Studying Nuclear Receptor Complexes in the Cellular Environment

Ep300 sequestration to functionally distinct glucocorticoid receptor binding loci underlie rapid gene activation and repression

The rapid transcriptional response to the transcription factor, glucocorticoid receptor (GR), including gene activation or repression, is mediated by the spatial association of genes with multiple GR binding sites (GBSs) over large genomic distances. However, only a minority of the GBSs have independent GR-mediated activating capacity, and GBSs with independent repressive activity were rarely reported. To understand the positive and negative effects of GR we mapped the regulatory environment of its gene targets. We show that the chromatin interaction networks of GR-activated and repressed genes are spatially separated and vary in the features and configuration of their GBS and other non-GBS regulatory elements. The convergence of the KLF4 pathway in GR-activated domains and the STAT6 pathway in GR-repressed domains, impose opposite transcriptional effects to GR, independent of hormone application. Moreover, the ROR and Rev-erb transcription factors serve as positive and negative regulators, respectively, of GR-mediated gene activation. We found that the spatial crosstalk between GBSs and non-GBSs provides a physical platform for sequestering the Ep300 co-activator from non-GR regulatory loci in both GR-activated and -repressed gene compartments. While this allows rapid gene repression, Ep300 recruitment to GBSs is productive specifically in the activated compartments, thus providing the basis for gene induction.

Flow cytometry-based FRET identifies binding intensities in PPARγ1 protein-protein interactions in living cells

PPARγ is a pharmacological target in inflammatory and metabolic diseases. Upon agonistic treatment or following antagonism, binding of co-factors is altered, which consequently affects PPARγ-dependent transactivation as well as its DNA-independent properties. Therefore, establishing techniques to characterize these interactions is an important issue in living cells. Methods: Using the FRET pair Clover/mRuby2, we set up a flow cytometry-based FRET assay by analyzing PPARγ1 binding to its heterodimerization partner RXRα. Analyses of PPARγ-reporter and co-localization studies by laser-scanning microscopy validated this system. Refining the system, we created a new readout to distinguish strong from weak interactions, focusing on PPARγ-binding to the co-repressor N-CoR2. Results: We observed high FRET in cells expressing Clover-PPARγ1 and mRuby2-RXRα, but no FRET when cells express a mRuby2-RXRα deletion mutant, lacking the PPARγ interaction domain. Focusing on the co-repressor N-CoR2, we identified in HEK293T cells the new splice variant N-CoR2-ΔID1-exon. Overexpressing this isoform tagged with mRuby2, revealed no binding to Clover-PPARγ1, nor in murine J774A.1 macrophages. In HEK293T cells, binding was even lower in comparison to N-CoR2 constructs in which domains established to mediate interaction with PPARγ binding are deleted. These data suggest a possible role of N-CoR2-ΔID1-exon as a dominant negative variant. Because binding to N-CoR2-mRuby2 was not altered following activation or antagonism of Clover-PPARγ1, we determined the effect of pharmacological treatment on FRET intensity. Therefore, we calculated flow cytometry-based FRET efficiencies based on our flow cytometry data. As with PPARγ antagonism, PPARγ agonist treatment did not prevent binding of N-CoR2. Conclusion: Our system allows the close determination of protein-protein interactions with a special focus on binding intensity, allowing this system to characterize the role of protein domains as well as the effect of pharmacological agents on protein-protein interactions.