger DNA-binding domain, and the other is within the zinc fingers. Using mutational analysis, we also determined that the critical binding sequence of
RFLAT-1 is CTCCC. The intact CTCCC box on the RANTES
promoter is necessary for RFLAT-1-mediated RANTES
transcription and is also required for the synergy between RFLAT-1 and
NF-
B proteins.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Transcription factors are sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins
that regulate gene expression by either activating or repressing the
initiation of transcription. Mammalian transcription factors are
grouped into several categories based upon their structural domains for
DNA binding and include the helix-loop-helix, homeodomain, leucine
zipper, and zinc finger protein families (1). The zinc finger proteins
are further classified based on the number of zinc fingers and the
amino acid residues responsible for zinc binding. Among them, the
Cys2His2
(C2H2)1
zinc finger proteins have been estimated to make up 1% of the human
genome (2). The majority of these have not been characterized, and
their biological functions are just beginning to be elucidated. A
subset of C2H2 proteins contains a DNA-binding
domain consisting of three contiguous C2H2 zinc
fingers at the carboxyl terminus. Because their highly conserved DNA
binding motifs resemble those of the segmentation gene product of
Drosophila melanogaster, Krüppel, they
have been named Krüppel-like factors (KLFs) (3, 4). Based on a
recent BLAST search, this rapidly growing family now has 19 members and
includes one of the first identified general transcription factors, Sp1
(5). These KLFs play critical roles in regulating a diverse range of
biological processes, including cell growth, differentiation,
embryogenesis, and tumorigenesis (6).
We have been investigating the transcriptional control of RANTES gene
expression to understand the "late" expression kinetics of
RANTES in activated T lymphocytes. RFLAT-1 was identified by expression cloning through its binding to the A site of the
RANTES promoter (7). In addition to activating the RANTES
gene in T-cells, RFLAT-1 (also known as FKLF2 and BTEB3) can
activate the human
globin promoter, other erythroid-specific genes,
SV40, and SM22
promoters (8, 9). DNA binding studies demonstrate that RFLAT-1 bound to the A site of the RANTES promoter, a
consensus basic transcription element (BTE), and CACCC box of the
globin promoter (7-9).
By sequence analysis, RFLAT-1 belongs to the KLF family and shares the
greatest homology with basic transcription element-binding protein 1 (BTEB1/KLF9) and BTEB4 (see Fig. 1). Although the amino acid sequences
in the zinc finger domains of KLFs are highly conserved and bind to
similar DNA sequences, the regions outside of the zinc fingers are
not homologous. This heterogeneity may in part account for the
tissue-specific expression of KLFs, the diverse biochemical mechanisms
by which KLFs function, and explain their specific roles in a variety
of biological processes. The structure-function relationships of
selected KLFs have been studied in detail. Sp1, a relatively large
protein (782 amino acids), contains multiple transactivation domains,
including two glutamine-rich activation motifs and Ser/Thr rich regions
(10). Although Sp1 is a potent activator of transcription, some KLFs,
like Sp3 (11) and KLF12 (12), are repressors. Other KLFs, such as
EKLF/KLF1, GKLF/KLF4, and LKLF/KLF2, contain separate transcriptional
activation and repression domains (13-17). The transactivation domain
of EKLF/KLF1 is critical for cell-specific inducibility of a
-globin
promoter (18). GKLF/KLF4 activates the human keratin 4 and Epstein-Barr virus ED-L2 promoters (19), whereas it suppresses the activity of the
CYP1A1 promoter (20). Thus, despite similar DNA binding properties, the
specific biological activities of KLFs may largely rely on their
distinct domains outside of DNA binding, and characterization of these
motifs may help elucidate their functions.
The human RFLAT-1/KLF13 is a 288-AA polypeptide with three
C2H2 fingers at the carboxyl terminus (AA
169-249). The zinc finger domain is responsible for DNA binding and
also appears to mediate interaction with coactivators cAMP- response
element-binding protein-binding protein/p300 and p300/CBP-associated
factor (21). Nevertheless, little is known about the function of
other structural regions of RFLAT-1/KLF13. The present study is a
detailed analysis of selected functional domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13. We
show that RFLAT-1 contains distinct transcriptional activation and
inhibitory domains, which reside at the very end of the amino
terminus and the middle portion of the protein, respectively.
The activation domain, which differs from any of the well known
transactivation motifs, is rich in hydrophobic amino acids and embedded
with negatively charged residues. These negatively charged residues are
important for transactivation activity. We identified two potent,
independent NLS within RFLAT-1, either of which is sufficient to
translocate GFP into the nucleus. We also demonstrate that RFLAT-1
recognizes and binds to a CTCCC box within the RANTES
promoter. The intact binding sequence is absolutely required for
RFLAT-1-mediated RANTES transcription in T-cells. Finally,
the structural similarities and differences between RFLAT-1/KLF13 and
other KLFs are compared to better specify their biological functions.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Plasmid Constructs--
Truncated RFLAT-1 cDNAs
were generated by PCR with Advantage® cDNA PCR kit
(CLONTECH) and corresponding 5'- and 3'-primers (PCR primer sequences available upon request). The PCR-generated DNA
fragments containing appropriate start codon, Kozak sequence, and stop
codon were subcloned into a mammalian expression vector pcDNA3.1/V5-His TOPO using a TA cloning kit (Invitrogen).
GAL4-RFLAT-1 chimeric constructs were made by fusing RFLAT-1 fragments
in-frame to the carboxyl terminus of the GAL4 DNA-binding domain (DBD; amino acids 1-147). For this purpose, segments of RFLAT-1 were generated by PCR, and the PCR products were then digested with XbaI and KpnI, separated on a 1.5% agarose gel,
purified using a Concert kit (Invitrogen), and ligated into the
corresponding sites of the cytomegalovirus-driven mammalian expression
vector pBIND (Promega), which contained the GAL4 DBD. Site-directed
mutagenesis was used to mutate the indicated amino acids within the
GAL4-RFLAT-1 1-35 construct. D8A, E32A/S33A mutants and
RANTES promoter mutants were generated in the same manner as
the deletion constructs. The other mutants were made using a modified
version of megaprimer mutagenesis PCR as described (22). For GFP fusion
constructs, the PCR products encoding fragments of RFLAT-1
cDNA were subcloned into a mammalian expression vector
pcDNA3.1/CT GFP (Invitrogen). For all of the constructs, the PCR
procedure consisted of heating at 95 °C for 5 min, 30 cycles of
95 °C for 30 s and 68 °C for 3 min, and finally incubating
at 68 °C for 3 min. The reading frame and sequences of all of the
constructs were confirmed by DNA sequence analysis.
Cell Culture, Transfections, and Cellular Localization of GFP
Fusion Proteins--
Fibroblast cells NIH 3T3, COS-7, and Jurkat T
tumor cells were cultured in either Dulbecco's modified Eagle's
medium (Invitrogen), or RPMI 1640 medium (Irvine Scientific)
supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM
L-glutamine, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml
streptomycin. The fibroblasts (106 cells/60-mm dish) were
transiently transfected by either the calcium phosphate method (7) or
the LipofectAMINE procedure (Invitrogen) according to the
manufacturer's instructions. Jurkat T-cells were transfected by
electroporation as described previously (23). For GAL4 fusion
experiments, the reporter plasmid was pG5luc (Promega),
which contained five GAL4-binding sites upstream of the luciferase
gene. The expression plasmid pBIND also contained a Renilla
luciferase gene downstream of the fusion protein that allowed
normalization for transfection efficiency. When pcDNA3.1-derived expression plasmids were cotransfected with RANTES
promoter-driven luciferase reporter gene pGL2R (7), a
pRL-null (Promega) plasmid encoding a Renilla luciferase
gene was included for normalization. 36-48 h after transfection, the
cells were harvested, and luciferase activity was determined using a
dual luciferase assay system kit (Promega) following the
manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured in a
Wallac/EG&G Lumat LB 9507 Luminometer. To visualize RFLAT-1-GFP fusion
proteins, the fusion constructs were transfected using the FuGENE
method (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) into COS-7 cells grown on tissue
culture glass slides. 48 h later, the cells were treated with
MitoTracker Red (Molecular Probes) for 15 min and subsequently fixed
with 4% paraformaldehyde. Vectashield with DAPI mounting medium
(Vector Laboratories) was used to counterstain DNA and preserve
fluorescence. The cellular localization of various fusion proteins was
monitored using a Nikon Eclipse E800 microscope equipped for epifluorescence.
Immunoblotting Assay and Production of Recombinant
RFLAT-1--
The level of protein expression by transfected constructs
was determined by immunoblotting. After the cells were transfected as
described above, nuclear extracts were prepared according to Andrews
and Faller (24), and protein concentration was determined by Bradford
assay. The proteins were separated on an SDS-polyacrylamide gel and
transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes. The membranes were
blocked with 5% nonfat milk overnight at 4 °C and probed with
either a polyclonal anti-GAL4 (1-147) antibody (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) or a protein A column purified polyclonal anti-RFLAT-1
antibody. They were further incubated with horseradish peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibody and visualized by ECL
(Amersham Biosciences). The full-length recombinant RFLAT-1 protein was
produced by subcloning the human RFLAT-1 cDNA into a
pET-28a(+) vector (Invitrogen). The expression and purification of the
His-tagged RFLAT-1 through a Ni+ column were described
previously (7).
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay--
Oligonucleotides used
for EMSA were synthesized and PAGE-purified by Invitrogen. The
oligonucleotides were end-labeled using [
-32P]ATP and
T4 polynucleotide kinase (New England Biolabs). A typical binding
reaction mixture contained 15,000-20,000 cpm of probe, 2-8 µg of
nuclear extracts or recombinant protein, 1.5 µg of
poly(dI-dC)·poly(dI-dC), 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 80 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM
dithiothreitol, and 5% glycerol. The mixture was incubated at 4 °C
for 30 min and fractionated on a 8% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel
in 1× Tris-borate-EDTA buffer.
 |
RESULTS |
RFLAT-1/KLF13 Is a Member of the KLF Family with the
Closest Similarity to BTEB1 and BTEB4--
A phylogenetic tree was
generated to reveal the structural relationships between RFLAT-1/KLF13
and 18 other human KLFs identified in a recent BLAST search (Fig.
1A). RFLAT-1, BTEB1, and BTEB4 form a separate subfamily that is relatively distant from other well
studied KLFs, such as Sp1 and EKLF/KLF1. By sequence comparison, the
homology of RFLAT-1/KLF13 with the other KLFs is limited to the zinc
finger DNA-binding domain. Similarity outside of the zinc fingers is
only found among RFLAT-1, BTEB1, and BTEB4 (Fig. 1B).
Overall, at the protein level, RFLAT-1 is 41% identical to BTEB1 and
43% identical to BTEB4. The sizes of the three proteins are also
similar (RFLAT-1, 288 AA; BTEB1, 244 AA; and BTEB4, 252 AA) compared
with the relatively larger sizes of other KLFs (EKLF, 362 AA; GKLF, 470 AA; TIEG2, 512 AA, etc.) (6). These data suggest that these three
proteins may be more closely related during evolution and may represent
a subfamily with similar characteristics.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Structural similarities of
RFLAT-1/KLF13 with other Krüppel-like factors. A,
human KLFs were identified by BLAST search using human RFLAT-1/KLF13
protein sequence (GenBankTM accession number AAD26846). The
phylogenetic tree was generated by the Kimura algorithm using the GCG
SeqWeb GrowTree evolutionary analysis program. The horizontal
bar indicates 100 amino acid changes. The accession numbers for
each protein are as follows: Sp3, Q02447; Sp1, AF252284; Sp4, Q02446;
Sp2, Q02086; BTEB1, Q13886; BTEB4, AF327440; RFLAT-1,
AAD26864; TIEG1, Q13118; TIEG2, O14901; GKLF/EZF, O43474;
LKLF, Q9y5W3; EKLF, Q13351; CPBP/BCD1/Zf9/GBF, Q99612; UKLF,
O75840; IKLF/CKLF/BTEB2, Q13887; AP-2rep, CAB46982; BKLF3,
NP_009181; BKLF, P57682; and KKLF, BAA88561. The
abbreviations are as follows: TIEG/FKLF,
transforming growth factor- -inducible early growth response/fetal
and embryonic Krüppel-like factor;
GKLF/EZF, gut-enriched Krüppel-like
factor/epithelial zinc finger; LKLF, lung Krüppel-like
factor; EKLF, erythroid Krüppel-like factor;
CPBP/BCD1/Zf9/GBF,
core promoter-binding protein/B-cell derived 1/zinc finger 9/GC-rich
sites binding factor; UKLF, ubiquitous Krüppel-like
factor; IKLF/CKLF/BTEB2,
intestinal-enriched Krüppel-like factor/colon Krüppel-like
factor/basic transcription element-binding protein 2;
AP-2rep, AP-2 repressor; BKLF: basic Krüppel-like
factor; and KKLF, kidney Krüppel-like factor. BTEB4
and KKLF have not received a nomenclature from the Human Gene
Nomenclature Committee. B, amino acid sequence alignment of
human RFLAT-1, BTEB4, and BTEB1. The multiple alignment was performed
by Clustal W. Identical, strongly similar, and weakly similar amino
acids are indicated by a black box, a white box,
or bold type, respectively. The dashes indicate
missing amino acids.
|
|
RFLAT-1/KLF13 Contains Distinct Transcriptional
Activation and Repression Domains--
Sequence analysis of
RFLAT-1/KLF13 revealed a DNA-binding domain (AA 169-249) with three
typical contiguous C2H2 zinc fingers, a
serine-rich carboxyl-terminal tail (AA 250-288), a basic region adjacent to the amino terminus of zinc fingers (AA 147-168), and an
amino-terminal domain (AA 1-146) rich in proline (24/146), serine
(10/146), and alanine (30/146) residues, which are known to constitute
transcriptional activation domains for a number of transcription
factors (1). We hypothesized that the RFLAT-1/KLF13 transactivation
domain may reside within this region. To investigate this, the yeast
transcription factor GAL4 fusion system was used because GAL4 fusion
proteins have little background interference in mammalian cells because
of their origin. In addition, the GAL4 DBD directs fusion proteins to
the nucleus, alleviating the concern that deletion mutants might
disrupt the natural nuclear localization signal. To determine the
minimal region necessary for transactivation, a series of RFLAT-1
carboxyl-terminal deletions fused in-frame to GAL4 DBD (AA 1-147) was
created (Fig. 2A). These
fusion plasmids were cotransfected into NIH 3T3 cells with a reporter
construct containing five GAL4-binding sites upstream of the firefly
luciferase gene. The GAL4-RFLAT-1 (full-length) fusion had little
effect on activating the reporter gene. In some experiments, it
appeared to repress transcription (Fig. 2B). Further
deletions toward the amino terminus resulted in a gradual increase in
reporter gene expression, with GAL4-RFLAT-1 1-35 giving 5-10-fold
induction compared with GAL4 DBD alone (Fig. 2A). This
result demonstrates that RFLAT-1/KLF13 AA 1-35 contains a
transactivation domain that is able to enhance GAL4 transcription. In
addition, a repression domain is contained within the carboxyl-terminal
region of AA 1-168. The presence of the repression domain appears to
inhibit the activation domain (AA 1-35) in the fusion system.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Identification of transcriptional activation
and repression domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13 by the GAL4 fusion assay.
Full-length or fragments of RFLAT-1/KLF13 as indicated were fused
in-frame with the GAL4 DBD. A and B, 1 µg of
fusion construct and 1 µg of reporter gene were cotransfected into
NIH 3T3 cells, and the luciferase activity was measured. The effect of
the respective constructs on luciferase activity is indicated as fold
induction or repression over that by the control vector containing only
GAL4 DBD. The transfection was normalized according to
Renilla luciferase activity as described under
"Experimental Procedures." The data are presented as triplicate
or duplicate transfections and represent at least five independent
experiments. C, 20 µg of each fusion construct indicted in
A and B was transfected into NIH 3T3 cells, and
nuclear extracts were made 36 h post-transfection. 15 µg of each
extract was separated by SDS-PAGE and Western blotted with a polyclonal
anti-GAL4 (1-147) antibody.
|
|
To further characterize the repression domain, a series of
amino-terminal deletions of RFLAT-1/KLF13 fused to GAL4 DBD was generated (Fig. 2B). Among them, AA 67-168 has the
strongest inhibitory effect with greater than 15-fold repression of
transcription. AA 74-112 and 112-168 showed significant suppression,
but the activity of neither was comparable with that of AA 67-168,
suggesting that all of the sequences within AA 67-168 are required to
reach maximum repression. In comparison, neither AA 168-250 nor AA
250-288 affected transactivation, demonstrating that neither the
DNA-binding domain nor the carboxyl-terminal tail contains any
activating or repressive activity. These data suggest that AA 67-112
contains a strong repression domain.
To ensure that these results were not due to differences in protein
expression of the constructs, NIH 3T3 cells were transfected with each
of the constructs, and protein extracts were prepared and analyzed by
Western blot with an anti-GAL4 antibody. As shown in Fig.
2C, the appropriate size fusion proteins were produced from
each construct, and their expression levels were comparable.
Deletion of the Activation Domain Impairs RFLAT-1/KLF13
as a Transcription Factor--
To independently confirm that distinct
transcriptional activation and repression domains exist within RFLAT-1,
several RFLAT-1 truncated proteins were created in which either the
amino-terminal activation domain or the middle repression domain was
deleted but the potential nuclear localization signal and DNA-binding domain (AA 147-249) remained intact (Fig.
3A). The expression and
nuclear localization of these protein products was demonstrated by
transfection of the constructs into NIH 3T3 cells, followed by nuclear
extract preparation and Western blotting using a polyclonal anti-RFLAT-1 antibody (Fig. 3B). These truncated proteins
were then coexpressed together with a luciferase reporter gene driven by the RANTES promoter in Jurkat T-cells to test their
ability to activate RANTES transcription. Compared with the
full-length RFLAT-1, proteins with the amino terminus deleted (RFLAT-1
36-288 and RFLAT-1 67-288) completely lost their ability to induce
the RANTES promoter (Fig. 3A). This observation
further indicates that AA 1-35 contains the transcriptional activation
domain. In contrast, truncation of the middle portion including the
repression domain (RFLAT-1 1-35 + 147-288) increased target gene
transactivation (Fig. 3A), suggesting that this domain
mediates activity in suppressing transcription. In comparison, removal
of the very end of the carboxyl tail (RFLAT-1 1-249) had little
effect on RFLAT-1 activity.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Transcriptional activation and repression
domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13 are functionally separate and
independent. A, truncated RFLAT-1 proteins were made as
described under "Experimental Procedures." 10 µg of each of the
expression constructs was transfected into Jurkat T-cells with 10 µg
of RANTES promoter-driven luciferase reporter gene and 0.1 µg of pRL-null plasmid. 48 h post-transfection, firefly
luciferase activity was measured and normalized to Renilla
luciferase activity. The data are presented as fold induction over that
by the control vector in triplicate transfections and represent five
independent experiments. B, 1 µg of each of the construct
expressing truncated RFLAT-1 proteins was transfected into NIH 3T3
cells, and nuclear extracts were made 48 h post-transfection. 10 µg of each extract was separated by SDS-PAGE and Western blotted with
a polyclonal anti-RFLAT-1 antibody. C, recombinant RFLAT-1
wild type and mutant proteins were produced and purified from E. coli and tested for DNA binding. 1 µg of each recombinant
protein was incubated with a radiolabeled probe containing the
RANTES promoter A/B site. The resulting complexes were
separated on a 8% nondenaturing acrylamide gel.
|
|
The DNA binding of RFLAT-1 truncated proteins to their native target
RANTES promoter A/B site was examined by an EMSA using recombinant proteins. Full-length or truncated His tag RFLAT-1 proteins
were produced in Escherichia coli, purified by
Ni+ columns, and incubated with a radiolabeled A/B
oligonucleotide. As shown in Fig. 3C, the four truncated
proteins all bound to the A/B site, consistent with the fact that they
all contain DNA-binding domains similar to that of the wild type. More
than one band was observed with RFLAT-1 1-35 + 147-288. The slower
migrating species may represent dimers/oligomers because when using
glutaraldehyde fixation followed by Western blot, dimer/oligomer
species were detected in the protein preparation (data not shown). The
specificity of DNA-bound bands was confirmed by cold competitions (data
not shown). These results demonstrate that deletion of AA 1-35 or 1-67 does not affect RFLAT-1 DNA binding. Thus, the loss of
transcriptional activity of the two mutants is most likely due to the
removal of the intrinsic activation domain.
Negatively Charged Amino Acid Residues Are Important for the
RFLAT-1 Transactivation Domain--
The RFLAT-1/KLF13 activation
domain (AA 1-35) does not share any characteristics with other well
defined transcriptional activation motifs, such as a high percentage of
acidic residues (Asp and Glu), glutamines (Gln), or prolines (Pro) (1).
Instead, it is rich in hydrophobic (Ala and Val) residues and exhibits
high homology with the amino termini of BTEB1 and BTEB4 (Fig.
1B). This region of BTEB1 contains one of its activation
domains (AA 13-26) (25). We noted that RFLAT-1 AA 1-35 also contains
several acidic and serine residues (Asp8 and
Glu13 and the Ser17, Ser19, and
Ser20 cluster) embedded among the hydrophobic
residues. These residues are also found in BTEB1 and BTEB4 (Fig.
1B). To further characterize the RFLAT-1 activation domain
and to identify amino acid(s) critical for transactivation,
site-directed mutagenesis on GAL4-RFLAT-1 1-35 was performed (Fig.
4). Mutations of D8A, E13A, S20A, and S17A/S19A/S20A substantially impaired the activity of GAL4-RFLAT-1 1-35 in transfection assays, suggesting that these residues are all
important in mediating transcriptional activation. A mutant in which
the negatively charged residues Glu32 and Ser33
that are missing in BTEB1 and BTEB4 were changed to alanines also
showed significant reduction in activity (Fig. 4). Mutation of the
hydrophobic valine at position 7 to alanine also decreased activity to
basal level (data not shown), indicating that both hydrophobic and
acidic residues are important to transactivation. Similar expression of
GAL4-RFLAT-1-35 and its point mutation proteins was revealed by
Western blot (data not shown), indicating that differences in their
transcriptional activities are due to the mutations themselves.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Identification of critical amino acids for
RFLAT-1/KLF13 transactivation domain. Selected amino acids as
indicated were mutated to alanines within RFLAT-1 AA 1-35 in the GAL4
fusion protein. The resultant mutant constructs were cotransfected with
the GAL4 reporter gene into NIH 3T3 cells, and the activity of each
mutant is presented as fold induction over that of the construct
containing only the GAL4 DBD.
|
|
RFLAT-1 Contains Two Potent, Independent Nuclear Localization
Signals--
RFLAT-1 is a nuclear protein (7). To identify functional
sequences responsible for its nuclear localization, the full-sized and
truncated RFLAT-1 fused in-frame to GFP were expressed in COS-7 cells,
and cellular localization of the fusion products was monitored by
autofluorescence. Fluorescence of GFP alone is shown in Fig.
5A and is present throughout
the cell. In contrast, the majority of full-sized RFLAT-1-GFP
accumulated in the nucleus (Fig. 5B), indicating that it
contains a strong NLS(s). Sequence analysis revealed that RFLAT-1 AA
147-168 contains a bipartite NLS (26), consisting of two clusters of
basic amino acids separated by a short nonbasic peptide. Thus, a fusion
protein was constructed with AA 147-168 deleted (Fig. 5C).
Surprisingly, this protein was still able to translocate into the
nucleus, suggesting that in addition to AA 147-168, RFLAT-1 has other
NLS. AA 147-168 is a potent NLS, because RFLAT-1 1-168-GFP
accumulated in the nucleus (Fig. 5D), whereas RFLAT-1
1-146-GFP was spread throughout the cytoplasm (Fig. 5E).
These results also confirm that AA 1-146 does not contain any NLS.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Cellular localization of GFP fusion
proteins. The various RFLAT-1-GFP fusion constructs used in the
experiments are depicted on the right side.
Fluorescence microscopy for COS-7 cells transfected by each construct
is shown in panels A-I. The green color shows GFP
autofluorescence (GFP). The whole cell and the nucleus are
visualized by MitoTracker Red (MITOTRACKER RED) and DAPI
autofluorescence (DAPI), respectively.
|
|
The effort to identify additional NLS was next focused on AA 169-288,
the zinc finger DNA-binding domain plus the carboxyl tail. Fusion
proteins RFLAT-1 169-288-GFP (Fig. 5F) and RFLAT-1 169-249-GFP (Fig. 5G) localized in the nucleus, whereas
RFLAT-1 250-288-GFP did not (Fig. 5I), demonstrating that
the second NLS is within AA 169-249, the zinc finger domain. The
additional deletion of the third zinc finger (RFLAT-1 169-221) reduced
nuclear accumulation significantly (Fig. 5H). These data
demonstrate that RFLAT-1/KLF13 contains two potent, independent NLS;
one is in the basic region immediately upstream of the zinc finger
DNA-binding domain, and the other is within the zinc fingers. Each of
the two signals is strong and sufficient to translocate GFP into the nucleus.
RFLAT-1/KLF13 Recognizes and Binds to the CTCCC
Element--
RFLAT-1/KLF13 binds to the A site of the
RANTES promoter with high specificity. It does not bind to
the B, C, or E regions, as demonstrated using partial recombinant
RFLAT-1 protein (7). The A site (Fig.
6A) displays
B-like characteristics and was identified as a second NF-
B
binding site by Moriuchi et al. (27). However, RFLAT-1 does
not bind to an oligonucleotide containing a classical
B site derived
from the immunoglobin promoter (7), demonstrating that the RFLAT-1
consensus sequence differs from the
B site. In EMSA, no complexes
were observed using nuclear extracts of late activated T-cells with an
oligonucleotide in which the four cytosine residues on the 3' end of
the A site were missing, suggesting that these residues are most
critical for recognition and binding (28). Because all KLFs recognize
related GC-type elements and CACCC boxes (4), we predicted that the central sequence for RFLAT-1/KLF13 recognition on the A site is likely
to be the 3' part of CTCCC. To test this, a series of mutated oligonucleotides were radiolabeled and used in EMSAs with full-length recombinant RFLAT-1/KLF13 protein (Fig. 6A). Mutation of the
3' two cytosine residues (CTCCCC
CTCCTT) reduced binding to
RFLAT-1. Mutation of all four cytosines (CTCCCC
CTTTTT) abolished
protein binding, demonstrating that these cytosine residues are
critical for RFLAT-1 recognition. In addition, mutation of the 5'
single cytosine residue (CTCCCC
TTCCCC) decreased binding
significantly. In comparison, mutation of the thymidine (CTCCCC
CCCCCC) and sequences 5' to the CTCCC box (AAA
GGG and
GG
AA) reduced but did not eliminate binding, suggesting that they
play minor roles in recognition. Destruction of the CTCCC box by
reversing the sequence to TCTTT completely abrogated binding to
recombinant RFLAT-1 (Fig. 6A).

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Critical nucleotide residues for
RFLAT-1/KLF13 recognition and binding. A, the indicated
mutations were introduced into the oligonucleotide derived from the
human RANTES promoter A site. These oligonucleotides were
radiolabeled and mixed with 4 µg of full-length RFLAT-1/KLF13
recombinant protein produced from E. coli in an EMSA assay.
B, competition experiments using established transcription
factor binding sites. Radiolabeled A/B oligonucleotide and 3 µg of
recombinant RFLAT-1 protein were used in each EMSA. Lane 1,
free probe; lanes 2-17, probe plus RFLAT-1 protein. With
the exception of lane 2, all of the lanes contained unlabeled
competitor oligonucleotides. For each cold competitor, increasing
amounts of competitor DNA in the order of 5-, 10-, and 20-fold molar
excess over the probe were added to the reaction. The minimal essential
binding sequence for corresponding KLFs is in bold
type.
|
|
The RFLAT-1 binding site on the RANTES promoter is similar
to a number of previously identified DNA sequences that interact with
known KLFs. It has also been reported that RFLAT-1 binds to the BTE
consensus sequence and the CACCC box (9, 21). To determine the affinity
of RFLAT-1 to published KLF DNA binding sequences, cold competition
experiments were performed. As shown in Fig. 6B, EKLF
(lanes 9-11) and BTE (lanes 15-17)
oligonucleotides competed for binding slightly better than the wild
type RFLAT-1 sequences. GKLF (lanes 12-14) competed as
efficiently as the wild type. In comparison, a synthetic
oligonucleotide containing the binding site for Sp1 (lanes
6-8) competed relatively poorly for binding. Because the binding
sites for BTE, EKLF, and GKLF are all GT-like, the Sp1-binding site is
GC-rich; this result suggests that RFLAT-1 may preferably recognize and
bind to GT boxes.
The Intact CTCCC Box Is Necessary and Required for RFLAT-1-mediated
RANTES Promoter Transcription--
A subset of mutations described
above were then introduced into the RANTES promoter by
PCR-based site-directed mutagenesis. Both wild type and mutant
promoters were transfected into Jurkat T-cells together with a
RFLAT-1 expression construct. Compared with the wild type
promoter with an intact RFLAT-1 binding site, the A-2 mutation
(CTCCCC
CTCCTT, see Fig. 6A) reduced but did not
eliminate induction of RANTES expression by RFLAT-1 (Fig. 7A). In comparison, both the
A-4 (CTCCCC
CTTTTT) and A-9 (CTCCC
TCTTT) Fig. 6A
mutations resulted in complete loss of RFLAT-1-mediated RANTES promoter activation (Fig. 7A). These
results are consistent with the EMSA data and suggest that an intact
CTCCC box sequence is absolutely required for RFLAT-1 to activate the
RANTES gene.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
CACCC box is required for RFLAT-1-mediated
RANTES transcription. A, the A-2, A-4,
or A-9 mutations were introduced into the RANTES promoter
( 195) by PCR-based mutagenesis. The wild type (WT) and
mutant reporter genes (10 µg) were cotransfected into Jurkat T-cells
with either empty vector (pcDNA3.1, 10 µg) or RFLAT-1 expressing
construct (pcDNA3.1-RFLAT-1, 10 µg) in the presence of pRL-null
(0.1 µg). 48 h post-transfection, the firefly luciferase
activity was measured and normalized to Renilla luciferase
activity. The data are presented as fold induction with activation of
the empty vector set at 1. The data are presented as triplicate
transfections and represent three independent experiments.
B, cotransfection of RFLAT-1 and NF- B genes in Jurkat
T-cells. Jurkat cells were transfected with 10 µg of either wild type
(R), or A-9 RANTES promoter-luciferase reporter
genes, together with 10 µg of pcDNA3.1-RFLAT-1, 10 µg of pcDNA3.1-p50, 10 µg of
pcDNA3.1-p65, or 10 µg of each of the three plasmids
in different combinations. For each transfection, the total amount of
plasmid used was equal and was achieved by using the empty vector
pcDNA3.1 for compensation. The data are presented as fold induction
over that of the empty vector, representing triplicate transfections
and three independent experiments.
|
|
In T-cells, RFLAT-1 and NF-
B protein (p65 and p50) are both
expressed late (3-5 days) after activation, and they drive RANTES gene
expression in a synergistic fashion (7). On the RANTES promoter, both RFLAT-1 and NF-
B binding sites are between the CAAT
and TATA boxes, with the NF-
B site downstream and adjacent to the
RFLAT-1 site. To examine whether an intact RFLAT-1 binding site is
necessary for synergy, the wild type RANTES promoter and the
A-9 mutation were compared in cotransfection experiments. Introduction
of all three proteins (RFLAT-1, p65, and p50) resulted in a significant
synergistic induction of the RANTES promoter. This synergy
is completely blocked by the disruption of the CTCCC box (Fig.
7B), suggesting that this sequence on the promoter is required for synergy.
Taken together, these data demonstrate that the RFLAT-1/KLF13
recognition and binding sequence on the RANTES promoter is
the CTCCC box. RFLAT-1/KLF13 is also able to bind equally well to the
other consensus GT boxes, and to a less degree, the GC boxes. The
intact DNA binding sequence is required for RFLAT-1-mediated RANTES induction. In addition, it is required for the
synergy observed between RFLAT-1 and NF-
B proteins. Although we do
not know whether protein-protein interaction is involved between the two transcription factors, it is certain that the DNA-protein interaction between RFLAT-1 and CTCCC box is absolutely required for
achieving synergy.
 |
DISCUSSION |
RFLAT-1/KLF13 was first identified as part of a search for late
expressed T-cell transcription factors regulating RANTES
transcription in T lymphocytes (7). In the present study to determine
the structure-function relationship of RFLAT-1, a transcriptional activation domain, a repression domain, and two nuclear localization signals have been identified. Combined with information from other reports (21), our current model of the RFLAT-1 structural/functional domains is summarized in Fig. 8.
RFLAT-1/KLF13 belongs to the recently identified and expanding KLF
family. The evolutionary phylogenetic tree of 19 members of this family
shows that RFLAT-1/KLF13, BTEB1/KLF9, and BTEB4/DRRF are most closely
related and may form a subfamily. BTEB1/KLF9 was first cloned based on
its ability to bind to the BTE, a GC-rich sequence present in the
promoter of the cytochrome P-450IA1 (CYP1A1) gene (29). It functions as
an activator for multiple GC box-containing promoters such as the SV40
early promoter but acts as a repressor of single GC box containing
promoters like that of the CYP1A1 gene. The transcriptional activation
domain of BTEB1 was mapped to two regions at the amino terminus: AA
13-26 and AA 58-68 (25). BTEB4 was recently cloned from human
pancreas (30), but little information is available as to its function
and domain structure. It may be an ortholog of the mouse DRRF, which is
important for modulating dopaminergic transmission in the brain (31).
In addition to the similar DNA-binding motifs shared by all family
members, these three proteins also share homology within their
transactivation domains. As shown in Fig. 1B, the amino
termini of these three factors are very similar. This region contains
one of the activation domains of BTEB1/KLF9 (25) and is the activation
domain of RFLAT-1/KLF13 identified in this study. It will be
interesting to determine whether this region also mediates
transactivation by BTEB4.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Functional domains of RFLAT-1. The
RFLAT-1 minimum activation domain is localized to AA 1-35, whereas the
repression domain resides in AA 67-168. There are two NLS; one is the
basic region upstream of the DNA-binding domain (AA 147-168), and one
is the zinc finger DNA-binding domain. The zinc finger domain has also
been shown to mediate interaction with coactivators such as CBP/p300
and p300/CBP-associated factor (21).
|
|
The Transcriptional Activation Domain of
RFLAT-1/KLF13--
The activation domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13
and BTEB1/KLF9 differ from the well characterized activation domains of
many transcription factors, including other KLFs. For example, the
transactivation domain of Sp1 is glutamine-rich (10), that of BTEB2 is
proline-rich (32), and those of EKLF and GKLF are acidic-rich (13, 16). The activation domains of RFLAT-1/KLF13 and BTEB1/KLF9 have a high
content of hydrophobic residues, with a small number of acidic and
serine residues embedded within them (Fig. 2B). Mutagenesis studies on RFLAT-1 indicate that the highly conserved acidic residues and their neighboring hydrophobic residues are equally important in
mediating transactivation. Thus, they may represent a new module responsible for transcriptional activation. It is generally accepted that the role of activation domains is to mediate interaction between
sequence-specific transcription factors and basal transcriptional machinery (33). For example, the acidic residues may contact the target
by charged interactions, and glutamine residues are involved in
hydrogen bonding. In the case of RFLAT-1 and BTEB1, we predict that the
contact between their transactivation domains with the basal
transcriptional apparatus may involve both charged residues and
hydrophobic interaction. The interaction may be initiated by contact
between charged amino acids and reinforced and stabilized by stronger
hydrophobic forces. Although it is currently not known whether the
general components of the initiation complex or RNA polymerase II
itself is the target for RFLAT-1, BTEB1, and BTEB4, it seems reasonable
to predict that they probably all interact with the same protein or a
similar region.
The Repression Domain of RFLAT-1/KLF13--
Although
many KLFs function only as activators or repressors, some KLFs are
bifunctional, containing both activation and repression domains. Most
of the repression domains have been identified using the GAL4 fusion
system, like those of EKLF (13), GKLF (15), and LKLF (17).
RFLAT-1/KLF13 is an activator for the RANTES gene, but, when fused with
the GAL4 DBD, it acts as a repressor (Fig. 2B). This
observation provides the first evidence that RFLAT-1/KLF13 may be a
bifunctional transcription factor. Deletion analysis revealed that the
minimum region conferring maximum repression is AA 67-168. This region
shows no obvious sequence similarity with any other proteins, including
its closest family members, BTEB1 and BTEB4 (Fig. 1B), but
it is rich in alanines (19%) and prolines (20%), which are common
residues in a few of the known repression domains (34). These residues
are also known to mediate protein-protein interactions. Although no
repression domain has been identified for BTEB1, this factor was first
cloned as a repressor for the rat CYP1A1 promoter (29).
Additionally, the mouse BTEB4/DRRF can act as either an activator or
repressor on dopamine receptor promoters (31). These data suggest that,
in addition to the well known bifunctional EKLF subfamily (EKLF, LKLF,
and GKLF), the RFLAT-1/KLF13 subfamily of KLFs can also be activators
and repressors depending upon the targeting promoters, the interacting proteins, and the cellular contacts.
In general, the mechanisms of transcriptional repression are less well
understood than those mediating activation. It has been proposed that
there are three mechanisms for repression: interference with
(a) activator DNA binding; (b) the activity of
DNA-bound activators; or (c) the general transcription
machinery (34). It has long been known that some KLFs are
transcriptional repressors, but only recent reports describe the
mechanisms of suppressive activities of selective KLFs. BKLF confers
its repressive activity by binding to the cellular protein CtBP2
(carboxyl-terminal binding protein 2) (35). EKLF interacts with the
corepressors mSIN3A and histone deacetylase 1 through its zinc finger
domain and suppresses transcription (14). The inhibitory domain of LKLF
binds to a cofactor WWP1, an E3 ubiquitin ligase, which results in
attenuated transactivation (17). In the above cases, the mechanisms of
repression are all at the intermolecular level and involve interaction
with corepressors. In the GAL4 system, fusion of the RFLAT-1/KLF13
repression domain with GAL4 DBD did not change its DNA binding affinity
(data not shown). On the contrary, the presence of the repression
domain completely masked or quenched the activity of the activation
domain, suggesting that its mode of action is either by covering the
activation surface or interacting and interfering with the basal
transcriptional machinery. In the RFLAT-1, RANTES promoter
system, deletion of the repression domain resulted in increased RFLAT-1
transactivation activity, which further indicates the inhibitory
function of this domain.
The NLS of RFLAT-1--
Most eukaryotic transcription factors
contain one or more NLS that can be recognized by nuclear transport
proteins. These proteins translocate the transcription factors across
the nuclear membrane in an ATP-dependent fashion (36). Two
types of NLS have been defined: the "core" NLS, which contains
four or more arginine and lysine residues within a hexapeptide that is
frequently flanked by acidic residues or prolines and glycines, and the
"bipartite" NLS, which consists of two clusters of basic amino
acids separated by a short nonbasic peptide (26). Based on sequence
search, a bipartite NLS was identified within RFLAT-1 AA 147-168. This is a potent NLS because it is sufficient to direct GFP into the nucleus. However, it is not the only NLS on RFLAT-1 because deletion of
this signal did not affect the nuclear transport. Moreover, this
bipartite NLS sequence is not conserved on BTEB1 and BTEB4 (Fig.
1B), and little is known about the NLS of the two BTEB proteins.
Although no putative NLS (core or bipartite) is found within the finger
region, the second NLS of RFLAT-1 was localized to the three zinc
fingers of the DNA-binding domain. Deletion of the last zinc finger
significantly reduced nuclear transport, perhaps indicating that all
three fingers are required for optimal nuclear translocation. The zinc
fingers of other KLFs, such as those of GKLF (26), UKLF (37), and EKLF
(38), have also been shown to act as strong NLS. In some cases, a
"global" structure of zinc fingers, rather than specific
sequences, serves as an NLS (39, 40). In others, basic residues within
the zinc fingers are critical determinants for nuclear localization
(38). Thus, we conclude that for KLFs, the zinc finger domain may have
multiple functions. This domain of RFLAT-1/KLF13 is involved in nuclear localization, interaction with coactivators CBP/p300 and
p300/CBP-associated factor, and binding to DNA.
RFLAT-1 Recognition Sequences--
All KLFs recognize GC-rich
regions, but their precise recognition sequences are slightly
different. Sp1 binds to GC-rich box GGGGCGGGG, whereas EKLF recognizes
GT-rich CACCC sequence. Our mutation analyses demonstrated that
RFLAT-1/KLF13 recognizes and binds to the CTCCC box of the
RANTES promoter. Competition studies showed that it also
binds to other previously published GT- or GC-rich sequences. However,
its affinity to the GT box is somewhat stronger than that to the GC
box. This intact CTCCC sequence is required for RFLAT-1-mediated RANTES
gene transcription in T-cells. The importance of this sequence for the
synergistic effect between RFLAT-1 and NF-
B proteins supports the
enhanceosome model in which both activators and their cognate DNA
fragments are all required to exert optimal gene transcription (7).
In conclusion, the functions of selected structural regions of
RFLAT-1/KLF13, a member of the Krüppel-like transcription factor
family, were analyzed. Distinct transcriptional activation and
repression domains and two potent, independent nuclear localization signals were identified. Unique structural features may help define the
mechanisms of action of RFLAT-1/KLF13 in regulating gene expression. Additionally, this information provides new insights into functional similarity and differences among the large and growing
Krüppel-like transcription factor family.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Grant DK35008 from the National
Institutes of Health (to A. M. K.), by Grant PF-77419 from
the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation (to A. S.), and by the Satellite Dialysis Young Investigator Grant of the National Kidney
Foundation (to A. S.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Div. of Immunology and
Transplantation Biology, Dept. of Pediatrics, Stanford University
School of Medicine, CCSR Room 2105C, 300 Pasteur Dr., Stanford, CA
94305-5164.
¶
Supported by the Satellite Dialysis Centers Fund in
Nephrology. Present address: Div. of Nephrology, Dept. of Medicine,
Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI 48202.
Present address: Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0202.

Shelagh Galligan Professor of Pediatrics.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 5, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M204278200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
C2H2, Cys2His2;
RANTES, regulated upon activation, normal T-cell expressed and secreted;
RFLAT, RANTES factor of late activated T lymphocytes;
KLF, Krüppel-like factor;
BTE, basic transcription element;
BTEB, BTE-binding protein;
NLS, nuclear localization signal(s);
GFP, green
fluorescence protein;
DBD, DNA-binding domain;
EMSA, electrophoretic
mobility shift assay;
AA, amino acid(s);
DRRF, dopamine
receptor-regulating factor;
CBP, cAMP-response element-binding
protein-binding protein.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Mitchell, P. J.,
and Tjian, R.
