Two Highly Related p66 Proteins Comprise a New Family of Potent
Transcriptional Repressors Interacting with MBD2 and MBD3*
Marc
Brackertz
,
Joern
Boeke
,
Ru
Zhang, and
Rainer
Renkawitz§
From the Institute for Genetics, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen,
Heinrich-Buff-Ring 58-62, D-35392 Giessen, Germany
Received for publication, July 25, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
Methyl-CpG-binding domain proteins (MBD) mediate
functional responses of methylated DNA. MBD2 and MBD3 are components of
the MeCP1 protein complex, which contains the Mi-2/NuRD complex
and includes 66- and 68-kDa polypeptides. Here we identified two highly related 66-kDa proteins in a yeast two-hybrid screen with MBD2b. Based
on the high degree of sequence conservation to the previously identified Xenopus p66 subunit of the Mi-2/NuRD complex, we
termed these proteins hp66
and hp66
. hp66
is the human
orthologue of Xenopus p66, whereas hp66
, previously
identified as a component of the human MeCP1 complex, is a second
member of a p66 gene family. Coprecipitation of hp66
and MBD2
demonstrates their in vivo association. Furthermore,
confocal microscopy shows a nuclear colocalization of hp66
with
hp66
and MBD2 in a speckled pattern. hp66
is a potent
transcriptional repressor reducing gene activity about 100-fold and is
ubiquitously coexpressed with hp66
in cell lines and in fetal and
adult tissues. We demonstrate direct binding of both p66 family members
to MBD2 as well as MBD3. Interestingly, hp66
, which binds with a
higher affinity than hp66
, interacts via two interaction domains in
contrast to a single interaction domain present in hp66
. These
results demonstrate that two highly related mammalian p66 proteins
display overlapping functions and are involved in methylation dependent
transcriptional repression.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
DNA methylation at the 5-position of cytosine within CpG
dinucleotides has been shown in mammals to be essential for several important functions, such as cell differentiation, imprinting, and
X-inactivation. Indeed, genetic diseases have been described that are
caused by defects within the methylation machinery, like the Rett,
fragile X, and ICF syndromes. Rett and ICF syndromes are caused by
mutations in the genes for the methyl-CpG-binding protein MeCP2 and the
DNA methyltransferase Dnmt3B, respectively (1-4). The fragile X
syndrome is characterized by a triplet repeat expansion, which is
associated with de novo methylation of an upstream CpG
island and with gene inactivation (5, 6). Furthermore, DNA
hypomethylation of the genome, as well as methylation dependent silencing of tumor suppressor genes is often found in human cancer (for
review, see Refs. 7 and 8). A repressive effect on gene activity is a
common theme throughout these and other functions mediated by DNA
methylation. In several cases, repression could be demonstrated to be
conferred by histone deacetylation (9, 10). Targeting of histone
deacetylase complexes to methylated CpG dinucleotides is mediated by
proteins containing a methyl-CpG-binding domain
(MBD)1 (11). Four of these
proteins, MeCP2, MBD1, MBD2, and MBD3, have been shown to be involved
in transcriptional repression (12, 13). Indeed a transcriptional
repression domain has been found for MBD1, MBD2 as well as MeCP2
(12, 14, 15). Repression mediated by MeCP2 was shown to involve a
component of the basal transcriptional machinery, TFIIB, and the
Sin3-deacetylase complex (9, 10, 16). Similarly, Sin3A also binds MBD2
and is involved in MBD2-mediated repression (14). In contrast to the
other MBD family members, MBD2 and MBD3 are similar even outside the
MBD, although they seem to differ in function. There are two potential forms of MBD2 depending on the use of the first translation initiation codon: MBD2a and MBD2b. Until now no difference in function for either
form has been identified. MBD2 binds specifically to methylated DNA
(11, 14), whereas mammalian MBD3 does not bind methylated DNA in
vivo or in vitro (11). In contrast to mammalian MBD3, Xenopus MBD3 has been shown to bind with high selectivity to
methylated DNA (17). Complex purification provided another distinction between MBD2 and MBD3. MBD3 copurifies with the NuRD histone
deacetylation complex (17, 18). MBD2 is the methyl-CpG binding
component of the MeCP1 protein complex, which contains the NuRD complex and two polypeptides of 66 and 68 kDa (19, 20). In other words, the
MBD3 containing NuRD complex in mammals can be targeted to methylated
DNA by MBD2. Such a functional difference between MBD2 and MBD3 is also
evident from knockout experiments. MBD2
/
mice show a maternal
behavior defect, whereas MBD3
/
mice die early during embryogenesis
(21).
Although MBD2 has been shown to associate with Mi-2/NuRD within the
MeCP1 complex (18, 19), little is known about proteins binding directly
to MBD2. Therefore, in the present study, we have searched for
interaction partners of MBD2 utilizing a yeast two-hybrid screen. We
identified two proteins of approximate molecular weights of
66,000. Sequence comparison of both proteins to the 66-kDa
component of Xenopus Mi-2/NuRD demonstrates the existence of
a novel gene family with overlapping functions.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Plasmids--
The cDNA of hp66
was provided by the
Resource Center and Primary Data Base, RZPD (IMAGE:3953055) in pOTB7
(www.bio.llnl.gov), and revealed a full-length open reading frame
(1899 bp) after sequencing.
pGal-hp66
was constructed by inserting the
SalI/NdeI-linker 5'-tcgaccatatgaccgaagaagcatg-3'
in front of the SphI site of pOTB7-hp66
(IMAGE: 3953055)
to generate pOTB7-hp66
oligo and subcloning the
SalI/XbaI fragment in-frame into the pABGal94
linker (Baniahmad). pGal-hp66
-(1-134) and -(133-633) were created
by in-frame insertion of the SalI/BspHI or
BspHI/XbaI fragments into thepABGal94 linker.
pGal-hp66
-(133-238) was generated by digesting pGal-hp66
-(133-633) with SacI/BamHI, followed
by religation. The C-terminal deletions of pGal-hp66
were created by
digestion of pGal-hp66
with XbaI and the internal sites
EheI (aa 1-433), BcuI (aa 1-329), and
SacI (aa 1-238), followed by religation. pGal-hp66
-(434-633) resulted from SalI/EheI
digestion of Gal-hp66
, with subsequent religation.
pGal-hp66
-(334-633) was constructed by subcloning the
EcoRI/XbaI fragment from pOTB7-hp66
into pSG5 (Stratagene) and inserting the BstEII/BglII
fragment from the resulting clone into pABGal94 linker. For the yeast
two-hybrid screen pGBK-T7-MBD2b was created by digesting pGEX-2T MBD2b
(14) with XmaI/EcoRI and inserting the MBD2b
containing fragment into pGBK-T7 (Clontech). For
transfections, the 4xUAS tk luciferase reporter construct and
expression plasmid pCMV-lacZ encoding
-galactosidase were kindly
provided by A. Baniahmad. Generation of GST fusion constructs for
bacterial expression have been described previously (14). The GST
fusion of MBD2b for expression in eukaryotic cells, pCMV-GST-MBD2b, was
generated by excision of the BamHI/EcoRI fragment of pGEX-2T-MBD2b (14) and in-frame insertion into pCMV-GST (22), digested with BamHI/Cfr9I. pSG5-hp66
for
mammalian expression and in vitro translation was generated
by inserting the EcoRI/XbaI fragment of
pOTB7-hp66
into pSG5 (Stratagene) digested with
EcoRI/BamHI. C-terminal deletions of hp66
were
carried out by digestion of pSG5-hp66
with BamHI and the
internal sites EheI (aa 1-433), BcuI (aa
1-329), and SacI (aa 1-238), followed by religation. Constructs coding for hp66
-(1-133), -(133-238), and -(133-633) were created by EcoRI/BamHI excision of MBD
fragments of the corresponding Gal constructs and ligation into pSG5
digested with EcoRI and BamHI. hp66
-(372-633)
was derived by digestion of hp66
f.l. with EcoRI and
BcuI followed by religation. For in vitro
translation, only internal ATGs present in hp66
were used as
translational start sites. The AU5-tagged hp66
was generated by
excising the NdeI/XbaI fragment of
pOTB7-hp66
oligo and in-frame insertion into pCEFLAU5
digested with BglII and EcoRI. The EGFP fusion of hp66
was generated by excising the EcoRI/BamHI
fragment of pGal-hp66
and in-frame insertion into pEGFP-C2
(Clontech) cut with EcoRI and
BamHI. pGal-hp66
was generated by amplification of
hp66
cDNA via reverse transcriptase-PCR from 293 mRNA using
the gene specific 5' SalI, primer
5'-caccgtcgacatggatagaatgacagaaga-3', and the respective 3'
BamHI, primer 5'-tcaaggatccggcagtacaagtggaacag-3'. The
reverse transcriptase-PCR product was cut with
SalI/BamHI and cloned into the
SalI/BamHI site of pABGal94 linker. The obtained clone was sequenced.
Yeast Two-hybrid Screen--
The Matchmaker Two-Hybrid System 3 (Clontech) was used to perform a two-hybrid screen
with MBD2b fused to the Gal DNA binding domain (pGBK-T7-MBD2b)
as bait. An embryonic (9.5 days postconception) mouse cDNA
library fused to the VP16 activation domain (23) was used as prey. Bait
and prey plasmids were then cotransformed into Saccharomyces
cerevisiae AH109 (Clontech), and the
transformants were selected on SD minimal medium. Positive colonies
were further tested for
-galactosidase activity using colony-lift
and liquid assays, as described by the manufacturer
(Clontech). Final clones where identified by sequencing.
Immunofluorescence--
HEK 293 cells were grown on coverslips
and cotransfected with pCEFLAU5-hp66
and pEGFP-C2, GFP-MBD2a, and
pEGFP-hp66
, respectively. 48 h after transfection, cells were
fixed with 2.5% paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline at room
temperature for 20 min and permeabilized with 0.5% Triton X-100 in
cold phosphate-buffered saline for 5 min. Afterward, cells were treated
with blocking buffer (20% fetal calf serum, 10% glycerol, 100 mM glycine, 0.1% Triton-X-100 in phosphate-buffered
saline, pH 7.4) for 30 min at room temperature. Cells were incubated
with monoclonal anti-AU5 antibodies (BAbCO) to detect AU5-tagged
hp66
(1:100). Texas Red dye-conjugated affinity pure goat anti-mouse
IgG (1:200, Dianova) was used as the secondary antibody. Incubations
were performed at room temperature for 1 h, followed by three
washing steps with phosphate-buffered saline. Finally, the slides were
mounted with mounting medium (3% N-propyl gallate (Sigma),
87% glycerol, in 20 mM Tris, pH 7.5) and sealed with nail
polish. Confocal laser scanning microscopy was performed using a Leica
TCS 4D microscope.
Cell Culture and Transfections--
CV1 and HEK 293 cells were
cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium with 10% fetal calf
serum at 37 °C, 5% CO2. Transfections were done using
the CaPO4 method as described earlier (24). CV1 cells were
cotransfected in 6-well plates (105 cells/well) using 0.88 µg of 4xUAS tk-luc luciferase reporter plasmid, 0.18 µg of
pCMV-lacZ encoding
-galactosidase, and 0.06-1.58 µg of expression
plasmids pGal-p66
or pGal-p66
deletions. Cells were harvested
36-72 h after transfection and assayed for luciferase and
-galactosidase activity. All transfection assays shown were performed in triplicate and repeated at least twice. For eukaryotic overexpression of GST and GST-MBD2b fusions together with pCEFLAU5 or
pCEFLAU5-hp66
, HEK 293 cells were transfected using the
CaPO4 method (see above). Cells were grown to 60%
confluency and transfected with 25 µg of pCMV-GST, pCMV-GST-MBD2b,
and/or pCEFLAU5 or pCEFLAU5-hp66
, respectively. Transfected cells
were cultured for 48 h, harvested, and subjected to nuclear
extract preparation.
GST Pull-down of in Vitro Translated Proteins--
GST and GST
fusion proteins were expressed in Escherichia coli BL21. GST
pull-downs were carried out essentially as described earlier (14).
