Genetic analysis of the role of Pol II holoenzyme components in repression by the Cyc8-Tup1 corepressor in yeast

Dissecting the role of mitogen-activated protein kinase Hog1 in yeast flocculation

Living organisms are frequently exposed to multiple biotic and abiotic stress forms during their lifetime. Organisms cope with stress conditions by regulating their gene expression programs. In response to different environmental stress conditions, yeast cells activate different tolerance mechanisms, many of which share common signaling pathways. Flocculation is one of the key mechanisms underlying yeast survival under unfavorable environmental conditions, and the Tup1-Cyc8 corepressor complex is a major regulator of this process. Additionally, yeast cells can utilize different mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways to modulate gene expression during stress conditions. Here, we show that the high osmolarity glycerol (HOG) MAPK pathway is involved in the regulation of yeast flocculation. We observed that the HOG MAPK pathway was constitutively activated in flocculating cells, and found that the interaction between phosphorylated Hog1 and the FLO genes promoter region increased significantly upon sodium chloride exposure. We found that treatment of cells with cantharidin decreased Hog1 phosphorylation, causing a sharp reduction in the expression of FLO genes and the flocculation phenotype. Similarly, deletion of HOG1 in yeast cells reduced flocculation. Altogether, our results suggest a role for HOG MAPK signaling in the regulation of FLO genes and yeast flocculation.

Roles of the transcriptional regulators Fts1, YlNrg1, YlTup1, and YlSsn6 in the repression of the yeast-to-filament transition in the dimorphic yeast Yarrowia lipolytica

In dimorphic fungi, the yeast-to-filament transition critical for cell survival under nutrient starvation is controlled by both activators and repressors. However, very few filamentation repressors are known. Here we report that, in the dimorphic yeast Yarrowia lipolytica, the conserved transcription factor YlNrg1 plays a minor role whereas Fts1, a newly identified Zn(II)₂ Cys₆ zinc cluster transcription factor, plays a key role in filamentation repression. FTS1 deletion caused hyperfilamentation whereas Fts1 overexpression drastically reduced filamentation. The expression of FTS1 is downregulated substantially during the yeast-to-filament transition. Transcriptome sequencing revealed that Fts1 represses 401 genes, including the filamentation-activating transcription factor genes MHY1, YlAZF1, and YlWOR4 and key cell wall protein genes. Tup1-Ssn6, a general transcriptional corepressor, is involved in the repression of many cellular functions in fungi. We show that both YlTup1 and YlSsn6 strongly repress filamentation in Y. lipolytica. YlTup1 and YlSsn6 together repress 1383 genes, including a large number of transcription factor and cell wall protein genes, which overlap substantially with Fts1-repressed genes. Fts1 interacts with both YlTup1 and YlSsn6, and LexA-Fts1 fusion represses a lexAop-promoter-lacZ reporter in a Tup1-Ssn6-dependent manner. Our findings suggest that Fts1 functions as a transcriptional repressor, directing the repression of target genes through the Tup1-Ssn6 corepressor.

Heavy metal exposure induces Yap1 and Hac1 mediated derepression of GSH1 and KAR2 by Tup1-Cyc8 complex

Heavy metal pollution is one of the most severe environmental problem. The toxicity of heavy metals is correlated with the production of increased reactive oxygen species and misfolded protein accumulation. Exposures of these metals even at low concentrations adversely affect human health. The Tup1-Cyc8 complex has been identified as a general repressor complex, is also involved in the derepression of few target genes in association with gene-specific activator proteins. Exposure to heavy metals activates the antioxidant defense mechanism, essential for cellular homeostasis. Here we present evidence that TUP1/CYC8 deleted cells are compromised to tolerate heavy metals exposure. Upon metal-induced oxidative stress, Yeast AP-1p (Yap1) recruits the Tup1-Cyc8 complex to the promoter of oxidative stress response gene GSH1 and derepresses its expression. We also found that the TUP1/CYC8 deficient cells have altered endoplasmic reticulum (ER) homeostasis and fail to activate the unfolded protein response pathway. In response to ER stress, the Tup1-Cyc8 complex, with the help of activated Hac1, binds to the promoter of ER chaperone KAR2 and activates its transcription. Altogether, our findings suggest that the Tup1-Cyc8 complex is crucial for the activation of genes that are involved in the mitigation of oxidative and ER stress during heavy metal exposure.

Repression by the Arabidopsis TOPLESS corepressor requires association with the core mediator complex

The plant corepressor TOPLESS (TPL) is recruited to a large number of loci that are selectively induced in response to developmental or environmental cues, yet the mechanisms by which it inhibits expression in the absence of these stimuli are poorly understood. Previously, we had used the N-terminus of Arabidopsis thaliana TPL to enable repression of a synthetic auxin response circuit in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast). Here, we leveraged the yeast system to interrogate the relationship between TPL structure and function, specifically scanning for repression domains. We identified a potent repression domain in Helix 8 located within the CRA domain, which directly interacted with the Mediator middle module subunits Med21 and Med10. Interactions between TPL and Mediator were required to fully repress transcription in both yeast and plants. In contrast, we found that multimer formation, a conserved feature of many corepressors, had minimal influence on the repression strength of TPL.

Epigenetic Transcriptional Memory of GAL Genes Depends on Growth in Glucose and the Tup1 Transcription Factor in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Previously expressed inducible genes can remain poised for faster reactivation for multiple cell divisions, a conserved phenomenon called epigenetic transcriptional memory. The GAL genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae show faster reactivation for up to seven generations after being repressed. During memory, previously produced Gal1 protein enhances the rate of reactivation of GAL1, GAL10, GAL2, and GAL7 These genes also interact with the nuclear pore complex (NPC) and localize to the nuclear periphery both when active and during memory. Peripheral localization of GAL1 during memory requires the Gal1 protein, a memory-specific cis-acting element in the promoter, and the NPC protein Nup100 However, unlike other examples of transcriptional memory, the interaction with NPC is not required for faster GAL gene reactivation. Rather, downstream of Gal1, the Tup1 transcription factor and growth in glucose promote GAL transcriptional memory. Cells only show signs of memory and only benefit from memory when growing in glucose. Tup1 promotes memory-specific chromatin changes at the GAL1 promoter: incorporation of histone variant H2A.Z and dimethylation of histone H3, lysine 4. Tup1 and H2A.Z function downstream of Gal1 to promote binding of a preinitiation form of RNA Polymerase II at the GAL1 promoter, poising the gene for faster reactivation. This mechanism allows cells to integrate a previous experience (growth in galactose, reflected by Gal1 levels) with current conditions (growth in glucose, potentially through Tup1 function) to overcome repression and to poise critical GAL genes for future reactivation.

