Advertisement
JBC

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


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M607288200 on December 6, 2006

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 282, Issue 9, 5973-5983, March 2, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/9/5973    most recent
M607288200v1
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eto, K.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, M. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eto, K.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, M. K.
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?

Regulation of Pancreas Duodenum Homeobox-1 Expression by Early Growth Response-1*

Kazuhiro Eto, Varinderpal Kaur, and Melissa K. Thomas1

From the Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology and Diabetes Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02114

Received for publication, August 1, 2006 , and in revised form, November 27, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The homeodomain transcription factor pancreas duodenum homeobox-1 (PDX-1) is a key regulator of pancreatic beta-cell development, function, and survival. Deficits in PDX-1 expression result in insulin deficiency and hyperglycemia. We previously found that the glucose-responsive transcription factor early growth response-1 (Egr-1) activates the insulin promoter in part by increasing expression levels of PDX-1. We now report that Egr-1 binds and activates multiple regulatory sites within the pdx-1 promoter. We identified consensus Egr-1 recognition sequences within proximal and distal regions of the mouse pdx-1 promoter and demonstrated specific binding of Egr-1 by chromatin immunoprecipitation and electrophoretic mobility shift assays. Overexpression of Egr-1 increased transcriptional activation of the –4500 proximal pdx-1 promoter and of the highly conserved regulatory Areas I, II, and III. Mutagenesis of a specific Egr-1 binding site within Area III substantially decreased Egr-1-mediated activation. Egr-1 increased the transcriptional activation of Areas I and II, despite the absence of Egr-1 recognition sequences within this promoter segment, suggesting that Egr-1 also can regulate the pdx-1 promoter indirectly. Egr-1 increased, and a dominant-negative Egr-1 mutant repressed, the transcriptional activation of distal pdx-1 promoter sequences. Mutagenesis of a specific Egr-1 binding site within regulatory Area IV reduced basal and Egr-1-mediated transcriptional activation. Our data indicate that Egr-1 regulates expression of PDX-1 in pancreatic beta-cells by both direct and indirect activation of the pdx-1 promoter. We propose that Egr-1 expression levels may act as a sensor in pancreatic beta-cells to translate extracellular signals into changes in PDX-1 expression levels and pancreatic beta-cell function.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The homeodomain transcription factor pancreas duodenum homeobox-1 (PDX-1)2 is an essential regulator of the development of the pancreas in the embryo and of insulin production and glucose homeostasis in the adult. Homozygous disruption of the pdx-1/ipf-1 gene in mice or humans prevents normal pancreas development and leads to a phenotype of pancreatic agenesis (1–4). PDX-1 functions in later developmental stages to regulate the generation, function, and survival of insulin-producing pancreatic beta-cells (5–10). PDX-1 mediates the adaptive responsiveness of pancreatic beta-cells to changes in extracellular glucose concentrations through the regulation of expression levels of glucose sensors, such as glucose transporter-2 and glucokinase, and through the activation of glucose-responsive enhancers within the insulin promoter, in conjunction with other transcriptional regulators (11). PDX-1 also functions downstream of the insulin signaling pathway in the regulation of pancreatic beta-cell mass (12, 13).

Deficits in PDX-1 expression levels in mice result in reduced insulin secretion, accelerated beta-cell apoptosis, and insulin-deficient diabetes (5, 7–10). The appropriate regulation of PDX-1 expression is of clinical importance, as illustrated by the findings that different mutations in the pdx-1/ipf-1 gene increase susceptibility to the development of hyperglycemia in humans, with a range of phenotypes that include maturity-onset diabetes of the young, Type 2 diabetes, and gestational diabetes (11, 14–19). Therefore, intracellular mechanisms that govern the dynamic regulation of PDX-1 expression are potential determinants of physiologic and pathologic glucose levels.

Several regions within the 5'-flanking sequences of the pdx-1 gene are conserved across multiple species, including mouse, rat, chick, and humans (20–22). Within the proximal –4.5 to –4.6 kb segment of the mouse pdx-1 promoter, three highly conserved and distinct regulatory areas (Areas I, II, and III) were identified within a nuclease-hypersensitive region that confers selective expression in beta-cells in culture and in vivo (20, 21, 23). Regulatory Areas I and II confer beta-cell selectivity and are active regulatory regions during embryonic pancreas development and in the adult mouse islet (20, 24). Multiple transcription factors converge on regulatory Areas I and/or II within the pdx-1 promoter, including HNF-1{alpha}, Foxa2, Maf, Nkx 2.2, Pax6, SP1, SP3, and even PDX-1 (20, 21, 23–28). Key transcriptional regulators of Area III of the pdx-1 promoter are yet to be identified. Regulatory Area III sequences confer some beta-cell selectivity, albeit less so than sequences derived from regulatory Areas I and II (20, 21). A distal segment of the pdx-1 promoter, designated regulatory Area IV, is conserved in the human, mouse, rat, and chick and confers beta-cell selectivity (22, 29, 30). Area IV sequences are activated by Foxa2, NeuroD1/Beta-2, Nkx 2.2, and PDX-1 (22, 30).

We recently demonstrated that early growth response-1 (Egr-1), a zinc finger transcription factor that also is known as zif268, NGFI-A, Krox24, and TIS8, regulates PDX-1 expression levels in clonal pancreatic beta-cells (31). As an immediate early response gene, pulses of increased Egr-1 expression levels can be rapidly induced by a variety of hormones, growth factors, and nutrients (32). In pancreatic beta-cells Egr-1 expression levels are known to be regulated by changes in extracellular glucose, membrane depolarization, and intracellular cAMP and calcium levels (33–35). Reduction of Egr-1 expression in insulin-producing pancreatic beta-cells decreases insulin mRNA expression (31) and cellular proliferation (36).

In our studies of Egr-1-mediated regulation of insulin production in beta-cells, we found that Egr-1 positively regulated the transcriptional activation of the rat insulin I promoter. Egr-1 activated the insulin promoter in part via the glucose-responsive A boxes that serve as PDX-1 recognition sites. Interestingly, the overexpression of Egr-1 in INS-1 cells increased the mRNA and protein expression levels of PDX-1. Thus, we proposed that Egr-1 regulates insulin gene transcription through the activation of PDX-1 expression (31).

In these studies, we have examined mechanisms by which Egr-1 regulates the expression of PDX-1 in pancreatic beta-cells. Our results indicate that changes in Egr-1 expression levels influence the transcriptional activation of both proximal and distal regulatory segments of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. We have identified Egr-1 recognition sites within the pdx-1 promoter that contribute to its responsiveness to regulation by Egr-1. We propose that Egr-1 provides a route by which extracellular signals modify the transcriptional activation of the pdx-1 promoter to regulate PDX-1 expression levels and pancreatic beta-cell function.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Screening Analysis of Mouse pdx-1 Promoter Sequences for Egr-1 Consensus Binding Sites—Approximately 10 kb of mouse pdx-1 promoter sequences available in GenBankTM public databases were analyzed with GENETYX-MAC (10.1) software (Genetyx, Tokyo, Japan) and screened for consensus nonameric Egr-1 recognition sites as defined by Swirnoff and Milbrandt (37). Sequences of potential Egr-1 recognition sites were confirmed by automated sequencing analysis of sense and antisense strands of corresponding regions of mouse genomic DNA amplified by PCR.

