Control of transcription by Krüppel through interactions with TFIIB and TFIIE beta

The N-terminal region of yeast TFIIB contains two adjacent functional domains involved in stable RNA polymerase II binding and transcription start site selection

The general transcription factor IIB (TFIIB) is required for accurate and efficient transcription of protein-coding genes by RNA polymerase II (RNAPII). To define functional domains in the highly conserved N-terminal region of TFIIB, we have analyzed 14 site-directed substitution mutants of yeast TFIIB for their ability to support cell viability, transcription in vitro, accurate start site selection in vitro and in vivo, and to form stable complexes with purified RNAPII in vitro. Mutations impairing the formation of stable TFIIB.RNAPII complexes mapped to the zinc ribbon fold, whereas mutations conferring downstream shifts in transcription start site selection were identified at multiple positions within a highly conserved homology block adjacent and C-terminal to the zinc ribbon. These results demonstrate that the N-terminal region of yeast TFIIB contains two separable and adjacent functional domains involved in stable RNAPII binding and transcription start site selection, suggesting that downstream shifts in transcription start site selection do not result from impairment of stable TFIIB.RNAPII binding. We discuss models for yeast start site selection in which TFIIB may affect the ability of preinitiation complexes to interact with downstream DNA or to affect start site recognition by a scanning polymerase.

Even-skipped represses transcription by binding TATA binding protein and blocking the TFIID-TATA box interaction

The Drosophila homeodomain protein Even-skipped (Eve) is a transcriptional repressor, and previous studies have suggested that it functions by interfering with the basal transcription machinery. Here we describe experiments indicating that the mechanism of Eve repression involves a direct interaction with the TATA binding protein (TBP) that blocks binding of TBP-TFIID to the promoter. We first compared Eve activities in in vitro transcription systems reconstituted with either all the general transcription factors or only TBP, TFIIB, TFIIF30, and RNA polymerase II. In each case, equivalent and very efficient levels of repression were observed, indicating that no factors other than those in the minimal system are required for repression. We then show that Eve can function efficiently when its recognition sites are far from the promoter and that the same regions of Eve required for repression in vivo are necessary and sufficient for in vitro repression. This includes, in addition to an Ala-Pro-rich region, residues within the homeodomain. Using GAL4-Eve fusion proteins, we demonstrate that the homeodomain plays a role in repression in addition to DNA binding, which is to facilitate interaction with TBP. Single-round transcription experiments indicate that Eve must function prior to TBP binding to the promoter, suggesting a mechanism whereby Eve represses by competing with the TATA box for TBP binding. Consistent with this, excess TATA box-containing oligonucleotide is shown to specifically and efficiently disrupt the TBP-Eve interaction. Importantly, we show that Eve binds directly to TFIID and that this interaction can also be disrupted by the TATA oligonucleotide. We conclude that Eve represses transcription via a direct interaction with TBP that blocks TFIID binding to the promoter.

An interplay between TATA box-binding protein and transcription factors IIE and IIA modulates DNA binding and transcription

The basal transcription factor IIE (TFIIE) is thought to be one of the last factors to be assembled into a preinitiation complex (PIC) at eukaryotic promoters after RNA polymerase II and TFIIF have been incorporated. It was shown that a primary function of TFIIE is to recruit and cooperate with TFIIH in promoter melting. Here, we show that the large subunit of TFIIE (E56) can directly stimulate TBP binding to the promoter in the absence of other basal factors. The zinc-finger domain of E56, required for transcriptional activity, is critical for this function. In addition, the small subunit of TFIIE (E34) directly contacts DNA and TFIIA and thus providing a second mechanism for TFIIE to help binding of a TBP/IIA complex to the promoter, the first critical step in the PIC assembly. These studies suggest an alternative PIC assembly pathway in which TFIIE affects both TBP and TFIIH functions during initiation of RNA synthesis.

The mammalian transcriptional repressor RBP (CBF1) targets TFIID and TFIIA to prevent activated transcription

RBP is a cellular protein that functions as a transcriptional repressor in mammalian cells. RBP has elicited great interest lately because of its established roles in regulating gene expression, in Drosophila and mouse development, and as a component of the Notch signal transduction pathway. This report focuses on the mechanism by which RBP represses transcription and thereby regulates expression of a relatively simple, but natural, promoter. The results show that, irrespective of the close proximity between RBP and other transcription factors bound to the promoter, RBP does not occlude binding by these other transcription factors. Instead, RBP interacts with two transcriptional coactivators: dTAFII110, a subunit of TFIID, and TFIIA to repress transcription. The domain of dTAFII110 targeted by RBP is the same domain that interacts with TFIIA, but is disparate from the domain that interacts with Sp1. Repression can be thwarted when stable transcription preinitiation complexes are formed before RBP addition, suggesting that RBP interaction with TFIIA and TFIID perturbs optimal interactions between these coactivators. Consistent with this, interaction between RBP and TFIIA precludes interaction with dTAFII110. This is the first report of a repressor specifically targeting these two coactivators to subvert activated transcription.

Molecular genetics of the RNA polymerase II general transcriptional machinery

Transcription initiation by RNA polymerase II (RNA pol II) requires interaction between cis-acting promoter elements and trans-acting factors. The eukaryotic promoter consists of core elements, which include the TATA box and other DNA sequences that define transcription start sites, and regulatory elements, which either enhance or repress transcription in a gene-specific manner. The core promoter is the site for assembly of the transcription preinitiation complex, which includes RNA pol II and the general transcription fctors TBP, TFIIB, TFIIE, TFIIF, and TFIIH. Regulatory elements bind gene-specific factors, which affect the rate of transcription by interacting, either directly or indirectly, with components of the general transcriptional machinery. A third class of transcription factors, termed coactivators, is not required for basal transcription in vitro but often mediates activation by a broad spectrum of activators. Accordingly, coactivators are neither gene-specific nor general transcription factors, although gene-specific coactivators have been described in metazoan systems. Transcriptional repressors include both gene-specific and general factors. Similar to coactivators, general transcriptional repressors affect the expression of a broad spectrum of genes yet do not repress all genes. General repressors either act through the core transcriptional machinery or are histone related and presumably affect chromatin function. This review focuses on the global effectors of RNA polymerase II transcription in yeast, including the general transcription factors, the coactivators, and the general repressors. Emphasis is placed on the role that yeast genetics has played in identifying these factors and their associated functions.

TFIID (TBP) stabilizes the binding of MyoD to its DNA site at the promoter and MyoD facilitates the association of TFIIB with the preinitiation complex

The myogenic determination factor MyoD activates the transcription of muscle-specific genes by binding to consensus DNA sites found in the regulatory sequences of these genes. The interaction of MyoD with the basal transcription machinery is not known. Several activators induce transcription by recruiting TFIID and/or TFIIB to the promoter. We asked whether MyoD interacted functionally with TFIID and TFIIB in transcription. We reconstituted in vitro DNA binding and transcription systems of MyoD and basal transcription factors, and found that MyoD function in transcription occurred during the assembly of the preinitiation complex. Interestingly, MyoD activated transcription without affecting the binding of TFIID to the promoter. However, TFIID or TBP dramatically stabilized the binding of MyoD to its recognition site. MyoD and TBP interacted in solution. Deletion analysis of MyoD suggested that interaction of MyoD with TBP is needed for its activity in transcription. At a later stage of assembly, MyoD stabilized the binding of TFIIB to the preinitiation complex. These findings suggest that MyoD is involved in two steps of preinitiation; first, TFIID stabilizes MyoD binding to its DNA recognition site and at a later stage MyoD facilitates the association of TFIIB with the preinitiation complex.

Transcriptional control and the role of silencers in transcriptional regulation in eukaryotes

Mechanisms controlling transcription and its regulation are fundamental to our understanding of molecular biology and, ultimately, cellular biology. Our knowledge of transcription initiation and integral factors such as RNA polymerase is considerable, and more recently our understanding of the involvement of enhancers and complexes such as holoenzyme and mediator has increased dramatically. However, an understanding of transcriptional repression is also essential for a complete understanding of promoter structure and the regulation of gene expression. Transcriptional repression in eukaryotes is achieved through 'silencers', of which there are two types, namely 'silencer elements' and 'negative regulatory elements' (NREs). Silencer elements are classical, position-independent elements that direct an active repression mechanism, and NREs are position-dependent elements that direct a passive repression mechanism. In addition, 'repressors' are DNA-binding trasncription factors that interact directly with silencers. A review of the recent literature reveals that it is the silencer itself and its context within a given promoter, rather than the interacting repressor, that determines the mechanism of repression. Silencers form an intrinsic part of many eukaryotic promoters and, consequently, knowledge of their interactive role with enchancers and other transcriptional elements is essential for our understanding of gene regulation in eukaryotes.

Adenovirus E1B 55K represses p53 activation in vitro

Adenovirus E1B 55K protein cooperates with E1A gene products to induce cell transformation. E1B 55K mediates its effects by binding to and inhibiting the transcriptional activation and growth-suppression functions of the tumor suppressor p53. Previous studies in vivo have suggested that E1B 55K has an active role in repressing p53 transcriptional activation and that this repression function is directed to specific promoters through E1B 55K's interaction with DNA-bound p53. Flag-tagged E1B 55K (e55K) was expressed with the baculovirus expression system and immunopurified. Gel filtration, velocity sedimentation centrifugation, and glutaraldehyde cross-linking indicated that e55K is a dimer with a nonglobular conformation. e55K bound directly to purified p53, causing an approximately 10-fold increase in p53 affinity for tandem binding sites. Using in vitro transcription assays reconstituted with purified p53, e55K, and HeLa cell nuclear extracts, we found that e55K specifically repressed p53 activation. These results demonstrate that as postulated from earlier transient expression experiments, E1B 55K is a specific repressor of transcription from a promoter with bound p53. Since HeLa nuclear extracts contain little detectable histone protein, E1B 55K probably represses transcription through direct or indirect interactions with the RNA polymerase II transcription machinery.

Neuronal expression of zinc finger transcription factor REST/NRSF/XBR gene

The identification of a common cis-acting silencer element, a neuron-restrictive silencer element (NRSE), in multiple neuron-specific genes, together with the finding that zinc finger transcription factor REST/NRSF/XBR could confer NRSE-mediated silencing in non-neuronal cells, suggested that REST/NRSF/XBR is a master negative regulator of neurogenesis. Here we show that, although REST/NRSF/XBR expression decreases during neuronal development, it proceeds in the adult nervous system. In situ hybridization analysis revealed neuronal expression of rat REST/NRSF/XBR mRNA in adult brain, with the highest levels in the neurons of hippocampus, pons/medulla, and midbrain. The glutamate analog kainic acid increased REST/NRSF/XBR mRNA levels in various hippocampal and cortical neurons in vivo, suggesting that REST/NRSF/XBR has a role in neuronal activity-implied processes. Several alternatively spliced REST/NRSF/XBR mRNAs encoding proteins with nine, five, or four zinc finger motifs are transcribed from REST/NRSF/XBR gene. Two of these transcripts are generated by neuron-specific splicing of a 28-bp-long exon. Rat REST/NRSF/XBR protein isoforms differ in their DNA binding specificities; however, all mediate repression in transient expression assays. Our data suggest that REST/NRSF/XBR is a negative regulator rather than a transcriptional silencer of neuronal gene expression and counteracts with positive regulators to modulate target gene expression quantitatively in different cell types, including neurons.

Drosophila Goosecoid requires a conserved heptapeptide for repression of paired-class homeoprotein activators

Goosecoid (Gsc) is a homeodomain protein expressed in the organizer region of vertebrate embryos. Its Drosophila homologue, D-Gsc, has been implicated in the formation of the Stomatogastric Nervous System. Although there are no apparent similarities between the phenotypes of mutations in the gsc gene in flies and mice, all known Gsc proteins can rescue dorsoanterior structures in ventralized Xenopus embryos. We describe how D-Gsc behaves as a transcriptional repressor in Drosophila cells, acting through specific palindromic HD binding sites (P3K). D-Gsc is a ‘passive repressor’ of activator homeoproteins binding to the same sites and an ‘active repressor’ of activators binding to distinct sites. In addition, D-Gsc is able to strongly repress transcription activated by Paired-class homeoproteins through P3K, via specific protein-protein interactions in what we define as ‘interactive repression’. This form of repression requires the short conserved GEH/eh-1 domain, also present in the Engrailed repressor. Although the GEH/eh-1 domain is necessary for rescue of UV-ventralized Xenopus embryos, it is dispensable for ectopic induction of Xlim-1 expression, demonstrating that this domain is not required for all Gsc functions in vivo. Interactive repression may represent specific interactions among Prd-class homeoproteins, several of which act early during development of invertebrate and vertebrate embryos.

Multiple functions within the Epstein-Barr virus EBNA-3A protein

Two regions of the EBNA-3A protein of Epstein-Barr virus were shown to be capable of binding to the cell protein RBP-Jk (also known as CBF-1), a component of the Notch signaling pathway. Consistent with this binding, EBNA-3A inhibited reporter gene expression from plasmids containing RBP-Jk DNA binding sites within their promoters, including the Cp promoter. When EBNA-3A was linked to a GAL4 DNA binding domain, it repressed the activity of a promoter containing GAL4 binding sites at all plasmid concentrations tested. However, a deletion mutant of EBNA-3A lacking amino acids 100 to 364 showed a biphasic response in the GAL4 assay: it inhibited transcription at low DNA concentrations but activated it at high DNA concentrations. There appears to be a gene activation function within EBNA-3A that is masked in the full-length protein in this assay. Current models for EBNA-3 function have stressed transcription repression through binding to RBP-Jk, but we consider an alternative scheme in which the role of the binding of EBNA-3A, -3B, and -3C to RBP-Jk is to buffer the levels of active EBNA-3 protein. We have also found that the behavior of EBNA-3A in a cell fractionation procedure that distinguishes insoluble matrix from soluble cell fractions is modified by EBNA-LP, indicating a further novel level of interplay between the EBNA proteins.