Mediator Undergoes a Compositional Change during Transcriptional Activation

Mediator is a transcriptional co-activator recruited to enhancers by DNA-binding activators, and it also interacts with RNA polymerase (Pol) II as part of the preinitiation complex (PIC). We demonstrate that a single Mediator complex associates with the enhancer and core promoter in vivo, indicating that it can physically bridge these transcriptional elements. However, the Mediator kinase module associates strongly with the enhancer, but not with the core promoter, and it dissociates from the enhancer upon depletion of the TFIIH kinase. Severing the kinase module from Mediator by removing the connecting subunit Med13 does not affect Mediator association at the core promoter but increases occupancy at enhancers. Thus, Mediator undergoes a compositional change in which the kinase module, recruited via Mediator to the enhancer, dissociates from Mediator to permit association with Pol II and the PIC. As such, Mediator acts as a dynamic bridge between the enhancer and core promoter.

Analysis of Candida albicans mutants defective in the Cdk8 module of mediator reveal links between metabolism and biofilm formation

Candida albicans biofilm formation is a key virulence trait that involves hyphal growth and adhesin expression. Pyocyanin (PYO), a phenazine secreted by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, inhibits both C. albicans biofilm formation and development of wrinkled colonies. Using a genetic screen, we identified two mutants, ssn3Δ/Δ and ssn8Δ/Δ, which continued to wrinkle in the presence of PYO. Ssn8 is a cyclin-like protein and Ssn3 is similar to cyclin-dependent kinases; both proteins are part of the heterotetrameric Cdk8 module that forms a complex with the transcriptional co-regulator, Mediator. Ssn3 kinase activity was also required for PYO sensitivity as a kinase dead mutant maintained a wrinkled colony morphology in the presence of PYO. Furthermore, similar phenotypes were observed in mutants lacking the other two components of the Cdk8 module-Srb8 and Srb9. Through metabolomics analyses and biochemical assays, we showed that a compromised Cdk8 module led to increases in glucose consumption, glycolysis-related transcripts, oxidative metabolism and ATP levels even in the presence of PYO. In the mutant, inhibition of respiration to levels comparable to the PYO-treated wild type inhibited wrinkled colony development. Several lines of evidence suggest that PYO does not act through Cdk8. Lastly, the ssn3 mutant was a hyperbiofilm former, and maintained higher biofilm formation in the presence of PYO than the wild type. Together these data provide novel insights into the role of the Cdk8 module of Mediator in regulation of C. albicans physiology and the links between respiratory activity and both wrinkled colony and biofilm development.

The yeast Cyc8-Tup1 complex cooperates with Hda1p and Rpd3p histone deacetylases to robustly repress transcription of the subtelomeric FLO1 gene

We demonstrate that the yeast flocculation gene, FLO1, is representative of a distinct subset of subtelomeric genes that are robustly repressed by the Cyc8–Tup1 complex. We have examined Cyc8–Tup1 localisation, histone acetylation and long-range chromatin remodelling within the extensive FLO1 upstream region. We show that Cyc8–Tup1 is localised in a DNase I hypersensitive site within an ordered array of strongly positioned nucleosomes around − 700 base pairs upstream of the transcription start site. In cyc8 deletion mutant strains, Tup1p localisation is absent, with concomitant histone hyperacetylation of adjacent regions at the FLO1 promoter. This is accompanied by extensive histone depletion across the upstream region and gene activation. The yeast histone deacetylases, Hda1p and Rpd3p, occupy the repressed FLO1 promoter region in a Cyc8–Tup1 dependent manner and coordinate histone deacetylation, nucleosome stabilisation and gene repression. Moreover, we show that the ATP-dependent chromatin remodelling complex Swi–Snf occupies the site vacated by Cyc8–Tup1 in a cyc8 mutant. These data suggest that distinctly bound Cyc8–Tup1 cooperates with Hda1p and Rpd3p to establish or maintain an extensive array of strongly positioned, deacetylated nucleosomes over the FLO1 promoter and upstream region which inhibit histone acetylation, block Swi–Snf binding and prevent transcription.

•

Cyc8–Tup1 repression activity is enriched at chromosome subtelomeric regions.

•

The subtelomeric FLO1 gene is subject to chromatin-mediated repression by Cyc8–Tup1.

•

Cyc8–Tup1 promotes long-range nucleosome positioning and histone deacetylation.

•

Hda1p and Rpd3p cooperate with Cyc8–Tup1 to facilitate this repressive chromatin.

•

Swi–Snf directs extensive nucleosome remodelling when Cyc8–Tup1 is absent.

Transcriptional regulation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: transcription factor regulation and function, mechanisms of initiation, and roles of activators and coactivators

Here we review recent advances in understanding the regulation of mRNA synthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Many fundamental gene regulatory mechanisms have been conserved in all eukaryotes, and budding yeast has been at the forefront in the discovery and dissection of these conserved mechanisms. Topics covered include upstream activation sequence and promoter structure, transcription factor classification, and examples of regulated transcription factor activity. We also examine advances in understanding the RNA polymerase II transcription machinery, conserved coactivator complexes, transcription activation domains, and the cooperation of these factors in gene regulatory mechanisms.

Shields up: the Tup1-Cyc8 repressor complex blocks coactivator recruitment

The Tup1-Cyc8 complex is responsible for repression of a large and diverse collection of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The predominant view has been that Tup1-Cyc8 functions as a corepressor, actively associating with regulatory proteins and organizing chromatin to block transcription. A new study by Wong and Struhl in this issue of Genes & Development (pp. 2525-2539) challenges nearly 20 years of models by demonstrating that Tup1-Cyc8 functions primarily as a shield to block DNA-binding proteins from recruiting transcriptional coactivators.

The Cyc8-Tup1 complex inhibits transcription primarily by masking the activation domain of the recruiting protein

The yeast Tup1-Cyc8 corepressor complex is recruited to promoters by DNA-binding repressors, but the mechanisms by which it inhibits expression of genes involved in various stress pathways are poorly understood. Conditional and rapid depletion of Tup1 from the nucleus leads to concurrent nucleosome depletion and histone acetylation, recruitment of coactivators (Swi/Snf, SAGA, and Mediator), and increased transcriptional activity. Conversely, coactivator dissociation occurs rapidly upon rerepression by Cyc8-Tup1, although coactivator association and transcription can be blocked even in the absence of nucleosomes. The coactivators are recruited to the sites where Tup1 was located prior to depletion, indicating that the repressor proteins that recruit Tup1 function as activators in its absence. Last, Cyc8-Tup1 can interact with activation domains in vivo. Thus, Cyc8-Tup1 regulates transcription primarily by masking and inhibiting the transcriptional activation domains of the recruiting proteins, not by acting as a corepressor. We suggest that the corepressor function of Cyc8-Tup1 makes only a modest contribution to expression of target genes, specifically to keep expression levels below the nonactivated state.

