Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M204399200 on July 9, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 37, 33890-33894, September 13, 2002
Upstream Stimulatory Factor (USF) Is Recruited into a Steroid
Hormone-triggered Regulatory Circuit by the Estrogen-inducible
Transcription Factor
EF1*
Naomi B.
Dillner and
Michel M.
Sanders
From the Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and
Biophysics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Received for publication, May 6, 2002, and in revised form, July 8, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
In the past decade, investigation into steroid
hormone signaling has focused on the mechanisms of steroid hormone
receptors as they act as signaling molecules and transcription factors
in cells. However, the majority of hormone-responsive genes are not directly regulated by hormone receptors. These genes are termed secondary response genes. To explore the molecular mechanisms by which
the steroid hormone estrogen regulates secondary response genes, the
ovalbumin (Ov) gene was analyzed.
Three protein-protein complexes (Chirp-I, -II, -III), which do not
contain the estrogen receptor, are induced by estrogen to bind to the
5'-flanking region of the Ov gene. The Chirp-III DNA
binding site, which is required for estrogen induction, binds a complex
of proteins that contains the estrogen-inducible transcription factor
EF1. Experiments undertaken to identify proteins complexed with
EF1 led to the elucidation of a novel mechanism of action of
upstream stimulatory factor-1 (USF-1), which involves its tethering to
the Ov gene 5'-flanking region by
EF1. Gel mobility
shift assays and co-immunoprecipitation experiments identify USF-1 as a
component of Chirp-III. However, USF-1 is not able to bind to the
Chirp-III site independently. In addition, USF-1 overexpression is able
to induce Ov gene promoter activity in transfection
experiments. USF-1 can also potentiate the induction of the
Ov gene by the transcription factor
EF1. Moreover,
mutating the
EF1 binding sites in the 5'-flanking region of the
Ov gene abrogates induction of the gene by USF-1. These data begin to establish a molecular mechanism by which
hormone-inducible transcription factors and ubiquitous transcription
factors cooperate to regulate estrogen-induced secondary
response gene expression.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Estrogen is a lipophilic molecule that diffuses into cells and
binds to the estrogen receptor. The estrogen-estrogen receptor complex
then binds to and regulates genes called primary response genes (for
reviews, see Refs. 1-5). In some cases, a primary response gene
encodes a transcription factor that is capable of regulating downstream
genes, or secondary response genes. In the last decade, uncovering the
mechanism of action of the estrogen receptor as a signaling molecule
and as a regulator of transcription has been a priority. However, the
majority of genes regulated by estrogen are not primary response genes
but secondary response genes. To investigate the mechanisms of
transcriptional activation of secondary response genes, the induction
of the ovalbumin
(Ov)1
gene by estrogen was analyzed.
Ov gene expression is up-regulated 200-fold upon estrogen
administration in vivo (6). This is due to a 20-fold
increase of transcription of the Ov gene (7) coupled with a
10-fold increase in mRNA stability (8). The Ov gene is
classified as a secondary response gene because the estrogen receptor
does not directly bind to it and because there is a requirement for
concomitant protein synthesis for transcriptional activation (9).
Estrogen induction of the Ov gene requires two
cis-acting regulatory elements in the 5'-flanking region
(7), the steroid dependent
regulatory element (SDRE), which spans from
892 to
793, and the negative regulatory
element (NRE), which spans from
308 to
88 (Fig.
1). Ten-base pair linker scanner
mutations or deletion mutations spanning the SDRE abrogate
Ov gene induction by estrogen (10). Furthermore, in
vivo genomic footprinting has identified three protein-protein complexes that bind to the SDRE upon estrogen administration (10). These are called the chicken inducible
regulatory proteins-I, -II, and -III (Chirp-I,
-II, -III) (for reviews, see Refs. 11 and 12). The NRE binds proteins
that are positive and/or negative regulators of the Ov gene
(13).

