Imposing specificity by localization: mechanism and evolvability

Transcriptional activation by artificial recruitment in yeast is influenced by promoter architecture and downstream sequences

The idea that recruitment of the transcriptional machinery to a promoter suffices for gene activation is based partly on the results of "artificial recruitment" experiments performed in vivo. Artificial recruitment can be effected by a "nonclassical" activator comprising a DNA-binding domain fused to a component of the transcriptional machinery. Here we show that activation by artificial recruitment in yeast can be sensitive to any of three factors: position of the activator-binding elements, sequence of the promoter, and coding sequences downstream of the promoter. In contrast, classical activators worked efficiently at all promoters tested. In all cases the "artificial recruitment" fusions synergized well with classical activators. A classical activator evidently differs from a nonclassical activator in that the former can touch multiple sites on the transcriptional machinery, and we propose that that difference accounts for the broader spectrum of activity of the typical classical activator. A similar conclusion is reached from studies in mammalian cells in the accompanying paper [Nevado, J., Gaudreau, L., Adam, M. & Ptashne, M. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 2674-2677].

Transcriptional activation by artificial recruitment in mammalian cells

We show that the typical "nonclassical" activator, which comprises a fusion protein bearing a component of the transcriptional machinery fused to a DNA-binding domain, activates transcription in mammalian cells only weakly when tested with an array of promoters. However, as found in analogous "artificial recruitment" experiments performed in yeast, these activators work synergistically with "classical" activators. The effect of the classical activator in such experiments requires that it be tethered to DNA, a requirement that cannot be overcome by expression of that classical activator at high levels. The effect of the one nonclassical activator that does elicit significant levels of transcription when working alone (i.e., that bearing TATA box-binding protein) is strongly influenced by promoter architecture. The results, consistent with those of analogous experiments in yeast [see the accompanying paper: Gaudreau, L., Keaveney, M., Nevado, J., Zaman, Z., Bryant, G. O., Struhl, K. & Ptashne, M. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 2668-2673], suggest that classical activators, presumably by virtue of their abilities to interact with multiple targets, have a functional flexibility that nonclassical activators lack.