Distinct role of Mediator tail module in regulation of SAGA-dependent, TATA-containing genes in yeast

The evolutionarily conserved Mediator complex is required for transcription of nearly all RNA Pol II-dependent promoters, with the tail module serving to recruit Mediator to active promoters in current models. However, transcriptional dependence on tail module subunits varies in a gene-specific manner, and the generality of the tail module requirement for transcriptional activation has not been explored. Here, we show that tail module subunits function redundantly to recruit Mediator to promoters in yeast, and transcriptome analysis shows stronger effects on genome-wide expression in a double-tail subunit deletion mutant than in single-subunit deletion mutants. Unexpectedly, TATA-containing and SAGA-dependent genes were much more affected by impairment of tail module function than were TFIID-dependent genes. Consistent with this finding, Mediator and preinitiation complex association with SAGA-dependent promoters is substantially reduced in gal11/med15Δ med3Δ yeast, whereas association of TBP, Pol II, and other Mediator modules with TFIID-dependent genes is largely independent of the tail module. Thus, we have identified a connection between the Mediator tail module and the division of promoter dependence between TFIID and SAGA.

The LAMMER kinase homolog, Lkh1, regulates Tup transcriptional repressors through phosphorylation in Schizosaccharomyces pombe

Disruption of the fission yeast LAMMER kinase, Lkh1, gene resulted in diverse phenotypes, including adhesive filamentous growth and oxidative stress sensitivity, but an exact cellular function had not been assigned to Lkh1. Through an in vitro pull-down approach, a transcriptional repressor, Tup12, was identified as an Lkh1 binding partner. Interactions between Lkh1 and Tup11 or Tup12 were confirmed by in vitro and in vivo binding assays. Tup proteins were phosphorylated by Lkh1 in a LAMMER motif-dependent manner. The LAMMER motif was also necessary for substrate recognition in vitro and cellular function in vivo. Transcriptional activity assays using promoters negatively regulated by Tup11 and Tup12 showed 6 or 2 times higher activity in the Δlkh1 mutant than the wild type, respectively. Northern analysis revealed derepressed expression of the fbp1⁺ mRNA in Δlkh1 and in Δtup11Δtup12 mutant cells under repressed conditions. Δlkh1 and Δtup11Δtup12 mutant cells showed flocculation, which was reversed by co-expression of Tup11 and -12 with Ssn6. Here, we presented a new aspect of the LAMMER kinase by demonstrating that the activities of global transcriptional repressors, Tup11 and Tup12, were positively regulated by Lkh1-mediated phosphorylation.

Synergy of repression and silencing gradients along the chromosome

The expression of a gene is determined by the transcriptional activators and repressors bound to its regulatory regions. It is not clear how these opposing activities are summed to define the degree of silencing of genes within a segment of the eukaryotic chromosome. We show that the general repressor Ssn6 and the silencing protein Sir3 generate inhibitory gradients with similar slopes over a transcribed gene, even though Ssn6 is considered a promoter-specific repressor of single genes, while Sir3 is a regional silencer. When two repression or silencing gradients flank a gene, they have a multiplicative effect on gene expression. A significant amplification of the interacting gradients distinguishes silencing from repression. When a silencing gradient is enhanced, the distance-dependence of the amplification changes and long-range effects are established preferentially. These observations reveal that repression and silencing proteins can attain different tiers in a hierarchy of conserved regulatory modes. The quantitative rules associated with these modes will help to explain the co-expression pattern of adjacent genes in the genome.

Spreading of a corepressor linked to action of long-range repressor hairy

Transcriptional repressor proteins play key roles in the control of gene expression in development. For the Drosophila embryo, the following two functional classes of repressors have been described: short-range repressors such as Knirps that locally inhibit the activity of enhancers and long-range repressors such as Hairy that can dominantly inhibit distal elements. Several long-range repressors interact with Groucho, a conserved corepressor that is homologous to mammalian TLE proteins. Groucho interacts with histone deacetylases and histone proteins, suggesting that it may effect repression by means of chromatin modification; however, it is not known how long-range effects are mediated. Using embryo chromatin immunoprecipitation, we have analyzed a Hairy-repressible gene in the embryo during activation and repression. When inactivated, repressors, activators, and coactivators cooccupy the promoter, suggesting that repression is not accomplished by the displacement of activators or coactivators. Strikingly, the Groucho corepressor is found to be recruited to the transcribed region of the gene, contacting a region of several kilobases, concomitant with a loss of histone H3 and H4 acetylation. Groucho has been shown to form higher-order complexes in vitro; thus, our observations suggest that long-range effects may be mediated by a "spreading" mechanism, modifying chromatin over extensive regions to inhibit transcription.

Reciprocal nuclear shuttling of two antagonizing Zn finger proteins modulates Tup family corepressor function to repress chromatin remodeling

The Schizosaccharomyces pombe global corepressors Tup11 and Tup12, which are orthologs of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Tup1, are involved in glucose-dependent transcriptional repression and chromatin alteration of the fbp1+ gene. The fbp1+ promoter contains two regulatory elements, UAS1 and UAS2, one of which (UAS2) serves as a binding site for two antagonizing C2H2 Zn finger transcription factors, the Rst2 activator and the Scr1 repressor. In this study, we analyzed the role of Tup proteins and Scr1 in chromatin remodeling at fbp1+ during glucose repression. We found that Scr1, cooperating with Tup11 and Tup12, functions to maintain the chromatin of the fbp1+ promoter in a transcriptionally inactive state under glucose-rich conditions. Consistent with this notion, Scr1 is quickly exported from the nucleus to the cytoplasm at the initial stage of derepression, immediately after glucose starvation, at which time Rst2 is known to be imported into the nucleus. In addition, chromatin immunoprecipitation assays revealed a switching of Scr1 to Rst2 bound at UAS2 during glucose derepression. On the other hand, Tup11 and Tup12 persist in the nucleus and bind to the fbp1+ promoter under both derepressed and repressed conditions. These observations suggest that Tup1-like proteins recruited to the fbp1+ promoter are controlled by either of two antagonizing C2H2 Zn finger proteins. We propose that the actions of Tup11 and Tup12 are regulated by reciprocal nuclear shuttling of the two antagonizing Zn finger proteins in response to the extracellular glucose concentration. This notion provides new insights into the molecular mechanisms of the Tup family corepressors in gene regulation.

Synergy among differentially regulated repressors of the ribonucleotide diphosphate reductase genes of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The Ssn6/Tup1 general repression complex represses transcription of a number of regulons through recruitment by regulon-specific DNA-binding repressors. Rox1 and Mot3 are Ssn6/Tup1-recruiting, DNA-binding proteins that repress the hypoxic genes, and Rfx1 is a Ssn6/Tup1-recruiting, a DNA-binding protein that represses the DNA damage-inducible genes. We previously reported that Rox1 and Mot3 functioned synergistically to repress a subset of the hypoxic genes and that this synergy resulted from an indirect interaction through Ssn6. We report here cross-regulation between Rox1 and Mot3 and Rfx1 in the regulation of the RNR genes encoding ribonucleotide diphosphate reductase. Using a set of strains containing single and multiple mutations in the repressor encoding genes and lacZ fusions to the RNR2 to -4 genes, we demonstrated that Rox1 repressed all three genes and that Mot3 repressed RNR3 and RNR4. Each repressor could act synergistically with the others, and synergy required closely spaced sites. Using artificial constructs containing two repressor sites, we confirmed that all three proteins could function synergistically but that two Rox1 sites or two Rfx1 sites could not. The significance of this synergy lies in the ability to repress gene transcription strongly under normal growth conditions, and yet allow robust induction under conditions that inactivate only one of the repressors. Since the interaction between the proteins is indirect, the evolution of dually regulated genes requires only the acquisition of closely spaced repressor sites.

Transcriptional repression by Tup1–Ssn6This paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 27th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process

The Tup1–Ssn6 complex from budding yeast is one of the best studied corepressors and has served as a model for the study of similar corepressor complexes in higher eukaryotes. Tup1–Ssn6 represses multiple subsets of genes when recruited to promoters by sequence-specific DNA binding repressors. Tup1–Ssn6 mediated repression involves interactions among the corepressor and hypoacetylated histones, histone deacetylases, and the RNA transcriptional machinery. Nucleosome positioning is also involved in repression of a subset of Tup1–Ssn6 regulated genes. These findings highlight the importance of chromatin modification states in Tup1–Ssn6 mediated repression. Here we review the multiple mechanisms involved in repression and discuss Tup1–Ssn6 homolog functions in higher organisms. We also present a model for how repression by Tup1–Ssn6 may be established.

Genome-wide occupancy profile of mediator and the Srb8-11 module reveals interactions with coding regions

Mediator exists in a free form containing the Med12, Med13, CDK8, and CycC subunits (the Srb8-11 module) and a smaller form, which lacks these four subunits and associates with RNA polymerase II (Pol II), forming a holoenzyme. We use chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) and DNA microarrays to investigate genome-wide localization of Mediator and the Srb8-11 module in fission yeast. Mediator and the Srb8-11 module display similar binding patterns, and interactions with promoters and upstream activating sequences correlate with increased transcription activity. Unexpectedly, Mediator also interacts with the downstream coding region of many genes. These interactions display a negative bias for positions closer to the 5' ends of open reading frames (ORFs) and appear functionally important, because downregulation of transcription in a temperature-sensitive med17 mutant strain correlates with increased Mediator occupancy in the coding region. We propose that Mediator coordinates transcription initiation with transcriptional events in the coding region of eukaryotic genes.

Glucose signaling in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Eukaryotic cells possess an exquisitely interwoven and fine-tuned series of signal transduction mechanisms with which to sense and respond to the ubiquitous fermentable carbon source glucose. The budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has proven to be a fertile model system with which to identify glucose signaling factors, determine the relevant functional and physical interrelationships, and characterize the corresponding metabolic, transcriptomic, and proteomic readouts. The early events in glucose signaling appear to require both extracellular sensing by transmembrane proteins and intracellular sensing by G proteins. Intermediate steps involve cAMP-dependent stimulation of protein kinase A (PKA) as well as one or more redundant PKA-independent pathways. The final steps are mediated by a relatively small collection of transcriptional regulators that collaborate closely to maximize the cellular rates of energy generation and growth. Understanding the nuclear events in this process may necessitate the further elaboration of a new model for eukaryotic gene regulation, called "reverse recruitment." An essential feature of this idea is that fine-structure mapping of nuclear architecture will be required to understand the reception of regulatory signals that emanate from the plasma membrane and cytoplasm. Completion of this task should result in a much improved understanding of eukaryotic growth, differentiation, and carcinogenesis.

Fck1, a C-type cyclin-dependent kinase, interacts with Fcc1 to regulate development and secondary metabolism in Fusarium verticillioides

In Fusarium verticillioides, the C-type cyclin Fcc1 is a global regulator of gene expression. In Saccharomyces cerevisiae and other organisms, C-type cyclins regulate the activity of specific cyclin-dependent kinases through physical association. We identified FCK1, a gene encoding a cyclin-dependent kinase in F. verticillioides. The Fck1 protein is predicted to contain a cyclin-binding motif and a serine-threonine protein kinase domain homologous to previously described cyclin-dependent kinases. Disruption of FCK1 resulted in pleiotropic morphological defects including reduced growth, conidiation, fumonisin B(1) (FB(1)) production, and enhanced pigmentation. Two-hybrid analysis indicated a strong physical interaction between Fcc1 and Fck1. This study presents the first description of the interaction between a C-type cyclin and a cyclin-dependent kinase in a filamentous fungus and provides new insight regarding a molecular mechanism that regulates aspects of maize kernel colonization by F. verticillioides.

Activator Gcn4p and Cyc8p/Tup1p are interdependent for promoter occupancy at ARG1 in vivo

The Cyc8p/Tup1p complex mediates repression of diverse genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and is recruited by DNA binding proteins specific for the different sets of repressed genes. By screening the yeast deletion library, we identified Cyc8p as a coactivator for Gcn4p, a transcriptional activator of amino acid biosynthetic genes. Deletion of CYC8 confers sensitivity to an inhibitor of isoleucine/valine biosynthesis and impairs activation of Gcn4p-dependent reporters and authentic amino acid biosynthetic target genes. Deletion of TUP1 produces similar but less severe activation defects in vivo. Although expression of Gcn4p is unaffected by deletion of CYC8, chromatin immunoprecipitation assays reveal a strong defect in binding of Gcn4p at the target genes ARG1 and ARG4 in cyc8Delta cells and to a lesser extent in tup1Delta cells. The defects in Gcn4p binding and transcriptional activation in cyc8Delta cells cannot be overcome by Gcn4p overexpression but are partially suppressed in tup1Delta cells. The impairment of Gcn4p binding in cyc8Delta and tup1Delta cells is severe enough to reduce recruitment of SAGA, Srb mediator, TATA binding protein, and RNA polymerase II to the ARG1 and ARG4 promoters, accounting for impaired transcriptional activation of these genes in both mutants. Cyc8p and Tup1p are recruited to the ARG1 and ARG4 promoters, consistent with a direct role for this complex in stimulating Gcn4p occupancy of the upstream activation sequence (UAS). Interestingly, Gcn4p also stimulates binding of Cyc8p/Tup1p at the 3' ends of these genes, raising the possibility that Cyc8p/Tup1p influences transcription elongation. Our findings reveal a novel coactivator function for Cyc8p/Tup1p at the level of activator binding and suggest that Gcn4p may enhance its own binding to the UAS by recruiting Cyc8p/Tup1p.

Oxidant-specific Folding of Yap1p Regulates Both Transcriptional Activation and Nuclear Localization

The yeast transcriptional regulator Yap1p is a key determinant in oxidative stress resistance. This protein is found in the cytoplasm under non-stressed conditions but rapidly accumulates in the nucleus following oxidant exposure. There it activates transcription of genes encoding antioxidants that return the redox balance of the cell to an acceptable range. Yap1p localization to the nucleus requires the oxidant-specific formation of disulfide bonds in the N-terminal cysteine-rich domain (N-CRD) and/or the C-terminal cysteine-rich domain (C-CRD). H(2)O(2) exposure triggers the formation of two interdomain disulfide bonds between the N-and C-CRDs. This dually disulfide-bonded structure has been argued to mask the nuclear export signal in the C-CRD that would otherwise prevent Yap1p nuclear accumulation. The C-CRD is required for wild-type H(2)O(2) tolerance but dispensable for resistance to diamide. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae TRX2 gene, encoding a thioredoxin protein, cannot be induced by H(2)O(2) in the presence of various mutant forms of Yap1p lacking the normally functioning C-CRD. In this work, we demonstrate that the proper folding of Yap1p in the presence of H(2)O(2) is required for recruitment of the mediator component Rox3p to the TRX2 promoter in addition to the nuclear accumulation of Yap1p during stress by this oxidant. These data demonstrate that the dually disulfide-bonded Yap1p N- and C-CRDs form a bifunctional protein domain controlling both nuclear localization and transcriptional activation.

The yeast Mediator complex and its regulation

The Mediator complex acts as a bridge, conveying regulatory information from enhancers and other control elements to the basal RNA polymerase II transcription machinery. Mediator is required for the regulated transcription of nearly all RNA polymerase II-dependent genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and post-translational modifications of specific Mediator subunits can affect global patterns of gene transcription.

Functional comparison of the Tup11 and Tup12 transcriptional corepressors in fission yeast

Gene duplication is considered an important evolutionary mechanism. Unlike many characterized species, the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe contains two paralogous genes, tup11+ and tup12+, that encode transcriptional corepressors similar to the well-characterized budding yeast Tup1 protein. Previous reports have suggested that Tup11 and Tup12 proteins play redundant roles. Consistently, we show that the two Tup proteins can interact together when expressed at normal levels and that each can independently interact with the Ssn6 protein, as seen for Tup1 in budding yeast. However, tup11- and tup12- mutants have different phenotypes on media containing KCl and CaCl2. Consistent with the functional difference between tup11- and tup12- mutants, we identified a number of genes in genome-wide gene expression experiments that are differentially affected by mutations in the tup11+ and tup12+ genes. Many of these genes are differentially derepressed in tup11- mutants and are over-represented in genes that have previously been shown to respond to a range of different stress conditions. Genes specifically derepressed in tup12- mutants require the Ssn6 protein for their repression. As for Tup12, Ssn6 is also required for efficient adaptation to KCl- and CaCl2-mediated stress. We conclude that Tup11 and Tup12 are at least partly functionally diverged and suggest that the Tup12 and Ssn6 proteins have adopted a specific role in regulation of the stress response.

Genome-wide analysis of the functions of a conserved surface on the corepressor Tup1

The general transcriptional repressor Tup1 is responsible for the regulation of a large, diverse set of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and functional homologues of Tup1 have been identified in many metazoans. The crystal structure for the C-terminal portion of Tup1 has been solved and, when sequences of Tup1 homologues from fungi and metazoans were compared, a highly conserved surface was revealed. In this article, we analyze five point mutations that lie on this conserved surface. A statistical analysis of expression microarrays demonstrates that the mutant alleles are deficient in the repression of different subsets of Tup1-regulated genes. We were able to rank the mutant alleles of TUP1 based on the severity of their repression defects measured both by the number of genes derepressed and by the magnitude of that derepression. For one particular class of genes, the mutations on the conserved surface disrupted recruitment of Tup1 to the repressed promoters. However, for the majority of the genes derepressed by the Tup1 point mutants, recruitment of Tup1 to the regulated promoters is largely unaffected. These mutations affect the mechanism of repression subsequent to recruitment of the complex and likely represent a disruption of a mechanism that is conserved in fungi and metazoans. This work demonstrates that the evolutionarily conserved surface of Tup1 interacts with two separate types of proteins-sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins responsible for recruiting Tup1 to promoters as well as components that are likely to function in a conserved repression mechanism.

Glucose repression of STA1 expression is mediated by the Nrg1 and Sfl1 repressors and the Srb8-11 complex

In the yeast Saccharomyces diastaticus, expression of the STA1 gene, which encodes an extracellular glucoamylase, is negatively regulated by glucose. Here we demonstrate that glucose-dependent repression of STA1 expression is imposed by both Sfl1 and Nrg1, which serve as direct transcriptional repressors. We show that Nrg1 acts only on UAS1, and Sfl1 acts only on UAS2, in the STA1 promoter. When bound to its specific site, Sfl1 (but not Nrg1) prevents the binding to UAS2 of two transcriptional activators, Ste12 and Tec1, required for STA1 expression. We also found that Sfl1 contributes to STA1 repression by binding to the promoter and inhibiting the expression of FLO8, a gene that encodes a third transcriptional activator involved in STA1 expression. In addition, we show that the levels of Nrg1 and Sfl1 increase in glucose-grown cells, suggesting that the effects of glucose are mediated, at least in part, through an increase in the abundance of these repressors. NRG1 and SFL1 expression requires the Srb8-11 complex, and correspondingly, the Srb8-11 complex is also necessary for STA1 repression. However, our evidence indicates that the Srb8-11 complex does not associate with either the SFL1 or the NRG1 promoter and thus plays an indirect role in activating NRG1 and SFL1 expression.

The Ras/PKA signaling pathway directly targets the Srb9 protein, a component of the general RNA polymerase II transcription apparatus

RNA polymerase II transcription is a complex process that is controlled at multiple levels. The data presented here add to this repertoire by showing that signal transduction pathways can directly regulate gene expression by targeting components of the general RNA polymerase II apparatus. In particular, this study shows that the Ras/PKA signaling pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae regulates the activity of the Srb complex, a regulatory group of proteins that is part of the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. Genetic and biochemical data indicate that Srb9p is a substrate for PKA and that this phosphorylation modulates the activity of the Srb complex. The Srb complex, like many components of the RNA II polymerase machinery, is responsible for regulating the expression of a relatively large number of genes. Thus, this type of a transcriptional control mechanism would provide the cell with an efficient way of bringing about broad changes in gene expression.

Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by yeast hypoxic genes and chromatin-independent exclusion of TATA binding protein

The Tup1-Ssn6 general repression complex in Saccharomyces cerevisiae represses a wide variety of regulons. Regulon-specific DNA binding proteins recruit the repression complex, and their synthesis, activity, or localization controls the conditions for repression. Rox1 is the hypoxic regulon-specific protein, and a second DNA binding protein, Mot3, augments repression at tightly controlled genes. We addressed the requirements for Tup1-Ssn6 recruitment to two hypoxic genes, ANB1 and HEM13, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Either Rox1 or Mot3 could recruit Ssn6, but Tup1 recruitment required Ssn6 and Rox1. We also monitored events during derepression. Rox1 and Mot3 dissociated from DNA quickly, accounting for the rapid accumulation of ANB1 and HEM13 RNAs, suggesting a simple explanation for induction. However, Tup1 remained associated with these genes, suggesting that the localization of Tup1-Ssn6 is not the sole determinant of repression. We could not reproduce the observation that deletion of the Tup1-Ssn6-interacting protein Cti6 was required for induction. Finally, Tup1 is capable of repression through a chromatin-dependent mechanism, the positioning of a nucleosome over the TATA box, or a chromatin-independent mechanism. We found that the rate of derepression was independent of the positioned nucleosome and that the TATA binding protein was excluded from ANB1 even in the absence of the positioned nucleosome. The mediator factor Srb7 has been shown to interact with Tup1 and to play a role in repression at several regulons, but we found that significant levels of repression remained in srb7 mutants even when the chromatin-dependent repression mechanism was eliminated. These findings suggest that the repression of different regulons or genes may invoke different mechanisms.

Redundant mechanisms are used by Ssn6-Tup1 in repressing chromosomal gene transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The Ssn6-Tup1 corepressor complex regulates many genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Three mechanisms have been proposed to explain its repression functions: 1) nucleosome positioning by binding histone tails; 2) recruitment of histone deacetylases; and 3) direct interference with the general transcription machinery or activators. It is unclear if Ssn6-Tup1 utilizes each of these mechanisms at a single gene in a redundant manner or each individually at different loci. A systematic analysis of the contribution of each mechanism at a native promoter has not been reported. Here we employed a genetic strategy to analyze the contributions of nucleosome positioning, histone deacetylation, and Mediator interference in the repression of chromosomal Tup1 target genes in vivo. We exploited the fact that Ssn6-Tup1 requires the ISW2 chromatin remodeling complex to establish nucleosome positioning in vivo to disrupt chromatin structure without affecting other Tup1 repression functions. Deleting ISW2, the histone deacetylase gene HDA1, or genes encoding Mediator subunits individually caused slight or no derepression of RNR3 and HUG1. However, when Mediator mutations were combined with Deltaisw2 or Deltahda1 mutations, enhanced transcription was observed, and the strongest level of derepression was observed in triple Deltaisw2/Deltahda1/Mediator mutants. The increased transcription in the mutants was not due to the loss of Tup1 at the promoter and correlated with increased TBP cross-linking to promoters. Thus, Tup1 utilizes multiple redundant mechanisms to repress transcription of native genes, which may be important for it to act as a global corepressor at a wide variety of promoters.

Fission yeast Tup1-like repressors repress chromatin remodeling at the fbp1+ promoter and the ade6-M26 recombination hotspot

Chromatin remodeling plays crucial roles in the regulation of gene expression and recombination. Transcription of the fission yeast fbp1(+) gene and recombination at the meiotic recombination hotspot ade6-M26 (M26) are both regulated by cAMP responsive element (CRE)-like sequences and the CREB/ATF-type transcription factor Atf1*Pcr1. The Tup11 and Tup12 proteins, the fission yeast counterparts of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Tup1 corepressor, are involved in glucose repression of the fbp1(+) transcription. We have analyzed roles of the Tup1-like corepressors in chromatin regulation around the fbp1(+) promoter and the M26 hotspot. We found that the chromatin structure around two regulatory elements for fbp1(+) was remodeled under derepressed conditions in concert with the robust activation of fbp1(+) transcription. Strains with tup11delta tup12delta double deletions grown in repressed conditions exhibited the chromatin state associated with wild-type cells grown in derepressed conditions. Interestingly, deletion of rst2(+), encoding a transcription factor controlled by the cAMP-dependent kinase, alleviated the tup11delta tup12delta defects in chromatin regulation but not in transcription repression. The chromatin at the M26 site in mitotic cultures of a tup11delta tup12delta mutant resembled that of wild-type meiotic cells. These observations suggest that these fission yeast Tup1-like corepressors repress chromatin remodeling at CRE-related sequences and that Rst2 antagonizes this function.

Promoter-dependent roles for the Srb10 cyclin-dependent kinase and the Hda1 deacetylase in Tup1-mediated repression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The Tup1-Ssn6 complex has been well characterized as a Saccharomyces cerevisiae general transcriptional repressor with functionally conserved homologues in metazoans. These homologues are essential for cell differentiation and many other developmental processes. The mechanism of repression of all of these proteins remains poorly understood. Srb10 (a cyclin-dependent kinase associated with the Mediator complex) and Hda1 (a class I histone deacetylase) have each been implicated in Tup1-mediated repression. We present a statistically based genome-wide analysis that reveals that Hda1 partially represses roughly 30% of Tup1-repressed genes, whereas Srb10 kinase activity contributes to the repression of approximately 15% of Tup1-repressed genes. These effects only partially overlap, suggesting that different Tup1-repression mechanisms predominate at different promoters. We also demonstrate a distinction between histone deacetylation and transcriptional repression. In an HDA1 deletion, many Tup1-repressed genes are hyperacetylated at lysine 18 of histone H3, yet are not derepressed, indicating deacetylation alone is not sufficient to repress most Tup1-controlled genes. In a strain lacking both Srb10 and Hda1 functions, more than half of the Tup1-repressed genes are still repressed, suggesting that Tup1-mediated repression occurs by multiple, partially overlapping mechanisms, at least one of which is unknown.

Fission yeast global repressors regulate the specificity of chromatin alteration in response to distinct environmental stresses

The specific induction of genes in response to distinct environmental stress is vital for all eukaryotes. To study the mechanisms that result in selective gene responses, we examined the role of the fission yeast Tup1 family repressors in chromatin regulation. We found that chromatin structure around a cAMP-responsive element (CRE)-like sequence in ade6-M26 that is bound by Atf1.Pcr1 transcriptional activation was altered in response to osmotic stress but not to heat and oxidative stresses. Such chromatin structure alteration occurred later than the Atf1 phosphorylation but correlated well with stress-induced transcriptional activation at ade6-M26. This chromatin structure alteration required components for the stress-activated protein kinase (SAPK) cascade and both subunits of the M26-binding CREB/ATF-type protein Atf1.Pcr1. Cation stress and glucose starvation selectively caused chromatin structure alteration around CRE-like sequences in cta3(+) and fbp1(+) promoters, respectively, in correlation with transcriptional activation. However, the tup11Delta tup12Delta double deletion mutants lost the selectivity of stress responses of chromatin structure and transcriptional regulation of cta3(+) and fbp1(+). These data indicate that the Tup1-like repressors regulate the chromatin structure to ensure the specificity of gene activation in response to particular stresses. Such a role for these proteins may serve as a paradigm for the regulation of stress response in higher eukaryotes.

Two subunits of the Drosophila mediator complex act together to control cell affinity

The organizing centers for Drosophila imaginal disc development are created at straight boundaries between compartments; these are maintained by differences in cell affinity controlled by selector genes and intercellular signals. skuld and kohtalo encode homologs of TRAP240 and TRAP230, the two largest subunits of the Drosophila mediator complex; mutations in either gene cause identical phenotypes. We show here that both genes are required to establish normal cell affinity differences at the anterior-posterior and dorsal-ventral compartment boundaries of the wing disc. Mutant cells cross from the anterior to the posterior compartment, and can distort the dorsal-ventral boundary in either the dorsal or ventral direction. The Skuld and Kohtalo proteins physically interact in vivo and have synergistic effects when overexpressed, consistent with a skuld kohtalo double-mutant phenotype that is indistinguishable from either single mutant. We suggest that these two subunits do not participate in all of the activities of the mediator complex, but form a submodule that is required to regulate specific target genes, including those that control cell affinity.

Transcriptional control of nonfermentative metabolism in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Although sugars are clearly the preferred carbon sources of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, nonfermentable substrates such as ethanol, glycerol, lactate, acetate or oleate can also be used for the generation of energy and cellular biomass. Several regulatory networks of glucose repression (carbon catabolite repression) are involved in the coordinate biosynthesis of enzymes required for the utilization of nonfermentable substrates. Positively and negatively acting complexes of pleiotropic regulatory proteins have been characterized. The Snf1 (Cat1) protein kinase complex, together with its regulatory subunit Snf4 (Cat3) and alternative beta-subunits Sip1, Sip2 or Gal83, plays an outstanding role for the derepression of structural genes which are repressed in the presence of a high glucose concentration. One molecular function of the Snf1 complex is deactivation by phosphorylation of the general glucose repressor Mig1. In addition to regulation of alternative sugar fermentation, Mig1 also influences activators of respiration and gluconeogenesis, although to a lesser extent. Snf1 is also required for conversion of specific regulatory factors into transcriptional activators. This review summarizes regulatory cis-acting elements of structural genes of the nonfermentative metabolism, together with the corresponding DNA-binding proteins (Hap2-5, Rtg1-3, Cat8, Sip4, Adr1, Oaf1, Pip2), and describes the molecular interactions among general regulators and pathway-specific factors. In addition to the influence of the carbon source at the transcriptional level, mechanisms of post-transcriptional control such as glucose-regulated stability of mRNA are also discussed briefly.

Functional interactions within yeast mediator and evidence of differential subunit modifications

It is possible to recruit RNA polymerase II to a target promoter and, thus, activate transcription by fusing Mediator subunits to a DNA binding domain. To investigate functional interactions within Mediator, we have tested such fusions of the lexA DNA binding domain to Med1, Med2, Gal11, Srb7, and Srb10 in wild type, med1, med2, gal11, sin4, srb8, srb10, and srb11 strains. We found that lexA-Med2 and lexA-Gal11 are strong activators that are independent of all Mediator subunits tested. lexA-Srb10 is a weak activator that depends on Srb8 and Srb11. lexA-Med1 and lexA-Srb7 are both cryptic activators that become active in the absence of Srb8, Srb10, Srb11, or Sin4. An unexpected finding was that lexA-VP16 differs from Gal4-VP16 in that it is independent of the activator binding Mediator module. Both lexA-Med1 and lexA-Srb7 are stably associated with Med4 and Med8, which suggests that they are incorporated into Mediator. Med4 and Med8 exist in two mobility forms that differ in their association with lexA-Med1 and lexA-Srb7. Within purified Mediator, Med4 is present as a phosphorylated lower mobility form. Taken together, these results suggest that assembly of Mediator is a multistep process that involves conversion of both Med4 and Med8 to their low mobility forms.

Functional dissection of the global repressor Tup1 in yeast: dominant role of the C-terminal repression domain

In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Tup1, in association with Cyc8 (Ssn6), functions as a general repressor of transcription. Tup1 and Cyc8 are required for repression of diverse families of genes coordinately controlled by glucose repression, mating type, and other mechanisms. This repression is mediated by recruitment of the Cyc8-Tup1 complex to target promoters by sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins. We created a library of XhoI linker insertions and internal in-frame deletion mutations within the TUP1 coding region. Insertion mutations outside of the WD domains were wild type, while insertions within the WD domains induced mutant phenotypes with differential effects on the target genes SUC2, MFA2, RNR2, and HEM13. Deletion mutations confirmed previous findings of two separate repression domains in the N and C termini. The cumulative data suggest that the C-terminal repression domain, located near the first WD repeat, plays the dominant role in repression. Although the N-terminal repression domain is sufficient for partial repression, deletion of this region does not compromise repression. Surprisingly, deletion of the majority of the histone-binding domain of Tup1 also does not significantly reduce repression. The N-terminal region containing potential alpha-helical coiled coils is required for Tup1 oligomerization and association with Cyc8. Association with Cyc8 is required for repression of SUC2, HEM13, and RNR2 but not MFA2 and STE2.

Histone-dependent association of Tup1-Ssn6 with repressed genes in vivo

The Tup1-Ssn6 complex regulates diverse classes of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and serves as a model for corepressor functions in many organisms. Tup1-Ssn6 does not directly bind DNA but is brought to target genes through interactions with sequence-specific DNA binding factors. Full repression by Tup1-Ssn6 appears to require interactions with both the histone tails and components of the general transcription machinery, although the relative contribution of these two pathways is not clear. Here, we map Tup1 locations on two classes of Tup1-Ssn6-regulated genes in vivo via chromatin immunoprecipitations. Distinct profiles of Tup1 are observed on a cell-specific genes and DNA damage-inducible genes, suggesting that alternate repressive architectures may be created on different classes of repressed genes. In both cases, decreases in acetylation of histone H3 colocalize with Tup1. Strikingly, although loss of the Srb10 mediator protein had no effect on Tup1 localization, both histone tail mutations and histone deacetylase mutations crippled the association of Tup1 with target loci. Together with previous findings that Tup1-Ssn6 physically associates with histone deacetylase activities, these results indicate that the repressor complex alters histone modification states to facilitate interactions with histones and that these interactions are required to maintain a stable repressive state.

Ssn6-Tup1 regulates RNR3 by positioning nucleosomes and affecting the chromatin structure at the upstream repression sequence

The DNA damage inducible gene ribonucleotide reductase (RNR3) is regulated by a transcriptional repression mechanism by the recruitment of the Ssn6-Tup1 corepressor complex to its promoter by the sequence-specific DNA-binding protein Crt1. Ssn6-Tup1 is reported to represses transcription by interfering with transcription factors, recruiting histone deacetylases, and positioning nucleosomes at the promoter of its target genes. Two of the three mechanisms involve effects on chromatin structure, and therefore, we have delineated the nucleosomal structure of RNR3 in the repressed and derepressed state using multiple nuclease mapping strategies. A regular array of positioned nucleosomes is detected over the repressed RNR3 promoter that extends into the coding sequence. Treating cells with DNA damaging agents or deleting CRT1, SSN6, or TUP1 derepresses RNR3 transcription, and causes a dramatic disruption of nucleosome positioning over its promoter. Furthermore, derepression of RNR3 correlated with changes in nuclease sensitivity within the upstream repression sequence (URS) region. Specifically, the loss of a MNase-hypersensitive site, and the appearance of strong DNase I hypersensitivity, was observed over the URS. Interestingly, we find that the binding of Crt1 to the promoter in the absence of Ssn6 or Tup1 is insufficient for nucleosome positioning or regulating chromatin structure at the URS; thus, these two functions are strictly dependent upon Ssn6-Tup1. We propose that RNR3 is regulated by changes in nucleosome positioning and chromatin structure that are mediated by Ssn6, Tup1, and Crt1.

The Ras/PKA signaling pathway of Saccharomyces cerevisiae exhibits a functional interaction with the Sin4p complex of the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme

Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells enter into the G(0)-like resting state, stationary phase, in response to specific types of nutrient limitation. We have initiated a genetic analysis of this resting state and have identified a collection of rye mutants that exhibit a defective transcriptional response to nutrient deprivation. These transcriptional defects appear to disrupt the control of normal growth because the rye mutants are unable to enter into a normal stationary phase upon nutrient deprivation. In this study, we examined the mutants in the rye1 complementation group and found that rye1 mutants were also defective for stationary phase entry. Interestingly, the RYE1 gene was found to be identical to SIN4, a gene that encodes a component of the yeast Mediator complex within the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. Moreover, mutations that affected proteins within the Sin4p module of the Mediator exhibited specific genetic interactions with the Ras protein signaling pathway. For example, mutations that elevated the levels of Ras signaling, like RAS2(val19), were synthetic lethal with sin4. In all, our data suggest that specific proteins within the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme might be targets of signal transduction pathways that are responsible for coordinating gene expression with cell growth.

A two-hybrid system for transactivator bait proteins

We describe a two-hybrid strategy for detection of interactions with transactivator proteins. This repressed transactivator (RTA) system employs the N-terminal repression domain of the yeast general repressor TUP1. TUP1-GAL80 fusion proteins, when coexpressed with GAL4, are shown to inhibit transcription of GAL4-dependent reporter genes. This effect requires the C-terminal 30 residues of GAL4, which are required for interaction with GAL80 in vitro. Furthermore, repression of GAL transcription by TUP1-GAL80 requires SRB10, demonstrating that the TUP1 repression domain, in the context of a two-hybrid interaction, functions by the same mechanism as endogenous TUP1. Using this strategy, we demonstrate interactions between the mammalian basic helix-loop-helix proteins MyoD and E12, and between c-Myc and Bin-1. We have also identified interacting clones from a TUP1-cDNA fusion expression library by using GAL4-VP16 as a bait fusion. These results demonstrate that RTA is generally applicable for identifying and characterizing interactions with transactivator proteins in vivo.

Inhibition of androgen receptor-mediated transcription by amino-terminal enhancer of split

A yeast two-hybrid assay has identified an androgen-dependent interaction of androgen receptor (AR) with amino-terminal enhancer of split (AES), a member of the highly conserved Groucho/TLE family of corepressors. Full-length AR, as well as the N-terminal fragment of AR, showed direct interactions with AES in in vitro protein-protein interaction assays. AES specifically inhibited AR-mediated transcription in a well-defined cell-free transcription system and interacted specifically with the basal transcription factor (TFIIE) in HeLa nuclear extract. These observations implicate AES as a selective repressor of ligand-dependent AR-mediated transcription that acts by directly interacting with AR and by targeting the basal transcription machinery.

Conversion of a gene-specific repressor to a regional silencer

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, gene silencing at the HMR and HML loci is normally dependent on Sir2p, Sir3p, and Sir4p, which are structural components of silenced chromatin. Sir2p is a NAD+-dependent histone deacetylase required for silencing. Silencing can be restored in cells lacking Sir proteins by a dominant mutation in SUM1, which normally acts as a mitotic repressor of meiotic genes. This study found that mutant Sum1-1p, but not wild-type Sum1p, associated directly with HM loci. The origin recognition complex (ORC) was required for Sum1-1p-mediated silencing, and mutations in ORC genes reduced association of Sum1-1p with the HM loci. Sum1-1p-mediated silencing also depended on HST1, a paralog of SIR2. Both Sum1-1p and wild-type Sum1p interacted with Hst1p in coimmunoprecipitation experiments. Therefore, the SUM1-1 mutation did not change the affinity of Sum1p for Hst1p, but rather relocalized Sum1p to the HM loci. Sum1-1-Hst1p action led to hypoacetylation of the nucleosomes at HM loci. Thus, Sum1-1p and Hst1p could substitute for Sir proteins to achieve silencing through formation of a compositionally distinct type of heterochromatin.

Why Ppr1p is a weak activator of transcription

Upon uracil depletion, the transcriptional activator Ppr1p stimulates expression of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae URA3 gene only four-fold. We performed a split-ubiquitin screen with Tup1p as bait, and we found that the global repressor Tup1p interacts with the transcriptional activator Ppr1p both in vivo and in vitro. The interaction is biologically significant, since the deletion of the TUP1 gene as well as the removal of the Tup1p-binding domain from Ppr1p results in an increased expression of the URA3 gene. Our results suggest that Tup1p blocks Ppr1p directly, and that Ppr1p is a weak activator of transcription because of its interaction with Tup1p. Thus we were able to demonstrate that the global repressor Tup1p can modulate transcription by interacting with an activator.

Srb7p is a physical and physiological target of Tup1p

The holoenzyme of transcription integrates the positive and negative signals from the promoters of eukaryotic genes. We demonstrate that the essential holoenzyme component Srb7p is a physiologically relevant target of the global repressor Tup1p in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Tup1p binds Srb7p in vivo and in vitro, and all genes tested that are repressed by Tup1p are derepressed when wild-type Srb7p is replaced by a mutant derivative of Srb7p that is no longer capable of interacting with Tup1p. Therefore, Srb7p is the first holoenzyme component essential for repression by Tup1p for which a physical interaction with Tup1p has been demonstrated. Furthermore, we find that Srb7p also binds Med6p and that this interaction is necessary for full transcriptional activation by different activators. Our finding that Med6p and Tup1p compete for the interaction with Srb7p suggests a model for Tup1p-mediated repression.