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Schematic of the Ov gene
5'-flanking region. The Ov gene has two main
regulatory regions: the NRE region ( 308 to 88), which plays a role
in both induction and repression of the gene, and the SDRE region
( 892 to 785793), which is necessary for induction of the gene by
estrogen. The SDRE and the NRE each contain several functional
subdomains that bind specific transcription factors or factor
complexes. These transcription factors are represented by
shaded circles (for review, see Ref. 12). Two subdomains
bind the transcription factor EF1, and the boundaries of these
sequences are denoted. The most distal EF1 site coincides
with Chirp-III. This map is not drawn to scale. HNF, hepatic
nuclear factor; CAR, COUP-adjacent repressor;
COUP-TF, chicken ovalbumin upstream promoter-transcription
factor.
|
|
Chirp-III includes the estrogen-inducible transcription factor
EF1
(14). However, analysis by in vivo footprinting and gel
mobility shift assays (GMSAs) indicates that an additional protein(s)
is present in the Chirp-III complex (10). Based on studies that
demonstrate that estrogen induces USF to bind to regulatory regions of
genes (15, 16), experiments were conducted to test whether USF is a
component of the Chirp-III complex.
USF-1 and USF-2 are ubiquitous basic helix-loop-helix proteins (17)
that were first identified as activators of the adenovirus major late
promoter (18). USF-1 and USF-2 are capable of homodimerization or
heterodimerization and typically bind to E-box DNA sequences (21). USF
can be recruited to bind E-boxes in the 5'-flanking region of target
genes by transcription factors responding to a specific signal (15,
19-22). For example, the USF heterodimer cooperates with Stat1
to bind to and to induce the class II transactivator (CIITA) regulatory
region (19). The USF heterodimer is also recruited to bind to the
cathepsin D promoter in an estrogen-dependent manner (15).
In these examples, USF functions in a capacity that enhances or
amplifies a pre-existing signal rather than directly mediating that
signal from the source to a downstream gene.
Herein, experiments demonstrate that USF-1 is part of the Chirp-III
complex that is required for estrogen induction of the Ov
gene. Furthermore, overexpression of USF-1 induces Ov gene transcriptional activity, and activity is potentiated by
co-overexpression of USF-1 and
EF1. However, mutating the
EF1
binding sites in the 5'-flanking region of the Ov gene
abrogates its induction by USF-1. These data invite us to propose a
novel paradigm whereby the ubiquitous transcription factor USF is
tethered to the Ov gene by the estrogen-inducible
transcription factor
EF1.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Gel Mobility Shift Assays--
The DNA oligo C.5, USF consensus
oligo, and mutated USF consensus oligo were synthesized and high
pressure liquid chromatography-purified by the Microchemical Facility
at the University of Minnesota. Oligo C.5 consists of
nucleotides
811 to
788 with respect to the start point of
transcription of the Ov gene with HindIII
overhangs added to the ends. Restriction enzyme overhangs and mutated
sequences are denoted by lowercase letters. The
EF1 binding site and
USF binding site are bolded. After corresponding oligos were annealed, the HindIII overhangs were Klenow-filled using
[
-32P]dCTP.
|
|
GMSAs were performed as described (23). Briefly, 8 µg
of oviduct nuclear protein extract from estrogen-stimulated chicks was
incubated with 2 µl of antibody, 2 µl of antibody plus 2 µl of
peptide blocker, or 2 µl of preimmune serum as indicated on ice for
30 min. Then, the DNA probe was added, and these reactions were
incubated for 30 min at room temperature. The reactions were run on a
6% non-denaturing polyacrylamide gel. The gel was exposed to a
PhosphorImager screen for 2 h and then analyzed. The USF-1 C-terminal antibody (catalog no. sc-229) and the peptide blocker (catalog no. sc-229p) were obtained from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Santa Cruz, CA). The
EF1 antibody was raised to amino acids 8-21
(26).
Co-immunoprecipitation and Western Blots--
Fifty µg of
chick oviduct nuclear protein extract was incubated with 20 µl of
EF1 N-terminal antibody (23), 20 µl of USF-1 C-terminal
antibody, catalog no. sc-229 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), 20 µl of
EF1 preimmune serum, or 20 µl of USF-1 C-terminal antibody preincubated with a peptide blocker (Santa Cruz Biotechnology catalog
no. sc-229p) for 90 min at 4 °C with occasional inversion. Then, 50 µl of protein A/G-agarose slurry (IP05) from Oncogene Research
Products (Boston, MA) was added to each sample. The samples were
rotated at 4 °C for 1 h, and then the agarose beads were pelleted with a brief centrifugation. Pellets were washed
three times in 1 ml of zinc shift buffer (23). The pellets were
resuspended in SDS loading buffer, boiled, and loaded onto a 4-20%
gradient denaturing polyacrylamide gel. Western blots were performed as described (23) except that the USF-1 C-terminal antibody (catalog no.
sc-229, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) was used at a dilution of 1:300.
Steroid Hormone Treatment, Transfection, and Culture of Tubular
Gland Cells--
Two-week-old female white leghorn chicks were
implanted with two 20-mg diethylstilbesterol pellets to promote
differentiation of the oviduct. After 2 weeks, the pellets were
withdrawn for 2 days before sacrificing the animals. Tubular gland
cells from the oviduct were isolated, cultured in serum-free media (6), and transfected by CaPO4 co-precipitation as described
previously (24). Animals were maintained in accordance with the
National Institutes of Health Guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.
CAT Assays and Statistics--
CAT assays were performed as
described (24). Experimental data were pooled after normalizing
each experiment with pOvCAT.900 plus estrogen and corticosterone
activity set to 1. Paired t tests were performed on the raw
data to test the significance of the differences among means.
p < 0.1 was considered significant.
 |
RESULTS |
The Chirp-III Complex Contains Both
EF1 and USF-1--
The
sequence of the 5'-flanking region of the Ov gene spanning
811 to
788, which has historically been called oligo C.5, is
necessary for the induction of the Ov gene by estrogen and binds a protein complex called Chirp-III (7, 25). Recently, experiments
demonstrated that the estrogen-inducible transcription factor
EF1
binds to the nucleotides from
810 to
806 (14, 27) and that the
integrity of this site is required for proper induction of the gene by
estrogen or by
EF1 overexpression (14, 23, 27). Furthermore,
overexpression of
EF1 induces the Ov promoter in the
absence of estrogen (23), which indicates that estrogen is inducing the
Ov gene at least in part via
EF1. However, maximal
induction cannot be achieved by overexpressing
EF1 (7).
Because USF is recruited to the cathepsin D gene in response to
estrogen, we hypothesized that it may also be recruited to the
Ov gene. To test whether USF-1 is present in the Chirp-III protein complex in addition to
EF1, a GMSA was performed (Fig. 2A). When chick oviduct
nuclear protein extracts are incubated with oligo C.5, one major
shifted band is observed (Fig. 2A, band B). There
are also several smaller bands that are thought to be degradation
products because their intensity decreases with the addition of
protease inhibitors during the preparation of the nuclear protein
extracts (data not shown). Nonspecific DNA does not compete band
B (lane 3), whereas unlabeled oligo C.5 competes band B (lane 4), which indicates that proteins
bind to oligo C.5 in a sequence-specific manner.
EF1 preimmune serum
does not affect protein binding to oligo C.5 (lane 5), yet
EF1 antibody eliminates protein binding (lane 6),
indicating that
EF1 is present in band B (14). USF-1
antibody preincubated with a peptide blocker before being added to
oviduct nuclear protein extracts does not affect protein binding to
oligo C.5 (lane 7). However, USF-1 antibody incubated with
oviduct nuclear protein extract results in a supershift of band
B (band A, lane 8). Therefore, these data
demonstrate that Chirp-III contains both
EF1 and USF-1.

View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
USF-1 binds to the 5'-flanking region of the
Ov gene in a complex with
EF1. In A, lanes 1-8
contain oligo C.5 as a probe. Lanes 2-8 contain 8 µg of
chick oviduct nuclear protein extract from estrogen-stimulated chicks.