Plasmids—The plasmids pcDNA3/Egr-1 and pcDNA3/DN-Egr-1 were constructed as previously reported (31, 38). The 4500 WT/luc plasmid consists of –4531 bp of the proximal mouse pdx-1 promoter cloned upstream of a luciferase reporter in the vector pGL3 (Promega, Madison, WI) and was previously designated –4.6 IDX-pGL3 (39). The plasmid Area 123 WT/luc spans nucleotides –2821 to –1563 to include regulatory Areas I, II, and III of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. Area 123 WT/luc was constructed by cloning a product of PCR amplification from the 4500 WT/luc plasmid template generated with the primers 5'-AGATCTAGTCCAAACAGCCTTTGG-3' and 5'-AAGCTTGGGATCACCGAGGGAACTCT-3' into the luciferase reporter vector pGL3/basic. The plasmid Area 12 WT/luc spans nucleotides –2821 to –1885 to include regulatory Areas I and II of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. Area 12 WT/luc was constructed by cloning a product of PCR amplification from the 4500 WT/luc plasmid template generated with the primers 5'-AGATCTAGTCCAAACAGCCTTTGG-3' and 5'-AAGCTTGGGACAAAGATAGGGACCTT-3' into the luciferase reporter vector pGL3/basic. The plasmid Area 3 WT/luc spans nucleotides –1898 to –1563 to include regulatory Area III of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. Area 3 WT/luc was constructed by cloning a product of PCR amplification from the 4500 WT/luc plasmid template generated with the primers 5'-AGATCTTTGTCCCAAGTCTCGCTCA-3' and 5'-AAGCTTGGGATCACCGAGGGAACTCT-3' into the luciferase reporter vector pGL3/basic. The plasmid Area 4 WT/luc spans nucleotides –6529 to –6047 to include regulatory Area IV of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. Area 4 WT/luc was constructed by first cloning a product of PCR amplification from FVB mouse genomic DNA template generated with the primers 5'-CTCGAGTCTAGAGAGTTCTTCTGTTTGCTAGATAAG-3' and 5'-AAGCTTCAGCTTCCTTTAAAGGTAAATGAATT-3' into pCR-BluntII-TOPO (Invitrogen), subsequent excision of the promoter segment with XhoI and Hind III, and cloning into the luciferase reporter vector pGL3/basic.

The plasmids 4500 mut/luc, Area 123 mut/luc, Area 3 mut/luc, and Area 4 mut/luc were generated by site-directed mutagenesis of Egr-1 recognition sites within 4500 WT/luc, Area 123 WT/luc, Area 3 WT/luc, and Area 4 WT/luc constructs, respectively, using the QuikChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Oligonucleotides used for mutagenesis were as follows: 4500 mut/luc, Area 123 mut/luc, and Area 3 mut/luc, 5'-CTTGCCGCTGATCCAAACCAACCCTCGGGCCCTTT-3' and 5-AAAGGGCCCGAGGGTTGGTTTGGATCAGCGGCAAG-3'; and Area 4 mut/luc, 5'-TGCCCTTTACTCAGGAGCCCCAGAACAGAAAGTAAATAAG-3' and 5'-CTTATTTACTTTCTGTTCTGGGGCTCCTGAGTAAAGGGCA-3' (mutations underlined). All constructs generated by cloning and mutagenesis experiments were confirmed by automated sequencing analyses.

Cell Culture and Transfections—Rat INS-1 cells (gift of C. Wollheim, University Medical Center, Geneva, Switzerland) and mouse MIN6 cells (gift of J. Miyazaki, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan) were cultured as previously reported (31, 40). CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 stable cell lines were generated and maintained under selection with G418 and hygromycin (31). For induction of Egr-1 expression, CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells were grown in vehicle or 1000 ng/ml doxycycline for 24 h prior to harvest. Transfections were conducted with Lipofectamine 2000 (Invitrogen). Transfected cells were harvested 48 or 72 h after transfection, and luciferase activities within cell lysates were measured in replicate samples and normalized by cellular protein content (31). Data from transfections were analyzed by Student's t tests or by one-way analysis of variance for multiple group comparisons. Differences between samples of p < 0.05 were considered significant.

Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assays—EMSAs were conducted according to previously described methods (31). Double-stranded 32P-radiolabeled oligonucleotide probes were either incubated with nuclear extracts prepared according to the method of Schreiber (41) from CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 stable cells pretreated with doxycycline or vehicle or incubated with in vitro translated proteins prepared from pcDNA3 or pcDNA3/Egr-1. Binding reactions were conducted in a buffer composed of polydeoxyinosinic-polydeoxycytidylic acid (Sigma), 12 mM HEPES (pH 7.9), 50 mM KCl, 4.7 mM MgCl2, 20 µM ZnSO4, 0.85 mM dithiothreitol, 12.5% glycerol, and 0.5 mg/ml bovine serum albumin for 20 min. In some reactions, proteins were preincubated with anti-Egr-1 antibody (Ab1, rabbit polyclonal anti-Egr-1 (sc110 (588)); Ab2, rabbit polyclonal anti-Egr-1 (sc189 (C-19)), Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) or excess unlabeled wild-type or mutant double-stranded oligonucleotide competitor probes for 20 min prior to the addition of radiolabeled oligonucleotide probes. Reaction mixtures were analyzed by nondenaturing PAGE and autoradiography. Oligonucleotide probe sequences (sense strands) were as follows: WT probe 1, 5'-TGCCCTTTACTCAGGAGTGGGAGAACAGAAAGT-3'; mut probe 1, 5'-TGCCCTTTACTCAGGAGCCCCAGAACAGAAAGT-3'; WT probe 2, 5'-CCTTGCGCTGATCCACCCCCACCCTCGGGCCCTTT-3'; mut probe 2, 5'-CCTTGCCGCTGATCCAAACCAACCCTCGGGCCCTTT-3'; WT probe 3, 5'-GGGGTCTATCCCTAAGGGGGTGACCAGGTGAAGGA-3'; and mut probe 3, 5'-GGGGTCTATCCCTAATGGTTGACCAGGTGAAGGA-3' (mutations underlined).


Figure 1
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1.
Candidate Egr-1 recognition sites within the mouse pdx-1 promoter. A, consensus nonameric sequence for Egr-1 recognition sites as defined by Swirnoff and Millbrandt (37). B, candidate Egr-1 binding sites identified within mouse pdx-1 promoter sequences. Sequences are numbered with respect to the transcription start site. Potential Egr-1 recognition sites are underlined (Egr-1). Sense strand sequences of oligonucleotide probes used in EMSAs are indicated for probes 1–3.

 
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation Assays—ChIP assays were conducted with previously reported methods (31) using CHIP-IT kits from Active Motif (Carlsbad, CA). Cells were fixed in 1% formaldehyde for 10 min at room temperature, and genomic DNA was purified and sheared by sonication. Chromatin was immunoprecipitated with Protein A-Sepharose CL-4B (Amersham Biosciences), and complexes were precipitated with rabbit polyclonal anti-Egr-1(C-19) antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), negative control normal rabbit IgG (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), or positive control rabbit polyclonal anti-PDX-1 antiserum (gift from J. Habener, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA). Primer pairs used for PCR amplification of immunoprecipitated DNA were as follows: mouse Area I, 5'-CCAGTATCAGGGAGGACTAT-3' (nt –2712 to –2692) and 5'-CTGAGATACCCAGCCATTAG-3' (nt –2567 to nt –2558); mouse Area III, 5'-TGGCCACTAGGTAGATTATCTGTG-3'(nt –1851 to –1828) and 5'-TGCCTCAATGAGTCCATTGTTCAG-3' (nt –1720 to –1697); mouse Area IV, 5'-GTCGCTAGCTGGTCTGTGACAGAT-3' (nt –6331 to –6308) and 5'-ACTGGTTAACAACATGGGGCTAAC-3' (nt –6102 to –6079); rat Area IV, 5'-CTTAGCTGGTCAGTGACAGA-3' (nt –5990 to –5971) and 5'-GGTTAACAACATCAGGCTGA-3' (nt –5826 to –5807). Products were generated by PCR with a melting step of 94 °C for 3 min followed by 30–35 cycles of amplification (94 °C for 30 s, 55 °C for 30 s, and 72 °C for 30 s), terminal extension at 72 C for 3 min and subsequent separation by agarose gel electrophoresis.

RNA Expression Analyses—mRNA expression levels for selected transcriptional regulators of the pdx-1 promoter were determined by quantitative real-time TaqMan reverse transcription-PCR on an ABI Prism 7900 HT sequence detection system, using total RNA derived from CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 stable cell lines treated with 0–1000 ng/ml doxycycline for 24 h prior to harvest. Replicate samples were analyzed, and expression levels were normalized to cyclophilin expression. Student's t tests were employed to detect significant differences in expression levels.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Identification of Egr-1 Recognition Sequences within Proximal and Distal Regions of the Mouse pdx-1 Promoter—We previously discovered that PDX-1 mRNA expression levels were increased in clonal pancreatic beta (INS-1)-cells in response to increasing Egr-1 expression levels (31), raising the possibility that Egr-1 regulates the pdx-1 promoter. We analyzed ~10 kb of upstream mouse pdx-1 promoter sequences (GenBankTM accession numbers AC127549 [GenBank] , AC115847 [GenBank] , AF192495 [GenBank] , and AF334615 [GenBank] ) to identify sequence elements similar to nonameric consensus Egr-1 recognition sites or their reverse complements as defined by Swirnoff and Milbrandt (Fig. 1A) (37). From this analysis we identified three potential Egr-1 binding sites within highly conserved regulatory regions of the mouse pdx-1 promoter, one in the distal region within regulatory Area IV (–6529 to –6047 bp) and two within the proximal region encompassing regulatory Areas I, II, and III (–2761 to –1600 bp) (Fig. 1B).

Egr-1 Binds a Consensus Sequence within Regulatory Area III of the Mouse pdx-1 Promoter—To evaluate whether any of these potential Egr-1 recognition sites were of functional significance, we first examined the sites identified within the proximal region of the pdx-1 promoter. In DNA binding assays, in vitro translated Egr-1 bound to a radiolabeled oligonucleotide probe (Probe 2) that spanned nucleotides –1817 to –1782 within regulatory Area III of the mouse pdx-1 promoter and included the sequence 5'-CACCCCCAC-3' (Fig. 2A, lane 3 as compared with lane 2). Preincubation of in vitro translated Egr-1 with anti-Egr-1 antibodies attenuated specific Egr-1 binding to this site (Fig. 2A, lanes 8 and 9 as compared with lane 3). The specificity of the Egr-1 recognition sequence was demonstrated by the failure of Egr-1 to bind to a radiolabeled mutant probe 2 with the nonameric sequence 5'-CAAACCAAC-3' (mutations underlined, Fig. 2A, lane 12 as compared with lane 3). The addition of excess unlabeled wild-type (Fig. 2A, lane 5 as compared with lane 3), but not mutant (Fig. 2A, lane 7 as compared with lane 3), probe reduced binding of Egr-1 to the radiolabeled probe 2 in competition assays. We employed a cellular model for the inducible overexpression of Egr-1 that we previously established, stable CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells in which the administration of doxycycline increases Egr-1 expression (31), to prepare nuclear extracts with basal or enhanced Egr-1 expression levels. Nuclear proteins derived from CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells bound radiolabeled probe 2 in DNA binding assays in a doxycycline-dependent manner (Fig. 2B, lane 3 as compared with lane 2), and specific Egr-1 protein-DNA complexes were identified by attenuation of binding by preincubation with anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Fig. 2B, lanes 8 and 9 as compared with lane 3). These complexes were not observed in DNA binding assays conducted with radiolabeled mutant probe 2 (Fig. 2B, lane 12 as compared with lane 3).


Figure 2
View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2.
Egr-1 binds to Area III, but not Area II, sequences within the mouse pdx-1 promoter. A, specific binding of in vitro translated Egr-1 to Area III sequences. EMSAs were conducted with radiolabeled wild-type (WT) or mutant (mut) oligonucleotide probe 2 and in vitro transcribed and translated Egr-1 (IVTT+) or empty vector in vitro transcription control reactions (IVTT–), as indicated (+). In competition assays, DNA-binding reactions were preincubated with 100-fold (x100) or 400-fold (x400) excess unlabeled WT or mut probe 2 as indicated (+). Specific protein-DNA complexes containing Egr-1 (arrow) were identified by interference from preincubation with either of two anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Ab1 and Ab2). B, specific binding of Egr-1 derived from INS-1 nuclear extracts to Area III sequences. EMSAs were conducted with nuclear extracts (ne) from stable CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells treated with vehicle (ne 0) or doxycycline (ne 1000) for 24 h and radiolabeled WT or mut oligonucleotide probe. DNA-binding reactions were preincubated with 100-fold (x100) or 400-fold (x400) excess unlabeled WT or mut probe 2 as indicated (+). Specific protein-DNA complexes containing Egr-1 (arrow) were identified by interference from pre-incubation with either of two anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Ab1 and Ab2). C, in vitro translated Egr-1 does not bind to a candidate recognition site in Area II sequences. EMSAs were conducted with radiolabeled WT or mut oligonucleotide probe 3 and in vitro transcribed and translated Egr-1 (IVTT+) or empty vector in vitro transcription control reactions (IVTT–). Competition assays were conducted with excess unlabeled WT or mut probe 3 as indicated. No specific protein-DNA complexes containing Egr-1 were identified following preincubation with either of two anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Ab1 and Ab2). D, Egr-1 binds to a proximal segment of the pdx-1 gene that includes regulatory Area III but not Area I sequences in ChIP assays. ChIP assays were performed with chromatin derived from MIN6 cells, and immunoprecipitated DNA was analyzed by PCR for detection of proximal pdx-1 promoter segments spanning nucleotides –1851 to –1697 from regulatory Area III (upper panel) or nucleotides –2712 to –2558 from regulatory Area I (lower panel) with control template (input, positive control DNA 1/100 dilution) or water (no DNA negative control). Immunoprecipitations were conducted with no antibody (no Ab), control IgG (IgG), anti-Egr-1 antibody (anti-Egr-1), or anti-PDX-1 antiserum (anti-PDX-1). Representative images are shown of agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR products.

 
In contrast, we did not observe evidence for direct binding of in vitro translated Egr-1 to radiolabeled oligonucleotide probe 3, spanning nucleotides –1941 to –1907 at the 3'-end of regulatory Area II of the mouse pdx-1 promoter that includes the sequence 5'-AAGGGGGTG-3' in a similar series of studies (Fig. 2C). In these assays, the single nucleotide mismatch within the potential nonameric Egr-1 binding site in probe 2 as compared with the consensus Egr-1 recognition sequence (Fig. 1A) may have interfered with interactions between Egr-1 and Area II sequences.


Figure 3
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3.
Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of proximal segments of the pdx-1 promoter. A, schematic diagram of mouse pdx-1 enhancer-luciferase reporter constructs. Wild-type (WT) or mutant (mut) constructs containing –4500 (4500), Areas I–III (Area 123), Areas I and II (Area 12), Area III (Area 3), or Area IV (Area 4) promoter/enhancer sequences are depicted with sequence locations relative to the transcription start site indicated on the upper horizontal scale. Approximate locations of Egr-1 recognition site mutations are indicated (asterisk). B, Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of the –4500-bp pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6µg of 4500 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001). C, DN-Egr-1 decreases transcriptional activation of the –4500-bp pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/DN-Egr-1 (DN-Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6µg of 4500 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (**, p < 0.01). D, Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of a segment encompassing Areas I–III within the pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6 µg of Area 123 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (**, p < 0.01). E, Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of a segment encompassing Area III within the pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6 µg of Area 3 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001). F, DN-Egr-1 decreases transcriptional activation of a segment encompassing Area III within the pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/DN-Egr-1 (DN-Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6 µg of Area 3 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of three independent transfections (n = 3), each conducted in duplicate (*, p < 0.05). G, Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of a segment encompassing Areas I and II within the pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6µg of Area 12 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001). H, DN-Egr-1 decreases transcriptional activation of a segment encompassing Areas I and II within the pdx-1 promoter. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bar) or pcDNA3/DN-Egr-1 (DN-Egr-1, solid bar) and 0.6 µg of Area 12 WT/luc reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation of three independent transfections (n = 3), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001).

 
Egr-1 Is Associated with Proximal pdx-1 Promoter Segments in Vivo—We also performed ChIP assays in MIN6 cells to assess whether Egr-1 proteins associate with proximal segments of the mouse pdx-1 promoter in insulin-producing cells in vivo. In ChIP assays, we immunoprecipitated proximal pdx-1 promoter regulatory segments encompassing Area III within mouse genomic DNA derived from MIN6 cells with anti-Egr1 antibodies but not with negative control immunoglobulin IgG (Fig. 2D, upper panel). These segments of the mouse pdx-1 promoter also were immunoprecipitated by anti-PDX-1 antiserum, consistent with previous reports of PDX-1 binding to Area III sequences in vivo (26). Anti-Egr-1 antibody did not immunoprecipitate negative control Area I sequences within mouse genomic DNA (Fig. 2D, lower panel).

Activation of Proximal Regions of the Mouse pdx-1 Promoter by Egr-1—In INS-1 cells transfected with a –4500 mouse pdx-1 promoter-luciferase reporter construct designated 4500 WT (Fig. 3A), the overexpression of Egr-1 increased proximal pdx-1 promoter activity by ~50% (Fig. 3B). In contrast, the introduction of a dominant-negative mutant Egr-1 protein comprised of only the zinc finger DNA-binding domain (38) significantly decreased the basal activity of the promoter both in INS-1 cells (Fig. 3C) and in MIN6 cells (data not shown). Similarly, Egr-1 overexpression significantly increased the transcriptional activation of a –2821 to –1563 bp Area I–III enhancer construct in transfected INS-1 cells (Fig. 3D). Consistent with our identification of an Egr-1 binding site within regulatory Area III of the mouse pdx-1 promoter, the overexpression of Egr-1 significantly increased, and expression of dominant-negative mutant Egr-1 significantly decreased, the transcriptional activation of an isolated Area III enhancer-reporter construct (Fig. 3, E and F). Although we did not identify a functional Egr-1 binding site within the sequences of regulatory Areas I and II, the enhancer region of the mouse pdx-1 promoter encompassing Areas I and II also was activated by Egr-1 and inhibited by dominant-negative mutant Egr-1 in transfection assays (Fig. 3, G and H), raising the possibility that Egr-1 regulates the pdx-1 promoter through a combination of direct and indirect mechanisms.

To determine the functional impact of the Egr-1 binding site identified within regulatory Area III of the pdx-1 promoter, we introduced the mutation 5'-CAAACCAAC-3' within the –4500, Area I–III, and Area III enhancer-reporter constructs. In transfected INS-1 (Fig. 4) or MIN6 cells mutagenesis of the Egr-1 binding site within Area III significantly reduced the activation of pdx-1 promoter sequences by Egr-1. Mutagenesis of the Area III Egr-1 binding site attenuated the activation of the –4500 pdx-1 promoter-reporter construct by 22% (Fig. 4A). Activation of Area I–III and Area III enhancer constructs by Egr-1 was highly dependent on the Egr-1 binding site, with mutagenesis reducing Egr-1-dependent activation by 43% (Fig. 4B) and 55% (Fig. 4C), respectively. Notably, the mutagenesis of the Area III Egr-1 binding site significantly reduced but did not eliminate the Egr-1 responsiveness of the proximal segment of the pdx-1 promoter or of the Area I–III regulatory regions in INS-1 cells, suggesting that additional regulatory options exist for the activation of pdx-1 expression by Egr-1.


Figure 4
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4.
Mutagenesis of the Egr-1 recognition site in regulatory Area III reduces transcriptional activation of the pdx-1 promoter by Egr-1. A, mutagenesis of the Area III Egr-1 binding site reduces activation of the –4500 pdx-1 promoter by Egr-1. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µgof empty vector pcDNA3 or pcDNA3/Egr-1 and 0.6 µg of 4500 mut/luc (open bar) or 4500 WT/luc (solid bar) reporter constructs. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. activation for each reporter construct by pcDNA3/Egr-1 relative to empty vector pcDNA3 from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (*, p < 0.05). B, mutagenesis of the Area III Egr-1 binding site reduces activation of a segment encompassing Areas I–III of the pdx-1 promoter by Egr-1. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 or pcDNA3/Egr-1 and 0.6 µg of Area 123 mut/luc (open bar) or Area 123 WT/luc (solid bar) reporter constructs. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. activation for each reporter construct by pcDNA3/Egr-1 relative to empty vector pcDNA3 from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001). C, mutagenesis of the Area III Egr-1 binding site reduces activation of a segment of the pdx-1 promoter encompassing regulatory Area III by Egr-1. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 or pcDNA3/Egr-1 and 0.6 µg of Area 3 mut/luc (open bar) or Area 3 WT/luc (solid bar) reporter constructs. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. activation for each reporter construct by pcDNA3/Egr-1 relative to empty vector pcDNA3 from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (***, p < 0.001).