Transcriptional repression by v-Ski and c-Ski mediated by a specific DNA binding site

The Ski oncoprotein has been shown to bind DNA and activate transcription in conjunction with other cellular factors. Because tumor cells or myogenic cells were used for those studies, it is not clear that those activities of Ski are related to its transforming ability. In this study, we use a nuclear extract of c-ski-transformed cells to identify a specific DNA binding site for Ski with the consensus sequence GTCTAGAC. We demonstrate that both c-Ski and v-Ski in nuclear extracts are components of complexes that bind specifically to this site. By evaluating the features of the sequence that are critical for binding, we show that binding is cooperative. Although Ski cannot bind to this sequence on its own, we use cross-linking with ultraviolet light to show that Ski binds to this site along with several unidentified cellular proteins. Furthermore, we find that Ski represses transcription either through upstream copies of this element or when brought to the promoter by a heterologous DNA binding domain. This is the first demonstration that Ski acts as a repressor rather than an activator and could provide new insights into regulation of gene expression by Ski.

Involvement of negative cofactor NC2 in active repression by zinc finger-homeodomain transcription factor AREB6

The transcription factor AREB6 contains a homeodomain flanked by two clusters of Krüppel type C2H2 zinc fingers. AREB6 binds to the E-box consensus sequence, CACCTGT, through either the N- or the C-terminal zinc finger cluster. To gain insights into the molecular mechanism by which AREB6 activates and represses gene expression, we analyzed the domain structure of AREB6 in the context of a heterologous DNA-binding domain by transient-transfection assays. The C-terminal region spanning amino acids 1011 to 1124 was identified as a conventional acidic activation domain. The region containing amino acids 754 to 901, which was identified as a repression domain, consists of 40% hydrophobic amino acids displaying no sequence similarities to other known repression domains. This region repressed transcription in vitro in a HeLa nuclear extract but not in reconstituted transcription systems consisting of transcription factor IID (TFIID), TFIIB, TFIIE, TFIIH/F, and RNA polymerase II. The addition of recombinant negative cofactor NC2 (NC2alpha/DRAP1 and NC2beta/Dr1) to the reconstituted transcription system restored the activity of the AREB6 repression domain. We further demonstrated interactions between the AREB6 repression domain and NC2alpha in yeast two-hybrid assay. Our findings suggest a mechanism of transcriptional repression that is mediated by the general cofactor NC2.

CDF-1-mediated repression of cell cycle genes targets a specific subset of transactivators

The cdc25C , cyclin A and cdc2 genes are regulated during the cell cycle through two contiguous repressor binding sites, the CDE and CHR, located in the region of transcription initiation and interacting with a factor termed CDF-1. The target of this repression seems to be transcriptional activation of these promoters by transcription factors bound upstream. The majority of these factors falls into the class of glutamine-rich activators, suggesting that CDF-1-mediated repression might be activation domain specific. In the present study we have used chimeric promoter constructs to demonstrate that the cdc25C UAS, but not the core promoter, is crucial for repression. In addition, we show that only specific transcription factors and activation domains are responsive to CDE-CHR-mediated cell cycle regulation. These observations clearly indicate that CDF-1 interferes with activation of transcription by a specific subset of transactivators. The repressible activation domains belong to the same class of glutamine-rich activators, pointing to specific interactions of CDF-1 with components of the transcription machinery. In agreement with this conclusion we find that a simple inversion of the CDE-CHR module completely abrogates cell cycle-regulated repression.

HUB1, a novel Krüppel type zinc finger protein, represses the human T cell leukemia virus type I long terminal repeat-mediated expression

We have shown that human T-cell leukemia virus type I (HTLV-I) gene expression is negatively regulated by the U5 repressive element (U5RE) of its long terminal repeat (LTR). To isolate factors binding to U5RE, we screened a cDNA expression library by south-western blotting with a U5RE probe. Screening 2 x10(6) clones gave a positive clone with a 3.8 kb insert encoding a novel 671 residue polypeptide, named HTLV-I U5RE binding protein 1 (HUB1), with five zinc finger domains and a Krüppel-associated box like domain; HUB1 may be related to a repressor belonging to the Krüppel type zinc finger protein. A 4.0 kb mRNA for HUB1 is ubiquitously expressed among all human tissues tested. HUB1 recognizes the TCCACCCC sequence as a core motif and exerts a strong repressive effect on HTLV-I LTR-mediated expression. A new repressive domain, named HUB1 repressive (HUR) domain, was identified, rather than the Krüppel-associated box like domain. The N-terminal region upstream of HUR domain seemed to be also indispensable to the repression. Thus, we propose that HUB1 is a new type repressor and plays an important role in the HTLV-I U5-mediated repression.

Mutational analysis of the D1/E1 core helices and the conserved N-terminal region of yeast transcription factor IIB (TFIIB): identification of an N-terminal mutant that stabilizes TATA-binding protein-TFIIB-DNA complexes

The general transcription factor IIB (TFIIB) plays an essential role in transcription of protein-coding genes by RNA polymerase II. We have used site-directed mutagenesis to assess the role of conserved amino acids in several important regions of yeast TFIIB. These include residues in the highly conserved amino-terminal region and basic residues in the D1 and E1 core domain alpha-helices. Acidic substitutions of residues K190 (D1) and K201 (E1) resulted in growth impairments in vivo, reduced basal transcriptional activity in vitro, and an inability to form stable TFIIB-TATA-binding protein-DNA (DB) complexes. Significantly, these mutants retained the ability to respond to acidic activators in vivo and to the Gal4-VP16 activator in vitro, supporting the view that these basic residues play a role in basal transcription. In addition, 14 single-amino-acid substitutions were introduced in the conserved amino-terminal region. Three of these mutants, the L50D, R64E, and R78L mutants, displayed altered growth properties in vivo and were compromised for supporting transcription in vitro. The L50D mutant was impaired for RNA polymerase II interaction, while the R64E mutant exhibited altered transcription start site selection both in vitro and in vivo and, surprisingly, was more active than the wild type in the formation of stable DB complexes. These results support the view that the amino-terminal domain is involved in the direct interaction between yeast TFIIB and RNA polymerase II and suggest that this domain may interact with DNA and/or modulate the formation of a DB complex.

Groucho acts as a corepressor for a subset of negative regulators, including Hairy and Engrailed

Relatively little is known about the molecular mechanisms involved in transcriptional repression, despite its importance in development and differentiation. Recent evidence suggests that some transcriptional repressors act by way of adaptor molecules known as corepressors. Here, we use in vivo functional assays to test whether different repressor activities are mediated by the Groucho (Gro) corepressor in the Drosophila embryo. Previously, Gro was proposed to mediate repression by the Hairy-related family of basic helix-loop-helix proteins. Our results indicate not only that repression by Hairy requires Gro, but that a repressor domain from the Engrailed (En) homeodomain protein is also Gro dependent. The latter result correlates with an ability of this En domain to bind to Gro in vitro. In contrast, repressor regions from the Even-skipped, Snail, Krüppel, and Knirps transcription factors are effective in the absence of Gro. These results show that Gro is not generally required for repression, but acts as a specific corepressor for a fraction of negative regulators, including Hairy and En.