Bacteria were induced with 0.2 mM
isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside for 3 h at
20 °C. Recombinant proteins were purified with glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham Biosciences) and analyzed on SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis to normalize protein amounts. Equivalent amounts of
GST fusion proteins were incubated with
[35S]methionine-labeled hp66 proteins, produced by the
T7/T3 TNT-coupled transcription/translation system
(Promega) in 200 µl of binding buffer (100 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 5 µg of ethidium bromide, 100 µg of bovine serum albumin). After 0.5 h of incubation at room temperature, the beads were washed six times with 1 ml of binding buffer without ethidium bromide
and bovine serum albumin. The bound proteins were eluted with SDS
sample buffer, fractionated on SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis,
and after treatment with sodium salicylate, visualized by fluorography.
Binding efficiency was quantified by densitometry and analysis with the
TINA raytest program. The percentage of binding was calculated relative
to the input after subtraction of the GST signal.
Nuclear Extract Preparation and Coprecipitation Assay--
HEK
293 cells were transiently cotransfected with mammalian expression
vectors for GST or GST-MBD2b and pCEFLAU5 or pCEFLAU5-hp66
, respectively. Cells were harvested after 48 h and nuclear extracts were prepared essentially as described previously (25). Cells were
resuspended in 3 volumes of buffer A (20 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 10% glycerol, 0.2% Nonidet P-40, 10 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA). After centrifugation at 5000 × g
for 10 min at 4 °C, the supernatant was discarded and the remaining
nuclei pellet resuspended in 2 volumes buffer B (420 mM
NaCl, 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 10 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA), followed by rotational incubation for 40 min at
4 °C. To remove cell debris, the extract was centrifuged at
20,000 × g for 15 min at 4 °C, the supernatant was
transferred into a new tube and diluted with 3 volumes of buffer C (10 mM KCl, 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.9, 1 mM
EDTA). For coprecipitation assays, 500 µg of the nuclear extracts
were incubated with 50 µl of glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham
Biosciences) and washed five times with washing buffer (200 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Nonidet P-40). The bound proteins were
eluted with SDS sample buffer, fractionated together with the
corresponding input fractions on SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis, and analyzed by Western blotting. Antibodies for HDAC1
(C-19) and HDAC2 (C-8) were obtained from Santa Cruz Biotechnology.
Comparative mRNA Expression Analysis--
Tissue expression
patterns of transcripts from hp66
and hp66
were analyzed by
semiquantitative PCR using gene-specific primers (hp66
,
5'-acaggcgagctcacaggtcgtcat-3' and
5'-gactcggcagaggtgaccacagag-3'; hp66
, 5'-gccaccgccaggatggatagaa-3'
and 5'-ttgaggttcaaccccttgggcc-3').
RNA from different cancer cell lines (293, HeLa, C33A, K562, Saos-2,
A549, H1299, HepG2, MCF7, T47D, and LNCaP) was isolated using
phenol/guanidinium isothiocyanate (peqGold RNAPure, peqlab) according
to the manufacturers protocol. Briefly, 5 × 106 cells
were treated with 1 ml of peqGold RNAPure, heavily vortexed after
addition of 0.2 ml of chloroform, and incubated at room temperature for
10 min. Following centrifugation at 12,000 × g for 5 min, the aqueous top phase was added to 0.5 ml of isopropyl alcohol,
incubated for 15 min at 20 °C, and centrifuged at 12,000 × g for 10 min at 4 °C. The RNA pellet was washed twice
with 1 ml of 75% ethanol and dissolved in double distilled
H2O. cDNAs from different human adult and fetal tissues
(Human MTC Panel I and Human Fetal MTC Panel,
Clontech) were used for tissue-specific expression
patterns of transcripts from hp66
and hp66
. PCR amplification was
performed with prepared or purchased cDNAs using the following temperature profile: denaturation at 94 °C for 90 s;
amplification during 26-31 cycles of 94 °C for 45 s, 67 °C
for 30 s, and 72 °C for 60 s; final extension at 72 °C
for 10 min. Gene-specific primers for the housekeeping gene
glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (5'-tgaaggtcggagtcaacggatttggt-3' and
5'-catgtgggccatgaggtccaccac-3') were used as a control for cDNA
normalization. PCR products were analyzed on a 2% agarose gel and
stained with ethidium bromide.
 |
RESULTS |
A Yeast Two-hybrid Screen with MBD2b Identified Two Related p66
Proteins, hp66
and hp66b--
To analyze MeCP1 and MBD2 in more
detail, we carried out a yeast two-hybrid screen with MBD2b as a bait.
We tested a total of 5 × 106 mouse cDNA sequences
and identified 15 different clones, which could be sorted into two
groups. The first and larger group of cDNA sequences consisted of
13 clones, sharing an identical stretch of 57 nucleotides. Therefore,
these sequences could be arranged according to their overlapping region
(Fig. 1). Based on this arrangement, a
sequence contig of 414 bp in length (contig 1) was generated and used
to search the GenBankTM data bases for mouse and human
expressed sequence tag sequences. This search revealed a high degree of
homology with a mouse sequence (BC019178) and a human sequence
(BF025891). In addition to this large group of overlapping cDNA
clones, we found two other cDNA sequences that almost completely
overlapped with each other and generated a second contig (Fig. 1).
Again, GenBankTM data base search revealed a high degree of
identity with mouse and human cDNA sequences (mouse, AF411837;
human, AF411836). Contig 1 is very similar to a previously identified
Xenopus protein of 66 kDa (Fig.
2A), which is a component of
the Mi-2/NuRD complex (17). The contig 2 sequence generated from the
two-hybrid cDNAs is again similar to a p66 protein (20), but is not
identical to contig 1. Therefore, we directly compared the human
sequence BF025891 (best fit to contig 1) with the human sequence
AF411836 (best fit to the contig 2 sequence) and with the
Xenopus p66 sequence (Fig. 2A). Clearly, the
human cDNA sequence derived from contig 1 shows a very high degree
of conservation. To clarify the evolutionary relationship between the
published Xenopus p66 sequence (17), the published human p66
sequence (20), and the open reading frames identified in
GenBankTM analysis with contigs 1 (BF025891) and 2 (AF411836), we carried out a dendogram analysis (Fig. 2B).