 
To consider the possibility that Egr-1 modifies the expression levels of other transcriptional regulators of the pdx-1 promoter, we employed the CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cell model of inducible Egr-1 expression in which the administration of doxycycline to CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells significantly increased Egr-1 mRNA levels (31). The expression levels of several transcription factors that regulate PDX-1 expression, including Foxa2 (31), HNF-1{alpha}, HNF-1beta, MafA, Pax6, USF, and SP-1, did not significantly change in response to increasing levels of Egr-1 in CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells as determined by quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (data not shown).

Egr-1 Binds a Consensus Sequence within Regulatory Area IV of the Mouse pdx-1 Promoter—Next we considered whether Egr-1 binds the recognition site identified within the distal pdx-1 promoter sequences. We conducted EMSAs with probe 1, corresponding to nucleotides –6277 to –6255 of the distal mouse pdx-1 promoter, which includes the sequence 5'-GAGTGGGAG-3' (Fig. 1B). In vitro translated Egr-1 bound the radiolabeled wild-type probe 1 (Fig. 5A, lane 3 as compared with control lane 2) but not the mutant probe with the nonameric sequence 5'-GAGCCCCAG-3' (mutation underlined, Fig. 5A, lane 12 as compared with lane 3). Preincubation with anti-Egr-1 antibodies eliminated specific Egr-1 protein-DNA complexes (Fig. 5A, lanes 8 and 9 as compared with lane 3). The specificity of Egr-1 binding was further indicated by attenuation of binding complexes with the addition of excess unlabeled wild-type (Fig. 5A, lane 5 as compared with lane 3) but not unlabeled mutant (Fig. 5A, lane 7 as compared with lane 3) probe. We conducted similar experiments with nuclear extracts prepared from CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cell lines in which Egr-1 protein expression was increased by the addition of doxycycline. We observed doxycycline-dependent increases in a protein-DNA complex (Fig. 5B, lane 3 as compared with lane 2) that was attenuated by preincubation with anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Fig. 5B, lanes 8 and 9 as compared with lane 3). Competition experiments with excess unlabeled wild-type (Fig. 5B, lane 5) and mutant (Fig. 5B, lane 7) probes confirmed the specificity of the Egr-1 recognition site.


Figure 5
View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 5.
Egr-1 binds to Area IV sequences within the mouse pdx-1 promoter. A, specific binding of in vitro translated Egr-1 to Area IV sequences. EMSAs were conducted with radiolabeled wild-type (WT) or mutant (mut) oligonucleotide probe 1 and in vitro transcribed and translated Egr-1 (IVTT+) or empty vector in vitro transcription control reactions (IVTT–), as indicated (+). In competition assays, DNA-binding reactions were preincubated with 100-fold (x100) or 400-fold (x400) excess unlabeled WT or mut probe 2 as indicated (+). Specific protein-DNA complexes containing Egr-1 (arrow) were identified by interference from preincubation with either of two anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Ab1 and Ab2). B, specific binding of Egr-1 derived from INS-1 nuclear extracts to Area IV sequences. EMSAs were conducted with nuclear extracts (ne) from stable CMV-rtTA/Tet-Egr-1 INS-1 cells treated with vehicle (ne 0) or doxycycline (ne 1000) for 24 h and radiolabeled WT or mut oligonucleotide probe 1. DNA-binding reactions were preincubated with 100-fold (x100) or 400-fold (x400) excess unlabeled WT or mut probe 1 as indicated (+). Specific protein-DNA complexes containing Egr-1 (arrow) were identified by interference from preincubation with either of two anti-Egr-1 antibodies (Ab1 and Ab2). C, Egr-1 binds to distal segments of mouse and rat pdx-1 promoters that include regulatory Area IV sequences in ChIP assays. Upper panel, ChIP assays were performed with chromatin derived from MIN6 cells, and immunoprecipitated DNA was analyzed by PCR for detection of a distal mouse pdx-1 promoter segment spanning nucleotides –6331 to –6079 that encompasses regulatory Area IV with control template (input, positive control DNA 1/100 dilution) and water (no DNA, negative control). Immunoprecipitations were conducted with no antibody (no Ab), control IgG (IgG), anti-Egr-1 antibody (anti-Egr-1), or anti-PDX-1 antiserum (anti-PDX-1). Lower panel, ChIP assays were performed with chromatin derived from INS-1 cells, and immunoprecipitated DNA was analyzed by PCR for detection of a distal rat pdx-1 promoter segment spanning nucleotides –5990 to –5807 derived from regulatory Area IV. Representative images are shown of agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR products.

 
Egr-1 Is Associated with Distal pdx-1 Promoter Segments in Vivo—To determine whether Egr-1 proteins also associate with distal segments of the mouse pdx-1 promoter in intact insulin-producing cells, we conducted a second series of ChIP assays with genomic DNA derived from MIN6 cells. Egr-1 antibodies immunoprecipitated a distal pdx-1 promoter regulatory segment that encompassed the Egr-1 recognition sequence identified within regulatory Area IV in a specific manner (Fig. 5C, upper panel). As a positive control in these studies we also confirmed a previous report that PDX-1 associates with regulatory Area IV sequences in vivo (22). Because the Egr-1 recognition site sequences in Area IV are conserved in the mouse and rat pdx-1 promoters (22, 29, 30), we were able to conduct additional ChIP assays with genomic DNA derived from INS-1 cells. In these studies we observed a specific association of Egr-1 with rat genomic Area IV sequences that encompass the conserved Egr-1 recognition site (Fig. 5C, lower panel) as compared with negative control rat insulin I promoter sequences (31).

Activation of a Distal Segment of the Mouse pdx-1 Promoter by Egr-1—To assess the potential function of Egr-1 in the regulation of the distal mouse pdx-1 promoter segment, we generated an Area IV pdx-1 enhancer (–6529 to –6047 bp) –reporter construct. Overexpression of Egr-1 significantly increased transcriptional activation of the Area IV enhancer-reporter construct by 84% in transfected INS-1 cells (Fig. 6A, left panel). Mutagenesis of the Egr-1 binding site significantly decreased the basal activity of the Area IV enhancer by 28%, suggesting that endogenous Egr-1 likely functions to maintain the activity of distal pdx-1 enhancer sequences through this site. The mutant Area IV enhancer construct was substantially less responsive to Egr-1, although a small component of Egr-1-responsiveness was retained (Fig. 6A, right panel), as further demonstrated by the dose-dependent response to increasing expression levels of Egr-1 (Fig. 6B). In transfected MIN6 cells the expression of Egr-1 significantly increased the transcriptional activation of wild-type but not mutant Area IV enhancer-reporter constructs (data not shown). Expression of the dominant-negative mutant Egr-1 significantly reduced the activation of the Area IV enhancer in INS-1 cells (Fig. 6C), consistent with a function for native Egr-1 in maintaining distal pdx-1 enhancer activation. These results indicate that Egr-1 can activate the distal pdx-1 promoter segment through the Egr-1 binding site within Area IV and suggest that additional indirect mechanisms contribute to the activation of this promoter segment by Egr-1.


