The sequence specificity of homeodomain-DNA interaction

The Drosophila developmental gene, engrailed, encodes a sequence-specific DNA binding activity. Using deletion constructs expressed as fusion proteins in E. coli, we localized this activity to the conserved homeodomain (HD). The binding site consensus, TCAATTAAAT, is found in clusters in the engrailed regulatory region. Weak binding of the En HD to one copy of a synthetic consensus is enhanced by adjacent copies. The distantly related HD encoded by fushi tarazu binds to the same sites as the En HD, but differs in its preference for related sites. Both HDs bind a second type of sequence, a repeat of TAA. The similarity in sequence specificity of En and Ftz HDs suggests that, within families of DNA binding proteins, close relatives will exhibit similar specificities. Competition among related regulatory proteins might govern which protein occupies a given binding site and consequently determine the ultimate effect of cis-acting regulatory sites.     

Interchange of DNA-binding modes in the deformed and ultrabithorax homeodomains: a structural role for the N-terminal arm

The deformed (Dfd) and ultrabithorax (Ubx) homeoproteins regulate developmental gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster by binding to specific DNA sequences within its genome. DNA binding is largely accomplished via a highly conserved helix-turn-helix DNA-binding domain that is known as a homeodomain (HD). Despite nearly identical DNA recognition helices and similar target DNA sequence preferences, the in vivo functions of the two proteins are quite different. We have previously revealed differences between the two HDs in their interactions with DNA. In an effort to define the individual roles of the HD N-terminal arm and recognition helix in sequence-specific binding, we have characterized the structural details of two Dfd/Ubx chimeric HDs in complex with both the Dfd and Ubx-optimal-binding site sequences. We utilized hydroxyl radical cleavage of DNA to assess the positioning of the proteins on the binding sites. The effects of missing nucleosides and purine methylation on HD binding were also analyzed. Our results show that both the Dfd and Ubx HDs have similar DNA-binding modes when in complex with the Ubx-optimal site. There are subtle but reproducible differences in these modes that are completely interchanged when the Dfd N-terminal arm is replaced with the corresponding region of the Ubx HD. In contrast, we showed previously that the Dfd-optimal site sequence elicits a very different binding mode for the Ubx HD, while the Dfd HD maintains a mode similar to that elicited by the Ubx-optimal site. Our current methylation interference studies suggest that this alternate binding mode involves interaction of the Ubx N-terminal arm with the minor groove on the opposite face of DNA relative to the major groove that is occupied by the recognition helix. As judged by hydroxyl radical footprinting and the missing nucleoside experiment, it appears that interaction of the Ubx recognition helix with the DNA major groove is reduced. Replacing the Dfd N-terminal arm with that of Ubx does not elicit a complete interchange of the DNA-binding mode. Although the position of the chimera relative to DNA, as judged by hydroxyl radical footprinting, is similar to that of the Dfd HD, the missing nucleoside and methylation interference patterns resemble those of the Ubx HD. Repositioning of amino acid side-chains without wholesale structural alteration in the polypeptide appears to occur as a function of N-terminal arm identity and DNA-binding site sequence. Complete interchange of binding modes was achieved only by replacement of the Dfd N-terminal arm and the recognition helix plus 13 carboxyl-terminal residues with the corresponding residues of Ubx. The position of the N-terminal arm in the DNA minor groove appears to differ in a manner that depends on the two base-pair differences between the Dfd and Ubx-optimal-binding sites. Thus, N-terminal arm position dictates the binding mode and the interaction of the recognition helix with nucleosides in the major groove.     

Using the recognition code to swap homeodomain target specificity in cell culture

The homeodomain (HD) is a 60 amino acid-long DNA-binding domain. A large fraction of HDs binds with high affinity sequences containing the 5′-TAAT-3′ core motif. However, NK-2 class HDs recognizes sequences containing the 5′-CAAG-3′ core motif. By using a cell transfection approach, here we show that modification of residues located in the N-terminal arm (at positions 6, 7 and 8) and in the recognition helix (at position 54) is enough to swap the “in vivo” binding specificity of TTF-1 HD (which is a member of the NK-2 class HD) from 5′-CAAG-3′ to 5′-TAAT-3′-containing targets. The role of residue at position 54 is also supported by data obtained with the HD of the Drosophila engrailed protein. These data support the notion that DNA-binding specificity “in vivo” is dictated by few critical residues.