(1989)
Science
245,
371-378[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Klug, A.,
and Schwabe, J. W.
(1995)
FASEB J.
9,
597-604[Abstract]
|
| 3.
|
Philipsen, S.,
and Suske, G.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
2991-3000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Turner, J.,
and Crossley, M.
(1999)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
24,
236-240[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Kadonaga, J. T.,
Carner, K. R.,
Masiarz, F. R.,
and Tjian, R.
(1987)
Cell
51,
1079-1090[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Dang, D. T.,
Pevsner, J.,
and Yang, V. W.
(2000)
Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol.
32,
1103-1121[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Song, A.,
Chen, Y. F.,
Thamatrakoln, K.,
Storm, T. A.,
and Krensky, A. M.
(1999)
Immunity
10,
93-103[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Asano, H., Li, X. S.,
and Stamatoyannopoulos, G.
(2000)
Blood
95,
3578-3584[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Martin, K. M.,
Cooper, W. N.,
Metcalfe, J. C.,
and Kemp, P. R.
(2000)
Biochem. J.
345,
529-533[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Courey, A. J.,
and Tjian, R.
(1988)
Cell
55,
887-898[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Hagen, G.,
Muller, S.,
Beato, M.,
and Suske, G.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
3843-3851[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Imhof, A.,
Schuierer, M.,
Werner, O.,
Moser, M.,
Roth, C.,
Bauer, R.,
and Buettner, R.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
194-204[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Chen, X.,
and Bieker, J. J.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
5888-5896[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Chen, X.,
and Bieker, J. J.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
3118-3125[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Yet, S. F.,
McA'Nulty, M. M.,
Folta, S. C.,
Yen, H. W.,
Yoshizumi, M.,
Hsieh, C. M.,
Layne, M. D.,
Chin, M. T.,
Wang, H.,
Perrella, M. A.,
Jain, M. K.,
and Lee, M. E.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
1026-1031[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Geiman, D. E.,
Ton-That, H.,
Johnson, J. M.,
and Yang, V. W.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
1106-1113[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Conkright, M. D.,
Wani, M. A.,
and Lingrel, J. B.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
29299-29306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Bieker, J. J.,
and Southwood, C. M.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
852-860[Abstract]
|
| 19.
|
Jenkins, T. D.,
Opitz, O. G.,
Okano, J.,
and Rustgi, A. K.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
10747-10754[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Zhang, W.,
Shields, J. M.,
Sogawa, K.,
Fujii-Kuriyama, Y.,
and Yang, V. W.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17917-17925[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Song, C. Z.,
Keller, K.,
Murata, K.,
Asano, H.,
and Stamatoyannopoulos, G.
(2002)
J. Biol. Chem.
277,
7029-7036[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Picard, V.,
Ersdal-Badju, E., Lu, A.,
and Bock, S. C.
(1994)
Nucleic Acids Res.
22,
2587-2591[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Nelson, P. J.,
Kim, H. T.,
Manning, W. C.,
Goralski, T. J.,
and Krensky, A. M.
(1993)
J. Immunol.
151,
2601-2612[Abstract]
|
| 24.
|
Andrews, N. C.,
and Faller, D. V.
(1991)
Nucleic Acids Res.
19,
2499[Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Kobayashi, A.,
Sogawa, K.,
Imataka, H.,
and Fujii-Kuriyama, Y.
(1995)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
117,
91-95[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Shields, J. M.,
and Yang, V. W.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
18504-18507[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Moriuchi, H.,
Moriuchi, M.,
and Fauci, A. S.
(1997)
J. Immunol.
158,
3483-3491[Abstract]
|
| 28.
|
Nelson, P. J.,
Ortiz, B. D.,
Pattison, J. M.,
and Krensky, A. M.
(1996)
J. Immunol.
157,
1139-1148[Abstract]
|
| 29.
|
Imataka, H.,
Sogawa, K.,
Yasumoto, K.,
Kikuchi, Y.,
Sasano, K.,
Kobayashi, A.,
Hayami, M.,
and Fujii-Kuriyama, Y.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
3663-3671[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Conley, A. A.,
and Urrutia, R.
(2000)
Pancreas
21,
437
|
| 31.
|
Hwang, C. K.,
D'Souza, U. M.,
Eisch, A. J.,
Yajima, S.,
Lammers, C. H.,
Yang, Y.,
Lee, S. H.,
Kim, Y. M.,
Nestler, E. J.,
and Mouradian, M. M.
(2001)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
98,
7558-7563[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Kojima, S.,
Kobayashi, A.,
Gotoh, O.,
Ohkuma, Y.,
Fujii-Kuriyama, Y.,
and Sogawa, K.
(1997)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
121,
389-396[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Tjian, R.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1994)
Cell
77,
5-8[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Johnson, A. D.
(1995)
Cell
81,
655-658[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Turner, J.,
and Crossley, M.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
5129-5140[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Richardson, W. D.,
Mills, A. D.,
Dilworth, S. M.,
Laskey, R. A.,
and Dingwall, C.
(1988)
Cell
52,
655-664[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Matsumoto, N.,
Laub, F.,
Aldabe, R.,
Zhang, W.,
Ramirez, F.,
Yoshida, T.,
and Terada, M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
28229-28237[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Pandya, K.,
and Townes, T. M.
(2002)
J. Biol. Chem.
277,
16304-16312[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Matheny, C.,
Day, M. L.,
and Milbrandt, J.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
8176-8181[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Yang, M.,
May, W. S.,
and Ito, T.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
27399-27406[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

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

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Ohguchi, T. Tanaka, A. Uchida, K. Magoori, H. Kudo, I. Kim, K. Daigo, I. Sakakibara, M. Okamura, H. Harigae, et al.
Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor 4{alpha} Contributes to Thyroid Hormone Homeostasis by Cooperatively Regulating the Type 1 Iodothyronine Deiodinase Gene with GATA4 and Kruppel-Like Transcription Factor 9
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
June 15, 2008;
28(12):
3917 - 3931.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Huang, Y.-T. Ahn, L. McPherson, C. Clayberger, and A. M. Krensky
Interaction of PRP4 with Kruppel-Like Factor 13 Regulates CCL5 Transcription
J. Immunol.,
June 1, 2007;
178(11):
|