Identification of the transcriptional repression domain of nuclear factor 1-A

We previously showed that nuclear factor 1-A (NF1-A) binds to the silencer elements in the glutathione transferase P (GST-P) gene, and the carboxy terminal region of NF1-A represses the transcription activity of human metallothionein IIA (hMTIIA) promoter. In this study, we identified a repression region which is divided into two 100 amino acid domains (RD1 and RD2). RD1 increased the repression activity of RD2 to the hMTIIA promoter activity. The NF1-A repression domain inhibited the promoter activities of not only the hMTIIA gene but also those of the GST-P and CCAAT/enhancer binding protein delta genes. RD1 and RD2 had abundant serine and glycine residues, and proline and serine residues, respectively. Whereas some repression domains identified previously are enriched with alanine, proline, or serine, and are associated with the general transcription factors, the NF1-A repression domains did not interact with transcription factor IIB, TATA-binding protein (TBP), or TBP-associated factors in vitro.

Interaction of elongation factors TFIIS and elongin A with a human RNA polymerase II holoenzyme capable of promoter-specific initiation and responsive to transcriptional activators

Affinity chromatography on columns containing the immobilized monomeric transcriptional elongation factor TFIIS or the essential large subunit, Elongin A, of the trimeric elongation factor, Elongin, was used to purify a human RNA polymerase II holoenzyme from HeLa whole cell extract. This holoenzyme contained nearstoichiometric amounts of all the general transcription factors, TFIIB, TFIID (TBP + TAFIIs), TFIIE, TFIIF, and TFIIH, required to accurately initiate transcription in vitro at the adenovirus major late promoter. It behaved as a large complex, slightly smaller than 70 S ribosomes, during gel filtration chromatography, and contained nearly half the TFIID that was present in the extract used for the affinity chromatography. It also contained the cyclin-dependent kinase CDK8, a human homologue of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae holoenzyme subunit SRB10, and many other polypeptides. Efficient interaction of holoenzyme with TFIIS or Elongin A required only the amino-terminal region of either protein. These regions are similar in amino acid sequence but dispensable for TFIIS or Elongin to regulate elongation in vitro by highly purified RNA polymerase II. The transcriptional activators GAL4-VP16 and GAL4-Sp1 activated transcription in vitro by purified holoenzyme in the absence of any additional factors.

The transcriptional activation and repression domains of RFX1, a context-dependent regulator, can mutually neutralize their activities

EP is a DNA element found in regulatory regions of viral and cellular genes. While being a key functional element in viral enhancers, EP has no intrinsic enhancer activity but can stimulate or silence transcription in a context-dependent manner. The EP element is bound by RFX1, which belongs to a novel, evolutionarily conserved protein family. In an attempt to decipher the mechanism by which EP regulates transcription, the intrinsic transcriptional activity of RFX1 was investigated. A functional dissection of RFX1, by analysis of deletion mutants and chimeric proteins, identified several regions with independent transcriptional activity. An activation domain containing a glutamine-rich region is found in the N-terminal half of RFX1, while a region with repressor activity overlaps the C-terminal dimerization domain. In RFX1 these activities were mutually neutralized, producing a nearly inactive transcription factor. This neutralization effect was reproduced by fusing RFX1 sequences to a heterologous DNA-binding domain. We propose that relief of self-neutralization may allow RFX1 to act as a dual-function regulator via its activation and repression domains, accounting for the context-dependent activity of EP.

Two evolutionarily conserved repression domains in the Drosophila Kruppel protein differ in activator specificity

To identify biologically functional regions in the product of the Drosophila melanogaster gene Kruppel, we cloned the Kruppel homolog from Drosophila virilis. Both the previously identified amino (N)-terminal repression region and the DNA-binding region of the D. virilis Kruppel protein are greater than 96% identical to those of the D. melanogaster Kruppel protein, demonstrating a selective pressure to maintain the integrity of each region during 60 million to 80 million years of evolution. An additional region in the carboxyl (C) terminus of Kruppel that was most highly conserved was examined further. A 42-amino-acid stretch within the conserved C-terminal region also encoded a transferable repression domain. The short, C-terminal repression region is a composite of three subregions of distinct amino acid composition, each containing a high proportion of either basic, proline, or acidic residues. Mutagenesis experiments demonstrated, unexpectedly, that the acidic residues contribute to repression function. Both the N-terminal and C-terminal repression regions were tested for the ability to affect transcription mediated by a variety of activator proteins. The N-terminal repression region was able to inhibit transcription in the presence of multiple activators. However, the C-terminal repression region inhibited transcription by only a subset of the activator proteins. The different activator specificities of the two regions suggest that they repress transcription by different mechanisms and may play distinct biological roles during Drosophila development.

Repression of p53-mediated transcription by MDM2: a dual mechanism

The oncoprotein MDM2 binds to the activation domain of the tumor suppressor p53 and inhibits its ability to stimulate transcription. This same region of p53 is able to bind several basal transcription factors that appear to be important for the transactivation function of p53. It has therefore been suggested that MDM2 acts to inhibit p53 by concealing its activation domain from the basal machinery. Here we present data suggesting that MDM2 possesses an additional inhibitory function. Our experiments reveal that in addition to a p53-binding domain, MDM2 also contains an inhibitory domain that can directly repress basal transcription in the absence of p53. By fusing portions of MDM2 to a heterologous DNA-binding domain to allow p53-independent promoter recruitment, we have localized this inhibitory domain to a region encompassing amino acids 50-222 of MDM2. Furthermore, the function of this inhibitory domain does not require the presence of either TFIIA or the TAFs. Of the remaining basal factors, both the small subunit of TFIIE and monomeric TBP are bound by the MDM2 inhibitory domain. It is possible that MDM2 inhibits the ability of the preinitiation complex to synthesize RNA through one of these interactions. Our results are consistent with a model in which MDM2 represses p53-dependent transcription by a dual mechanism: a masking of the activation domain of p53 through a protein-protein interaction that additionally serves to recruit MDM2 to the promoter where it directly interferes with the basal transcription machinery.

Promoter structure-dependent functioning of the general transcription factor IIE in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

General transcription factor (TF) IIE is an essential component of the basal transcription complex for protein-encoding genes, which is widely conserved in eukaryotes. Here we analyzed requirement for TFIIE for transcription in vivo by using yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells harboring mutations in the TFA1 gene encoding the larger one of the two subunits of TFIIE. Deletion analysis indicated that the N-terminal half of Tfa1 protein has an essential function to support the cell growth. In a temperature-sensitive tfa1 mutant cell, the steady-state level of bulk poly(A)+ RNA decreased rapidly at the restrictive temperature. Surprisingly, levels of several mRNAs, whose transcription is directed by the promoters lacking the typical TATA sequence, were not affected in the mutant cells at that temperature. This promoter-specific functioning of TFIIE was reproduced in a cell-free system composed of TFIIE-depleted nuclear extracts. These results strongly suggest that requirement for TFIIE varies in each gene depending on the promoter structures in vivo.