Lane 3 contains 100× unlabeled nonspecific DNA
(NS) as a competitor. Lane 4 contains 100× oligo
C.5 competitor. Lane 5 contains nuclear protein extract
preincubated with EF1 preimmune serum (PI). Lane
6 contains nuclear protein extract preincubated with EF1
antibody ( ). Lane 7 contains nuclear protein extract
preincubated with USF-1 antibody plus the antibody peptide blocker
(PB). Lane 8 contains nuclear protein extract
preincubated with USF-1 antibody (U1). Band B is
the band representing the predominant protein-DNA complex. Band
A is this protein-DNA complex supershifted with the USF-1
antibody. In B, oligo C.5 was used as the probe in
lanes 9, 12, and 13. A consensus USF
oligomer (U) was used as probe in lane 10, and a
mutant USF oligomer (mU) was used as the probe in lane
11. Eight µg of estrogen-stimulated oviduct nuclear extract was
used in all reactions. Competition of oligo C.5 with the USF consensus
binding oligomer, mutated USF consensus binding oligomer, or no
competitor is shown in lanes 12, 13, and
9, respectively.
|
|
Interestingly, there is no canonical E-box binding site in oligo C.5.
Therefore, a consensus USF binding site was used as a probe in a GMSA
for comparison with oligo C.5 (Fig. 2B). The USF consensus
oligomer binds a protein from oviduct nuclear protein extracts with a
greater mobility than band B (Fig. 2B, band
C, lane 10), which indicates that USF must be complexed
with other proteins when binding oligo C.5. Furthermore, the USF
consensus and mutant oligos show little competition for binding of
nuclear proteins to oligo C.5 (band B), suggesting that USF
is not binding to oligo C.5 in the same manner as to the USF consensus
oligo. Perhaps competition of USF is hindered by other proteins that sequester or tether it to oligo C.5.
EF1 and USF-1 Are Co-immunoprecipitated--
To test whether
the interaction of
EF1 and USF-1 is DNA-dependent, a
co-immunoprecipitation assay was performed (Fig.
3). In the top panel of Fig.
3, precipitated proteins were subjected to Western blotting with
anti-
EF1. In the bottom panel, precipitated proteins were
blotted with anti-USF-1. The USF-1 antibody precipitates the USF-1
protein and the
EF1 protein (lane 2). However,
preincubation with a USF-1 peptide blocker abolished precipitation of
USF-1 and
EF1 (lane 1). Similarly, the
EF1 antibody
precipitates both
EF1 and USF from oviduct nuclear extracts
(lane 3), whereas the
EF1 preimmune serum does not
(lane 4). Therefore, USF-1 and
EF1 can be
co-immunoprecipitated from oviduct nuclear protein extracts, supporting
the concept that the two proteins are part of the same complex.
Furthermore, these data suggest that USF-1 and
EF1 are capable of
interacting in the absence of DNA, which may explain why the USF
consensus oligo was unable to compete for USF in Fig. 2B.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
EF1 and USF-1 are
co-immunoprecipitated. The arrow designated
EF1 denotes the EF1 protein of ~120 kDa recognized
by the EF1 antibody, and the arrow designated
USF denotes the USF proteins of ~43-44 kDa recognized by
the USF-1 antibody. Lane 1 contains proteins precipitated by
the USF-1 antibody and its peptide blocker. Lane 2 contains
proteins precipitated by the USF-1 antibody. Lane 3 contains
proteins precipitated by the EF1 antibody. Lane 4 contains proteins precipitated by the EF1 preimmune serum.
Lane 5 contains proteins bound to the protein A/G-agarose
beads.
|
|
The
EF1 antibody also precipitates a protein slightly larger than
USF-1 (43 kDa) that is recognized by the USF-1 antibody. As human USF-2
is 44 kDa, the most likely explanation is that
EF1 is interacting
with the USF-1/USF-2 heterodimer as well as with the USF-1 homodimer.
Although the antibody is thought to be specific to human USF-1, it is
feasible that it also recognizes chick USF-2 as the human proteins are
70% identical in the C-terminal half of the protein.
USF-1 Induces the Ov Promoter--
To test whether the interaction
of USF-1 with the 5'-flanking region of the Ov gene is
functionally relevant, a human USF-1 expression vector was
co-transfected into primary oviduct cells with pOvCAT.900 (Fig.
4), which contains all the sequences
necessary for proper induction of the Ov gene by estrogen
and corticosterone (9). When pCMV-USF-1 is co-expressed with the
pOvCAT.900 reporter construct, the Ov promoter is induced
~5-fold in the absence of steroids. This expression is
dose-dependent as transcriptional activity in the absence
of estrogen and corticosterone increases proportionally to the amount
of the USF-1 expression vector co-transfected. USF-1 has no effect when
steroids are present, presumably because endogenous USF is sufficient
for maximal transcriptional activation.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
USF overexpression induces the Ov
promoter. Oviduct cells were cultured in the presence
(dark bars) or absence (light bars) of estrogen
(1 × 10 7 M) and corticosterone (1 × 10 6 M). The permissive effects of
corticosterone are required for maximal induction of the Ov
gene by estrogen. Fifteen µg/ml pOvCAT.900 was co-transfected with
450 ng/ml pCMV empty expression vector, 225 ng/ml pCMV-USF-1, or 450 ng/ml pCMV-USF-1. Sufficient empty vector was added to each sample to
keep the amount of DNA equivalent. As the concentration of pCMV-USF-1
increases, there is a significant increase in of the Ov
promoter activity in the absence of steroids (*, p < 0.05). Data were pooled from three experiments in which the samples
were normalized to pOvCAT.900 co-transfected with pCMV empty expression
vector in the presence of steroids. Error bars denote the
standard error of the mean.
|
|
EF1 and USF-1 Cooperate to Activate Ov Gene
Transcription--
Co-immunoprecipitation and GMSA experiments
indicate that
EF1 and USF-1 are part of the same complex, and
transfection data demonstrate that the Ov gene can be
induced by USF-1 (Fig. 3) as well as by
EF1 (23). To assay whether
EF1 and USF-1 cooperate in cells to activate transcription of the
Ov gene, they were co-expressed with the reporter pOvCAT.900
(Fig. 5). When
EF1 is overexpressed, there is a 3-5-fold induction of the Ov gene in the absence
of hormones (lane 2), which confirms previous data (23).
When USF-1 is added, there is an increase in reporter gene expression
(lanes 3 and 4). Similarly, when USF-1 is
overexpressed, there is a 5-fold induction of the Ov gene in
the absence of hormones (lane 5), and when
EF1 is added,
there is a further increase of reporter gene expression (lanes
6 and 7). Therefore, Ov gene transcription is potentiated by the combination of
EF1 and USF-1, lending further support to the model that they are functioning together in a complex. These data imply that the induction of the Ov gene by
estrogen is largely, if not exclusively, the consequence of the
induction of
EF1 and the subsequent recruitment of USF to the
Ov gene.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
EF1 and USF-1 induce the
Ov gene. Oviduct cells were cultured in the
presence (dark bars) or absence (light bars) of
estrogen and corticosterone. pCMV empty vector was added so that the
total amount of DNA transfected in each sample was equivalent. The
reporter pOvCAT.900 was co-transfected in each sample with the
indicated expression vector. A constant amount of pCMV- EF1 (450 ng/ml) and increasing amounts of pCMV-USF-1 (225 ng/ml, 450 ng/ml) were
co-transfected into oviduct cells in lanes 2-4. Likewise, a
constant amount of pCMV-USF-1 (450 ng/ml) and increasing amounts of
pCMV- EF1 (225 ng/ml, 450 ng/ml) were transfected into oviduct cells
in lanes 5-7. Samples that are significantly different
(p < 0.1) with respect to steroid hormone treatment
from samples in lane 2 (pCMV- EF1-transfected) and
lane 5 (pCMV-USF-1-transfected) are indicated (*). Samples
that are significantly different (p < 0.1) with
respect to steroid hormone treatment from the samples in lane
1 (pOvCAT.900-transfected) are also denoted ( ). Data were
pooled from two experiments in which the samples were normalized to
pOvCAT.900 co-transfected with pCMV empty expression vector in the
presence of steroids. Error bars denote the standard error
of the mean.
|
|
The Mass of USF-1 Is Not Regulated by Estrogen--
Overexpression
of USF-1 and/or
EF1 alleviates the estrogen requirement for
transcriptional activation of the Ov gene. Because
EF1 is
induced by estrogen to bind to the Ov gene and to activate Ov gene transcription (23), a Western blot was performed to determine whether USF-1 was induced by estrogen in a manner similar to
EF1. Oviduct nuclear extracts were made from estrogen-stimulated chicks and from chicks withdrawn from estrogen for 4 days. These extracts were blotted with a USF-1 or a
EF1 antibody. There is no
change in USF-1 or USF-2 protein levels when comparing the stimulated
and withdrawn oviduct nuclear protein extracts (Fig. 6). However, more
EF1 protein is
present in nuclear extracts from estrogen-stimulated extracts
than from estrogen-withdrawn extracts (Fig. 6) (see also Ref. 23).
Thus, the data indicate that estrogen does not increase the amount of
USF-1 protein expressed and support the contention that USF-1 is
recruited to the Ov gene 5'-flanking region to activate
transcription.

View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
USF-1 is not induced by estrogen.
Oviduct nuclear extracts were harvested either from chicks stimulated
with diethylstilbesterone pellets for 2 weeks (+E) or from
chicks stimulated with diethylstilbesterone pellets for 2 weeks after
which the pellets were withdrawn for 4 days ( E). Extracts
were run on a denaturing polyacrylamide gel and blotted with either a
USF-1 antibody or a EF1 antibody. The USF (USF-1 and USF-2) and
EF1 proteins are denoted.
|
|
Induction of the Ov Gene by USF-1 Is Abolished When
EF1 Binding
Sites in the Ov 5' Regulatory Region Are Mutated--
As a ubiquitous
transcription factor, USF is recruited to the promoters of genes by
various signals (15, 19, 21, 22). For example, USF is targeted to an
E-box in the hormone-responsive cathepsin D promoter by estrogen
administration (15). Furthermore, there is no USF binding site (E-box)
in oligo C.5 or in the entire 5' regulatory region of the Ov
gene. Therefore, we hypothesized that USF-1 is recruited to the Ov
5'-flanking region by the estrogen-responsive transcription factor
EF1, which binds to the 5'-flanking region of the Ov gene
at two sites. To test whether USF activation of the Ov
promoter is dependent on
EF1 binding, USF-1 was overexpressed with a
reporter construct (LS-810-150) containing mutations in both
EF1
binding sites centered around
810 and
150 with respect to the start
point of transcription (Fig. 7).
EF1
is not able to activate or to bind to the Ov gene with these
mutations (23, 14). USF-1 activation of Ov gene
transcriptional activity is abolished in the context of these
mutations. Therefore, induction of the Ov gene by USF-1 is
dependent on
EF1 binding to the 5'-flanking region of the gene.
These data present a novel mechanism for gene regulation by USF whereby
USF is shuttled to a DNA regulatory element by another transcription
factor without actually binding to its cognate E-box site.

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
USF induction of the Ov gene
is abolished when EF1 binding sites in the
5'-flanking region of the Ov gene are mutated.
Oviduct cells were transfected and cultured as described previously.
The fold induction due to transfected pCMV-USF-1 of each reporter
construct in the absence of steroids is plotted. pOvCAT.900 is not
induced by the empty expression vector (pCMV-empty), and
this CAT activity is set to 1. The fold induction of CAT activity from
either pOvCAT.900 or LS-810-150 co-transfected with 450 ng/ml
pCMV-USF-1 is shown. Data were pooled from three experiments.
Error bars denote the standard error of the mean.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Altogether, these data indicate that the Ov gene is
induced via a unique molecular mechanism involving the tethering of USF to DNA by
EF1. GMSA and co-immunoprecipitation experiments clearly demonstrate that USF-1, and probably USF-2, is part of the Chirp-III complex containing
EF1 (Figs. 2 and 3). However, whether the interaction between
EF1 and USF-1 is direct or whether the
interaction is mediated by another protein(s) present in the nuclear
protein extracts is yet to be determined. Future co-immunoprecipitation experiments with purified proteins should address this issue. Unfortunately, these experiments must await the cloning of the chicken
USF-1 and USF-2 homologs. In the meantime, it is tempting to speculate
that the interaction involves the
EF1 Pit, Oct, UNC (POU)
homeodomain, which is postulated to be a protein-protein interaction domain.
The interaction between
EF1 and USF is functionally relevant.
Overexpression of USF-1 induces the Ov gene in the absence of estrogen (Fig. 4), presumably through the small but detectable amount of
EF1 in oviduct cells in the absence of estrogen (Fig. 6
and 26). The observation that USF-1 does not induce Ov gene transcription in the presence of steroids is likely due to endogenous USF. More importantly, Ov gene transcription is potentiated
by the combination of overexpressed
EF1 and USF-1 (Fig. 5), further substantiating the concept that they form a functionally relevant complex.
Most data indicate that the specificity of gene activation by USF is
directed by a binding partner or signaling protein. For example,
CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein
(C/EBP
) stimulates USF to bind to
an E-box in the C/EBP
5'-flanking region in an autoregulatory
circuit (22). USF cooperatively binds with Stat1 to contiguous DNA
elements to induce the class II transactivator promoter (19).
Interestingly, USF is also targeted to promoters in estrogen signaling
cascades. In vivo UV cross-linking has shown estrogen-dependent loading of USF to an E-box in the 5'
regulatory region of the cathepsin D gene (15). USF is also involved in the regulation of other estrogen-responsive genes such as the chicken
vitellogenin II gene (27) and the mouse efp gene (16) via
binding to E-box sites. The data herein demonstrate that USF contributes to Ov gene activation as well. More importantly,
the mechanism of USF induction of the Ov gene apparently
does not include a direct interaction with DNA (Fig. 2). Instead, it is dependent on intact
EF1 binding sites (Fig. 7). Furthermore, USF-1
is not regulated by estrogen (Fig. 6). This suggests that the
estrogen-inducible transcription factor
EF1 tethers USF to the 5'
regulatory region of the Ov gene. Additionally, this concept is made plausible by the GMSA (Fig. 2) and co-immunoprecipitation (Fig.
3) experiments, which demonstrate that USF cannot be competed from the
Chirp-III binding site with a USF consensus oligomer and that
EF1
and USF-1 can interact in the presence or absence of DNA. This supports
a novel mechanism for steroid hormone signaling whereby USF is
recruited to the 5'-flanking region of the Ov gene via
tethering to the estrogen-inducible transcription factor
EF1 in the
absence of a bona fide USF binding site. These data
also extend the emerging paradigm in which the ubiquitous USF
transcription factor is recruited by a signal-specific transcription
factor to enhance activation of a target gene.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We are grateful to Howard Towle for the
generous gift of pCMV-USF-1.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Grant R01DK40082 from the
National Institutes of Health (to M. M. 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: Dept. of Biochemistry,
Molecular Biology, and Biophysics, University of Minnesota, 6-155 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. Tel.:
612-624-9637; Fax: 612-625-5476; E-mail: sande001@umn.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, July 9, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M204399200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
Ov, ovalbumin;
USF, upstream stimulatory factor;
SDRE, steroid dependent
regulatory element;
NRE, negative regulatory element;
Chirp, chicken
inducible regulatory proteins;
CAT, chloramphenicol acetyltransferase;
GMSA, gel mobility shift assays;
oligo, oligonucleotide.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Beato, M.,
Herrlich, P.,
and Schutz, G.
(1995)
Cell
83,
851-857[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Dean, D. M.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(1996)
Mol. Endocrinol.
10,
1489-1495[Abstract]
|
| 3.
|
Manelsdorf, D. J.,
Thummel, C.,
Beato, M.,
Herrlich, P.,
Shcutz, G.,
Umesono, K.,
Blumberg, B.,
Kastner, P.,
Mark, M.,
Chambon, P.,
and Evans, R.
(1995)
Cell
83,
835-839[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Robyr, D.,
Wolffe, A. P.,
and Wahli, W.
(2000)
Mol. Endocrinol.
14,
329-347[Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Tsai, M.-J.,
and O'Malley, B. W.
(1994)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
63,
451-486[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Sanders, M. M.,
and McKnight, G. S.
(1986)
in
Molecular Genetics of Mammalian Cells
(Malacinski, G. M., ed)
, pp. 183-216, Macmillan Press, New York
|
| 7.
|
Sanders, M. M.,
and McKnight, G. S.
(1988)
Biochemistry
27,
6550-6557[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Arao, Y.,
Miyatake, N.,
Yamamoto, E.,
Usiku, H.,
Matsuura, A.,
Ninomiya, Y.,
Maushige, S.,
Hasegawa, T.,
and Kato, S.
(1996)
J. Biochem.
120,
710-715[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Swaneck, G. E.,
Nordstrom, J. L.,
Kreuzaler, F.,
Tsai, M.-J.,
and O'Malley, B. W.
(1979)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
76,
1049-1053[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Dean, D. M.,
Jones, P. S.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(2000)
DNA Cell Biol.
20,
27-39[CrossRef]
|
| 11.
|
Sensenbaugh, K. R.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(1996)
in
Gene Expression and Nutrition: From Cells to Whole Body
(Pandalai, S. G, ed)
, pp. 45-57, Research Signposts, Trivandrum, India
|
| 12.
|
Dillner, N. B.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(2000)
Recent Res. Devel. Mol. Cell. Biol.
1,
93-108
|
| 13.
|
Sensenbaugh, K. R.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(1999)
DNA Cell Biol.
18,
147-156[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Dillner, N. B.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(2002)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
19,
85-91
|
| 15.
|
Xing, W.,
and Archer, T. K.
(1998)
Mol. Endocrinol.
12,
1310-1321[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Ikeda, K.,
Inoue, S.,
Orimo, A.,
Tsutsumi, K.-I.,
and Muramatsu, M.
(1998)
Gene (Amst.)
216,
155-162[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Gregor, P. D.,
Sawadogo, M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1990)
Genes Dev.
4,
1730-1740[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Sawadogo, M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1985)
Cell
43,
165-175[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Muhlethaler-Mottet, A.,
Beraridino, W. D.,
Otten, L. A.,
and Mach, B.
(1998)
Immunity
8,
157-166[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Ribiero, A.,
Pastier, D.,
Kardassis, D.,
Chambaz, J.,
and Cardot, P.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
1216-1225[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Sieweke, M. H.,
Tekotte, H.,
Jarosch, U.,
and Graf, T.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
1728-1739[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Timchenko, N.,
Wilson, D. R.,
Taylor, L. R.,
Abdelsayed, S.,
Wilde, M.,
Sawadogo, M.,
and Darlington, G. J.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
1192-1202[Abstract]
|
| 23.
|
Chamberlain, E. M.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
3600-3606[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Sanders, M. M.,
and McKnight, G. S.
(1985)
Endocrinology
116,
398-405[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Schweers, L. A.,
Frank, D. M.,
Weigel, N. L.,
and Sanders, M. M.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
7590-7595[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Kaye, J. S.,
Pratt-Kaye, S.,
Bellard, M.,
Drtzen, G.,
Bellard, F.,
and Chambon, P.
(1986)
EMBO J.
5,
277-285[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Seal, S. M.,
Davis, D. L.,
and Burch, J. B. E.
(1991)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11,
2704-2717[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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. A. van Grunsven, C. Michiels, T. Van de Putte, L. Nelles, G. Wuytens, K. Verschueren, and D. Huylebroeck
Interaction between Smad-interacting Protein-1 and the Corepressor C-terminal Binding Protein Is Dispensable for Transcriptional Repression of E-cadherin
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 3, 2003;
278(28):
26135 - 26145.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.