Figure 6
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 6.
Egr-1 increases transcriptional activation of distal segments of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. A, Egr-1 increases activation of a segment of the pdx-1 promoter encompassing regulatory Area IV, and mutagenesis of the Area IV Egr-1 binding site disrupts that activation. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (open bars) or pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1, solid bars) and 0.6 µg of Area 4 mut/luc (Area 4 mut) or Area 4 WT/luc (Area 4 WT) reporter constructs. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation for each reporter construct from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (**, p < 0.01). B, Egr-1 activates Area IV sequences in a dose-dependent manner. INS-1 cells were transfected with 0, 0.4, 0.7, or 1.0 µg of pcDNA3/Egr-1 (Egr-1) and 1.0, 0.6, 0.3, or 0 µg of control empty vector pcDNA3, respectively, and 0.6 µg of Area 4 mut/luc (Area 4 mut, solid bars) or Area 4 WT/luc (Area 4 WT, open bars) reporter constructs. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation for each reporter construct from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (**, p < 0.01). C, DN-Egr-1 decreases transcriptional activation of Area IV sequences. INS-1 cells were transfected with 1.0 µg of empty vector pcDNA3 (solid bar) or pcDNA3/DN-Egr-1 (DN-Egr-1, open bar) and 0.6 µg of Area 4 WT/luc (Area 4 WT) reporter construct. Data shown represent the average ± S.D. -fold activation from four independent transfections (n = 4), each conducted in duplicate (**, p < 0.01).

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
In these studies we report that the early response gene and zinc finger transcription factor Egr-1 activates the expression of the pancreatic regulator PDX-1. We have identified two specific Egr-1 recognition sites that are located within highly conserved regulatory areas within proximal (Area III) and distal (Area IV) regions of the mouse pdx-1 promoter. These Egr-1 binding sites reside in regulatory areas that serve as convergence points for multiple transcription factors and collectively contribute to the specificity of the transcriptional expression of the pdx-1 gene in embryonic and adult pancreatic beta-cells (20, 22). The functional importance of each of the two Egr-1 recognition sites is illustrated in our mutagenesis experiments, in which modifications of the nonameric Egr-1 consensus sequence disrupt both Egr-1 binding in EMSAs as well as basal and Egr-1-mediated transcriptional activation of pdx-1 promoter segments in transfected cells. Multiple consensus sites for other transcription factors have been identified within regulatory Areas I and II within the proximal 5'-flanking sequences of the mouse pdx-1 promoter, but current knowledge is limited regarding regulatory mechanisms that converge on Area III. In this respect the proximal Egr-1 recognition site is unique.

In transfected clonal pancreatic beta-cells, we demonstrate that the overexpression of Egr-1 enhances the transcriptional activation of both proximal and distal segments of the pdx-1 promoter. Furthermore, interference with activation by Egr-1, through expression of a dominant-negative mutant Egr-1 protein, suggests that endogenous Egr-1 expression is required for maintaining basal promoter activation. However, not all of the Egr-1-responsive transcriptional activation of the pdx-1 promoter appears to be mediated through the identified Egr-1 recognition sites. Mutagenesis of Egr-1 binding sites significantly reduces but does not completely eliminate activation by Egr-1 of either proximal or distal promoter regions. We attribute this residual activation to an indirect effect of Egr-1 to activate other regulatory elements within the pdx-1 promoter, possibly mediated by other transcription factors. We have found no evidence for Egr-1-dependent increases in mRNA expression levels of multiple known regulators of the pdx-1 promoter, with the exception of PDX-1. PDX-1 binds to both proximal and distal regions of the pdx-1 promoter, including regulatory Areas I and II (22, 26). An autoregulatory feedback mechanism involving PDX-1 protein interactions on the pdx-1 promoter may contribute to the indirect regulation by Egr-1. Egr-1 also is known to interact with the nuclear hormone receptor coactivator p300 through direct contact with multiple p300 domains (42). Because PDX-1 and other transcriptional regulators of the pdx-1 gene also interact with p300 (43–46), Egr-1 may function to stabilize multiprotein transcriptional regulatory complexes that contain p300 to confer indirect augmentation of transcriptional activation. In other contexts, the binding of Egr-1 proteins to multiple Egr-1 recognition sites has been suggested to stabilize p300 interactions (42, 47). Thus, we propose the following model for the direct and indirect regulation of pdx-1 expression in pancreatic beta-cells by Egr-1 (Fig. 7). In a direct manner, Egr-1 binds specific nonameric recognition sites within the proximal and distal segments of the pdx-1 promoter to activate transcription. In an indirect manner PDX-1 protein induced by Egr-1 also can bind AT-rich recognition sites within proximal and distal segments of the pdx-1 promoter to further regulate transcription. Collectively, Egr-1 augments PDX-1 expression, resulting in the dose-dependent activation of PDX-1 target genes, including the insulin gene (31).


Figure 7
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 7.
Proposed model for the regulation of PDX-1 expression by Egr-1. In this schematic model, increasing Egr-1 expression from nutrient, hormone, or growth factor signaling in pancreatic beta-cells directly enhances proximal and distal pdx-1 promoter activity by binding to recognition sites within regulatory Areas III and IV. Increased PDX-1 expression may further modify Egr-1-mediated regulation of the promoter through PDX-1 binding sites within proximal and distal promoter segments.

 
It is possible that the Egr-1 recognition sites we identified within the PDX-1 promoter may provide loci for more complex control of transcriptional regulation. In several instances, other transcription factors have been identified in overlapping interactions with Egr-1 recognition sites in selected promoters (47). Many zinc finger transcription factors demonstrate some binding affinity for GC-rich sequences, and other Egr-1 family members, including WT-1, often bind Egr-1 recognition sites in vitro. Precedents also exist for complex regulation of promoters by both Egr-1 and SP1. Notably the human pdx-1 promoter can be activated by both SP1 and SP3 (25). SP1 consensus recognition sequences partially overlap with Egr-1 consensus sequences in some cases, providing the opportunity for Egr-1 to compete with SP1 for promoter occupancy (47). In addition to competition between Egr-1 and SP1 proteins for occupancy of some recognition sites, the potential also exists for phosphorylated Egr-1 to directly interact with and sequester SP1 in selected experimental contexts (47). Despite this potential regulatory complexity, in our ChIP studies we observed in vivo occupancy of regions spanning both proximal and distal Egr-1 recognition sites within the mouse pdx-1 promoter by Egr-1 proteins.

It is important to note that pancreatic beta-cell function appears to be exquisitely sensitive to small changes in PDX-1 expression levels within a 2-fold range in both humans and mice. Decreased insulin synthesis and secretion, hyperglycemia, reduced beta-cell mass, and increased beta-cell apoptosis result from heterozygous inheritance of mutant pdx-1 or ipf-1 genes (6, 7, 10, 14, 15). Furthermore, beta-cell phenotypes, associated with reductions in PDX-1 expression levels of 50% or less, increase in severity with aging (7, 8, 14, 15).

The activation of the pdx-1 promoter by increasing levels of Egr-1 expression may have broad physiologic relevance. Egr-1 expression is rapidly and transiently increased by an extensive range of extracellular signals, including nutrients, hormones, and growth factors. In pancreatic beta-cells, extracellular glucose levels regulate Egr-1 expression (33–35, 48, 49). Interestingly in many other cell types, but not in beta-cells under the experimental conditions tested to date (34, 35), increases in extracellular insulin levels augment Egr-1 expression (50, 51). Insulin-mediated activation of Egr-1 expression has been reported to work through multiple components of insulin signaling pathways, including insulin receptor substrate (IRS) proteins IRS-1, IRS-2, and IRS-3; kinases p38K, Erk (extracellular signal-regulated kinase), phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and protein kinase C{alpha}; and the adaptor protein Gab1 (51–55). Egr-1 may be required for insulin-dependent increases in DNA synthesis (56), and increases in Egr-1 expression occur in response to insulin even in selected cellular models of insulin resistance (57). Egr-1 expression also increases in many cell types in response to hypoxia as well as in post-injury-regenerative responses (58, 59). Thus, the identification of Egr-1 recognition sites within the pdx-1 promoter raises multiple possibilities for the regulation of PDX-1 expression levels by a range of extracellular signals that converge on Egr-1.

The regulation of target genes by Egr-1 also offers the advantage of temporal flexibility in the dynamic regulation of PDX-1 expression. Negative feedback loops have been well characterized for the regulation of Egr-1 expression levels (47). Induction of Egr-1 expression increases expression levels of the corepressor Nab2. Both Nab2 and Egr-1 can subsequently down-regulate egr-1 gene expression to restrict the duration of increases in Egr-1 levels in response to activating signals.

In addition to the regulation of PDX-1 and insulin gene expression, broader functions for Egr-1 likely exist within the endocrine pancreas. Reductions in Egr-1 expression levels diminish the proliferation rates of clonal insulin-producing cells (36). Furthermore, exendin-4 augments the expression levels of the cell cycle regulator cyclin D1 by increasing the binding of Egr-1 to the cyclin D1 promoter (60). These findings are concordant with the identification of multiple cell cycle regulators and growth factors as targets of Egr-1-mediated transcription in other cell types (61, 62). Egr-1 also is likely to be important in the regulation of glucagon expression in pancreatic {alpha}-cells in response to extracellular hormones, including gastrin (63). Egr-1 regulates cellular functions in multiple endocrine cell types, including pancreatic {alpha}- and beta-cells, pituitary somatotropes and gonadotropes, and ovarian follicular cells (64).

Future studies will be needed to better define the transcriptional targets and functions of Egr-1 in pancreatic beta-cells. We suggest that regulators of Egr-1 expression and/or function may provide effective mechanisms to modify PDX-1 expression levels, insulin production, and pancreatic beta-cell function.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by a pilot and feasibility award (to K. E.), Boston Area Diabetes and Endocrinology Research Center Grant P30DK057521, which is supported by the National Institutes of Health, and by a Career Development Award from the American Diabetes Association (to M. K. T.). 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

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed: Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology and Diabetes Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Thier 340, 50 Blossom St., Boston, MA 02114. Tel.: 617-726-6342; Fax: 617-726-6954; E-mail: mthomas1{at}partners.org.

2 The abbreviations used are: PDX-1, pancreas duodenum homeobox-1; Egr-1, early growth response-1; WT, wild type; nt, nucleotide(s); mut, mutant; CMV, cytomegalovirus; EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay; ChIP, chromatin immunoprecipitation; IRS, insulin receptor substrate. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank our colleagues in the Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology for insightful discussions of this project and value in particular the input and advice we received from C. Banz, D. Borger, J. Habener, V. Stanojevic, and J. Volinic. We appreciate gifts of reagents from H. Bujard, J. Miyazaki, N. Perkins, and C. Wollheim. We thank A. Ndyabahika for his assistance with the preparation of the manuscript.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Offield, M. F., Jetton, T. L., Labosky, P. A., Ray, M., Stein, R. W., Magnuson, M. A., Hogan, B. L., and Wright, C. V. (1996) Development 122, 983–995[Abstract]
  2. Jonsson, J., Carlsson, L., Edlund, T., and Edlund, H. (1994) Nature 371, 606–609[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Stoffers, D. A., Zinkin, N. T., Stanojevic, V., Clarke, W. L., and Habener, J. F. (1997) Nat. Genet. 15, 106–110[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Schwitzgebel, V. M., Mamin, A., Brun, T., Ritz-Laser, B., Zaiko, M., Maret, A., Jornayvaz, F. R., Theintz, G. E., Michielin, O., Melloul, D., and Philippe, J. (2003) J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 88, 4398–4406[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Ahlgren, U., Jonsson, J., Jonsson, L., Simu, K., and Edlund, H. (1998) Genes Dev. 12, 1763–1768[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Dutta, S., Bonner-Weir, S., Montminy, M., and Wright, C. (1998) Nature 392, 560[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Johnson, J. D., Ahmed, N. T., Luciani, D. S., Han, Z., Tran, H., Fujita, J., Misler, S., Edlund, H., and Polonsky, K. S. (2003) J. Clin. Invest. 111, 1147–1160[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Thomas, M. K., Devon, O. N., Lee, J. H., Peter, A., Schlosser, D. A., Tenser, M. S., and Habener, J. F. (2001) J. Clin. Invest. 108, 319–329[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Holland, A. M., Hale, M. A., Kagami, H., Hammer, R. E., and MacDonald, R. J. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 12236–12241[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Brissova, M., Shiota, M., Nicholson, W. E., Gannon, M., Knobel, S. M., Piston, D. W., Wright, C. V., and Powers, A. C. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 11225–11232[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Thomas, M. K., and Habener, J. F. (2004) in Molecular Basis of Inborn Errors of Development (Epstein, C. J., Erikson, R. P., and A. W.-B., eds) pp. 552–556, Oxford University Press, New York
  12. Kitamura, T., Nakae, J., Kitamura, Y., Kido, Y., Biggs, W. H., 3rd, Wright, C. V., White, M. F., Arden, K. C., and Accili, D. (2002) J. Clin. Invest. 110, 1839–1847[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Kushner, J. A., Ye, J., Schubert, M., Burks, D. J., Dow, M. A., Flint, C. L., Dutta, S., Wright, C. V., Montminy, M. R., and White, M. F. (2002) J. Clin. Invest. 109, 1193–1201[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Hani, E. H., Stoffers, D. A., Chevre, J. C., Durand, E., Stanojevic, V., Dina, C., Habener, J. F., and Froguel, P. (1999) J. Clin. Invest. 104, R41–R48[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Macfarlane, W. M., Frayling, T. M., Ellard, S., Evans, J. C., Allen, L. I., Bulman, M. P., Ayres, S., Shepherd, M., Clark, P., Millward, A., Demaine, A., Wilkin, T., Docherty, K., and Hattersley, A. T. (1999) J. Clin. Invest. 104, R33–R39[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Owen, K. R., Evans, J. C., Frayling, T. M., Hattersley, A. T., McCarthy, M. I., Walker, M., and Hitman, G. A. (2004) Diabetologia 47, 957–958[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Elbein, S. C., and Karim, M. A. (2004) Diabetes Care 27, 1968–1973[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Weng, J., Ekelund, M., Lehto, M., Li, H., Ekberg, G., Frid, A., Aberg, A., Groop, L. C., and Berntorp, K. (2002) Diabetes Care 25, 68–71[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Gragnoli, C., Stanojevic, V., Gorini, A., Von Preussenthal, G. M., Thomas, M. K., and Habener, J. F. (2005) Metabolism 54, 983–988[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Gerrish, K., Gannon, M., Shih, D., Henderson, E., Stoffel, M., Wright, C. V., and Stein, R. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 3485–3492[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Marshak, S., Benshushan, E., Shoshkes, M., Havin, L., Cerasi, E., and Melloul, D. (2000) Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 7583–7590[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Gerrish, K., Van Velkinburgh, J. C., and Stein, R. (2004) Mol. Endocrinol. 18, 533–548[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Wu, K. L., Gannon, M., Peshavaria, M., Offield, M. F., Henderson, E., Ray, M., Marks, A., Gamer, L. W., Wright, C. V., and Stein, R. (1997) Mol. Cell Biol. 17, 6002–6013[Abstract]
  24. Van Velkinburgh, J. C., Samaras, S. E., Gerrish, K., Artner, I., and Stein, R. (2005) J. Biol. Chem. 280, 38438–38444[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Ben-Shushan, E., Marshak, S., Shoshkes, M., Cerasi, E., and Melloul, D. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 17533–17540[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Gerrish, K., Cissell, M. A., and Stein, R. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 47775–47784[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Samaras, S. E., Cissell, M. A., Gerrish, K., Wright, C. V., Gannon, M., and Stein, R. (2002) Mol. Cell Biol. 22, 4702–4713[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Samaras, S. E., Zhao, L., Means, A., Henderson, E., Matsuoka, T. A., and Stein, R. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 12263–12270[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Sharma, S., Leonard, J., Lee, S., Chapman, H. D., Leiter, E. H., and Montminy, M. R. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 2294–2299[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Sharma, S., Jhala, U. S., Johnson, T., Ferreri, K., Leonard, J., and Montminy, M. (1997) Mol. Cell Biol. 17, 2598–2604[Abstract]
  31. Eto, K., Kaur, V., and Thomas, M. K. (2006) Endocrinology 147, 2923–2935[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Thiel, G., and Cibelli, G. (2002) J. Cell Physiol. 193, 287–292[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Frodin, M., Sekine, N., Roche, E., Filloux, C., Prentki, M., Wollheim, C. B., and Van Obberghen, E. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 7882–7889[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Josefsen, K., Sorensen, L. R., Buschard, K., and Birkenbach, M. (1999) Diabetologia 42, 195–203[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Ohsugi, M., Cras-Meneur, C., Zhou, Y., Warren W, Bernal-Mizrachi, E., and Permutt, M. A. (2004) Diabetes 53, 1496–1508[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Garnett, K. E., Chapman, P., Chambers, J. A., Waddell, I. D., and Boam, D. S. (2005) J. Mol. Endocrinol. 35, 13–25[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Swirnoff, A. H., and Milbrandt, J. (1995) Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 2275–2287[Abstract]
  38. Chapman, N. R., and Perkins, N. D. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 4719–4725[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Thomas, M. K., Lee, J. H., Rastalsky, N., and Habener, J. F. (2001) Endocrinology 142, 1033–1040[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Miyazaki, J., Araki, K., Yamato, E., Ikegami, H., Asano, T., Shibasaki, Y., Oka, Y., and Yamamura, K. (1990) Endocrinology 127, 126–132[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Schreiber, E., Matthias, P., Muller, M. M., and Schaffner, W. (1989) Nucleic Acids Res. 17, 6419[Free Full Text]
  42. Silverman, E. S., Du, J., Williams, A. J., Wadgaonkar, R., Drazen, J. M., and Collins, T. (1998) Biochem. J. 336, 183–189
  43. Qiu, Y., Sharma, A., and Stein, R. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 2957–2964[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Qiu, Y., Guo, M., Huang, S., and Stein, R. (2002) Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 412–420[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Mosley, A. L., Corbett, J. A., and Ozcan, S. (2004) Mol. Endocrinol. 18, 2279–2290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Stanojevic, V., Habener, J. F., and Thomas, M. K. (2004) Endocrinology 145, 2918–2928[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Silverman, E. S., and Collins, T. (1999) Am. J. Pathol. 154, 665–670[Free Full Text]
  48. Susini, S., Roche, E., Prentki, M., and Schlegel, W. (1998) FASEB J. 12, 1173–1182[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Bernal-Mizrachi, E., Wice, B., Inoue, H., and Permutt, M. A. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 25681–25689[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Jhun, B. H., Haruta, T., Meinkoth, J. L., Leitner, W., Draznin, B., Saltiel, A. R., Pang, L., Sasaoka, T., and Olefsky, J. M. (1995) Biochemistry 34, 7996–8004[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  51. Bruning, J. C., Winnay, J., Cheatham, B., and Kahn, C. R. (1997) Mol. Cell Biol. 17, 1513–1521[Abstract]
  52. Tsuruzoe, K., Emkey, R., Kriauciunas, K. M., Ueki, K., and Kahn, C. R. (2001) Mol. Cell. Biol. 21, 26–38[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  53. Harada, S., Esch, G. L., Holgado-Madruga, M., and Wong, A. J. (2001) DNA Cell Biol. 20, 223–229[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  54. Lin, Y. L., Chen, H. C., Yeh, S. F., and Chou, C. K. (1995) Endocrinology 136, 2922–2927[Abstract]
  55. Keeton, A. B., Bortoff, K. D., Bennett, W. L., Franklin, J. L., Venable, D. Y., and Messina, J. L. (2003) Endocrinology 144, 5402–5410[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  56. Gousseva, N., Kugathasan, K., Chesterman, C. N., and Khachigian, L. M. (2001) J. Cell Biochem. 81, 523–534[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  57. Sartipy, P., and Loskutoff, D. J. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 52298–52306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Bae, S. K., Bae, M. H., Ahn, M. Y., Son, M. J., Lee, Y. M., Bae, M. K., Lee, O. H., Park, B. C., and Kim, K. W. (1999) Cancer Res. 59, 5989–5994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Taub, R., Greenbaum, L. E., and Peng, Y. (1999) Semin. Liver Dis. 19, 117–127[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  60. Kang, J. H., Kim, M. J., Ko, S. H., Jeong, I. K., Koh, K. H., Rhie, D. J., Yoon, S. H., Hahn, S. J., Kim, M. S., and Jo, Y. H. (2006) Diabetologia 49, 969–979[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  61. Svaren, J., Ehrig, T., Abdulkadir, S. A., Ehrengruber, M. U., Watson, M. A., and Milbrandt, J. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 38524–38531[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  62. Fu, M., Zhu, X., Zhang, J., Liang, J., Lin, Y., Zhao, L., Ehrengruber, M. U., and Chen, Y. E. (2003) Gene (Amst.) 315, 33–41[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  63. Leung-Theung-Long, S., Roulet, E., Clerc, P., Escrieut, C., Marchal-Victorion, S., Ritz-Laser, B., Philippe, J., Pradayrol, L., Seva, C., Fourmy, D., and Dufresne, M. (2005) J. Biol. Chem. 280, 7976–7984[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  64. Topilko, P., Schneider-Maunoury, S., Levi, G., Trembleau, A., Gourdji, D., Driancourt, M. A., Rao, C. V., and Charnay, P. (1998) Mol. Endocrinol. 12, 107–122

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
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/9/5973    most recent
M607288200v1
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eto, K.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, M. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eto, K.
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, M. K.
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 © 2007 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement