Runx1 Phosphorylation by Src Increases Trans-activation via Augmented Stability,Reduced Histone Deacetylase (HDAC) Binding,and Increased DNA Affinity,and Activated Runx1 Favors Granulopoiesis

Src phosphorylates Runx1 on one central and four C-terminal tyrosines. We find that activated Src synergizes with Runx1 to activate a Runx1 luciferase reporter. Mutation of the four Runx1 C-terminal tyrosines to aspartate or glutamate to mimic phosphorylation increases trans-activation of the reporter in 293T cells and allows induction of Cebpa or Pu.1 mRNAs in 32Dcl3 myeloid cells, whereas mutation of these residues to phenylalanine to prevent phosphorylation obviates these effects. Three mechanisms contribute to increased Runx1 activity upon tyrosine modification as follows: increased stability, reduced histone deacetylase (HDAC) interaction, and increased DNA binding. Mutation of the five modified Runx1 tyrosines to aspartate markedly reduced co-immunoprecipitation with HDAC1 and HDAC3, markedly increased stability in cycloheximide or in the presence of co-expressed Cdh1, an E3 ubiquitin ligase coactivator, with reduced ubiquitination, and allowed DNA-binding in gel shift assay similar to wild-type Runx1. In contrast, mutation of these residues to phenylalanine modestly increased HDAC interaction, modestly reduced stability, and markedly reduced DNA binding in gel shift assays and as assessed by chromatin immunoprecipitation with the −14-kb Pu.1 or +37-kb Cebpa enhancers after stable expression in 32Dcl3 cells. Affinity for CBFβ, the Runx1 DNA-binding partner, was not affected by these tyrosine modifications, and in vitro translated CBFβ markedly increased DNA affinity of both the translated phenylalanine and aspartate Runx1 variants. Finally, further supporting a positive role for Runx1 tyrosine phosphorylation during granulopoiesis, mutation of the five Src-modified residues to aspartate but not phenylalanine allows Runx1 to increase Cebpa and granulocyte colony formation by Runx1-deleted murine marrow.     

Cooperative binding of DNA and CBFbeta to the Runt domain of the CBFalpha studied via MD simulations

The Runt domain (RD) is the DNA-binding region of the Runx genes. A related protein, known as core binding factor β (CBFβ) also binds to the RD to enhance RD–DNA interaction by 6- to 10-fold. Here, we report results from molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of RD alone, as a dimer in complexes with DNA and CBFβ and in a ternary complex with DNA and CBFβ. Consistent with the experimental findings, in the presence of CBFβ the estimated free energy of binding of RD to the DNA is more favorable, which is shown to be due to more favorable intermolecular interactions and desolvation contributions. Also contributing to the enhanced binding are favorable intramolecular interactions between the ‘wing’ residues (RD residues 139–145) and the ‘wing1’ residues (RD residues 104–116). The simulation studies also indicate that the RD–CBFβ binding is more favorable in the presence of DNA due to a more favorable RD–CBFβ interaction energy. In addition, it is predicted that long-range interactions involving ionic residues contribute to binding cooperativity. Results from the MD calculations are used to interpret a variety of experimental mutagenesis data. A novel role for RD Glu116 to the RD–CBFβ interaction is predicted.     

Runx1 is a central regulator of osteogenesis for bone homeostasis by orchestrating BMP and WNT signaling pathways

Runx1 is highly expressed in osteoblasts, however, its function in osteogenesis is unclear. We generated mesenchymal progenitor-specific (Runx1^f/fTwist2-Cre) and osteoblast-specific (Runx1^f/fCol1α1-Cre) conditional knockout (Runx1 CKO) mice. The mutant CKO mice with normal skeletal development displayed a severe osteoporosis phenotype at postnatal and adult stages. Runx1 CKO resulted in decreased osteogenesis and increased adipogenesis. RNA-sequencing analysis, Western blot, and qPCR validation of Runx1 CKO samples showed that Runx1 regulates BMP signaling pathway and Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway. ChIP assay revealed direct binding of Runx1 to the promoter regions of Bmp7, Alk3, and Atf4, and promoter mapping demonstrated that Runx1 upregulates their promoter activity through the binding regions. Bmp7 overexpression rescued Alk3, Runx2, and Atf4 expression in Runx1-deficient BMSCs. Runx2 expression was decreased while Runx1 was not changed in Alk3 deficient osteoblasts. Atf4 overexpression in Runx1-deficient BMSCs did not rescue expression of Runx1, Bmp7, and Alk3. Smad1/5/8 activity was vitally reduced in Runx1 CKO cells, indicating Runx1 positively regulates the Bmp7/Alk3/Smad1/5/8/Runx2/ATF4 signaling pathway. Notably, Runx1 overexpression in Runx2^-/- osteoblasts rescued expression of Atf4, OCN, and ALP to compensate Runx2 function. Runx1 CKO mice at various osteoblast differentiation stages reduced Wnt signaling and caused high expression of C/ebpα and Pparγ and largely increased adipogenesis. Co-culture of Runx1-deficient and wild-type cells demonstrated that Runx1 regulates osteoblast−adipocyte lineage commitment both cell-autonomously and non-autonomously. Notably, Runx1 overexpression rescued bone loss in OVX-induced osteoporosis. This study focused on the role of Runx1 in different cell populations with regards to BMP and Wnt signaling pathways and in the interacting network underlying bone homeostasis as well as adipogenesis, and has provided new insight and advancement of knowledge in skeletal development. Collectively, Runx1 maintains adult bone homeostasis from bone loss though up-regulating Bmp7/Alk3/Smad1/5/8/Runx2/ATF4 and WNT/β-Catenin signaling pathways, and targeting Runx1 potentially leads to novel therapeutics for osteoporosis.     

The Yeast a1 and α2 Homeodomain Proteins Do Not Contribute Equally to Heterodimeric DNA Binding

In diploid cells of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the α2 and a1 homeodomain proteins bind cooperatively to sites in the promoters of haploid cell-type-specific genes (hsg) to repress their expression. Although both proteins bind to the DNA, in the α2 homeodomain substitutions of residues that are involved in contacting the DNA have little or no effect on repression in vivo or cooperative DNA binding with a1 protein in vitro. This result brings up the question of the contribution of each protein in the heterodimer complex to the DNA-binding affinity and specificity. To determine the requirements for the a1-α2 homeodomain DNA recognition, we systematically introduced single base-pair substitutions in an a1-α2 DNA-binding site and examined their effects on repression in vivo and DNA binding in vitro. Our results show that nearly all substitutions that significantly decrease repression and DNA-binding affinity are at positions which are specifically contacted by either the α2 or a1 protein. Interestingly, an α2 mutant lacking side chains that make base-specific contacts in the major groove is able to discriminate between the wild-type and mutant DNA sites with the same sequence specificity as the wild-type protein. These results suggest that the specificity of α2 DNA binding in complex with a1 does not rely solely on the residues that make base-specific contacts. We have also examined the contribution of the a1 homeodomain to the binding affinity and specificity of the complex. In contrast to the lack of a defective phenotype produced by mutations in the α2 homeodomain, many of the alanine substitutions of residues in the a1 homeodomain have large effects on a1-α2-mediated repression and DNA binding. This result shows that the two proteins do not make equal contributions to the DNA-binding affinity of the complex.     

CTCF-dependent enhancer blockers at the upstream region of the chicken alpha-globin gene domain

The eukaryotic genome is partitioned into chromatin domains containing coding and intergenic regions. Insulators have been suggested to play a role in establishing and maintaining chromatin domains. Here we describe the identification and characterization of two separable enhancer blocking elements located in the 5′ flanking region of the chicken α-globin domain, 11–16 kb upstream of the embryonic α-type π gene in a DNA fragment harboring a MAR (matrix attachment region) element and three DNase I hypersensitive sites (HSs). The most upstream enhancer blocking element co-localizes with the MAR element and an erythroid-specific HS. The second enhancer blocking element roughly co-localizes with a constitutive HS. The third erythroid-specific HS present within the DNA fragment studied harbors a silencing, but not an enhancer blocking, activity. The 11 zinc-finger CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF), which plays an essential role in enhancer blocking activity in many previously characterized vertebrate insulators, is found to bind the two α-globin enhancer blocking elements. Detailed analysis has demonstrated that mutation of the CTCF binding site within the most upstream enhancer blocking element abolishes the enhancer blocking activity. The results are discussed with respect to special features of the tissue-specific α-globin gene domain located in a permanently open chromatin area.     

Assessing functional divergence in EF-1alpha and its paralogs in eukaryotes and archaebacteria

A number of methods have recently been published that use phylogenetic information extracted from large multiple sequence alignments to detect sites that have changed properties in related protein families. In this study we use such methods to assess functional divergence between eukaryotic EF-1α (eEF-1α), archaebacterial EF-1α (aEF-1α) and two eukaryote-specific EF-1α paralogs—eukaryotic release factor 3 (eRF3) and Hsp70 subfamily B suppressor 1 (HBS1). Overall, the evolutionary modes of aEF-1α, HBS1 and eRF3 appear to significantly differ from that of eEF-1α. However, functionally divergent (FD) sites detected between aEF-1α and eEF-1α only weakly overlap with sites implicated as putative EF-1β or aminoacyl-tRNA (aa-tRNA) binding residues in EF-1α, as expected based on the shared ancestral primary translational functions of these two orthologs. In contrast, FD sites detected between eEF-1α and its paralogs significantly overlap with the putative EF-1β and/or aa-tRNA binding sites in EF-1α. In eRF3 and HBS1, these sites appear to be released from functional constraints, indicating that they bind neither eEF-1β nor aa-tRNA. These results are consistent with experimental observations that eRF3 does not bind to aa-tRNA, but do not support the ‘EF-1α-like’ function recently proposed for HBS1. We re-assess the available genetic data for HBS1 in light of our analyses, and propose that this protein may function in stop codon-independent peptide release.