![]()
|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Papers In Press, published online ahead of print December 21, 2001
Department of Microbiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210
Corresponding Author: reeve.2{at}osu.edu
The roles and interdependence of DNA sequence and archaeal histone fold structure in determining archaeal nucleosome stability and positioning have been determined and quantitated. The presence of four tandem copies of TTTAAAGCCG in the polylinker region of pLITMUS28 resulted in a DNA molecule with increased affinity (delta,deltaG of ~700 cal.mol-1) for the archaeal histone HMfB relative to the polylinker sequence, and the dominant, quantitative contribution of the helical repeats of the dinucleotide TA to this increased affinity has been determined. The rotational and translational positioning of archaeal nucleosomes assembled on the (TTTAAAGCCG)4 sequence, and on DNA molecules selectively incorporated into archaeal nucleosomes by HMfB have been established. Alternating A/T- and G/C-rich regions were located where the minor and major grooves, respectively, sequentially face the archaeal nucleosome core, and identical positioning results were obtained using HMfA, a closely-related archaeal histone also from Methanothermus fervidus. However, HMfA did not have similarly high affinities for the HMfB-selected DNA molecules, and domain-swap experiments havshown that this difference in affinity is determined by residue differences in the C-terminal region of a-helix 3 of the histone fold, a region that is not expected to directly interact with DNA. Rather this region is thought to participate in forming the histone dimer:dimer interface at the center of an archaeal nucleosome histone tetramer core. If differences in this interface do result in archaeal histone cores with different sequence preferences, then the assembly of alternative archaeal nucleosome tetramer cores could provide an unanticipated and novel structural mechanism to regulate gene expression.
J. Biol. Chem, 10.1074/jbc.M110029200
Submitted on October 17, 2001
Revised on December 18, 2001
Accepted on December 20, 2001
Both DNA and histone fold sequences contribute to Archaeal nucleosome stability
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y. Xie and J. N. Reeve Transcription by an Archaeal RNA Polymerase Is Slowed but Not Blocked by an Archaeal Nucleosome J. Bacteriol., June 1, 2004; 186(11): 3492 - 3498. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. J. Soares, F. Marc, and J. N. Reeve Conserved Eukaryotic Histone-Fold Residues Substituted into an Archaeal Histone Increase DNA Affinity but Reduce Complex Flexibility J. Bacteriol., June 1, 2003; 185(11): 3453 - 3457. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Marc, K. Sandman, R. Lurz, and J. N. Reeve Archaeal Histone Tetramerization Determines DNA Affinity and the Direction of DNA Supercoiling J. Biol. Chem., August 16, 2002; 277(34): 30879 - 30886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |