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.     

Differential affinity and cooperativity functions of the amino-terminal 70 residues of lambda integrase

The site-specific recombinase (Int) of bacteriophage lambda is a heterobivalent DNA-binding protein that binds two different classes of DNA-binding sites within its recombination target sites. The several functions of Int are apportioned between a large carboxy-terminal domain that cleaves and ligates DNA at each of its four "core-type" DNA-binding sites and a small amino-terminal domain, whose primary function is binding to each of its five "arm-type" DNA sites, which are distant from the core region. Int bridges between the two classes of binding sites are facilitated by accessory DNA-bending proteins that along with Int comprise higher-order recombinogenic complexes. We show here that although the 64 amino-terminal residues of Int bind efficiently to a single arm site, this protein cannot form doubly bound complexes on adjacent arm sites. However, 1-70 Int does show the same cooperative binding to adjacent arm sites as the full length protein. We also found that 1-70 Int specifies cooperative interactions with the accessory protein Xis when the two are bound to their adjacent cognate sites P2 and X1, respectively. To complement the finding that these two amino-terminal domain functions (along with arm DNA binding) are all specified by residues 1-70, we determined that Thr75 is the first residue of the minimal carboxy-terminal domain, thereby identifying a specific interdomain linker region. We have measured the affinity constants for Int binding to each of the five arm sites and the cooperativity factors for Int binding to the two pairs of adjacent arm sites, and we have identified several DNA structural features that contribute to the observed patterns of Int binding to arm sites. Taken together, the results highlight several interesting features of arm DNA binding that invite speculation about additional levels of complexity in the regulation of lambda site-specific recombination.     

Identification of a binding motif specific to HNF4 by comparative analysis of multiple nuclear receptors

Nuclear receptors (NRs) regulate gene expression by binding specific DNA sequences consisting of AG[G/T]TCA or AGAACA half site motifs in a variety of configurations. However, those motifs/configurations alone do not adequately explain the diversity of NR function in vivo. Here, a systematic examination of DNA binding specificity by protein-binding microarrays (PBMs) of three closely related human NRs--HNF4α, retinoid X receptor alpha (RXRα) and COUPTF2--reveals an HNF4-specific binding motif (H4-SBM), xxxxCAAAGTCCA, as well as a previously unrecognized polarity in the classical DR1 motif (AGGTCAxAGGTCA) for HNF4α, RXRα and COUPTF2 homodimers. ChIP-seq data indicate that the H4-SBM is uniquely bound by HNF4α but not 10 other NRs in vivo, while NRs PXR, FXRα, Rev-Erbα appear to bind adjacent to H4-SBMs. HNF4-specific DNA recognition and transactivation are mediated by residues Asp69 and Arg76 in the DNA-binding domain; this combination of amino acids is unique to HNF4 among all human NRs. Expression profiling and ChIP data predict ≈ 100 new human HNF4α target genes with an H4-SBM site, including several Co-enzyme A-related genes and genes with links to disease. These results provide important new insights into NR DNA binding.     

Multimerization of the Drosophila zeste protein is required for efficient DNA binding.

The Drosophila zeste protein forms multimeric species in vitro through its C-terminal domain. Multimerization is required for efficient binding to DNA containing multiple recognition sequences and increasing the number of binding sites stimulates binding in a cooperative manner. Mutants that can only form dimers still bind to a dimeric site, but with lower affinity. Mutations or progressive deletions from the C-terminal show that when even dimer formation is prevented, DNA-binding activity is lost. Surprisingly, binding activity is regained with larger deletions that leave only the DNA-binding domain. Additional protein sequences apparently inhibit DNA binding unless they permit multimerization. The DNA-binding domain peptides bind strongly even to isolated recognition sequences and they bind as monomers. The ability of various zeste peptides to stimulate white gene expression in vivo shows that multimeric forms are the functional species of the zeste product in vivo. The DNA-binding domain peptide binds well to DNA in vitro, but it cannot stimulate white gene expression in vivo. This failure may reflect the need for an activation domain or it may be caused by indiscriminate binding of this peptide to non-functional isolated sites. Multimerization increases binding specificity, selecting only sites with multiple recognition sequences.     

ComEA is a DNA receptor for transformation of competent Bacillus subtilis

Competent cells of Bacillus subtilis efficiently bind and internalize DNA. ComEA and the seven proteins encoded by the comG operon are required in vivo for the binding step. We show here that ComEA, a bitopic membrane protein, is itself capable of high-affinity DNA binding. A domain necessary for DNA binding is located at the C-terminus of ComEA. Proteins with similar 60–80 amino acid residue domains are widespread among bacteria and higher organisms. ComEA shows a marked preference for double-stranded DNA and can bind to oligomers as small as 22 bp in length. DNA binding by ComEA exhibits no apparent base sequence specificity. Using a membrane vesicle DNA-binding assay system we show that in the absence of cell wall, ComEA is still required for DNA binding, whereas the requirement for the ComG proteins is bypassed. We conclude that the ComG proteins are needed in vivo to provide access of the binding domain of ComEA to exogenous DNA. Possible specific roles for the ComG proteins are discussed.     

Redox state regulates binding of p53 to sequence-specific DNA, but not to non-specific or mismatched DNA.

Redox modulation of wild-type p53 plays a role in sequence-specific DNA binding in vitro . Reduction produces a DNA-binding form of the protein while oxidation produces a non-DNA-binding form. Primer extension analysis reveals that increasing concentrations of reduced p53 result in enhanced protection of the consensus sequence, while increasing concentrations of oxidized p53 confer minimal protection of the consensus sequence. DNA binding by oxidized p53 is, therefore, not sequence-specific. In contrast, there is no observable difference in the binding of oxidized p53 and reduced p53 to double-stranded non-specific or mismatched DNA in gel mobility shift assays. Both forms of p53 bind equally well, suggesting that redox modulation of p53 does not play a role in its binding to non-specific or mismatched DNA. In view of the in vitro evidence that redox state influences the sequence-specific DNA-binding of p53, we have examined the effect of oxidative stress on the in vivo ability of p53 to bind to and transactivate PG13-CAT, a reporter construct containing multiple copies of the p53 consensus binding site linked to the chloramphenicol acetyltransferase gene. Hydrogen peroxide treatment of cells cotransfected with p53 results in a marked decrease in CAT activity, suggesting that oxidation of p53 decreases the ability of the protein to bind to consensus DNA and transactivate target genes in vivo.     

DNA-binding-defective mutants of the Epstein-Barr virus lytic switch activator Zta transactivate with altered specificities.

The Epstein-Barr virus BRLF1 and BZLF1 genes are the first viral genes transcribed upon induction of the viral lytic cycle. The protein products of both genes (referred to here as Rta and Zta, respectively) activate expression of other viral genes, thereby initiating the lytic cascade. Among the viral antigens expressed upon induction of the lytic cycle, however, Zta is unique in its ability to disrupt viral latency; expression of the BZLF1 gene is both necessary and sufficient for triggering the viral lytic cascade. We have previously shown that Zta can activate its own promoter (Zp), through binding to two Zta recognition sequences (ZIIIA and ZIIIB). Here we describe mutant Zta proteins that do not bind DNA (referred to as Zta DNA-binding mutants [Zdbm]) but retain the ability to transactivate Zp. Consistent with the inability of these mutants to bind DNA, transactivation of Zp by Zdbm is not dependent on the Zta recognition sequences. Instead, transactivation by Zdbm is dependent upon promoter elements that bind cellular factors. An examination of other viral and cellular promoters identified promoters that are weakly responsive or unresponsive to Zdbm. An analysis of a panel of artificial promoters containing one copy of various promoter elements demonstrated a specificity for Zdbm activation that is distinct from that of Zta. These results suggest that non-DNA-binding forms of some transactivators retain the ability to transactivate specific target promoters without direct binding to DNA.