TFIIA induces conformational changes in TFIID via interactions with the basic repeat.

DNA-binding studies with Saccharomyces cerevisiae TFIID point mutants indicated that TFIIA interacts with the basic repeat region of TFIID and induces structural changes. The latter was shown by the ability of TFIIA to compensate for TFIID point mutants defective for DNA binding. Interaction with TFIIA also rendered TFIID binding temperature independent, thus mimicking the effect of removing the nonconserved N terminus of TFIID. In addition, N-terminal truncation of the TFIID point mutants defective for DNA binding mimicked the ability of TFIIA to restore DNA binding of those mutants. Taken together, these results suggest that TFIIA enhances TFIID binding to DNA by eliminating an otherwise inhibitory effect of the nonconserved N terminus of TFIID. Furthermore, analyses of TFIID contact points on DNA and binding studies with TATA-containing oligonucleotide probes showed that TFIIA decreases the effect of sequences flanking the adenovirus major late TATA element on TFIID binding to DNA, suggesting a possible role of TFIIA in allowing TFIID to recognize a wider variety of promoters.     

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.     

Mode of reversible binding of neocarzinostatin chromophore to DNA: evidence for binding via the minor groove

Two general approaches have been taken to understand the mechanism of the reversible binding of the nonprotein chromophore of neocarzinostatin to DNA: (1) measurement of the relative affinity of the chromophore for various DNAs that have one or both grooves blocked by bulky groups and (2) studies on the influence of adenine-thymine residue-specific, minor groove binding agents such as the antibiotics netropsin and distamycin on the chromophore-DNA interaction. Experiments using synthetic DNAs containing halogen group (Br, I) substituents in the major groove or natural DNAs with glucosyl moieties projecting into the major groove show that obstruction of the major groove does not decrease the binding stoichiometry or the binding constant for the DNA-chromophore interaction. Chemical methylation of bases in both grooves of calf thymus DNA, resulting in 13% methylation of N-7 of guanine in the major groove and 7% methylation of N-3 of adenine in the minor groove, decreases the binding affinity and increases the size of the binding site for neocarzinostatin chromophore. Similar results were obtained whether binding parameters were determined directly by spectroscopic measurements or indirectly by measuring the ability of the DNA to protect the chromophore against degradation. On the other hand, netropsin and distamycin compete with neocarzinostatin chromophore for binding to the minor groove of DNA, as shown by their decrease in the ability of poly(dA-dT) to protect the chromophore against degradation and their reduction in chromophore-induced DNA damage as measured by thymine release.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)