Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.C500423200 on November 14, 2005

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 281, Issue 1, 13-15, January 6, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/1/13    most recent
C500423200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vojnic, E.
Right arrow Articles by Cramer, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vojnic, E.
Right arrow Articles by Cramer, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Structure and Carboxyl-terminal Domain (CTD) Binding of the Set2 SRI Domain That Couples Histone H3 Lys36 Methylation to Transcription*{boxs}

Erika Vojnic{ddagger}, Bernd Simon§, Brian D. Strahl¶1, Michael Sattler§2, and Patrick Cramer{ddagger}3

From the {ddagger}Gene Center, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Feodor-Lynen-Strasse 25, 81377 Munich, Germany, the §EMBL, Meyerhofstrasse 1, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany, and the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7260

Received for publication, October 25, 2005 , and in revised form, November 10, 2005.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
During mRNA elongation, the SRI domain of the histone H3 methyltransferase Set2 binds to the phosphorylated carboxyl-terminal domain (CTD) of RNA polymerase II. The solution structure of the yeast Set2 SRI domain reveals a novel CTD-binding fold consisting of a left-handed three-helix bundle. NMR titration shows that the SRI domain binds an Ser2/Ser5-phosphorylated CTD peptide comprising two heptapeptide repeats and three flanking NH2-terminal residues, whereas a single CTD repeat is insufficient for binding. Residues that show strong chemical shift perturbations upon CTD binding cluster in two regions. Both CTD tyrosine side chains contact the SRI domain. One of the tyrosines binds in the region with the strongest chemical shift perturbations, formed by the two NH2-terminal helices. Unexpectedly, the SRI domain fold resembles the structure of an RNA polymerase-interacting domain in bacterial {sigma} factors (domain {sigma}2 in {sigma}70).


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Gene transcription by RNA polymerase II (Pol II) is physically and functionally coupled to other nuclear events, most notably mRNA processing (1–7). Transcription-coupled events generally depend on the carboxyl-terminal repeat domain (CTD)4 of the largest Pol II subunit, which binds many nuclear factors during transcription elongation. The CTD forms a mobile extension from the structural core of Pol II (8) and consists of heptapeptide repeats of the consensus sequence Tyr1-Ser2-Pro3-Thr4-Ser5-Pro6-Ser7, which can be phosphorylated at residues Ser2 and Ser5. The CTD phosphorylation pattern changes during the transcription cycle. Ser5 phosphorylation occurs in promoter-proximal regions and leads to recruitment of the 5'-RNA capping enzyme (9–12). Ser2 phosphorylation occurs in regions that are more distal from the promoter and triggers binding of the 3'-RNA processing machinery (10, 13).

Recently it emerged that transcription is also coupled to the alteration of chromatin structure. The histone methyltransferases Set1 and Set2, which catalyze methylation of histone H3 lysines Lys4 and Lys36, respectively, are associated with Pol II during elongation (reviewed in Refs. 14 and 15). Histone methylation apparently controls newly initiated Pol II, and two phases of histone H3 methylation can be distinguished after transcription initiation (16). Set1 association with Pol II is mediated by the Paf complex, which occurs in promoter regions, and depends on Ser5 phosphorylation of the CTD (17, 18). In contrast, Set2 directly interacts with the phosphorylated CTD of Pol II and is observed throughout the coding region of genes (17–20). Set2 recruitment to Pol II requires the CTD kinase CTDK-I that phosphorylates Ser2 residues in the CTD (17, 18, 20, 21).

Set2 interacts with the Pol II CTD via a novel domain, the Set2 Rpb1-interacting (SRI) domain (22, 23). The SRI domain of S. cerevisiae comprises the COOH-terminal residues 619–718 of Set2 (22). In vitro, the yeast Set2 SRI domain binds specifically and with high affinity to the CTD doubly phosphorylated at Ser2 and Ser5 (22). In vivo, deletion of the Set2 SRI domain abolishes H3 Lys36 methylation and impairs transcription elongation (22), suggesting that the SRI domain is responsible for coupling transcription to histone methylation by Set2.

Here we report the solution structure of the Set2 SRI domain from the yeast S. cerevisiae and present NMR binding experiments with phospho-CTD peptides. Our results elucidate the molecular determinants for Set2 CTD binding, which underlies coupling of transcription to Set2-directed chromatin modification.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Sample Preparation—The region of the gene of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Set2 protein (Swiss Prot P46995 [GenBank] ) encoding for Set2 residues 620–719 was cloned into a modified pET9d vector with an NH2-terminal hexahistidine tag. The protein was overexpressed in Escherichia coli pLysS cells at 18 °C for 16 h. For labeling of the protein with 15N/13C or 15N, cells were grown in M9 minimal medium supplemented with [13C6]glucose and/or 15NH4Cl. Cell lysates were subjected to affinity chromatography on a nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid column (Quiagen), followed by cleavage of the hexahistidine tag with tobacco etch virus protease and dialysis overnight. The tag and the His6-tagged protease were removed on a second Ni-NTA column. DNA was removed by cation exchange chromatography (Mono S, Amersham Biosciences). After gel filtration the sample was dissolved in 20 mM sodium phosphate, pH 6.5, 200 mM NaCl, 0.2 mM dithiothreitol. Edman sequencing of the protein confirmed the presence of four additional residues (GAMG) at the NH2 terminus, which result from the cloning strategy. NMR samples were prepared in H2O or 100% D2O at 0.4–1 mM concentration of protein.

NMR Structure Determination—NMR spectra were acquired at 292 K on Bruker DRX500, DRX600, or DRX900 spectrometers with cryogenic triple resonance probes. Spectra were processed with NMRPipe (24) and analyzed using NMRVIEW (25). The 1H, 13C, and 15N chemical shifts were assigned by standard methods (26). Distance restraints were derived from two-dimensional NOESY and 15N- or 13C-resolved three-dimensional NOESY. Restraints for the backbone angles {phi} and {psi} were derived from TALOS (27). Slowly exchanging amide protons were identified from 1H,15N correlation experiments after dissolving of lyophilized protein in D2O. 15N relaxation (T1, T2) and heteronuclear (1H)-15N NOE was measured on a 15N-labeled protein sample at 292 K as described (28) (supplemental Fig. S1). The experimentally determined distance and dihedral restraints (supplemental Table S1 and Fig. 1C) were applied in a simulated-annealing protocol using ARIA (29) and CNS (30). NOEs were manually assigned and distance calibrations were performed by ARIA. The final ensemble of NMR structures was refined in a shell of water molecules (31). Structural quality was analyzed with PROCHECK (32).

Phosphopeptide Interaction Studies—The phospho-CTD peptides used for binding experiments were chemically synthesized (one-repeat peptide, YpSPTp-SPS; two-repeat peptide, SPS-YpSPTpSPS-YpSPTpSPS, pS = phosphoserine). For NMR titration, increasing amounts of the CTD peptide were added to a 0.4 mM solution of 15N,13C-labeled SRI domain up to a 1.25-fold molar excess. Chemical shifts were monitored in two-dimensional 1H,15N HSQC experiments.


   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
The Set2 SRI Domain Forms a Conserved Three-helix Bundle—The solution structure of the yeast Set2 SRI domain was determined by multidimensional NMR (supplemental Table S1; also see "Experimental Procedures"). The structure revealed three {alpha}-helices arranged in a left-handed bundle (Fig. 1). The NH2-terminal helix {alpha}1 is slightly kinked at residues Phe639 and Val640, and the linker between helices {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 includes a short 310-helical turn at residues Ser650– Gln652. A hydrophobic core is formed by numerous residues located at the interface between the three helices, including four residues in the two regions linking the helices (Fig. 1C). Consistently the heteronuclear {1H}-15N NOE measurements demonstrate that the polypeptide backbone in all three helices and the connecting linker regions is rigid (Fig. 1C and supplemental Fig. S1). The hydrophobic core residues are generally conserved across species (Fig. 1C), demonstrating that our structure is a good model for SRI domains in Set2 of other species.



View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1.
Structure and CTD binding of the yeast Set2 SRI domain. A, ensemble of final NMR structures. The three {alpha}-helices are shown in green, and a short 310-helix is shown in pink. B, ribbon diagram of the lowest energy structure in A. C, alignment of SRI domain sequences and NMR structure determination and CTD binding data. The secondary structure is shown above the sequence. Solvent-protected amide protons that show slow H/D exchange are indicated by filled circles. Secondary chemical shifts {Delta}{delta}(C{alpha}-C{beta}) are indicated by black bars. Residues that experience large chemical shift perturbations upon addition of the CTD two-repeat phosphopeptide SPS-YpSPTpSPS-YpSPTpSPS (pS = phosphoserine) are indicated above the alignment with crosses and circled crosses for backbone and side chain amides, respectively. Yellow stars indicate residues Ala662 and Val666 that are implicated in binding of a CTD tyrosine side chain. Residues that are identical and conserved in fungal Set2 homologues are on red background and in red, respectively. Hydrophobic core residues are marked with a black square.

 
The SRI Domain Defines a Novel CTD-binding Fold—Comparison with the five known structures of CTD-binding domains reveals that the SRI domain defines a novel CTD-binding fold. Other CTD-binding domains include FF domains, CTD-interacting domains, WW domains, BRCT domains, and a domain in the Cgt1 subunit of the 5'-capping enzyme (reviewed in Ref. 7). Of these, FF and CTD-interacting domains also form helical bundles (33, 34), but, in contrast to the SRI domain, the superhelical arrangement in these two domains is right-handed (supplemental Fig. S2). Thus the six CTD-binding domains that have been structurally characterized use different folds for specific CTD recognition.

The SRI Domain Binds a Two-repeat CTD Phosphopeptide—To characterize the CTD-binding determinants of the SRI domain, we performed NMR titration experiments with Ser2/Ser5-phosphorylated CTD peptides (Fig. 1C). A phosphopeptide consisting of a single CTD repeat (YpSPTpSPS, pS = phosphoserine; Fig. S3A) did not perturb chemical shifts in a two-dimensional 1H,15N HSQC spectrum, indicating that there is no significant binding (data not shown). However, titration with a peptide that comprised two CTD repeats and three flanking NH2-terminal residues (SPS-YpSPTpSPS-YpSPTp-SPS) resulted in many strong chemical shift perturbations (Fig. 1C and supplemental Fig. S3). From the titration data the dissociation constant is estimated to be in the low micromolar range, comparable with the reported approximate affinity of 6 µM for a CTD phosphopeptide comprising three repeats (22).

Regions in the SRI Domain That Interact with the CTD—Residues that show strong chemical shift perturbations of their backbone NH groups cluster in two regions on the SRI domain structure (Fig. 2A). The first region includes residues Lys634, Phe635 in {alpha}1, and Ala662, Val666, Lys667, Thr670, Thr671, and Glu673 in {alpha}2, whereas the second region includes residues Phe653, His655, Glu656 in the {alpha}1-{alpha}2 linker, and residue Ile705 in {alpha}3 (Figs. 1C and 2A and supplemental Fig. S3). With the exception of Ile705, the strongest perturbations upon peptide binding were observed in region 1 (Phe635, Ala662, Val666, Lys667, and Glu673). In this region, the side chain NH2 groups of residues Asn631 and Asn633 also show significant chemical shift perturbations (supplemental Fig. S3B). Both regions are conserved among fungal Set2 homologues (Fig. 2B), befitting the conserved function of the Saccharomyces pombe and Neurospora crassa Set2 homologues (35, 36). The observation of two putative CTD-binding regions, and the finding that two CTD repeats are required for SRI domain binding, indicate that the phospho-CTD extends over a long distance along helices {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 and the connecting linker.



View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 2.
Surface analysis of the Set2 SRI domain. Surface representation of the SRI domain color-coded according to chemical shift perturbation of backbone NH and side chain NH2 groups upon binding of the CTD peptide (supplemental Fig. S3A), colored from red to blue for strong to weak perturbations, respectively (A); amino acid conservation among fungal homologues in the alignment of Fig. 1C (B); and electrostatic surface potential (blue and red for positive and negative charges, respectively) (C).

 



View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 3.
The Set2 SRI domain resembles a domain in bacterial {sigma} factors. The domain in the {sigma} factor that resembles the SRI fold is highlighted in green. The PDB codes of the structures are given in parentheses.

 
CTD Tyrosine Side Chains Contribute to SRI Domain Binding—The peptide titration experiments also revealed that the two-repeat CTD peptide (supplemental Fig. S3A) binds to the SRI domain via its tyrosine residues. Intermolecular NOEs between both CTD tyrosine side chains and the SRI domain were detected (data not shown). Preliminary assignments indicate that one of the tyrosine side chains is in proximity of residues Ala662 and Val666 in region 1 (Figs. 1C and 2B). These two residues are part of a hydrophobic patch between helices {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 and flanked by positively charged surfaces (Fig. 2C), as expected for interaction with the negatively charged phospho-CTD. Interestingly, the tyrosine-proximal residue Ala662 is identical in human Set2, as are Phe635, Glu656, and Glu673 in the putative CTD-binding regions (Fig. 1C). In the three known CTD-protein complex structures, the Y1 side chain is also involved in hydrophobic contacts (34, 37, 38), suggesting that Y1 binding is a general feature of CTD recognition. Previous studies revealed that the CTD can adopt different conformations (reviewed in Ref. 7), and this structurally versatile nature of the CTD discourages any detailed model building.

The SRI Domain Resembles a Polymerase-interacting Domain in Bacterial {sigma} Factors—Comparison of our structure with known folds in the data base (DALI (39)) strikingly shows that the SRI domain resembles a region in bacterial {sigma} factors (Fig. 3). The four highest hits were the {sigma} factors {sigma}28 (PDB code 1rp3), {sigma}E (PDB-code 1or7), {sigma}R (PDB code 1h3l), and {sigma}70 (PDB code 1sig), which show DALI scores of 5.6, 5.4, 5.1, and 4.9, respectively, and root mean square deviations between 3.3 and 3.7 Å. The region in {sigma}70 that is structurally related to the SRI domain is domain 2 ({sigma}2), which interacts with the clamp region of the core RNA polymerase upon formation of the holoenzyme (40). The {sigma}2 domain is involved in binding the –10 element of promoter DNA and contributes to DNA melting during initiation (reviewed in Ref. 41). In the eukaryotic initiation complex, promoter DNA around position –10 lies near the NH2-terminal domain of the initiation factor TFIIE{alpha} (42), which shows weak sequence homology (43) and structural similarity (44) to the bacterial {sigma}2 domain. We speculate that the eukaryotic TFIIE{alpha} NH2-terminal domain, which may contact promoter DNA, and the Set2 SRI domain, which binds the negatively charged phospho-CTD, both evolved from the bacterial {sigma}2 domain.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported in part by 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. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

{boxs} The on-line version of this article (available at http://www.jbc.org) contains supplemental Table S1 and Figs. S1–S3.

The atomic coordinates and structure factors (code 2C5Z) have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank, Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (http://www.rcsb.org/). Back

1 Supported by the National Institutes of Health and is a Pew Scholar in the Biomedical Sciences. Back

2 To whom correspondence may be addressed. E-mail: sattler{at}embl-heidelberg.de. 3 To whom correspondence may be addressed. Tel.: 49-89-2180-76951; Fax: 49-89-2180-76999; E-mail: cramer{at}LMB.uni-muenchen.de.

4 The abbreviations used are: CTD, carboxyl-terminal domain; Pol, RNA polymerase II; SRI, Set2 Rpb1-interacting; NOE, nuclear Overhauser effect; NOESY, nuclear Overhauser and exchange spectroscopy; PDB, Protein Data Bank. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank C. Buchen, L. Lariviere, and other members of the Cramer laboratory (Gene Center Munich) for help. We thank G. Stier and A. Lingel (EMBL, Heidelberg, Germany) and K. Kizer (University of North Carolina) for help.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Dahmus, M. E. (1995) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1261, 171–182[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Palancade, B., and Bensaude, O. (2003) Eur. J. Biochem. 270, 3859–3870[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Sims, R. J., III, Mandal, S. S., and Reinberg, D. (2004) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 16, 263–271[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Zorio, D. A., and Bentley, D. L. (2004) Exp. Cell Res. 296, 91–97[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Proudfoot, N. (2004) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 16, 272–278[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Maniatis, T., and Reed, R. (2002) Nature 416, 499–506[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Meinhart, A., Kamenski, T., Hoeppner, S., Baumli, S., and Cramer, P. (2005) Genes Dev. 19, 1401–1415[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Cramer, P., Bushnell, D. A., and Kornberg, R. D. (2001) Science 292, 1863–1876[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Ho, C. K., Sriskanda, V., McCracken, S., Bentley, D., Schwer, B., and Shuman, S. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 9577–9585[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Komarnitsky, P., Cho, E. J., and Buratowski, S. (2000) Genes Dev. 14, 2452–2460[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. McCracken, S., Fong, N., Rosonina, E., Yankulov, K., Brothers, G., Siderovski, D., Hessel, A., Foster, S., Shuman, S., and Bentley, D. L. (1997) Genes Dev. 11, 3306–3318[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Cho, E. J., Takagi, T., Moore, C. R., and Buratowski, S. (1997) Genes Dev. 11, 3319–3326[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Cho, E. J., Kobor, M. S., Kim, M., Greenblatt, J., and Buratowski, S. (2001) Genes. Dev. 15, 3319–3329[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Gerber, M., and Shilatifard, A. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 26303–26306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Hampsey, M., and Reinberg, D. (2003) Cell 113, 429–432[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Morillon, A., Karabetsou, N., Nair, A., and Mellor, J. (2005) Mol. Cell 18, 723–734[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Krogan, N. J., Kim, M., Tong, A., Golshani, A., Cagney, G., Canadien, V., Richards, D. P., Beattie, B. K., Emili, A., Boone, C., Shilatifard, A., Buratowski, S., and Greenblatt, J. (2003) Mol. Cell Biol. 23, 4207–4218[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Ng, H. H., Robert, F., Young, R. A., and Struhl, K. (2003) Mol. Cell 11, 709–719[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Strahl, B. D., Grant, P. A., Briggs, S. D., Sun, Z. W., Bone, J. R., Caldwell, J. A., Mollah, S., Cook, R. G., Shabanowitz, J., Hunt, D. F., and Allis, C. D. (2002) Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 1298–1306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Xiao, T., Hall, H., Kizer, K. O., Shibata, Y., Hall, M. C., Borchers, C. H., and Strahl, B. D. (2003) Genes Dev. 17, 654–663[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Li, B., Howe, L., Anderson, S., Yates, J. R., III, and Workman, J. L. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 8897–8903[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Kizer, K. O., Phatnani, H. P., Shibata, Y., Hall, H., Greenleaf, A. L., and Strahl, B. D. (2005) Mol. Cell Biol. 25, 3305–3316[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Phatnani, H. P., Jones, J. C., and Greenleaf, A. L. (2004) Biochemistry 43, 15702–15719[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Delaglio, F., Grzesiek, S., Vuister, G., Zhu, G., Pfeifer, J., and Bax, A. (1995) J. Biomol. NMR 6, 277–293[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Johnson, B. A., and Blevins, R. A. (1994) J. Biomol. NMR 4, 603–614[CrossRef]
  26. Sattler, M., Schleucher, J., and Griesinger, C. (1999) Prog. NMR Spectrosc. 34, 93–158[CrossRef]
  27. Cornilescu, G., Delaglio, F., and Bax, A. (1999) J. Biomol. NMR 13, 289–302[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Farrow, N. A., Muhandiram, R., Singer, A. U., Pascal, S. M., Kay, C. M., Gish, G., Shoelson, S. E., Pawson, T., Forman-Kay, J. D., and Kay, L. E. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 5984–6003[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Linge, J. P., O'Donoghue, S. I., and Nilges, M. (2001) Methods Enzymol. 339, 71–90[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Brünger, A. T., Adams, P. D., Clore, G. M., DeLano, W. L., Gros, P., Grosse-Kunstleve, R. W., Jiang, J. S., Kuszewski, J., Nilges, M., Pannu, N. S., Read, R. J., Rice, L. M., Simonson, T., and Warren, G. L. (1998) Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D Biol. Crystallogr. 54, 905–921[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  31. Linge, J. P., Williams, M. A., Spronk, C. A., Bonvin, A. M., and Nilges, M. (2003) Proteins 50, 496–506[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Laskowski, R. A., Rullmannn, J. A., MacArthur, M. W., Kaptein, R., and Thornton, J. M. (1996) J. Biomol. NMR 8, 477–486[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Allen, M., Friedler, A., Schon, O., and Bycroft, M. (2002) J. Mol. Biol. 323, 411–416[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Meinhart, A., and Cramer, P. (2004) Nature 430, 223–226[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Morris, S. A., Shibata, Y., Noma, K., Tsukamoto, Y., Warren, E., Temple, B., Grewal, S. I., and Strahl, B. D. (2005) Eukaryot. Cell 4, 1446–1454[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Adhvaryu, K. K., Morris, S. A., Strahl, B. D., and Selker, E. U. (2005) Eukaryot. Cell 4, 1455–1464[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Fabrega, C., Shen, V., Shuman, S., and Lima, C. D. (2003) Mol. Cell 11, 1549–1561[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Verdecia, M. A., Bowman, M. E., Lu, K. P., Hunter, T., and Noel, J. P. (2000) Nat. Struct. Biol 7, 639–643[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  39. Holm, L., and Sander, C. (1995) Trends Biochem. Sci. 20, 478–480[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Murakami, K. S., Masuda, S., and Darst, S. A. (2002) Science 296, 1280–1284[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Gross, C. A., Chan, C., Dombroski, A., Gruber, T., Sharp, M., Tupy, J., and Young, B. (1998) Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 63, 141–155[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  42. Forget, D., Langelier, M.-F., Therien, C., Trinh, V., and Coulombe, B. (2004) Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 1122–1131[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Okhuma, Y., Sumimoto, H., Hoffmann, A., Shimasaki, S., Horikoshhi, M., and Roeder, R. (1991) Nature 354, 398–401[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Meinhart, A., Blobel, J., and Cramer, P. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 48267–48274[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Genes Dev.Home page
S. M. Yoh, J. S. Lucas, and K. A. Jones
The Iws1:Spt6:CTD complex controls cotranscriptional mRNA biosynthesis and HYPB/Setd2-mediated histone H3K36 methylation
Genes & Dev., December 15, 2008; 22(24): 3422 - 3434.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
M. L. Youdell, K. O. Kizer, E. Kisseleva-Romanova, S. M. Fuchs, E. Duro, B. D. Strahl, and J. Mellor
Roles for Ctk1 and Spt6 in Regulating the Different Methylation States of Histone H3 Lysine 36
Mol. Cell. Biol., August 15, 2008; 28(16): 4915 - 4926.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol Biol EvolHome page
P. Liu, A. L. Greenleaf, and J. W. Stiller
The Essential Sequence Elements Required for RNAP II Carboxyl-terminal Domain Function in Yeast and Their Evolutionary Conservation
Mol. Biol. Evol., April 1, 2008; 25(4): 719 - 727.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ScienceHome page
R. D. Chapman, M. Heidemann, T. K. Albert, R. Mailhammer, A. Flatley, M. Meisterernst, E. Kremmer, and D. Eick
Transcribing RNA Polymerase II Is Phosphorylated at CTD Residue Serine-7
Science, December 14, 2007; 318(5857): 1780 - 1782.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genes Dev.Home page
H. P. Phatnani and A. L. Greenleaf
Phosphorylation and functions of the RNA polymerase II CTD.
Genes & Dev., November 1, 2006; 20(21): 2922 - 2936.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/1/13    most recent
C500423200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vojnic, E.
Right arrow Articles by Cramer, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vojnic, E.
Right arrow Articles by Cramer, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2006 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement