A central role for SWI6 in modulating cell cycle Start-specific transcription in yeast

Fdo1, Fkh1, Fkh2, and the Swi6-Mbp1 MBF complex regulate Mcd1 levels to impact eco1 rad61 cell growth in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Cohesins promote proper chromosome segregation, gene transcription, genomic architecture, DNA condensation, and DNA damage repair. Mutations in either cohesin subunits or regulatory genes can give rise to severe developmental abnormalities (such as Robert Syndrome and Cornelia de Lange Syndrome) and also are highly correlated with cancer. Despite this, little is known about cohesin regulation. Eco1 (ESCO2/EFO2 in humans) and Rad61 (WAPL in humans) represent two such regulators but perform opposing roles. Eco1 acetylation of cohesin during S phase, for instance, stabilizes cohesin-DNA binding to promote sister chromatid cohesion. On the other hand, Rad61 promotes the dissociation of cohesin from DNA. While Eco1 is essential, ECO1 and RAD61 co-deletion results in yeast cell viability, but only within a limited temperature range. Here, we report that eco1rad61 cell lethality is due to reduced levels of the cohesin subunit Mcd1. Results from a suppressor screen further reveals that FDO1 deletion rescues the temperature-sensitive (ts) growth defects exhibited by eco1rad61 double mutant cells by increasing Mcd1 levels. Regulation of MCD1 expression, however, appears more complex. Elevated expression of MBP1, which encodes a subunit of the MBF transcription complex, also rescues eco1rad61 cell growth defects. Elevated expression of SWI6, however, which encodes the Mbp1-binding partner of MBF, exacerbates eco1rad61 cell growth and also abrogates the Mpb1-dependent rescue. Finally, we identify two additional transcription factors, Fkh1 and Fkh2, that impact MCD1 expression. In combination, these findings provide new insights into the nuanced and multi-faceted transcriptional pathways that impact MCD1 expression.

FvMbp1-Swi6 complex regulates vegetative growth, stress tolerance, and virulence in Fusarium verticillioides

The mycotoxigenic fungus Fusarium verticillioides is a common pathogen of grain and medicine that contaminates the host with fumonisin B1 (FB1) mycotoxin, poses serious threats to human and animal health. Therefore, it is crucial to unravel the regulatory mechanisms of growth, and pathogenicity of F. verticillioides. Mbp1 is a component of the MluI cell cycle box binding factor complex and acts as an APSES-type transcription factor that regulates cell cycle progression. However, no information is available regarding its role in F. verticillioides. In this study, we demonstrate that FvMbp1 interacts with FvSwi6 that acts as the cell cycle transcription factor, to form the heteromeric transcription factor complexes in F. verticillioides. Our results show that ΔFvMbp1 and ΔFvSwi6 both cause a severe reduction of vegetative growth, conidiation, and increase tolerance to diverse environmental stresses. Moreover, ΔFvMbp1 and ΔFvSwi6 dramatically decrease the virulence of the pathogen on the stalk and ear of maize. Transcriptome profiling show that FvMbp1-Swi6 complex co-regulates the expression of genes associated with multiple stress responses. These results indicate the functional importance of the FvMbp1-Swi6 complex in the filamentous fungi F. verticillioides and reveal a potential target for the effective prevention and control of Fusarium diseases.

The APSES transcription factor CfSwi6 is required for growth, cell wall integrity, and pathogenicity of Ceratocystis fimbriata

Cell wall integrity (CWI) is crucial for the growth, development, and host invasion of pathogenic fungi. The APSES transcription factor Swi6 in fungi plays a role in mediating cell wall integrity through the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway. Ceratocystis fimbriata is a notorious pathogenic fungus responsible for causing black rot in sweet potatoes. In this study, an orthologous APSES transcription factor Swi6 (CfSwi6) downstream of the CWI regulatory pathway in C. fimbriata was characterized. Deletion of CfSWI6 leads to impaired hyphal development, conidiation, and compromised cell wall integrity, resulting in a significant reduction in virulence. Transcriptome analysis revealed the involvement of CfSWI6 in various pathways, including the MAPK pathway, DNA synthesis and stress response. ChIP-seq data provided predictions of potential target genes regulated by CfSwi6. Through yeast one-hybrid, we confirmed the direct binding of CfSwi6 to the promoter of the chitin synthetase gene. In summary, these findings indicated that CfSwi6 plays an important role in the growth, development, and pathogenicity of C. fimbriata. This study provides new insights into the pathogenic mechanism of C. fimbriata in sweet potato and inspires potential strategies to control sweet potato black rot.

Opposing Roles of FACT for Euchromatin and Heterochromatin in Yeast

DNA is stored in the nucleus of a cell in a folded state; however, only the necessary genetic information is extracted from the required group of genes. The key to extracting genetic information is chromatin ambivalence. Depending on the chromosomal region, chromatin is characterized into low-density "euchromatin" and high-density "heterochromatin", with various factors being involved in its regulation. Here, we focus on chromatin regulation and gene expression by the yeast FACT complex, which functions in both euchromatin and heterochromatin. FACT is known as a histone H2A/H2B chaperone and was initially reported as an elongation factor associated with RNA polymerase II. In budding yeast, FACT activates promoter chromatin by interacting with the transcriptional activators SBF/MBF via the regulation of G1/S cell cycle genes. In fission yeast, FACT plays an important role in the formation of higher-order chromatin structures and transcriptional repression by binding to Swi6, an HP1 family protein, at heterochromatin. This FACT property, which refers to the alternate chromatin-regulation depending on the binding partner, is an interesting phenomenon. Further analysis of nucleosome regulation within heterochromatin is expected in future studies.

Essential Roles of Ribonucleotide Reductases under DNA Damage and Replication Stresses in Cryptococcus neoformans

A balance in the deoxyribonucleotide (dNTPs) intracellular concentration is critical for the DNA replication and repair processes. In the model yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the Mec1-Rad53-Dun1 kinase cascade mainly regulates the ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) gene expression during DNA replication and DNA damage stress. However, the RNR regulatory mechanisms in basidiomycete fungi during DNA replication and damage stress remain elusive. Here, we observed that in C. neoformans, RNR1 (large RNR subunit) and RNR21 (one small RNR subunit) were required for cell viability, but not RNR22 (another small RNR subunit). RNR22 overexpression compensated for the lethality of RNR21 suppression. In contrast to the regulatory mechanisms of RNRs in S. cerevisiae, Rad53 and Chk1 kinases cooperatively or divergently controlled RNR1 and RNR21 expression under DNA damage and DNA replication stress. In particular, this study revealed that Chk1 mainly regulated RNR1 expression during DNA replication stress, whereas Rad53, rather than Chk1, played a significant role in controlling the expression of RNR21 during DNA damage stress. Furthermore, the expression of RNR22, not but RNR1 and RNR21, was suppressed by the Ssn6-Tup1 complex during DNA replication stress. Notably, we observed that RNR1 expression was mainly regulated by Mbs1, whereas RNR21 expression was cooperatively controlled by Mbs1 and Bdr1 as downstream factors of Rad53 and Chk1 during DNA replication and damage stress. Collectively, the regulation of RNRs in C. neoformans has both evolutionarily conserved and divergent features in DNA replication and DNA damage stress, compared with other yeasts. IMPORTANCE Upon DNA replication or damage stresses, it is critical to provide proper levels of deoxynucleotide triphosphates (dNTPs) and activate DNA repair machinery. Ribonucleotide reductases (RNRs), which are composed of large and small subunits, are required for synthesizing dNTP. An imbalance in the intracellular concentration of dNTPs caused by the perturbation of RNR results in a reduction in DNA repair fidelity. Despite the importance of their roles, functions and regulations of RNR have not been elucidated in the basidiomycete fungi. In this study, we found that the roles of RNR1, RNR21, and RNR22 genes encoding RNR subunits in the viability of C. neoformans. Furthermore, their expression levels are divergently regulated by the Rad53-Chk1 pathway and the Ssn6-Tup1 complex in response to DNA replication and damage stresses. Therefore, this study provides insight into the regulatory mechanisms of RNR genes to DNA replication and damage stresses in basidiomycete fungi.

Replication stress inhibits synthesis of histone mRNAs in yeast by removing Spt10p and Spt21p from the histone promoters

Proliferating cells coordinate histone and DNA synthesis to maintain correct stoichiometry for chromatin assembly. Histone mRNA levels must be repressed when DNA replication is inhibited to prevent toxicity and genome instability due to free non-chromatinized histone proteins. In mammalian cells, replication stress triggers degradation of histone mRNAs, but it is unclear if this mechanism is conserved from other species. The aim of this study was to identify the histone mRNA decay pathway in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and determine the mechanism by which DNA replication stress represses histone mRNAs. Using reverse transcription-quantitative PCR and chromatin immunoprecipitation–quantitative PCR, we show here that histone mRNAs can be degraded by both 5′ → 3′ and 3′ → 5′ pathways; however, replication stress does not trigger decay of histone mRNA in yeast. Rather, replication stress inhibits transcription of histone genes by removing the histone gene–specific transcription factors Spt10p and Spt21p from histone promoters, leading to disassembly of the preinitiation complexes and eviction of RNA Pol II from histone genes by a mechanism facilitated by checkpoint kinase Rad53p and histone chaperone Asf1p. In contrast, replication stress does not remove SCB-binding factor transcription complex, another activator of histone genes, from the histone promoters, suggesting that Spt10p and Spt21p have unique roles in the transcriptional downregulation of histone genes during replication stress. Together, our data show that, unlike in mammalian cells, replication stress in yeast does not trigger decay of histone mRNAs but inhibits histone transcription.

High levels of Tryptophan reduce cell wall or membrane stress tolerance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Tryptophan (Trp) is a proteinogenic aromatic amino acid; however, high levels of Trp are toxic in animals and yeast with unknown mechanisms. Previously, we suggested that aromatic aminotransferase Aro9 is important for excess Trp degradation. Besides, Schroeder and Ikui showed that aro9Δ is sensitive to membrane stress by sodium dodecyl sulfate. Therefore, Trp accumulation may reduce the cell wall or membrane (CW/M) stress tolerance through participation of cell wall integrity (CWI) pathway, which detects and responds to CW/M perturbations. In this study, we found that yeast mutants of the CWI mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade were susceptible to excess Trp. Also, the Trp degradation deficient mutant aro8Δ aro9Δ cells, in which Trp accumulation was confirmed, were sensitive to several CW/M stresses. These results indicated that accumulation of Trp is adverse for the CW/M stress resistance and may disturb appropriate signal transduction responding to the stress.

Transcription Activator Swi6 Interacts with Mbp1 in MluI Cell Cycle Box-Binding Complex and Regulates Hyphal Differentiation and Virulence in Beauveria bassiana

Mbp1 protein acts as a DNA-binding protein in MluI cell cycle box-binding complex (MBF) and plays an essential role in filamentous myco-pathogen Beauveria bassiana.In the current study, BbSwi6 (a homologue of yeast Swi6) was functionally characterized in B.bassiana. Both BbSwi6 and BbMbp1 localize in the nucleus and display a direct interaction relationship which is indicated by a yeast two-hybrid assay. BbSwi6 significantly contributes to hyphal growth, asexual sporulation and virulence. On the aerial surface, ΔBbSwi6 grew slower on various nutrients and displayed abnormal conidia-producing structures, which hardly produced conidia. In liquid media, BbSwi6 loss led to 90% reduction in blastospore yield. Finally, the virulence of the ΔBbSwi6 mutant was modestly weakened with a reduction of 20% in median lethal time. Comparative transcriptomics revealed that BbSwi6 mediated different transcriptomes during fungal development into conidia and blastospores. Notably, under the indicated condition, the BbSwi6-mediated transcriptome significantly differed to that mediated by BbMbp1. Our results demonstrate that, in addition to their roles as the interactive components in MBF, BbSwi6 and BbMbp1 mediate divergent genetic pathways during morphological transitions in B. bassiana.

Evolutionary innovation, fungal cell biology, and the lateral gene transfer of a viral KilA-N domain

Fungi are found in diverse ecological niches as primary decomposers, mutualists, or parasites of plants and animals. Although animals and fungi share a common ancestor, fungi dramatically diversified their life cycle, cell biology, and metabolism as they evolved and colonized new niches. This review focuses on a family of fungal transcription factors (Swi4/Mbp1, APSES, Xbp1, Bqt4) derived from the lateral gene transfer of a KilA-N domain commonly found in prokaryotic and eukaryotic DNA viruses. These virus-derived fungal regulators play central roles in cell cycle, morphogenesis, sexual differentiation, and quiescence. We consider the possible origins of KilA-N and how this viral DNA binding domain came to be intimately associated with fungal processes.

Plasticity of the MFS1 Promoter Leads to Multidrug Resistance in the Wheat Pathogen Zymoseptoria tritici

The ascomycete Zymoseptoria tritici is the causal agent of Septoria leaf blotch on wheat. Disease control relies mainly on resistant wheat cultivars and on fungicide applications. The fungus displays a high potential to circumvent both methods. Resistance against all unisite fungicides has been observed over decades. A different type of resistance has emerged among wild populations with multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains. Active fungicide efflux through overexpression of the major facilitator gene MFS1 explains this emerging resistance mechanism. Applying a bulk-progeny sequencing approach, we identified in this study a 519-bp long terminal repeat (LTR) insert in the MFS1 promoter, a relic of a retrotransposon cosegregating with the MDR phenotype. Through gene replacement, we show the insert as a mutation responsible for MFS1 overexpression and the MDR phenotype. Besides this type I insert, we found two different types of promoter inserts in more recent MDR strains. Type I and type II inserts harbor potential transcription factor binding sites, but not the type III insert. Interestingly, all three inserts correspond to repeated elements present at different genomic locations in either IPO323 or other Z. tritici strains. These results underline the plasticity of repeated elements leading to fungicide resistance in Z. tritici and which contribute to its adaptive potential. IMPORTANCE Disease control through fungicides remains an important means to protect crops from fungal diseases and to secure the harvest. Plant-pathogenic fungi, especially Zymoseptoria tritici, have developed resistance against most currently used active ingredients, reducing or abolishing their efficacy. While target site modification is the most common resistance mechanism against single modes of action, active efflux of multiple drugs is an emerging phenomenon in fungal populations reducing additionally fungicides' efficacy in multidrug-resistant strains. We have investigated the mutations responsible for increased drug efflux in Z. tritici field strains. Our study reveals that three different insertions of repeated elements in the same promoter lead to multidrug resistance in Z. tritici. The target gene encodes the membrane transporter MFS1 responsible for drug efflux, with the promoter inserts inducing its overexpression. These results underline the plasticity of repeated elements leading to fungicide resistance in Z. tritici.

From START to FINISH: computational analysis of cell cycle control in budding yeast

In the cell division cycle of budding yeast, START refers to a set of tightly linked events that prepare a cell for budding and DNA replication, and FINISH denotes the interrelated events by which the cell exits from mitosis and divides into mother and daughter cells. On the basis of recent progress made by molecular biologists in characterizing the genes and proteins that control START and FINISH, we crafted a new mathematical model of cell cycle progression in yeast. Our model exploits a natural separation of time scales in the cell cycle control network to construct a system of differential-algebraic equations for protein synthesis and degradation, post-translational modifications, and rapid formation and dissociation of multimeric complexes. The model provides a unified account of the observed phenotypes of 257 mutant yeast strains (98% of the 263 strains in the data set used to constrain the model). We then use the model to predict the phenotypes of 30 novel combinations of mutant alleles. Our comprehensive model of the molecular events controlling cell cycle progression in budding yeast has both explanatory and predictive power. Future experimental tests of the model’s predictions will be useful to refine the underlying molecular mechanism, to constrain the adjustable parameters of the model, and to provide new insights into how the cell division cycle is regulated in budding yeast.

The APSES family proteins in fungi: Characterizations, evolution and functions

The APSES protein family belongs to transcriptional factors of the basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) class, the originally described members (APSES: Asm1p, Phd1p, Sok2p, Efg1p and StuAp) are used to designate this group of proteins, and they have been identified as key regulators of fungal development and other biological processes. APSES proteins share a highly conserved DNA-binding domain (APSES domain) of about 100 amino acids, whose central domain is predicted to form a typical bHLH structure. Besides APSES domain, several APSES proteins also contain additional domains, such as KilA-N and ankyrin repeats. In recent years, an increasing number of APSES proteins have been identified from diverse fungi, and they involve in numerous biological processes, such as sporulation, cellular differentiation, mycelial growth, secondary metabolism and virulence. Most fungi, including Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus nidulans, Candida albicans, Fusarium graminearum, and Neurospora crassa, contain five APSES proteins. However, Cryptococcus neoformans only contains two APSES proteins, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae contains six APSES proteins. The phylogenetic analysis showed the APSES domains from different fungi were grouped into four clades (A, B, C and D), which is consistent with the result of homologous alignment of APSES domains using DNAman. The roles of APSES proteins in clade C have been studied in detail, while little is known about the roles of other APSES proteins in clades A, B and D. In this review, the biochemical properties and functional domains of APSES proteins are predicted and compared, and the phylogenetic relationship among APSES proteins from various fungi are analyzed based on the APSES domains. Moreover, the functions of APSES proteins in different fungi are summarized and discussed.

Cell cycle-regulated transcription: effectively using a genomics toolbox

The cell cycle comprises a series of temporally ordered events that occur sequentially, including DNA replication, centrosome duplication, mitosis, and cytokinesis. What are the regulatory mechanisms that ensure proper timing and coordination of events during the cell cycle? Biochemical and genetic screens have identified a number of cell-cycle regulators, and it was recognized early on that many of the genes encoding cell-cycle regulators, including cyclins, were transcribed only in distinct phases of the cell cycle. Thus, "just in time" expression is likely an important part of the mechanism that maintains the proper temporal order of cell cycle events. New high-throughput technologies for measuring transcript levels have revealed that a large percentage of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae transcriptome (~20 %) is cell cycle regulated. Similarly, a substantial fraction of the mammalian transcriptome is cell cycle-regulated. Over the past 25 years, many studies have been undertaken to determine how gene expression is regulated during the cell cycle. In this review, we discuss contemporary models for the control of cell cycle-regulated transcription, and how this transcription program is coordinated with other cell cycle events in S. cerevisiae. In addition, we address the genomic approaches and analytical methods that enabled contemporary models of cell cycle transcription. Finally, we address current and future technologies that will aid in further understanding the role of periodic transcription during cell cycle progression.

Protein kinase CK2 holoenzyme promotes start-specific transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the entrance into S phase requires the activation of a specific burst of transcription, which depends on SBF (SCB binding factor, Swi4/Swi6) and MBF (MCB binding factor, Mbp1/Swi6) complexes. CK2 is a pleiotropic kinase involved in several cellular processes, including the regulation of the cell cycle. CK2 is composed of two catalytic subunits (α and α') and two regulatory subunits (β and β'), both of which are required to form the active holoenzyme. Here we investigate the function of the CK2 holoenzyme in Start-specific transcription. The ckb1Δ ckb2Δ mutant strain, bearing deletions of both genes encoding CK2 regulatory subunits, shows a delay of S-phase entrance due to a severe reduction of the expression of SBF- and MBF-dependent genes. This transcriptional defect is caused by an impaired recruitment of Swi6 and Swi4 to G1 gene promoters. Moreover, CK2 α and β' subunits interact with RNA polymerase II, whose binding to G1 promoters is positively regulated by the CK2 holoenzyme. Collectively, these findings suggest a novel role for the CK2 holoenzyme in the activation of G1 transcription.

Role of a Candida albicans Nrm1/Whi5 homologue in cell cycle gene expression and DNA replication stress response

To explore cell cycle regulation in the dimorphic fungus Candida albicans, we identified and characterized CaNrm1, a C. albicans homologue of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Whi5 and Nrm1 transcription inhibitors that, analogous to mammalian Rb, regulate the cell cycle transcription programme during the G1 phase. CaNRM1 is able to complement the phenotypes of both whi5 and nrm1 mutants in S. cerevisiae. In C. albicans, global transcription analysis of the CaNRM1 deletion mutant reveals a preferential induction of G1- and G1/S-specific genes. CaNrm1 interacts genetically with the C. albicans MBF functional homologue, and physically with its subunit CaSwi4. Similar to S. cerevisiae Whi5, CaNrm1 subcellular localization oscillates with the cell cycle between the nucleus and the cytoplasm. Deletion of CaNRM1 further results in increased resistance to hydroxyurea, an inhibitor of DNA replication; analysis of the expression of ribonucleotide reductase, the target of hydroxyurea, suggests that its transcriptional induction in response to hydroxyurea is regulated via CaNrm1, and biochemical analysis shows that hydroxyurea causes disruption of the interaction of CaNrm1 with CaSwi4. Furthermore, induction of the hyphal-specific genes is dampened under certain conditions in the Canrm1(-/-) mutant, suggesting that the cell cycle transcription programme can influence the morphogenetic transcription programme of C. albicans.

Ixr1 is required for the expression of the ribonucleotide reductase Rnr1 and maintenance of dNTP pools

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Dun1 protein kinase is a downstream target of the conserved Mec1-Rad53 checkpoint pathway. Dun1 regulates dNTP pools during an unperturbed cell cycle and after DNA damage by modulating the activity of ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) by multiple mechanisms, including phosphorylation of RNR inhibitors Sml1 and Dif1. Dun1 also activates DNA-damage-inducible genes by inhibiting the Crt1 transcriptional repressor. Among the genes repressed by Crt1 are three out of four RNR genes: RNR2, RNR3, and RNR4. The fourth RNR gene, RNR1, is also DNA damage-inducible, but is not controlled by Crt1. It has been shown that the deletion of DUN1 is synthetic lethal with the deletion of IXR1, encoding an HMG-box-containing DNA binding protein, but the reason for this lethality is not known. Here we demonstrate that the dun1 ixr1 synthetic lethality is caused by an inadequate RNR activity. The deletion of IXR1 results in decreased dNTP levels due to a reduced RNR1 expression. The ixr1 single mutants compensate for the reduced Rnr1 levels by the Mec1-Rad53-Dun1-Crt1–dependent elevation of Rnr3 and Rnr4 levels and downregulation of Sml1 levels, explaining why DUN1 is indispensible in ixr1 mutants. The dun1 ixr1 synthetic lethality is rescued by an artificial elevation of the dNTP pools. We show that Ixr1 is phosphorylated at several residues and that Ser366, a residue important for the interaction of HMG boxes with DNA, is required for Ixr1 phosphorylation. Ixr1 interacts with DNA at multiple loci, including the RNR1 promoter. Ixr1 levels are decreased in Rad53-deficient cells, which are known to have excessive histone levels. A reduction of the histone gene dosage in the rad53 mutant restores Ixr1 levels. Our results demonstrate that Ixr1, but not Dun1, is required for the proper RNR1 expression both during an unperturbed cell cycle and after DNA damage.

Dun1 is a non-essential protein kinase important for the maintenance of genome stability in budding yeast. Earlier studies found that simultaneous deletion of DUN1 and IXR1 results in lethality, but the reason for this so-called synthetic lethality is not clear. Ixr1 is implicated in DNA repair based on its ability to bind to DNA modified by the anticancer drug cisplatin. Here, we investigated the mechanism behind the ixr1 dun1 synthetic lethality. We demonstrate that yeast strains lacking Ixr1 have decreased amounts of dNTPs, the building blocks of DNA. This is because Ixr1 is required for the normal expression of Rnr1, one of the essential subunits of the enzyme ribonucleotide reductase (RNR), which catalyzes the rate-limiting step in the production of all four dNTPs. Cells lacking Ixr1 compensate the decreased expression of Rnr1 by the increased expression of other RNR genes and degradation of RNR inhibitors. These compensatory processes require Dun1. Hence, cells lacking both Dun1 and Ixr1 have dNTP pools that are too low for survival. Our work identifies a new important player in the synthesis of the building blocks of DNA.

Cell cycle sensing of oxidative stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by oxidation of a specific cysteine residue in the transcription factor Swi6p

Yeast cells begin to bud and enter the S phase when growth conditions are favorable during the G(1) phase. When subjected to some oxidative stresses, cells delay entry at G(1), allowing repair of cellular damage. Hence, oxidative stress sensing is coordinated with the regulation of cell cycle. We identified a novel function of the cell cycle regulator of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Swi6p, as a redox sensor through its cysteine residue at position 404. When alanine was substituted at this position, the resultant mutant, C404A, was sensitive to several reactive oxygen species and oxidants including linoleic acid hydroperoxide, the superoxide anion, and diamide. This mutant lost the ability to arrest in G(1) phase upon treatment with lipid hydroperoxide. The Cys-404 residue of Swi6p in wild-type cells was oxidized to a sulfenic acid when cells were subjected to linoleic acid hydroperoxide. Mutation of Cys-404 to Ala abolished the down-regulation of expression of the G(1) cyclin genes CLN1, CLN2, PCL1, and PCL2 that occurred when cells of the wild type were exposed to the lipid hydroperoxide. In conclusion, oxidative stress signaling for cell cycle regulation occurs through oxidation of the G(1)/S-specific transcription factor Swi6p and consequently leads to suppression of the expression of G(1) cyclins and a delay in cells entering the cell cycle.

Spt10 and Swi4 control the timing of histone H2A/H2B gene activation in budding yeast

The expression of the histone genes is regulated during the cell cycle to provide histones for nucleosome assembly during DNA replication. In budding yeast, histones H2A and H2B are expressed from divergent promoters at the HTA1-HTB1 and HTA2-HTB2 loci. Here, we show that the major activator of HTA1-HTB1 is Spt10, a sequence-specific DNA binding protein with a putative histone acetyltransferase (HAT) domain. Spt10 binds to two pairs of upstream activation sequence (UAS) elements in the HTA1-HTB1 promoter: UAS1 and UAS2 drive HTA1 expression, and UAS3 and UAS4 drive HTB1 expression. UAS3 and UAS4 also contain binding sites for the cell cycle regulator SBF (an Swi4-Swi6 heterodimer), which overlap the Spt10 binding sites. The binding of Spt10 and binding of SBF to UAS3 and UAS4 are mutually exclusive in vitro. Both SBF and Spt10 are bound in cells arrested with α-factor, apparently awaiting a signal to activate transcription. Soon after the removal of α-factor, SBF initiates a small, early peak of HTA1 and HTB1 transcription, which is followed by a much larger peak due to Spt10. Both activators dissociate from the HTA1-HTB1 promoter after expression has been activated. Thus, SBF and Spt10 cooperate to control the timing of HTA1-HTB1 expression.

The transcriptional network activated by Cln3 cyclin at the G1-to-S transition of the yeast cell cycle

Background

The G1-to-S transition of the cell cycle in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae involves an extensive transcriptional program driven by transcription factors SBF (Swi4-Swi6) and MBF (Mbp1-Swi6). Activation of these factors ultimately depends on the G1 cyclin Cln3.

Results

To determine the transcriptional targets of Cln3 and their dependence on SBF or MBF, we first have used DNA microarrays to interrogate gene expression upon Cln3 overexpression in synchronized cultures of strains lacking components of SBF and/or MBF. Secondly, we have integrated this expression dataset together with other heterogeneous data sources into a single probabilistic model based on Bayesian statistics. Our analysis has produced more than 200 transcription factor-target assignments, validated by ChIP assays and by functional enrichment. Our predictions show higher internal coherence and predictive power than previous classifications. Our results support a model whereby SBF and MBF may be differentially activated by Cln3.

Conclusions

Integration of heterogeneous genome-wide datasets is key to building accurate transcriptional networks. By such integration, we provide here a reliable transcriptional network at the G1-to-S transition in the budding yeast cell cycle. Our results suggest that to improve the reliability of predictions we need to feed our models with more informative experimental data.

Cyclin regulation by the s phase checkpoint

In eukaryotic cells a surveillance mechanism, the S phase checkpoint, detects and responds to DNA damage and replication stress, protecting DNA replication and arresting cell cycle progression. We show here that the S phase cyclins Clb5 and Clb6 are regulated in response to genotoxic stress in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Clb5 and Clb6 are responsible for the activation of the specific Cdc28 cyclin-dependent kinase activity that drives the onset and progression of the S phase. Intriguingly, Clb5 and Clb6 are regulated by different mechanisms. Thus, the presence of Clb6, which is eliminated early in an unperturbed S phase, is stabilized when replication is compromised by replication stress or DNA damage. Such stabilization depends on the checkpoint kinases Mec1 and Rad53. The stabilization of Clb6 levels is a dynamic process that requires continued de novo protein synthesis, because the cyclin remains subject to degradation. It also requires the activity of the G(1) transcription factor Mlu1 cell cycle box-binding factor (MBF) in the S phase, whereas Dun1, the checkpoint kinase characteristically responsible for the transcriptional response to genotoxic stress, is dispensable in this case. On the other hand, two subpopulations of endogenous Clb5 can be distinguished according to turnover in an unperturbed S phase. In the presence of replication stress, the unstable Clb5 pool is stabilized, and such stabilization requires neither MBF transcriptional activity nor de novo protein synthesis.

SBF transcription factor complex positively regulates UV mutagenesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The collection of gene deletion mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was used to screen for novel genes required for UV-induced mutagenesis. We found the SBF transcription factor (Swi4/Swi6 protein complex) to be required for wild-type levels of UV mutability in forward and reverse mutation assays. Expression of translesion polymerase zeta component Rev7 was identified as a target of SBF-dependent regulation.

Bayesian hierarchical model for transcriptional module discovery by jointly modeling gene expression and ChIP-chip data

Background

Transcriptional modules (TM) consist of groups of co-regulated genes and transcription factors (TF) regulating their expression. Two high-throughput (HT) experimental technologies, gene expression microarrays and Chromatin Immuno-Precipitation on Chip (ChIP-chip), are capable of producing data informative about expression regulatory mechanism on a genome scale. The optimal approach to joint modeling of data generated by these two complementary biological assays, with the goal of identifying and characterizing TMs, is an important open problem in computational biomedicine.

Results

We developed and validated a novel probabilistic model and related computational procedure for identifying TMs by jointly modeling gene expression and ChIP-chip binding data. We demonstrate an improved functional coherence of the TMs produced by the new method when compared to either analyzing expression or ChIP-chip data separately or to alternative approaches for joint analysis. We also demonstrate the ability of the new algorithm to identify novel regulatory relationships not revealed by ChIP-chip data alone. The new computational procedure can be used in more or less the same way as one would use simple hierarchical clustering without performing any special transformation of data prior to the analysis. The R and C-source code for implementing our algorithm is incorporated within the R package gimmR which is freely available at http://eh3.uc.edu/gimm.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that, whenever available, ChIP-chip and expression data should be analyzed within the unified probabilistic modeling framework, which will likely result in improved clusters of co-regulated genes and improved ability to detect meaningful regulatory relationships. Given the good statistical properties and the ease of use, the new computational procedure offers a worthy new tool for reconstructing transcriptional regulatory networks.

Transcriptional regulation of the Drosophila rfc1 gene by the DRE-DREF pathway

The DNA replication-related element (DRE) is a common 8-bp sequence (5'-TATCGATA) found in the promoters of many DNA replication-related genes, to which DRE-binding factor (DREF) specifically binds to activate transcription. Replication factor C (RFC) is an essential five-subunit complex in DNA replication, the largest subunit being RFC140. We first identified the gene (rfc1) encoding the Drosophila RFC140 (dRFC140) protein and then isolated a mutant. The phenotypes suggested that the gene is essential for cell-cycle progression, and immunocytochemical studies also indicated a relation between its expression and the cell cycle. The rfc1 gene contains three DRE-like sequences in its 5'-flanking region, one of them perfectly matching DRE and the other two demonstrating a match in seven of eight nucleotides. These sequences were named DRE1 (-63 to -69), DRE2 (-378 to -385), and DRE3 (-1127 to -1134), respectively. Immunostaining of polytene chromosomes in third-instar larvae using anti-DREF sera detected a specific band in 82E2 of 3R chromosome, containing the rfc1 gene region. Band-mobility shift assays using Drosophila Kc cell nuclear extracts revealed that DREF binds to DRE1, -2, and -3 in vitro, and chromatin immunoprecipitation using anti-DREF IgG confirmed that this occurs in vivo. Luciferase transient expression assays in S2 cells further suggested that DREs in the rfc1 promoter are involved in transcriptional regulation of the gene. Moreover, rfc1 promoter activity was reduced by 38% in DREF double-stranded RNA-treated S2 cells. These results indicate that DREF positively regulates the rfc1 promoter.

Identification of transcription factor cooperativity via stochastic system model

MOTIVATION

Transcription factor binding sites are known to co-occur in the same gene owing to cooperativity of the transcription factors (TFs) that bind to them. Genome-wide location data can help us understand how an individual TF regulates its target gene. Nevertheless, how TFs cooperate to regulate their target genes still needs further study. In this study, genome-wide location data and expression profiles are integrated to reveal how TFs cooperate to regulate their target genes from the stochastic system perspective.

RESULTS

Based on a stochastic dynamic model, a new measurement of TF cooperativity is developed according to the regulatory abilities of cooperative TF pairs and the number of their occurrences. Our method is employed to the yeast cell cycle and reveals successfully many cooperative TF pairs confirmed by previous experiments, e.g. Swi4-Swi6 in G1/S phase and Ndd1-Fkh2 in G2/M phase. Other TF pairs with potential cooperativity mentioned in our results can provide new directions for future experiments. Finally, a cooperative TF network of cell cycle is constructed from significant cooperative TF pairs.

CONTACT

bschen@ee.nthu.edu.tw

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/~bschen/cooperativity/

Cell-cycle control of gene expression in budding and fission yeast

Cell-cycle control of transcription seems to be a universal feature of proliferating cells, although relatively little is known about its biological significance and conservation between organisms. The two distantly related yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe have provided valuable complementary insight into the regulation of periodic transcription as a function of the cell cycle. More recently, genome-wide studies of proliferating cells have identified hundreds of periodically expressed genes and underlying mechanisms of transcriptional control. This review discusses the regulation of three major transcriptional waves, which roughly coincide with three main cell-cycle transitions (initiation of DNA replication, entry into mitosis, and exit from mitosis). I also compare and contrast the transcriptional regulatory networks between the two yeasts and discuss the evolutionary conservation and possible roles for cell cycle-regulated transcription.

Dynamic modeling of cis-regulatory circuits and gene expression prediction via cross-gene identification

Background

Gene expression programs depend on recognition of cis elements in promoter region of target genes by transcription factors (TFs), but how TFs regulate gene expression via recognition of cis elements is still not clear. To study this issue, we define the cis-regulatory circuit of a gene as a system that consists of its cis elements and the interactions among their recognizing TFs and develop a dynamic model to study the functional architecture and dynamics of the circuit. This is in contrast to traditional approaches where a cis-regulatory circuit is constructed by a mutagenesis or motif-deletion scheme. We estimate the regulatory functions of cis-regulatory circuits using microarray data.

Results

A novel cross-gene identification scheme is proposed to infer how multiple TFs coordinate to regulate gene transcription in the yeast cell cycle and to uncover hidden regulatory functions of a cis-regulatory circuit. Some advantages of this approach over most current methods are that it is based on data obtained from intact cis-regulatory circuits and that a dynamic model can quantitatively characterize the regulatory function of each TF and the interactions among the TFs. Our method may also be applicable to other genes if their expression profiles have been examined for a sufficiently long time.

Conclusion

In this study, we have developed a dynamic model to reconstruct cis-regulatory circuits and a cross-gene identification scheme to estimate the regulatory functions of the TFs that control the regulation of the genes under study. We have applied this method to cell cycle genes because the available expression profiles for these genes are long enough. Our method not only can quantify the regulatory strengths and synergy of the TFs but also can predict the expression profile of any gene having a subset of the cis elements studied.

Genetic interactions between mediator and the late G1-specific transcription factor Swi6 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Swi6 associates with Swi4 to activate HO and many other late G(1)-specific transcripts in budding yeast. Genetic screens for suppressors of SWI6 mutants have been carried out. A total of 112 of these mutants have been identified and most fall into seven complementation groups. Six of these genes have been cloned and identified and they all encode subunits of the mediator complex. These mutants restore transcription to the HO-lacZ reporter in the absence of Swi6 and have variable effects on other Swi6 target genes. Deletions of other nonessential mediator components have been tested directly for suppression of, or genetic interaction with, swi6. Mutations in half of the known subunits of mediator show suppression and/or growth defects in combination with swi6. These phenotypes are highly variable and do not correlate with a specific module of the mediator. Mutations in tail module components sin4 and pgd1 showed both growth defects and suppression when combined with swi6, but a third tail component, gal11, showed neither. A truncated form of the essential Srb7 mediator subunit also suppresses swi6 mutations and shows a defect in recruitment of the tail module components Sin4, Pgd1, and Gal11 to the mediator complex.

High functional overlap between MluI cell-cycle box binding factor and Swi4/6 cell-cycle box binding factor in the G1/S transcriptional program in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In budding yeast, many genes are induced early in the cell cycle. Induction of these genes has been predominantly attributed to two transcription factors, Swi4-Swi6 (SBF) and Mbp1-Swi6 (MBF). Swi4 and Mbp1 are related DNA-binding proteins with dissimilar target sequences. For most G1/S-regulated genes that we tested in a cdc20 block-release protocol for cell-cycle synchronization, removal of both Swi4 and Mbp1 was necessary and sufficient to essentially eliminate cell-cycle-regulated expression. Detectable SBF or MBF binding sites (SCBs or MCBs) in the promoters or available genome-wide promoter occupancy data do not consistently explain this functional overlap. The overlapping ability of these transcription factors to regulate many promoters with very similar cell-cycle kinetics may provide robustness to the G1/S transcriptional response, but poses a puzzle with respect to promoter-transcription factor specificity. In addition, for some genes, deletion of Mbp1 or Swi4 enhances transcription, suggesting that these factors can also function as transcriptional repressors. Finally, we observe residual G1/S transcriptional regulation in the absence of Swi4 and Mbp1.

Evidence that Spt10 and Spt21 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae play distinct roles in vivo and functionally interact with MCB-binding factor, SCB-binding factor and Snf1

Mutations in SPT10 and SPT21 of Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been previously shown to cause two prominent mutant phenotypes: (1) defects in transcription of particular histone genes and (2) suppression of Ty and delta-insertion mutations (Spt(-) phenotype). The requirement for Spt10 and Spt21 for transcription of particular histone genes suggested that they may interact with two factors previously shown to be present at histone loci, SBF (Swi4 and Swi6) and MBF (Mbp1 and Swi6). Therefore, we have studied swi4Delta, mbp1Delta, and swi6Delta mutants with respect to histone gene transcription and for interactions with spt10Delta and spt21Delta. Our results suggest that MBF and SBF play only modest roles in activation of histone gene transcription. In addition, we were surprised to find that swi4Delta, mbp1Delta, and swi6Delta mutations suppress the spt21Delta Spt(-) phenotype, but not the spt21Delta defect in histone gene transcription. In contrast, both swi4Delta and mbp1Delta cause lethality when combined with spt10Delta. To learn more about mutations that can suppress the spt21Delta Spt(-) phenotype, we performed a genetic screen and identified spt21Delta suppressors in seven additional genes. Three of these spt21Delta suppressors also cause lethality when combined with spt10Delta. Analysis of one spt21Delta suppressor, reg1, led to the finding that hyperactivation of Snf1 kinase, as caused by reg1Delta, suppresses the Spt(-) phenotype of spt21Delta. Taken together, these genetic interactions suggest distinct roles for Spt21 and Spt10 in vivo that are sensitive to multiple perturbations in transcription networks.

Meiosis-specific regulation of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae S-phase cyclin CLB5 is dependent on MluI cell cycle box (MCB) elements in its promoter but is independent of MCB-binding factor activity

In proliferating S. cerevisiae, genes whose products function in DNA replication are regulated by the MBF transcription factor composed of Mbp1 and Swi6 that binds to consensus MCB sequences in target promoters. We find that during meiotic development a subset of DNA replication genes exemplified by TMP1 and RNR1 are regulated by Mbp1. Deletion of Mbp1 deregulated TMP1 and RNR1 but did not interfere with premeiotic S-phase, meiotic recombination, or spore formation. Surprisingly, deletion of MBP1 had no effect on the expression of CLB5, which is purportedly controlled by MBF. Extensive analysis of the CLB5 promoter revealed that the gene is largely regulated by elements within a 100-bp fragment containing a cluster of MCB sequences. Surprisingly, induction of the CLB5 promoter requires MCB sequences, but not Mbp1, implying that another MCB-binding factor may exist in cells undergoing meiosis. In addition, full activation of CLB5 during meiosis requires Clb5 activity, suggesting that CLB5 may be regulated by a positive feedback mechanism. We further demonstrate that during meiosis MCBs function as effective transcriptional activators independent of MBP1.

Clb6/Cdc28 and Cdc14 regulate phosphorylation status and cellular localization of Swi6

Nuclear export of the transcription factor Swi6 during the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae cell cycle is known to require phosphorylation of the Swi6 serine 160 residue. We show that Clb6/Cdc28 kinase is required for this nuclear export. Furthermore, Cdc28 combined with the S-phase cyclin Clb6 specifically phosphorylates serine 160 of Swi6 in vitro. Nuclear import of Swi6 occurs concomitantly with dephosphorylation of serine 160 in late M phase. We show that Cdc14 phosphatase, the principal effector of the mitotic exit network, can trigger nuclear import of Swi6 in vivo and that Cdc14 dephosphorylates Swi6 at serine 160 in vitro. Taken together, these observations show how Swi6 dephosphorylation and phosphorylation are integrated into changes of Cdc28 activity governing entry and exit from the G1 phase of the cell cycle.

The interaction of Slt2 MAP kinase with Knr4 is necessary for signalling through the cell wall integrity pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In budding yeast, PKC1 plays an essential role in cell integrity and proliferation through a linear MAP (Mitogen Activated Protein) kinase phosphorylation cascade, which ends up with the activation of the Slt2-MAP kinase by dual phosphorylation on two conserved threonine and tyrosine residues. In this phosphorylated form, Slt2p kinase activates by phosphorylation at least two known downstream targets: Rlm1p, which is implicated in the expression of cell wall-related genes, and SBF, required for transcription activation of cell cycle-regulated genes at the G1 to S transition. In this paper, we demonstrate by two-hybrid, in vitro immunoprecipitation and tandem affinity purification (TAP) methods that Knr4p physically interacts with Slt2p. Moreover, we show that the absence of Knr4p alters proper signalling of Slt2p to its two known downstream targets. In a knr4 null mutant, the SLT2-dependent activation of Rlm1p is strongly reduced and the transcriptional activity of Rlm1p is decreased, although the phosphorylated form of Slt2p is more abundant than in wild-type cells. On the contrary, SBF is abnormally activated in this mutant, as shown by a more abundant phosphorylated form of Swi6p, by higher beta-galactosidase levels from a SCB-lacZ gene fusion, and by deregulation of the cyclic behaviour of several cell cycle-regulated genes. These results, taken together with our recent finding that Bck2p requires Knr4p to activate additively with Cln3-Cdc28p SBF target genes, lead to a model in which Knr4p is involved in co-ordinating the Slt2p-mediated cell wall integrity pathway with progression of the cell cycle.

Replication-independent MCB gene induction and deoxyribonucleotide accumulation at G1/S in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, many genes encoding enzymes involved in deoxyribonucleotide synthesis are expressed preferentially near the G1/S boundary of the cell cycle. The relationship between the induction of deoxyribonucleotide-synthesizing genes, deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate levels, and replication initiation was investigated using factor-synchronized wild-type yeast or dbf4 yeast that are temperature-sensitive for replication initiation. Neither the timing nor extent of gene induction was inhibited when factor-arrested dbf4 cells were released into medium containing the ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor hydroxyurea, which blocks replication fork progression, or were released at 37 degrees C, which blocks replication origin firing. Thus, the induction of deoxyribonucleotide-synthesizing genes at G1/S was fully independent of DNA chain elongation or initiation. Deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate levels increased severalfold at G1/S in wild-type cells and in dbf4 mutants incubated at the non-permissive temperature. Thus, deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate accumulation, like the induction of deoxyribonucleotide-synthesizing genes, was not dependent on replication initiation. Deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate accumulation at G1/S was suppressed in cells lacking Swi6, a transcription factor required for normal cell cycle regulation of deoxyribonucleotide-synthesizing genes. The results suggest that cells use gene induction at G1/S as a mechanism to pre-emptively, rather than reflexively, increase the synthesis of DNA precursors to meet the demand of the replication forks for deoxyribonucleotides.

Complex transcriptional circuitry at the G1/S transition in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, SBF (Swi4-Swi6 cell cycle box binding factor) and MBF (MluI binding factor) are the major transcription factors regulating the START of the cell cycle, a time just before DNA replication, bud growth initiation, and spindle pole body (SPB) duplication. These two factors bind to the promoters of 235 genes, but bind less than a quarter of the promoters upstream of genes with peak transcript levels at the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Several functional categories, which are known to be crucial for G1/S events, such as SPB duplication/migration and DNA synthesis, are under-represented in the list of SBF and MBF gene targets. SBF binds the promoters of several other transcription factors, including HCM1, PLM2, POG1, TOS4, TOS8, TYE7, YAP5, YHP1, and YOX1. Here, we demonstrate that these factors are targets of SBF using an independent assay. To further elucidate the transcriptional circuitry that regulates the G1-to-S-phase progression, these factors were epitope-tagged and their binding targets were identified by chIp-chip analysis. These factors bind the promoters of genes with roles in G1/S events including DNA replication, bud growth, and spindle pole complex formation, as well as the general activities of mitochondrial function, transcription, and protein synthesis. Although functional overlap exists between these factors and MBF and SBF, each of these factors has distinct functional roles. Most of these factors bind the promoters of other transcription factors known to be cell cycle regulated or known to be important for cell cycle progression and differentiation processes indicating that a complex network of transcription factors coordinates the diverse activities that initiate a new cell cycle.

The yeast pafl-rNA polymerase II complex is required for full expression of a subset of cell cycle-regulated genes

We have previously described an alternative form of RNA polymerase II in yeast lacking the Srb and Med proteins but including Pafl, Cdc73, Hprl, and Ccr4. The Pafl-RNA polymerase II complex (Paf1 complex) acts in the same pathway as the Pkc1-mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade and is required for full expression of many cell wall biosynthetic genes. The expression of several of these cell integrity genes, as well as many other Paf1-requiring genes identified by differential display and microarray analyses, is regulated during the cell cycle. To determine whether the Paf1 complex is required for basal or cyclic expression of these genes, we assayed transcript abundance throughout the cell cycle. We found that transcript abundance for a subset of cell cycle-regulated genes, including CLN1, HO, RNR1, and FAR1, is reduced from 2- to 13-fold in a paf1delta strain, but that this reduction is not promoter dependent. Despite the decreased expression levels, cyclic expression is still observed. We also examined the possibility that the Paf1 complex acts in the same pathway as either SBF (Swi4/Swi6) or MBF (Mbp1/Swi6), the partially redundant cell cycle transcription factors. Consistent with the possibility that they have overlapping essential functions, we found that loss of Paf1 is lethal in combination with loss of Swi4 or Swi6. In addition, overexpression of either Swi4 or Mbp1 suppresses some paf1delta phenotypes. These data establish that the Paf1 complex plays an important role in the essential regulatory pathway controlled by SBF and MBF.

The G(1) cyclin Cln3 promotes cell cycle entry via the transcription factor Swi6

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae (budding yeast), commitment to cell division in late G(1) is promoted by the G(1) cyclin Cln3 and its associated cyclin-dependent kinase, Cdc28. We show here that all known aspects of the function of Cln3 in G(1) phase, including control of cell size, pheromone sensitivity, cell cycle progress, and transcription, require the protein Swi6. Swi6 is a component of two related transcription factors, SBF and MBF, which are known to regulate many genes at the G(1)-S transition. The Cln3-Cdc28 complex somehow activates SBF and MBF, but there was no evidence for direct phosphorylation of SBF/MBF by Cln3-Cdc28 or for a stable complex between SBF/MBF and Cln3-Cdc28. The activation also does not depend on the ability of Cln3 to activate transcription when artificially recruited directly to a promoter. The amino terminus and the leucine zipper of Swi6 are important for the ability of Swi6 to respond to Cln3 but are not essential for the basal transcriptional activity of Swi6. Cln3-Cdc28 may activate SBF and MBF indirectly, perhaps by phosphorylating some intermediary protein.

Relationship between the function and the location of G1 cyclins inS. cerevisiae

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae cyclin-dependent kinase Cdc28 forms complexes with nine different cyclins to promote cell division. These nine cyclin-Cdc28 complexes have different roles, but share the same catalytic subunit; thus, it is not clear how substrate specificity is achieved. One possible mechanism is specific sub-cellular localization of specific complexes. We investigated the location of two G1 cyclins using fractionation and microscopy. In addition, we developed ‘forced localization’ cassettes, which direct proteins to particular locations, to test the importance of localization. Cln2 was found in both nucleus and cytoplasm. A substrate of Cln2, Sic1, was also in both compartments. Cytoplasmic Cln2 was concentrated at sites of polarized growth. Forced localization showed that some functions of Cln2 required a cytoplasmic location, while other functions required a nuclear location. In addition, one function apparently required shuttling between the two compartments. The G1 cyclin Cln3 required nuclear localization. An autonomous, nuclear localization sequence was found near the C-terminus of Cln3. Our data supports the hypothesis that Cln2 and Cln3 have distinct functions and locations, and the specificity of cyclin-dependent kinases is mediated in part by subcellular location.

Overexpression of eIF4E in Saccharomyces cerevisiae causes slow growth and decreased alpha-factor response through alterations in CLN3 expression

The association of G(1) cyclins and Cdc28/cyclin-dependent protein kinase catalyzes the cell cycle entry (Start) in budding yeast. Activation of Start is presumed to be triggered by a post-transcriptional increase in Cln3 during early G(1). Cells arrested by mating pheromone show a loss of cyclin-dependent protein kinase activity caused by transcriptional shutoff of cyclins and/or inhibition by Far1. We report that overexpression of eIF4E (Cdc33), a rate-limiting translation initiation factor, causes an increase in CLN3 mRNA translation, which results in increased expression of CLN2 and in slow growth and decreased alpha-factor response. This phenotype was abrogated in a Deltacln3 or Deltacln2 background. We isolated the transcription factor MBP1 as a multicopy suppressor of the growth and alpha-factor response defects. Furthermore, elevated MBP1, a transcriptional regulator of cyclins, altered the transcriptional start site in CLN3 mRNA, shifting it 45 nucleotides upstream of the normal. This lengthened 5'-untranslated region likely reduces translation efficiency and down-regulates CLN3 protein synthesis, thereby correcting for the excess translation promoted by elevated Cdc33. In addition, the CLN2 mRNA level returned to normal. We propose that regulation of translation initiation by Cdc33 plays a pivotal role in the activation of Start and cell cycle progression in budding yeast.

Serial regulation of transcriptional regulators in the yeast cell cycle

Genome-wide location analysis was used to determine how the yeast cell cycle gene expression program is regulated by each of the nine known cell cycle transcriptional activators. We found that cell cycle transcriptional activators that function during one stage of the cell cycle regulate transcriptional activators that function during the next stage. This serial regulation of transcriptional activators forms a connected regulatory network that is itself a cycle. Our results also reveal how the nine transcriptional regulators coordinately regulate global gene expression and diverse stage-specific functions to produce a continuous cycle of cellular events. This information forms the foundation for a complete map of the transcriptional regulatory network that controls the cell cycle.

Genomic binding sites of the yeast cell-cycle transcription factors SBF and MBF

Proteins interact with genomic DNA to bring the genome to life; and these interactions also define many functional features of the genome. SBF and MBF are sequence-specific transcription factors that activate gene expression during the G1/S transition of the cell cycle in yeast. SBF is a heterodimer of Swi4 and Swi6, and MBF is a heterodimer of Mbpl and Swi6 (refs 1, 3). The related Swi4 and Mbp1 proteins are the DNA-binding components of the respective factors, and Swi6 mayhave a regulatory function. A small number of SBF and MBF target genes have been identified. Here we define the genomic binding sites of the SBF and MBF transcription factors in vivo, by using DNA microarrays. In addition to the previously characterized targets, we have identified about 200 new putative targets. Our results support the hypothesis that SBF activated genes are predominantly involved in budding, and in membrane and cell-wall biosynthesis, whereas DNA replication and repair are the dominant functions among MBF activated genes. The functional specialization of these factors may provide a mechanism for independent regulation of distinct molecular processes that normally occur in synchrony during the mitotic cell cycle.

Mutational and structural analyses of the ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor Sml1 define its Rnr1 interaction domain whose inactivation allows suppression of mec1 and rad53 lethality

In budding yeast, MEC1 and RAD53 are essential for cell growth. Previously we reported that mec1 or rad53 lethality is suppressed by removal of Sml1, a protein that binds to the large subunit of ribonucleotide reductase (Rnr1) and inhibits RNR activity. To understand further the relationship between this suppression and the Sml1-Rnr1 interaction, we randomly mutagenized the SML1 open reading frame. Seven mutations were identified that did not affect protein expression levels but relieved mec1 and rad53 inviability. Interestingly, all seven mutations abolish the Sml1 interaction with Rnr1, suggesting that this interaction causes the lethality observed in mec1 and rad53 strains. The mutant residues all cluster within the 33 C-terminal amino acids of the 104-amino-acid-long Sml1 protein. Four of these residues reside within an alpha-helical structure that was revealed by nuclear magnetic resonance studies. Moreover, deletions encompassing the N-terminal half of Sml1 do not interfere with its RNR inhibitory activity. Finally, the seven sml1 mutations also disrupt the interaction with yeast Rnr3 and human R1, suggesting a conserved binding mechanism between Sml1 and the large subunit of RNR from different species.

Suppression of sorbitol dependence in a strain bearing a mutation in the SRB1/PSA1/VIG9 gene encoding GDP-mannose pyrophosphorylase by PDE2 overexpression suggests a role for the Ras/cAMP signal-transduction pathway in the control of yeast cell-wall biogenesis

Complementation studies and allele replacement in Saccharomyces cerevisiae revealed that PSA1/VIG9, an essential gene that encodes GDP-mannose pyrophosphorylase, is the wild-type SRB1 gene. Cloning and sequencing of the srb1-1 allele showed that it determines a single amino acid change from glycine to aspartic acid at residue 276 (srb1(D276)). Genetic evidence is presented showing that at least one further mutation is required for the sorbitol dependence of srb1(D276). A previously reported complementing gene, which this study has now identified as PDE2, is a multi-copy suppressor of sorbitol dependence and is not, as was previously suggested, the SRB1 gene. srb and pde2 mutants share a number of phenotypes, including lysis upon hypotonic shock and enhanced transformability. These data are consistent with the idea that the Ras/cAMP pathway might modulate cell-wall construction.

A Cdc7p-Dbf4p protein kinase activity is conserved from yeast to humans

DBF4 and CDC7 were identified as budding yeast cell cycle mutants that arrest immediately before S phase. The Dbf4p and Cdc7p proteins interact to form a protein kinase, Cdc7p being the catalytic subunit and Dbf4p is a cyclin-like molecule that activates the kinase in late G1. Dbf4p also targets Cdc7p to origins of replication where likely substrates include the Mcm proteins. Dbf4p and Cdc7p related proteins occur in the fission yeast and in metazoans. These also phosphorylate Mcm proteins and preliminary evidence indicates a similar function to Dbf4p/Cdc7p in budding yeast. The Dbf4p/Cdc7p activity will therefore very likely be conserved in all eukaryotes.