This analysis supported our notion that the BF025891 sequence is the
human orthologue of the Xenopus p66 protein. Therefore, we
refer to this protein as hp66
. Consequently, AF411836 codes for a
second p66 homologue we hereafter refer to as hp66
. Thus, human
p66
and p66
are encoded by two different genes comprising a novel
gene family. In contrast, in Drosophila as well as
Caenorhabditis elegans, just a single orthologue has been
described (20) that is included in the dendogram (Fig. 2B).
Similar to the human genes, we identified two different cDNAs in
mouse coding for two p66 gene family members (mp66
is BC019178;
mp66
is AF411837). The chromosomal loci for both human sequences can
be taken from the data base such that hp66
is located at 19p13.11
and hp66
is located at 1q23.1 (Fig. 2C). Inspection of
well conserved sequences between the different species lead to the
identification of two conserved regions (CR1 and CR2 (20)). Now in the
light of the presence of homologous as well as orthologous gene
members, CR1 and CR2 are not only conserved between the orthologous
members in different species, but also within the two human homologous
family members (Fig. 2A).

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A yeast two-hybrid screen with MBD2b
identifies two highly related groups of cDNA inserts. A total
of 15 cDNA inserts gave rise to two different, but highly
homologous contig sequences. 13 cDNA inserts with overlapping
regions (minimal overlapping region indicated) could be grouped to one
contig sequence (contig 1). Two additional cDNA inserts aligned to
each other (contig 2), and are highly homologous to contig 1. Horizontal black bars indicate cDNA inserts. Insert ends
were either determined from restriction digestion (bar with
arrowhead), or from sequencing (blunt end). Gray
bars delineate the length of the sequence contigs.
|
|

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
hp66 and
hp66 are highly related but different
proteins. A, alignment of xMi-2 p66 (Mi-2/NuRD)
with the two protein sequences identified in the GenBankTM
data base analysis with "contig 1" (BF025891) and "contig 2"
(AF411836). Identical and conserved amino acids are shaded with
black and gray, respectively. The two highly
conserved regions (CR1/CR2) are underlined. Alignment was
performed with the "Multiple Sequence Alignment" at
searchlauncher.bcm.tmc.edu. B, alignment of xMi-2 p66
together with hp66 , hp66 , and the respective
Drosophila (AE003547) and C. elegans (T19482)
orthologues. The alignment is displayed as a dendogram after
hierarchical clustering using MULTALIN
(prodes.toulouse.inra.fr/multalin/multalin.html). C,
schematic representation of the domain structure of hp66 and
hp66 . The CR1 and CR2 are depicted as black boxes and the
position of the GATA zinc finger is indicated by black bars
above the diagrams. The table (top) summarizes the results from
the data bank analysis. cDNAs for BF025891 and AF411836 correspond
to hp66 and hp66 , respectively. Chromosomal localization was
estimated using the "BLAT Search Genome" program at
genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgBlat.
|
|
In contrast to the published Xenopus sequence (17), the
protein predicted from the contig 1 sequence extended the predicted Xenopus protein by 143 amino acids at the N terminus. The
authors postulated a similar (truncated) N terminus for a human
cDNA sequence. Inspection of the nucleotide sequence coding for
hp66
revealed a start codon 429 bp upstream of the predicted
translation initiation ATG. To determine which translational start site
is used, we compared the molecular weight of a protein translated
in vitro from the full-length sequence to a protein
generated from the cDNA published with the shorter open reading
frame. When the second ATG is used as the translational start site,
both proteins should migrate to an identical position on SDS-PAGE gels.
Clearly, both proteins migrate differently (Fig.
3B), indicating that the
upstream ATG is used. In addition, the full-length protein migrates
according to the expected molecular weight of 66,000. Because the data
base contains a Xenopus expressed sequence tag clone
extending in-frame toward the N terminus (20) it can be presumed that
the Xenopus p66 protein has a similar N-terminal extension
as the human protein.

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
The N-terminal extension is required for the
expected molecular weight of hp66 .
A, alignment of the amino acid sequence of hp66 to a
previously predicted human p66 (17). The N-terminal extension is
labeled with gray. Identical and homologous amino acids are
boxed in black and dark gray,
respectively. The alignment was performed with "Multiple Sequence
Alignment" at searchlauncher.bcm.tmc.edu. B, in
vitro translation of hp66 and of a deletion, hp66 - N,
lacking the first 133 amino acids upstream of the predicted hp66 (17).
In vitro translated 35S-labeled proteins were
separated by SDS-PAGE and visualized by autoradiography.
|
|
In Vivo Association of hp66
with MBD2 and Colocalization with
hp66
--
The Xenopus orthologue of hp66
was found as
an integral component of the Mi-2/NuRD complex (17). Similarly,
sequencing of a p66 component of the human MeCP1 complex has identified
hp66
(20). Because MeCP1 and Mi-2/NuRD complexes contain or bind to
MBD2, respectively, it is very likely that hp66
is associated with
MBD2 in vivo as well. To prove this assumption, we
coexpressed GST-MBD2b constructs with hp66
fused to the AU5 tag in
HEK 293 cells. Subsequent nuclear extract preparation and purification with glutathione beads allowed the comparison of proteins bound either
to GST-MBD2b or to the GST domain itself as a negative control.
Analysis of the bound material with an antibody against the GST domain
confirmed the expression of both the control GST protein and GST-MBD2b
(Fig. 4). The AU5-specific antibody
identified the AU5 p66
fusion within the input fractions, whereas
after purification with the glutathione beads only the GST-MBD2b
containing sample retained AU5-tagged p66
(Fig. 4). In addition we
tested the capacity of endogenous HDAC1 or HDAC2 to bind to expressed GST-MBD2b. Clearly, GST-MBD2b retained HDAC1 and -2 as visualized with
a mixture of antibodies directed against HDAC1 and -2 (Fig. 4).

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
MBD2b is associated in vivo
with hp66 , HDAC1, and HDAC2. 293 cells were cotransfected with eukaryotic expression vectors for GST or
GST-MBD2b together with the AU5 expression vector or full-length
AU5-tagged hp66 , as indicated. Nuclear extracts derived from these
cells were purified with glutathione beads. Precipitates (lanes
5-8) and input controls (lanes 1-4) were resolved on
SDS-PAGE, transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane and
probed with the antibodies indicated on the left.
|
|
We were also interested in the subcellular localization of MBD2 and of
both human p66 proteins. Immunofluorescence, followed by confocal
microscopy, clearly showed that hp66
and GFP-MBD2a, but not the GFP
protein alone, colocalize in a speckled nuclear pattern (Fig.
5, A-F). Although both
proteins are clearly present at the same nuclear loci, as shown in the
merged picture, they do not colocalize completely, indicating that both
proteins also may exert their functions independently from each other.
Interestingly, analyzing the colocalization of both p66 proteins in the
same cell, we observed an identical distribution of both proteins, suggesting that hp66
and hp66
always appear pairwise and can be
recruited, at least in part, via the MBD2 protein.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
hp66 colocalizes
with MBD2 and hp66 in a speckled nuclear
pattern. pCEFLAU5-hp66 was cotransfected into HEK 293 cells with pEGFP-C2 (A-C), GFP-MBD2a (D-F), or
pEGFP-hp66 (G-I). Subnuclear distribution of each
protein was analyzed either by direct (GFP-constructs,
green) or by indirect immunofluorescence (AU5-hp66 ,
red), followed by confocal microscopy. A,
D, and G, nuclear distribution of EGFP,
GFP-MBD2a, and EGFP-hp66 , and B, E, and
H, the hp66 signal within the same cell, generated with
anti-AU5 antibodies against the fusion protein. C,
F, and I, colocalization of hp66 with
GFP-MBD2a and EGFP-hp66 , but not GFP, is shown in the merged
picture.
|
|
hp66
Is a Potent Transcriptional Repressor--
The p66
containing Mi-2/NURD complex or the MeCP1 complex play a role in
transcriptional repression. Therefore, we analyzed the transcriptional
effect of hp66
fused to the GAL4 DNA binding domain. Transfection of
a luciferase reporter gene, containing 4 GAL4 DNA binding sites (UAS),
into CV1 cells, served as a tool to study GAL4-hp66
repression.
Transfection of increasing amounts of GAL4-hp66
lead to a dose
responsive increase in transcriptional repression (Fig.
6A). More than 100-fold
repression by GAL4-hp66
could be observed in comparison to the
unfused GAL4 DNA binding domain (Fig. 6A). This system was
further used to analyze a number of different hp66
truncations (Fig.
6B). Truncation of the C-terminal 304 amino acids
(GAL4-hp66
-(1 to 329)) had no effect on the magnitude of the
repression. The N terminus of this protein (1-133) contains no
repression activity indicating that the region from 134 to 329 is
important for transcriptional inhibition. Interestingly, the remainder
of hp66
-(134-633) shows a more than 33-fold repression, but does
not achieve wild type activity. This region contains CR1. By testing
CR1 (GAL fusion 134-238), only weak repression can be observed. These
data suggest that a complex pattern of hp66
domains exist, mediating
transcriptional repression. Thus, we conclude that several repressive
domains act in synergy to mediate the more than 100-fold repression
seen with the full-length molecule.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Gal-hp66 represses
transcription. CV1 cells were cotransfected with a 4xUAS tk
luciferase reporter together with Gal-DNA binding domain, Gal-hp66
or Gal-hp66 deletion constructs. -Fold repression was determined
relative to Gal-DNA binding domain alone at the equivalent amounts of
transfected plasmid. Error bars represent variations within
triplicate transfections. A, hp66 represses
transcription dose dependently. Luciferase activity was measured after
cotransfecting the cells with increasing amounts of Gal-DNA binding
domain or Gal-hp66 (0.06-1.58 µg). B, at least
two separate domains are responsible for the repressive capacity of
hp66 . Schematic overview of Gal-hp66 deletion constructs (0.53 µg) and their respective repressive capacities.
|
|
Both hp66
and hp66
Are Ubiquitously Expressed in Cell Lines,
in Fetal and Adult Tissues--
Here we show that one component of the
Xenopus Mi-2/NuRD complex, the p66 protein, exists in two
homologues in man and mouse. We wondered whether these p66 homologues
improve the functional role of p66 by redundancy or, whether they are
specialized in different aspects. A possible specificity of the two p66
homologues might contribute to tissue-specific variations of the
Mi-2/NuRD complex or the MeCP1 complex. Heterogeneity of MeCP1 has been suggested from band shifts with liver and fibroblast extracts (21).
Therefore, we analyzed the expression pattern of transcripts from
hp66
and hp66
by semiquantitative PCR using cDNA prepared from RNA of several cell lines. The PCR primers were designed such that
p66
and p66
generated fragments of different size. This enabled
us to carry out single tube PCR reactions for both p66 homologues (Fig.
7A). Evaluation of the
generated PCR products demonstrated a marginal variation between p66
and -
. Cell lines often do not mirror the tissues from which they
are derived. Therefore, we used cDNAs from different human fetal
and adult tissues (Clontech). Again, all of the
tissues tested were positive for p66
and p66
, with minor
differences in absolute as well as in relative amounts (Fig.
7B). Colocalization and coexpression of both p66 proteins may suggest a common role. Whether this role is solely within the
Mi-2/NuRD or the MeCP1 complex remains to be shown.

View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
hp66 and
hp66 are ubiquitously expressed.
A, total RNA was extracted from the indicated cell
lines and cDNA was prepared using Moloney murine leukemia
virus reverse transcriptase with random hexamers. PCR was
performed with gene-specific primers for hp66 , hp66 , and
glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) resulting
in products of 723, 312, and 307 bp, respectively. B,
human cDNA from fetal and adult tissues
(Clontech) was used for PCR with gene-specific
primers for hp66 and hp66 and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate
dehydrogenase resulting in products of 723, 312, and 983 bp,
respectively. All PCR were performed within the linear range. Products
were separated on a 2% agarose gel and stained with ethidium
bromide.
|
|
hp66
and MBD2b Both Contain Two Domains Interacting with Each
Other--
The overlapping cDNA clones coding for fragments of
p66
, which bind to MBD2b in the yeast two-hybrid assay (Fig. 1),
suggested that the overlapping region contained a domain that mediates
the interaction with MBD2b. To substantiate this result, we carried out
in vitro GST pull-down experiments. For this purpose, we
in vitro translated human full-length hp66
as well as a
set of C- and N-terminal truncations (Fig.
8A). These were incubated with bacterial expressed GST-MBD2b and analyzed for binding. All of the
in vitro translated constructs containing the minimal
overlapping region from the yeast two-hybrid screen showed a specific
binding to GST-MBD2b and no binding to the GST control, even a small
fragment of just 105 amino acids (ID1 = aa 134-238). In contrast,
a fragment from amino acids 1 to 133, lacking the minimal overlapping
region, showed no binding (Fig. 8A). Analysis of the
C-terminal region of hp66
(aa 372-633) showed specific binding as
well (ID2). This region contains the CR2 sequence that codes for a
GATA-zinc finger. Therefore, two fragments of hp66
harboring the
conserved CR1 element or the CR2, respectively, mediated specific
in vitro binding to GST-MBD2b.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Identification of the interaction domains
within hp66 and MBD2b. A,
two domains within hp66 interact with MBD2b (ID1/ID2). Schematic
overview of the hp66 constructs used for in vitro
translation. The amino acid sequence shows the minimal overlapping
region identified in the yeast two-hybrid screen (see Fig. 1). In
vitro translated proteins before (input) or after binding to the
GST control or to GST-MBD2b were identified after gel electrophoresis
and autoradiography. B, the transcriptional repression
domain (ID1) and a region containing the coiled coil domain (ID2) of
MBD2 interact with hp66 . GST-MBD2b fusions used for the pull-down
assay are indicated on the left (methyl-CpG binding domain
is shown as a black box) and the interaction to in
vitro translated hp66 is summarized. Plus and
minus signs represent interaction and no interaction,
respectively. All GST fusions were expressed in E. coli,
purified, and incubated with in vitro translated,
35S-labeled hp66 . Input lanes contain 10% of the
reaction used for pull-down experiments.
|
|
To determine regions of MBD2b responsible for the interaction with
hp66
, C-terminal as well as N-terminal truncations of the GST-MBD2b
fusion were expressed in E. coli, purified, and controlled
for similar amounts. Incubation with in vitro translated hp66
allowed the identification of domains within MBD2b responsible for binding (Fig. 8B). All of the C-terminal truncations of
GST-MBD2b bound to hp66
except for the GST fusion aa 1-27. Because
the MBD2b fragment from amino acids 1 to 45 mediated specific binding, it can be concluded that a region between amino acids 27 and 45 is
necessary for binding, thereby defining interaction domain 1 (ID1).
Indeed, a fragment from amino acids 28 to 82, which contains ID1,
mediated specific binding. N-terminal truncations of GST-MBD2b showed
specific binding as well, such that the fragment from amino acids 211 to 262 was positive in binding, but not the fragment containing amino
acids from 163 to 211. This argues for a second interaction domain at
the very C terminus of MBD2b. These interaction domains (ID1 and ID2)
co-localize with other important features of MBD2b. ID1 overlaps both
with the domain responsible for binding to methylated DNA (11) and for
binding to Sin3A (14). ID2 overlaps with the predicted coiled-coiled
domain of MBD2 (26). Summarizing, the interaction of MBD2b and hp66
is mediated by two interaction domains on each protein.
hp66
and hp66
Differ in Their Domains Required for Binding to
MBD2b and MBD3--
To test possible binding specificities of MBD3 and
MBD2b with respect to binding p66
or p66
, we expressed GST-MBD
fusions in E. coli and analyzed binding to full-length p66
proteins (Fig. 9A). GST
fusions were controlled for similar amounts of expressed proteins (Fig.
9, Coomassie-stained gel) and were either incubated with in
vitro translated hp66
or hp66
. Both GST-MBDs bound p66
or
p66
(Fig. 9A). A significant difference in binding
affinity between the two p66 proteins was detected with about 35%
binding of p66
and about 20% binding of p66
.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
hp66 and
hp66 differ in binding to MBD2 and MBD3.
In vitro translated hp66 and hp66 protein
(A) and the respective C-terminal ends, hp66 -(372-633)
and hp66 -(342-593) (B), were subjected to GST pull-down
assays using purified GST-MBD2b and GST-MBD3. After electrophoresis,
the gel was stained with Coomassie Blue, to ensure equal usage of
protein in the pull-down reactions (lower panel), followed
by autoradiography (top panel). The input shown is 10% of
the in vitro translated product used in the assay. The
percentage of binding indicated below the lanes
was determined by densitometry. The Coomassie-stained band (*) in the
input lane is bovine serum albumin.
|
|
Because the deletion analysis above identified two MBD2b binding
domains within hp66
, we tested whether both domains exist in hp66
as well. The in vitro translated ID2 of hp66
-(372-633) or an equivalent construct of hp66
-(342-593) was incubated with GST-MBD2b or GST-MBD3 and analyzed for binding. No major difference in
binding of hp66
C terminus to MBD2b and -3 could be observed (Fig.
9B). Interestingly, the equivalent C-terminal region of hp66
did not bind to either MBD2b or MBD3. Because the CR2 region in
both hp66 proteins is highly conserved, and the interaction with MBD2/3
is specific for the C-terminal region of hp66
, the interaction
domain is probably outside the CR2 region or is specified by
nonconserved residues. Thus, p66
and hp66
differ in
binding to MBD2/3 with p66
showing a higher binding affinity
mediated by two interaction domains, whereas hp66
binds only via the
N terminus to MBD2 and MBD3.
 |
DISCUSSION |
In mammals, methylation of DNA at cytosines of CpG dinucleotides
has been correlated with regulation of gene expression and is known to
be involved in genomic imprinting (27) and X-chromosome inactivation
(28). Histone deacetylase complexes, such as MeCP1 and Sin3A, are
thought to be targeted to regions of methylated DNA and regulate
transcription by altering the nucleosomal structure (18, 29, 30). The
MeCP1 complex represses transcription through nucleosomal remodeling
and histone deacetylation resulting in a condensed chromatin structure
(19). The complex is composed of 10 subunits, including the
methyl-CpG-binding proteins MBD2, MBD3, and the Mi-2/NuRD complex with
2 proteins of 66 and 68 kDa. Recently, the p66/p68 components of the
MeCP1 complex were identified as a single protein differing by a
proposed modification (20). Here we demonstrate that two members of a
p66 gene family exist in mouse and man. Using a yeast two-hybrid screen
we identified two proteins, both with homologies to the 66-kDa
component of the Xenopus NuRD complex (17). We identified
one protein, termed hp66
, as the human orthologue to the 66-kDa
protein of Mi-2/NuRD and show that hp66
in a new homologue to the
previously identified p66 component of the MeCP1 complex (20). The
second protein, termed hp66
, turned out to be identical to the p66
protein from MeCP1.
We demonstrate here that both members of the p66 gene family colocalize
to nuclear speckles and that MBD2 and hp66
show a matching speckled
distribution within the nucleus. Furthermore, GST-MBD2b expressed in
eukaryotic cells is associated with AU5-tagged hp66
and histone
deacetylases 1 and 2. Additionally, hp66
and hp66
are
ubiquitously coexpressed in various cancer cell lines as well as in
human fetal and adult tissues, suggesting a common role for both p66
proteins, presumably within a deacetylase containing complex. It is
still possible, however, that the final contribution of one or the
other homologue to the NuRD or MeCP1 complex varies between different
tissues. However, a function of the p66 gene family outside the NuRD or
MeCP1 complex is possible as well and requires further investigation.
Functionally, hp66
is a potent transcriptional repressor inhibiting
reporter activity in a dose-dependent manner up to
140-fold. Several deletion constructs of hp66
indicate that a
synergistic action of several repressive domains is responsible to
achieve full repressive capacity. Repression by the homologous protein
hp66
has been shown to depend on CR1 (20), which in the case of
hp66
is clearly not the only repression domain. Because the
identification of both p66 proteins in a yeast two-hybrid screen
already suggests direct binding to MBD2, we further verified the
binding characteristics of both proteins, hp66
and hp66
. Indeed,
utilizing in vitro GST pull-down assays we could demonstrate direct association of both proteins with MBD2 and MBD3. Thus, members
of the p66 gene family may play a role not only structurally within the
Mi-2/NuRD complex, but also may function as a molecular bridge to MBD2
within the MeCP1 complex. In addition, MBD2-MBD3 heterodimerization
(31) may link the Mi-2/NURD complex to MeCP1. Other proteins binding
directly to MBD2 are the zinc finger protein MIZF (32) and Sin3A (14).
The latter suggests that the function of MBD2 may also involve other
histone deacetylase complexes as well, like the Sin3A complex (for
review, see Ref. 33). Interestingly we show here that the C-terminal
domain of hp66
and hp66
differ in respect to binding MBD2 or
MBD3. Although both C termini contain the conserved region 2 (CR2),
hp66
is able to bind MBD2 or MBD3 via its C terminus, whereas the
equivalent region of hp66
does not. Additionally the CR2 of hp66
has been shown to be involved in targeting hp66
and MBD3 to speckles
within the nucleus (20). Together, these data suggest that nuclear
targeting to speckles and binding to MBD2 or MBD3 are two different
functions of the C-terminal domains of hp66
and hp66
.
Interestingly, many of the factors involved in chromatin remodeling,
deacetylation, and transcriptional repression in the context of
methylated DNA have been found in pairs. The HDAC core complex, found
also in the Sin3A complex, is comprised of a pair of the histone
deacetylases HDAC1 and -2, together with their associated proteins
RbAp48/46. In addition, the simultaneous purification of the Mi-2/NuRD
components Mi-2
(CHD3) and Mi-2
(CHD4), which both confer
nucleosomal remodeling and ATPase activity and are associated with
histone deacetylases, has been described (34). Similar observations
have been made for the 70-kDa subunits of Mi-2/NuRD, which have been
identified either as metastasis associated protein 1 (MTA1) (35) or its
homologues MTA1-like (=MTA2) (18). MTA1 has been originally
identified as being overexpressed in metastatic carcinomas (36). Its
homologue, MTA2, besides the association with NuRD, where it directs
the assembly of an active histone deacetylase core complex (18), was
also found to specifically interact with and to target deacetylation of
p53 (37). Here we show that in humans, p66, another component of the
Mi-2/NuRD complex (17, 20) comes in two homologues, p66
and p66
,
as well. It is interesting to note that in Drosophila, as an
example for a lower eukaryotic organism, this kind of duplex
organization cannot be observed. All NuRD subunit orthologues have been
identified and reported to be also present in a functional, active
Drosophila Mi-2/NuRD complex, comprised of the single
factors dMi-2, dMTA-like, dRPD3, p55 (=RbAp48/46), and dMBD-like (38).
In addition to providing functional redundancy, the pairwise duplicated
factors in mammals may allow for a larger spectrum of regulatory
responses. Similarly, hp66
and hp66
, despite remarkable
similarities in repressive activity, ubiquitous expression, and nuclear
distribution, differ in their binding domains and affinities to
MBD2/3.
Colocalization of hp66
and hp66
in a speckled nuclear pattern,
in vivo binding of MBD2 to hp66
and HDAC1 and -2, and
identical expression profile of both p66 proteins in adult and fetal
tissues suggests that both proteins exert their function at identical sites within the genome. Because recent studies showed in
vivo binding of p66 (hp66
) to MBD2 and MBD3 (20), it can be
speculated that both hp66
and hp66
complete the set of duplicated
proteins within the MeCP1 complex. However, future experiments will
determine whether hp66
is contained within MeCP1 or if it is
involved in different functions, as compared with hp66
.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Adrian Bird for providing GFP-MBD2,
Brian Hendrich for GST-MBD2 and GST-MBD3, Yi Zhang for providing
information prior to publication, and Helga Wahn for technical
assistance. We thank Aria Baniahmad, Leslie Burke, and Martina Wessling
for critically reading the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by grants from the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft and the Fonds der Chemischen Industrie.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.
Both authors contributed equally to this work.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
49-641-99-35460; Fax: 49-641-99-35469; E-mail:
Rainer.Renkawitz@gen.bio.uni-giessen.de.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 14, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M207467200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
MBD, methyl-CpG-binding domain;
aa, amino acid(s);
GST, glutathione
S-transferase;
EGFP, enhanced green fluorescent protein;
UAS, upstream activation sequence;
ID1 and ID2, interaction domains 1 and 2, respectively.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Hansen, R. S.,
Wijmenga, C.,
Luo, P.,
Stanek, A. M.,
Canfield, T. K.,
Weemaes, C. M.,
and Gartler, S. M.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
14412-14417[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Amir, R. E.,
Van den Veyver, I. B.,
Wan, M.,
Tran, C. Q.,
Francke, U.,
and Zoghbi, H. Y.
(1999)
Nat. Genet.
23,
185-188[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Okano, M.,
Bell, D. W.,
Haber, D. A.,
and Li, E.
(1999)
Cell
99,
247-257[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Xu, G. L.,
Bestor, T. H.,
Bourc'his, D.,
Hsieh, C. L.,
Tommerup, N.,
Bugge, M.,
Hulten, M., Qu, X.,
Russo, J. J.,
and Viegas-Pequignot, E.
(1999)
Nature
402,
187-191[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Kremer, E. J.,
Pritchard, M.,
Lynch, M., Yu, S.,
Holman, K.,
Baker, E.,
Warren, S. T.,
Schlessinger, D.,
Sutherland, G. R.,
and Richards, R. I.
(1991)
Science
252,
1711-1714[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Oberle, I.,
Rousseau, F.,
Heitz, D.,
Kretz, C.,
Devys, D.,
Hanauer, A.,
Boue, J.,
Bertheas, M. F.,
and Mandel, J. L.
(1991)
Science
252,
1097-1102[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Jones, P. A.,
and Laird, P. W.
(1999)
Nat. Genet.
21,
163-167[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Baylin, S. B.,
Herman, J. G.,
Graff, J. R.,
Vertino, P. M.,
and Issa, J. P.
(1998)
Adv. Cancer Res.
72,
141-196[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Jones, P. L.,
Veenstra, G. J.,
Wade, P. A.,
Vermaak, D.,
Kass, S. U.,
Landsberger, N.,
Strouboulis, J.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1998)
Nat. Genet.
19,
187-191[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Nan, X., Ng, H. H.,
Johnson, C. A.,
Laherty, C. D.,
Turner, B. M.,
Eisenman, R. N.,
and Bird, A.
(1998)
Nature
393,
386-389[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Hendrich, B.,
and Bird, A.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
6538-6547[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Nan, X.,
Campoy, F. J.,
and Bird, A.
(1997)
Cell
88,
471-481[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Bird, A. P.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1999)
Cell
99,
451-454[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Boeke, J.,
Ammerpohl, O.,
Kegel, S.,
Moehren, U.,
and Renkawitz, R.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
34963-34967[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Fujita, N.,
Shimotake, N.,
Ohki, I.,
Chiba, T.,
Saya, H.,
Shirakawa, M.,
and Nakao, M.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
5107-5118[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Kaludov, N. K.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
1921-1928[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Wade, P. A.,
Gegonne, A.,
Jones, P. L.,
Ballestar, E.,
Aubry, F.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1999)
Nat. Genet.
23,
62-66[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Zhang, Y., Ng, H. H.,
Erdjument-Bromage, H.,
Tempst, P.,
Bird, A.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
1924-1935[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Feng, Q.,
and Zhang, Y.
(2001)
Genes Dev.
15,
827-832[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Feng, Q.,
Cao, R.,
Xia, L.,
Erdjument-Bromage, H.,
Tempst, P.,
and Zhang, Y.
(2002)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
22,
536-546[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Hendrich, B.,
Guy, J.,
Ramsahoye, B.,
Wilson, V. A.,
and Bird, A.
(2001)
Genes Dev.
15,
710-723[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Tsai, R. Y.,
and Reed, R. R.
(1997)
BioTechniques
23,
794-796[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve], 798-800
|
| 23.
|
Hollenberg, S. M.,
Sternglanz, R.,
Cheng, P. F.,
and Weintraub, H.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
3813-3822[Abstract]
|
| 24.
|
Chen, C.,
and Okayama, H.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
2745-2752[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Standke, G. J.,
Meier, V. S.,
and Groner, B.
(1994)
Mol. Endocrinol.
8,
469-477[Abstract]
|
| 26.
|
Bhattacharya, S. K.,
Ramchandani, S.,
Cervoni, N.,
and Szyf, M.
(1999)
Nature
397,
579-583[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Jaenisch, R.
(1997)
Trends Genet.
13,
323-329[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Heard, E.,
Clerc, P.,
and Avner, P.
(1997)
Annu. Rev. Genet.
31,
571-610[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Hassig, C. A.,
Fleischer, T. C.,
Billin, A. N.,
Schreiber, S. L.,
and Ayer, D. E.
(1997)
Cell
89,
341-347[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Heinzel, T.,
Lavinsky, R. M.,
Mullen, T. M.,
Soderstrom, M.,
Laherty, C. D.,
Torchia, J.,
Yang, W. M.,
Brard, G.,
Ngo, S. D.,
Davie, J. R.,
Seto, E.,
Eisenman, R. N.,
Rose, D. W.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1997)
Nature
387,
43-48[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Tatematsu, K. I.,
Yamazaki, T.,
and Ishikawa, F.
(2000)
Genes Cells
5,
677-688[Abstract]
|
| 32.
|
Sekimata, M.,
Takahashi, A.,
Murakami-Sekimata, A.,
and Homma, Y.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
42632-42638[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Nakao, M.
(2001)
Gene (Amst.)
278,
25-31[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Tong, J. K.,
Hassig, C. A.,
Schnitzler, G. R.,
Kingston, R. E.,
and Schreiber, S. L.
(1998)
Nature
395,
917-921[CrossRef][Medline]
|