The neuron-restrictive silencer element: a dual enhancer/silencer crucial for patterned expression of a nicotinic receptor gene in the brain

The neuron-restrictive silencer element (NRSE) has been identified in several neuronal genes and confers neuron specificity by silencing transcription in nonneuronal cells. NRSE is present in the promoter of the neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor beta2-subunit gene that determines its neuron-specific expression in the nervous system. Using transgenic mice, we show that NRSE may either silence or enhance transcription depending on the cellular context within the nervous system. In vitro in neuronal cells, NRSE activates transcription of synthetic promoters when located downstream in the 5' untranslated region, or at less than 50 bp upstream from the TATA box, but switches to a silencer when located further upstream. In contrast, in nonneuronal cells NRSE always functions as a silencer. Antisense RNA inhibition shows that the NRSE-binding protein REST contributes to the activation of transcription in neuronal cells.

Human TAF(II)28 interacts with the human T cell leukemia virus type I Tax transactivator and promotes its transcriptional activity

The Tax protein encoded by human T cell leukemia virus type I transactivates the viral promoter by forming a complex with several cellular factors bound to three repeats of a specific upstream regulatory sequence. We have shown that transactivation by Tax was correlated with its ability to interact with the C-terminal moiety of the TATA box-binding protein (TBP). In the present study, the ability of Tax to interact with several human TBP-associated factors (TAF(II)s) was analyzed. We show that Tax interacts selectively with hTAF(II)28 in transfected HeLa cells. A direct interaction between Tax and hTAF(II)28 was also observed in vitro with purified proteins. In transient expression studies we show that overexpression of hTAF(II)28 significantly increased transactivation by Tax, both in the absence and in the presence of overexpressed TBP. The ability of hTAF(II)28 to potentiate transactivation correlated with the ability of Tax to interact with hTAF(II)28 and also with the ability of hTAF(II)28 to interact with TBP. Coexpression of TBP and hTAF(II)28 resulted in an additive increase in transactivation by Tax. From these observations we propose that transcriptional activation by Tax involves multiple interactions with TFIID via its TBP and hTAF(II)28 subunits.

Drosophila development. Delimiting patterns by repression

Patterning of the Drosophila embryo requires not only the proper activation of determinants at specific times, but also their restriction to specific places. Recent studies on transcriptional repressors show how they delimit the gene expression patterns to ensure normal development.

Mutational studies of yeast transcription factor IIB in vivo reveal a functional surface important for gene activation

Recent experiments in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) cells have identified a species-specific region of yeast transcription factor IIB (TFIIB) located at residues 144-157. According to the human TFIIB structure, this region is part of a solvent-exposed helix in the first repeat of the carboxyl-terminal core domain. In this report, we systematically analyze four positions in this region (Lys-147, Cys-149, Lys-151, and Glu-152) that together have been shown previously to be important for yeast TFIIB's function in vivo. Our experiments suggest that all of these four positions, and in particular positions 151, 149, and 152, are critical for yeast TFIIB's ability to support cell growth. In addition, we describe an intragenic suppressor screening experiment to identify mutations that reverse, or partially reverse, the temperature-sensitive phenotype of a yeast TFIIB derivative bearing amino acid changes at these four positions to human residues. The suppressor mutations reveal changes at positions 115, 117, and 182 that are located outside the species-specific region of yeast TFIIB, suggesting an extended surface available to interact with other proteins. Finally, we demonstrate that the suppressor mutations restore gene activation in vivo, further supporting the idea that one important function of yeast TFIIB in living cells is to mediate gene activation.

Involvement of the carboxyl terminus of vertebrate poly(A) polymerase in U1A autoregulation and in the coupling of splicing and polyadenylation

Interactions required for inhibition of poly(A) polymerase (PAP) by the U1 snRNP-specific U1A protein, a reaction whose function is to autoregulate U1A protein production, are examined. PAP inhibition requires a substrate RNA to which at least two molecules of U1A protein can bind tightly, but we demonstrate that the secondary structure of the RNA is not highly constrained. A mutational analysis reveals that the carboxy-terminal 20 amino acids of PAP are essential for its inhibition by the U1A-RNA complex. Remarkably, transfer of these amino acids to yeast PAP, which is otherwise not affected by U1A protein, is sufficient to confer U1A-mediated inhibition onto the yeast enzyme. A glutathione S-transferase fusion protein containing only these 20 PAP residues can interact in vitro with an RNA-U1A protein complex containing two U1A molecules, but not with one containing a single U1A protein, explaining the requirement for two U1A-binding sites on the autoregulatory RNA element. A mutational analysis of the U1A protein demonstrates that amino acids 103-119 are required for PAP inhibition. A monomeric synthetic peptide consisting of the conserved U1A amino acids from this region has no detectable effect on PAP activity. However, the same U1A peptide, when conjugated to BSA, inhibits vertebrate PAP. In addition to this activity, the U1A peptide-BSA conjugate specifically uncouples splicing and 3'-end formation in vitro without affecting uncoupled splicing or 3'-end cleavage efficiencies. This suggests that the carboxy-terminal region of PAP with which it interacts is involved not only in U1A autoregulation but also in the coupling of splicing and 3'-end formation.

Sp3 is a bifunctional transcription regulator with modular independent activation and repression domains

Sp3 is a member of the Sp family of transcription factors and binds to DNA with affinity and specificity comparable to that of Sp1. We demonstrate that Sp3 is a bifunctional transcription factor that can both activate and repress transcription. Gene fusion experiments in mammalian cells demonstrate that the Sp3 activation potential is distributed over an extensive glutamine-rich N-terminal region, whereas the repressor activity has been mapped in a 72-amino acid region located at the 5' of the zinc finger DNA-binding domain. We demonstrated that the repression activity is strictly dependent on the context of the DNA-binding sites bound by Sp3. We found that Sp3 represses transcription of promoters bearing multiple GAL4 DNA-binding sites, whereas it activates isogenic reporters containing a single GAL4-binding site. Transfection experiments in Drosophila cells that lack endogenous Sp activity demonstrated that Sp3 does not possess an active repression domain that can function in insect cells, rather it is a weak transcriptional activator of the c-myc promoter. Our results strongly suggest that Sp3 is a dual-function regulator whose activity is dependent upon both the promoter and the cellular context.

Transcription of the Acanthamoeba TATA-binding protein gene. A single transcription factor acts both as an activator and a repressor

Transcription of the Acanthamoeba TATA-binding protein (TBP) gene is regulated by TBP promoter-binding factor (TPBF), a previously described transactivator that binds as a tetramer to the TBP Promoter Element (TPE) and stimulates transcription up to 10-fold in vitro. Here we report that TPBF also functions as a transcription repressor by binding to a negative cis-element, located between the TATA box and the transcription initiation site. The negative element, referred to as the nTPE, is structurally similar to the TPE, and its disruption increases the transcription potency of the TBP promoter. TPBF binds to the nTPE, as demonstrated by mobility shift assays. However, the binding affinity of TPBF for the nTPE is about 10-fold lower than for the TPE. When placed upstream of the TATA box, the nTPE has very little effect on transcription. However, it inhibits transcription when placed at several positions downstream of the TATA box. Mechanistic studies with the TBP promoter suggest that binding of TPBF to the nTPE not only prevents TBP from binding to the TATA box but also displaces bound TBP, thereby inhibiting further assembly of the preinitiation complex. These results suggest a mechanism in which the cellular TPBF concentration controls the level of TBP gene transcription and show that a single factor can be stimulatory, inhibitory, or neutral depending on the sequence and the context of its binding site.

Functional dissection of a human Dr1-DRAP1 repressor complex

The heterotetrameric Dr1-DRAP1 transcriptional repressor complex was functionally dissected. Dr1 was found to contain two domains required for repression of transcription. The tethering domain interacts with the TATA box binding protein and directs the repressor complex to the promoter. This tethering domain can be replaced by a domain conferring sequence-specific recognition to the repressor complex. In the absence of the tethering domain, Dr1 interacts with its corepressor DRAP1, but this interaction is not functional. The enhancement of Dr1-mediated repression of transcription by DRAP1 requires the tethering domain. The second domain of Dr1 is the repression domain, which is glutamine-alanine rich. A 65-amino-acid polypeptide containing the repression domain fused to the Ga14 DNA binding domain repressed transcription when directed to TATA-containing and TATA-less promoters. This repression domain was also found to functionally and directly interact with the TATA box binding protein.

ZBP-89, a Krüppel-like zinc finger protein, inhibits epidermal growth factor induction of the gastrin promoter

We have shown previously that a GC-rich element (GGGGCGGGGTGGGGGG) conferring epidermal growth factor (EGF) responsiveness to the human gastrin promoter binds Sp1 and additional undefined complexes. A rat GH4 cell line expression library was screened by using a multimer of the gastrin EGF response element, and three overlapping cDNA clones were identified. The full-length rat cDNA encoded an 89-kDa zinc finger protein (ZBP-89) that was 89% identical to a 49-kDa human factor, ht(beta), that binds a GTGGG/CACCC element in T-cell receptor promoters. The conservation of amino acids between the zinc fingers indicates that ZBP-89 is a member of the C2H2 zinc finger family subclass typified by the Drosophila Krüppel protein. ZBP-89 is ubiquitously expressed in normal adult tissues. It binds specifically to the gastrin EGF response element and inhibits EGF induction of the gastrin promoter. Collectively, these results demonstrate that ZBP-89 functions as a repressor of basal and inducible expression of the gastrin gene.

Interferon regulatory factors and TFIIB cooperatively regulate interferon-responsive promoter activity in vivo and in vitro

Interferon regulatory factors (IRFs) bind to the interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE) and regulate interferon- and virus-mediated gene expression. IRF-1 acts as a transcriptional activator, while IRF-2 acts as a repressor. Here we show that IRF-1 and IRF-2 bind to both cellular TFIIB, a component of the basal transcription machinery, and recombinant TFIIB (rTFIIB) and that this protein-protein interaction facilitates binding of IRFs to the ISRE. A functional interaction between TFIIB and IRF was assessed by a newly established in vitro transcription assay in which recombinant IRF-1 (rIRF-1) stimulated transcription specifically from an ISRE-containing template. With this assay we show that rIRF-1 and rTFIIB cooperatively enhance the ISRE promoter in vitro. We found that the activity of an ISRE-containing promoter was cooperatively enhanced upon cotransfection of TFIIB and IRF-1 cDNAs into P19 embryonal carcinoma cells, further demonstrating functional interactions in vivo. The cooperative enhancement by TFIIB and IRF-1 was independent of the TATA sequence in the ISRE promoter but dependent on the initiator sequence (Inr) and was abolished when P19 cells were induced to differentiate by retinoic acid treatment. In contrast, cotransfection of TFIIB and IRF-1 into NIH 3T3 cells resulted in a dose-dependent repression of promoter activation which occurred in a TATA-dependent manner. Our results indicate the presence of a cell type-specific factor that mediates the functional interaction between IRFs and TFIIB and that acts in conjunction with the requirement of TATA and Inr for promoter activation.

Mad proteins contain a dominant transcription repression domain

Transcription repression by the basic region-helix-loop-helix-zipper (bHLHZip) protein Mad1 requires DNA binding as a ternary complex with Max and mSin3A or mSin3B, the mammalian orthologs of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae transcriptional corepressor SIN3. The interaction between Mad1 and mSin3 is mediated by three potential amphipathic alpha-helices: one in the N terminus of Mad (mSin interaction domain, or SID) and two within the second paired amphipathic helix domain (PAH2) of mSin3A. Mutations that alter the structure of the SID inhibit in vitro interaction between Mad and mSin3 and inactivate Mad's transcriptional repression activity. Here we show that a 35-residue region containing the SID represents a dominant repression domain whose activity can be transferred to a heterologous DNA binding region. A fusion protein comprising the Mad1 SID linked to a Ga14 DNA binding domain mediates repression of minimal as well as complex promoters dependent on Ga14 DNA binding sites. In addition, the SID represses the transcriptional activity of linked VP16 and c-Myc transactivation domains. When fused to a full-length c-Myc protein, the Mad1 SID specifically represses both c-Myc's transcriptional and transforming activities. Fusions between the GAL DNA binding domain and full-length mSin3 were also capable of repression. We show that the association between Mad1 and mSin3 is not only dependent on the helical SID but is also dependent on both putative helices of the mSin3 PAH2 region, suggesting that stable interaction requires all three helices. Our results indicate that the SID is necessary and sufficient for transcriptional repression mediated by the Mad protein family and that SID repression is dominant over several distinct transcriptional activators.

The human cut homeodomain protein can repress gene expression by two distinct mechanisms: active repression and competition for binding site occupancy

By analogy with other homeodomain proteins conserved in evolution, mammalian Cut proteins are believed, as in Drosophila melanogaster, to play an important role in determining cell type specificity in several tissues. At the molecular level, Cut proteins appear to serve as transcriptional repressors. In this study, we have examined the mechanism by which the human Cut (hCut) protein down-regulates gene expression. The homeodomain and the three regions called Cut repeats are evolutionarily conserved and were previously shown to function as DNA binding domains. The carboxy-terminal region, although it does not show amino acid sequence homology per se, in all cases is enriched in alanine and proline residues, a distinctive feature of some transcriptional repression domains. Our results reveal two distinct modes of repression: competition for binding site occupancy and active repression. On one hand, the composite DNA binding domain formed by Cut repeat 3 and the Cut homeodomain was shown to bind to CCAAT and Sp1 sites within the tk gene promoter and to reduce gene expression, presumably by preventing activation by the corresponding transcription factors. On the other hand, the carboxy-terminal region of mammalian Cut proteins was found to function as an active repression domain in a distance-independent manner. We have further narrowed this activity to two subdomains that can independently repress activated transcription. Finally, we present a model to illustrate the two mechanisms by which Cut proteins repress gene expression.

A nuclear hormone receptor corepressor mediates transcriptional silencing by receptors with distinct repression domains

Ligand-independent transcriptional repression is an important function of nuclear hormone receptors. An interaction screen with the repression domain of the orphan receptor RevErb identified N-CoR, the corepressor for thyroid hormone receptor (TR) and retinoic acid receptor (RAR). N-CoR is likely to be a bona fide transcriptional corepressor for RevErb because (i) RevErb interacts with endogenous N-CoR, (ii) ectopic N-CoR potentiates RevErb-mediated repression, and (iii) transcriptional repression by RevErb correlates with its ability to bind N-CoR. Remarkably, a region homologous to the CoR box which is necessary for TR and RAR to interact with N-CoR is not required for RevErb. Rather, two short regions of RevErb separated by approximately 200 amino acids are required for interaction with N-CoR. The primary amino acid sequence of the N-terminal region of RevErb essential for N-CoR interaction is not homologous to that of TR or RAR, whereas similarities exist among the C-terminal domains of the receptors. N-CoR contains two adjacent but distinct interaction domains, one of which binds tightly to both RevErb and TR whereas the other binds more weakly and differentially interacts with the nuclear receptors. These results indicate that multiple nuclear receptors, utilizing different primary amino acid sequences, repress transcription by interacting with N-CoR.

Interferon regulatory factor-2 directs transcription from the gp91phox promoter

Repressor elements in the gp91(phox) promoter are necessary to restrict tissue-specific transcription to mature phagocytes. Deletion of these elements leads to significant promoter activity in cell lines such as HEL and K562 that do not normally express gp91(phox). The -100 to +12 base pair gp91(phox) promoter region is sufficient to direct maximal de-repressed transcription in these cells. However, promoter activity is dramatically decreased following a 16-base pair truncation that deletes an interferon-stimulated response element. This element interacts with IRF-1 and IRF-2, members of the interferon regulatory factor family of transcription factors. In addition, this promoter region is bound by a factor with properties similar to BID, a DNA-binding protein that also interacts with three upstream sites within the gp91(phox) promoter. Transient transfection studies using mutated promoters indicate that both the IRF and BID binding sites are required for maximal gp91(phox) promoter activity. Overexpression of IRF-1 or IRF-2 in K562 cells leads to transactivation of gp91(phox) promoter constructs, which is dependent on the presence of an intact IRF binding site. IRF-2 predominates in macrophages that express the gp91(phox) gene as well as in HEL and K562 cells. We conclude that IRF-2 and BID activate gp91(phox) promoter activity in the absence of transcriptional repression.

Protein-protein interaction between the transcriptional repressor E4BP4 and the TBP-binding protein Dr1

We have previously mapped a repression domain from the active transcriptional repressor E4BP4 to a 65 amino acid segment near the C-terminus of the polypeptide. Here we show that the E4BP4 repression domain interacts specifically with the TBP binding repressor protein Dr1. Mutants that affect the ability of E4BP4 to bring about transcriptional repression are also deficient in their binding of Dr1. The results are discussed in the light of evidence for squelching of a 'global' repressor by a DNA binding defective E4BP4 mutant.

KAP-1, a novel corepressor for the highly conserved KRAB repression domain

The KRAB repression domain is one of the most widely distributed transcriptional effector domains yet identified, but its mechanism of repression is unknown. We have cloned a corepressor, KAP-1, which associates with the KRAB domain but not with KRAB mutants that have lost repression activity. KAP-1 can enhance KRAB-mediated repression and is a repressor when directly tethered to DNA. KAP-1 contains a RING finger, B boxes, and a PHD finger; the RING-B1-B2 structure is required for KRAB binding and corepression. We propose that KAP-1 may be a universal corepressor for the large family of KRAB domain-containing transcription factors.

E(z): a polycomb group gene or a trithorax group gene?

The products of the Polycomb group of genes are cooperatively involved in repressing expression of homeotic selector genes outside of their appropriate anterior/posterior boundaries. Loss of maternal and/or zygotic function of Polycomb group genes results in the ectopic expression of both Antennapedia Complex and Bithorax Complex genes. The products of the trithorax group of genes are cooperatively involved in maintaining active expression of homeotic selector genes within their appropriate anterior/posterior boundaries. Loss of maternal and/or zygotic function of trithorax group genes results in reduced expression of both Antennapedia Complex and Bithorax Complex genes. Although Enhancer of zeste has been classified as a member of the Polycomb group, in this paper we show that Enhancer of zeste can also be classified as a member of the trithorax group. The requirement for Enhancer of zeste activity as either a trithorax group or Polycomb group gene depends on the homeotic selector gene locus as well as on spatial and temporal cues.

Identifying a species-specific region of yeast TF11B in vivo

The general transcription factor IIB (TFIIB) is required for RNA polymerase II transcription in eukaryotes. It provides a physical link between the TATA-binding protein (TBP) and the RNA polymerase and is a component previously suggested to respond to transcriptional activators in vitro. In this report, we compare the yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and human forms of the protein in yeast cells to study their functional differences. We demonstrate that human TFIIB fails to functionally replace yeast TFIIB in yeast cells. By analyzing various human-yeast hybrid TFIIB molecules, we show that a 14-amino-acid region at the amino terminus of the first repeat of yeast TFIIB plays an important role in determining species specificity in vivo. In addition, we identify four amino acids in this region that are critical for an amphipathic helix unique to yeast TFIIB. By site-directed mutagenesis analyses we demonstrate that these four amino acids are important for yeast TFIIB's activity in vivo. Finally, we show that mutations in the species-specific region of yeast TFIIB can differentially affect the expression of genes activated by different activators in vivo. These results provide strong evidence suggesting that yeast TFIIB is involved in the process of transcriptional activation in living cells.

Mapping of the transcriptional repression domain of the lymphoid-specific transcription factor oct-2A

The lymphoid-specific transcription factor Oct-2a is implicated in B cell-specific transcriptional activity via the octamer motif. Structure/function analysis of various Oct-2a effector regions in the context of the GAL4 DNA-binding domain revealed that Oct-2a contains two functionally different activation domains at the N and the C termini. The transcriptional activity of both domains is strongly potentiated by interactions with distinct B cell-specific coactivators. Recently, we have identified a repression domain located within the N terminus of Oct-2a (amino acids 2-99). When this domain was transferred to a potent activator, transcription was strongly inhibited. In this study we present a deletion analysis of the N-terminal region of Oct-2a to determine the minimal repression domain. We identified a stretch of 23 amino acids, rich in serine and threonine residues, which was responsible for most of the repression activity. We show that repression is strongly dependent on the type of enhancer present in the reporter plasmid as well as on the cell line tested. The possibility that Oct-2a can act as an activator and/or a repressor may have important consequences for the function of Oct-2a in B cell differentiation and other developmental processes.

Mechanisms of transcription complex assembly

Gene-specific activators control the access of RNA polymerase II (pol II) to promoters in several ways: by chromatin rearrangement involving an ATP-dependent SWI-SNF complex; by the synergistic recruitment of transcription factor IID (TFIID); and by either the sequential recruitment of basal transcription factors and pol II or the recruitment of a preformed pol II holoenzyme which includes most of the basal factors. One of the most significant recent developments has been the demonstration that distinct subunits of TFIID (namely subunits of the TATA-binding protein associated factor) target different activators, basal factors, and core promoter elements.

Transcriptional repression in development

It is becoming increasingly clear that transcriptional repression is at least as important as transcriptional activation for establishing cell-type specific patterns of gene expression during embryogenesis. Recent studies in Drosophila suggest that repressors fall into two categories, short-range and long-range repressors. The former permit enhancer autonomy in modular promoters, whereas the latter function in a dominant fashion to silence multiple enhancers.

Active repression mechanisms of eukaryotic transcription repressors

Regulators of transcription and, in particular, transcriptional repressors, play central roles in vital biological processes, such as development and the regulation of cell growth. A major class of transcriptional repressors consists of DNA-binding proteins that interact with specific promoter elements and repress transcription via small, portable repression 'domains'. Such transcriptional inhibition, first identified only five years ago, has been termed active repression, because it is not mediated simply by steric hindrance mechanisms. It is unknown how interaction(s) between such a repressor and the RNA polymerase II basal or regulatory transcription machinery can derail the formation or competency of a transcription complex at a promoter. However, the recent progress toward identification of molecular targets suggests several specific mechanisms for achieving active repression.

Fos-Jun dimerization promotes interaction of the basic region with TFIIE-34 and TFIIF

The regulation of RNA polymerase II-mediated transcription involves both direct and indirect interactions among regulatory proteins and the general transcription factors (GTFs) that assemble at TATA-containing promoters. Here we show that the oncogenic transcription factors Fos and Jun make direct physical contacts with three proteins of the basal transcription apparatus, TFIIE-34 (TFIIE-beta), TFIIF-30 (RAP30), and TFIIF-74 (RAP74). The interactions among the activator proteins and these three GTFs were not detected with other transcription factors, including some bZIP protein family members. Both coimmunoprecipitation and protein blotting experiments demonstrated that the interactions were strongly favored by dimerization of Fos and Jun and that they involved the basic region and basic region-proximal domain of both proteins. Mutations within the DNA-binding domains of Fos and Jun abolished binding to GTFs, although the presence of DNA was not required for the association. Surprisingly, only a single basic region in the context of a protein dimer was sufficient for the interaction. Squelching of AP-1-dependent transcription in vitro by an excess of Fos-Jun dimers was relieved by the addition of TFIIE, indicating that it is a direct functional target of Fos and Jun. These results suggest that dimerization induces a conformational alteration in the basic region of Fos and Jun that promotes an association with TFIIE-34 and TFIIF, thus contributing to transcription initiation.

Mechanisms of transcriptional activation and repression can both involve TFIID

Regulation of transcription involves the activities of activators and repressors. Recent experiments have provided evidence that the function of both types of regulators can involve interactions with one or more component of the basal transcription machinery. A principal target appears to be TFIID, which consists of the TATA binding protein (TBP) and associated factors (TAFs). Here we describe experiments that provide added support for the idea that interactions affecting TFIID can play important roles in both activation and repression. We show, using transfection assays in Drosophila Schneider cells, that recruitment of TBP to a promoter as a GAL4-TBP fusion protein can provide a substantial activation of transcription. The conserved core of TBP is necessary and sufficient for this effect, which was observed with both TATA-containing and TATA-lacking basal promoters. These findings extend experiments performed in yeast, and strengthen the idea that recruitment of TBP (TFIID) can be an important mechanism of activation. We also provide further support for the idea that TBP can be a target for a transcriptional repressor, the Drosophila Even-skipped protein (Eve). We present evidence that the homeodomain, which is necessary for binding TBP in vitro, can also be required for repression in vivo, independent of its role in DNA binding. On the other hand, deletion of the alanine/proline-rich region that is essential for repression in vivo and TBP binding in vitro does not significantly affect DNA binding by the purified protein. These results strengthen the view that TBP, either directly or indirectly as a component of TFIID, can be a target of both activators and repressors.

Requirement of a corepressor for Dr1-mediated repression of transcription

A Dr1-associated polypeptide (DRAP1) was isolated from HeLa cells and found to function as a corepressor of transcription. Corepressor function requires an interaction between DRAP1 and Dr1. Heterodimer formation was dependent on a histone fold motif present at the amino terminus of both polypeptides. Association of DRAP1 with Dr1 results in higher stability of the Dr1-TBP-TATA motif complex and precluded the entry of TFIIA and/or TFIIB to preinitiation complexes. DRAP1 was found to be expressed in all tissues analyzed with higher levels in tissues with a low mitotic index. Analysis of DRAP1 in the developing brain of rat demonstrated undetectable levels of DRAP1 in actively dividing cells but high levels of DRAP1 expression in differentiated non dividing cells. Dr1 was immunodetected in all cells analyzed. A model for DRAP1-dependent, Dr1-mediated repression of transcription is proposed.

Transcriptional corepression in vitro: a Mot1p-associated form of TATA-binding protein is required for repression by Leu3p

Signals from transcriptional activators to the general mRNA transcription apparatus are communicated by factors associated with RNA polymerase II or the TATA-binding protein (TBP). Currently, little is known about how gene-specific transcription repressors communicate with RNA polymerase II. We have analyzed the requirements for repression by the saccharomyces cerevisiae Leu3 protein (Leu3p) in a reconstituted transcription system. We have identified a complex form of TBP which is required for communication of the repressing signal. This TFIID-like complex contains a known TBP-associated protein, Mot1p, which has been implicated in the repression of a subset of yeast genes by genetic analysis. Leu3p-dependent repression can be reconstituted with purified Mot1p and recombinant TBP. In addition, a mutation in the Mot1 gene leads to partial derepression of the Leu3p-dependent LEU2 promoter. These in vivo and in vitro observations define a role for Mot1p as a transcriptional corepressor.

Short-range transcriptional repressors mediate both quenching and direct repression within complex loci in Drosophila

The early Drosophila embryo provides a unique system for the analysis of transcriptional repression since a broad spectrum of repressors are distributed in spatially distinct patterns. Krüppel (Kr) and snail (sna), two zinc finger repressors, are essential for segmentation and for the establishment of the mesoderm/neuroectoderm boundary, respectively. Both repressors were examined in the context of synthetic gene complexes containing modular promoters and divergently transcribed reporter genes. These studies indicate that Kr and sna function as short-range repressors, which can mediate either quenching or direct repression of the transcription complex, depending on the location of repressor sites. When located within an upstream enhancer, the repressor locally quenches nearby activators and permits other enhancers to interact with the transcription complex (enhancer autonomy). In contrast, when bound to promoter-proximal regions the repressor functions in a dominant fashion and blocks multiple enhancers. Local quenching and dominant repression require close linkage (<100 bp) of the repressor with either upstream activators or the transcription complex. These studies establish short-range repression as a flexible form of gene regulation and suggest that the key distinction among repressors is their range of action.