Mechanism of Regulatory Target Selection by the SOX High-Mobility-Group Domain Proteins as Revealed by Comparison of SOX1/2/3 and SOX9

SOX proteins bind similar DNA motifs through their high-mobility-group (HMG) domains, but their action is highly specific with respect to target genes and cell type. We investigated the mechanism of target selection by comparing SOX1/2/3, which activate δ-crystallin minimal enhancer DC5, with SOX9, which activates Col2a1 minimal enhancer COL2C2. These enhancers depend on both the SOX binding site and the binding site of a putative partner factor. The DC5 site was equally bound and bent by the HMG domains of SOX1/2 and SOX9. The activation domains of these SOX proteins mapped at the distal portions of the C-terminal domains were not cell specific and were independent of the partner factor. Chimeric proteins produced between SOX1 and SOX9 showed that to activate the DC5 enhancer, the C-terminal domain must be that of SOX1, although the HMG domains were replaceable. The SOX2-VP16 fusion protein, in which the activation domain of SOX2 was replaced by that of VP16, activated the DC5 enhancer still in a partner factor-dependent manner. The results argue that the proximal portion of the C-terminal domain of SOX1/2 specifically interacts with the partner factor, and this interaction determines the specificity of the SOX1/2 action. Essentially the same results were obtained in the converse experiments in which COL2C2 activation by SOX9 was analyzed, except that specificity of SOX9-partner factor interaction also involved the SOX9 HMG domain. The highly selective SOX-partner factor interactions presumably stabilize the DNA binding of the SOX proteins and provide the mechanism for regulatory target selection.     

A single amino acid can determine the DNA binding specificity of homeodomain proteins

Many Drosophila developmental genes contain a DNA binding domain encoded by the homeobox. This homeodomain contains a region distantly homologous to the helix-turn-helix motif present in several prokaryotic DNA binding proteins. We investigated the nature of homeodomain-DNA interactions by making a series of mutations in the helix-turn-helix motif of the Drosophila homeodomain protein Paired (Prd). This protein does not recognize sequences bound by the homeodomain proteins Fushi tarazu (Ftz) or Bicoid (Bcd). We show that changing a single amino acid at the C-terminus of the recognition helix is both necessary and sufficient to confer the DNA binding specificity of either Ftz or Bcd on Prd. This simple rule indicates that the amino acids that determine the specificity of homeodomains are different from those mediating protein-DNA contacts in prokaryotic proteins. We further show that Prd contains two DNA binding activities. The Prd homeodomain is responsible for one of them while the other is not dependent on the recognition helix.     

Mechanisms for flexibility in DNA sequence recognition and VP16-induced complex formation by the Oct-1 POU domain.

DNA binding by the Oct-1 protein is directed by its POU domain, a bipartite DNA-binding domain made up of a POU-specific (POUS) domain and a POU-homeo (POUH) domain, two helix-turn-helix-containing DNA-binding modules that cooperate in DNA recognition. Although the best-characterized DNA target for Oct-1 binding is the octamer sequence ATGCAAAT, Oct-1 also binds a number of different DNA sequence elements. For example, Oct-1 recognizes a form of the herpes simplex virus VP16-responsive TAATGARAT element, called the (OCTA-)TAATGARAT site, that lacks octamer site similarity. Our studies suggest two mechanisms by which Oct-1 achieves flexible DNA sequence recognition. First, an important arginine found in the Oct-1 POUS domain tolerates substitutions of its base contacts within the octamer site. Second, on the (OCTA-)TAATGARAT site, the POUS domain is located on the side of the POUH domain opposite from where it is located on an octamer site. This flexibility of the Oct-1 POU domain in DNA binding also has an impact on its participation in a multiprotein-DNA complex with VP16. We show that Oct-1 POUS domain residues that contact DNA have different effects on VP16-induced complex formation depending on whether the VP16-responsive element involved has overlapping octamer similarity or not.