Synergistic activation of ADH2 expression is sensitive to upstream activation sequence 2 (UAS2) orientation, copy number and UAS1-UAS2 helical phasing

Deletion analysis of Pichia pastoris alcohol dehydrogenase 2 (ADH2) promoter and development of synthetic promoters

Pichia pastoris (Komagataella phaffii) is a non-conventional Crabtree-negative yeast with the capability of reaching very high cell densities in a fed-batch fermentation process. The alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) genes of P. pastoris involved in ethanol metabolism were identified and were previously characterized. This work aimed to extend current knowledge of the regulation of the ADH2 promoter. To this end, we first determined the upstream activator (UAS) and repressor (URS) sequences of the promoter by deletion assays. Two upstream activator sites have been identified, positioned between -900 and -801 bp, and -284 and -108 bp upstream of the ADH2 transcription start site. The sequences positioned between -361 and -262 bp had a negative effect on the promoter activity and designated a repressor sequence (URS). We then demonstrated that Mxr1 (methanol expression regulator 1) transcription factor activates the ADH2 promoter through the direct interaction with UAS regions in response to ethanol. Furthermore, five different synthetic promoters were constructed by adding or deleting the regulatory sites. These synthetic promoters were tested for extracellular xylanase production at shake flask level by inducing with ethanol. These promoter variants improved the xylanase production ranging between 165% and 200% of the native promoter. The synthetic promoter 5 (SNT5) that displayed the highest activity was further evaluated at the fermenter scale. The modification in the promoter features might have several implications for industrial processes where decoupling the cell growth and product formation is advantageous.

Effects of glucose, ethanol and acetic acid on regulation of ADH2 gene from Lachancea fermentati

Background. Not all yeast alcohol dehydrogenase 2 (ADH2) are repressed by glucose, as reported in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Pichia stipitis ADH2 is regulated by oxygen instead of glucose, whereas Kluyveromyces marxianus ADH2 is regulated by neither glucose nor ethanol. For this reason, ADH2 regulation of yeasts may be species dependent, leading to a different type of expression and fermentation efficiency. Lachancea fermentati is a highly efficient ethanol producer, fast-growing cells and adapted to fermentation-related stresses such as ethanol and organic acid, but the metabolic information regarding the regulation of glucose and ethanol production is still lacking.

Methods. Our investigation started with the stimulation of ADH2 activity from S. cerevisiae and L. fermentati by glucose and ethanol induction in a glucose-repressed medium. The study also embarked on the retrospective analysis of ADH2 genomic and protein level through direct sequencing and sites identification. Based on the sequence generated, we demonstrated ADH2 gene expression highlighting the conserved NAD(P)-binding domain in the context of glucose fermentation and ethanol production.

Results. An increase of ADH2 activity was observed in starved L. fermentati (LfeADH2) and S. cerevisiae (SceADH2) in response to 2% (w/v) glucose induction. These suggest that in the presence of glucose, ADH2 activity was activated instead of being repressed. An induction of 0.5% (v/v) ethanol also increased LfeADH2 activity, promoting ethanol resistance, whereas accumulating acetic acid at a later stage of fermentation stimulated ADH2 activity and enhanced glucose consumption rates. The lack in upper stream activating sequence (UAS) and TATA elements hindered the possibility of Adr1 binding to LfeADH2. Transcription factors such as SP1 and RAP1 observed in LfeADH2 sequence have been implicated in the regulation of many genes including ADH2. In glucose fermentation, L. fermentati exhibited a bell-shaped ADH2 expression, showing the highest expression when glucose was depleted and ethanol-acetic acid was increased. Meanwhile, S. cerevisiae showed a constitutive ADH2 expression throughout the fermentation process.

Discussion. ADH2 expression in L. fermentati may be subjected to changes in the presence of non-fermentative carbon source. The nucleotide sequence showed that ADH2 transcription could be influenced by other transcription genes of glycolysis oriented due to the lack of specific activation sites for Adr1. Our study suggests that if Adr1 is not capable of promoting LfeADH2 activation, the transcription can be controlled by Rap1 and Sp1 due to their inherent roles. Therefore in future, it is interesting to observe ADH2 gene being highly regulated by these potential transcription factors and functioned as a promoter for yeast under high volume of ethanol and organic acids.

Yeast 14-3-3 protein functions as a comodulator of transcription by inhibiting coactivator functions

In eukaryotes combinatorial activation of transcription is an important component of gene regulation. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Adr1-Cat8 and Adr1-Oaf1/Pip2 are pairs of activators that act together to regulate two diverse sets of genes. Transcription activation of both sets is regulated positively by the yeast AMP-activated protein kinase homolog, Snf1, in response to low glucose or the presence of a non-fermentable carbon source and negatively by two redundant 14-3-3 isoforms, Bmh1 and Bmh2. Bmh regulates the function of these pairs at a post-promoter binding step by direct binding to Adr1. However, how Bmh regulates transcription after activator binding remains unknown. In the present study we analyzed Bmh-mediated regulation of two sets of genes activated independently by these pairs of activators. We report that Bmh inhibits mRNA synthesis when the second activator is absent. Using gene fusions we show that Bmh binding to the Adr1 regulatory domain inhibits an Adr1 activation domain but not a heterologous activation domain or artificially recruited Mediator, consistent with Bmh acting at a step in transcription downstream of activator binding. Bmh inhibits the assembly and the function of a preinitiation complex (PIC). Gene expression studies suggest that Bmh regulates Adr1 activity through the coactivators Mediator and Swi/Snf. Mediator recruitment appeared to occur normally, but PIC formation and function were defective, suggesting that Bmh inhibits a step between Mediator recruitment and PIC activation.

14-3-3 (Bmh) proteins inhibit transcription activation by Adr1 through direct binding to its regulatory domain

14-3-3 proteins, known as Bmh in yeast, are ubiquitous, highly conserved proteins that function as adaptors in signal transduction pathways by binding to phosphorylated proteins to activate, inactivate, or sequester their substrates. Bmh proteins have an important role in glucose repression by binding to Reg1, the regulatory subunit of Glc7, a protein phosphatase that inactivates the AMP-activated protein kinase Snf1. We describe here another role for Bmh in glucose repression. We show that Bmh binds to the Snf1-dependent transcription factor Adr1 and inhibits its transcriptional activity. Bmh binds within the regulatory domain of Adr1 between amino acids 215 and 260, the location of mutant ADR1(c) alleles that deregulate Adr1 activity. This provides the first explanation for the phenotype resulting from these mutations. Bmh inhibits Gal4-Adr1 fusion protein activity by binding to the Ser230 region and blocking the function of a nearby cryptic activating region. ADR1(c) alleles, or the inactivation of Bmh, relieve the inhibition and Snf1 dependence of this activating region, indicating that the phosphorylation of Ser230 and Bmh are important for the inactivation of Gal4-Adr1. The Bmh binding domain is conserved in orthologs of Adr1, suggesting that it acquired an important biological function before the whole-genome duplication of the ancestor of S. cerevisiae.

Snf1 dependence of peroxisomal gene expression is mediated by Adr1

Eukaryotes utilize fatty acids by beta-oxidation, which occurs in the mitochondria and peroxisomes in higher organisms and in the peroxisomes in yeast. The AMP-activated protein kinase regulates this process in mammalian cells, and its homolog Snf1, together with the transcription factors Adr1, Oaf1, and Pip2, regulates peroxisome proliferation and beta-oxidation in yeast. A constitutive allele of Adr1 (Adr1(c)) lacking the glucose- and Snf1-regulated phosphorylation substrate Ser-230 was found to be Snf1-independent for regulation of peroxisomal genes. In addition, it could compensate for and even suppress the requirement for Oaf1 or Pip2 for gene induction. Peroxisomal genes were found to be regulated by oleate in the presence of glucose, as long as Adr1(c) was expressed, suggesting that the Oaf1/Pip2 heterodimer is Snf1-independent. Consistent with this observation, Oaf1 binding to promoters in the presence of oleate was not reduced in a snf1Delta strain. Exploring the mechanism by which Adr1(c) permits Snf1-independent peroxisomal gene induction, we found that strength of promoter binding did not correlate with transcription, suggesting that stable binding is not a prerequisite for enhanced transcription. Instead, enhanced transcriptional activation and suppression of Oaf1, Pip2, and Snf1 by Adr1(c) may be related to the ability of Adr1(c) to suppress the requirement for and enhance the recruitment of transcriptional coactivators in a promoter- and growth medium-dependent manner.

Artificial recruitment of mediator by the DNA-binding domain of Adr1 overcomes glucose repression of ADH2 expression

The transcription factor Adr1 activates numerous genes in nonfermentable carbon source metabolism. An unknown mechanism prevents Adr1 from stably binding to the promoters of these genes in glucose-grown cells. Glucose depletion leads to Snf1-dependent binding. Chromatin immunoprecipitation showed that the Adr1 DNA-binding domain could not be detected at the ADH2 promoter under conditions in which the binding of the full-length protein occurred. This suggested that an activation domain is required for stable binding, and coactivators may stabilize the interaction with the promoter. Artificial recruitment of Mediator tail subunits by fusion to the Adr1 DNA-binding domain overcame both the inhibition of promoter binding and glucose repression of ADH2 expression. In contrast, an Adr1 DNA-binding domain-Tbp fusion did not overcome glucose repression, although it was an efficient activator of ADH2 expression under derepressing conditions. When Mediator was artificially recruited, ADH2 expression was independent of SNF1, SAGA, and Swi/Snf, whereas ADH2 expression was dependent on these factors with wild-type Adr1. These results suggest that in the presence of glucose, the ADH2 promoter is accessible to Adr1 but that other interactions that occur when glucose is depleted do not take place. Artificial recruitment of Mediator appears to overcome this requirement and to allow stable binding and transcription under normally inhibitory conditions.

Adr1 and Cat8 mediate coactivator recruitment and chromatin remodeling at glucose-regulated genes

Background

Adr1 and Cat8 co-regulate numerous glucose-repressed genes in S. cerevisiae, presenting a unique opportunity to explore their individual roles in coactivator recruitment, chromatin remodeling, and transcription.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We determined the individual contributions of Cat8 and Adr1 on the expression of a cohort of glucose-repressed genes and found three broad categories: genes that need both activators for full derepression, genes that rely mostly on Cat8 and genes that require only Adr1. Through combined expression and recruitment data, along with analysis of chromatin remodeling at two of these genes, ADH2 and FBP1, we clarified how these activators achieve this wide range of co-regulation. We find that Adr1 and Cat8 are not intrinsically different in their abilities to recruit coactivators but rather, promoter context appears to dictate which activator is responsible for recruitment to specific genes. These promoter-specific contributions are also apparent in the chromatin remodeling that accompanies derepression: ADH2 requires both Adr1 and Cat8, whereas, at FBP1, significant remodeling occurs with Cat8 alone. Although over-expression of Adr1 can compensate for loss of Cat8 at many genes in terms of both activation and chromatin remodeling, this over-expression cannot complement all of the cat8Δ phenotypes.

Conclusions/Significance

Thus, at many of the glucose-repressed genes, Cat8 and Adr1 appear to have interchangeable roles and promoter architecture may dictate the roles of these activators.

Combined global localization analysis and transcriptome data identify genes that are directly coregulated by Adr1 and Cat8

In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, glucose depletion causes a profound alteration in metabolism, mediated in part by global transcriptional changes. Many of the transcription factors that regulate these changes act combinatorially. We have analyzed combinatorial regulation by Adr1 and Cat8, two transcription factors that act during glucose depletion, by combining genome-wide expression and genome-wide binding data. We identified 32 genes that are directly activated by Adr1, 28 genes that are directly activated by Cat8, and 14 genes that are directly regulated by both. Our analysis also uncovered promoters that Adr1 binds but does not regulate and promoters that are indirectly regulated by Cat8, stressing the advantage of combining global expression and global localization analysis to find directly regulated targets. At most of the coregulated promoters, the in vivo binding of one factor is independent of the other, but Adr1 is required for optimal Cat8 binding at two promoters with a poor match to the Cat8 binding consensus. In addition, Cat8 is required for Adr1 binding at promoters where Adr1 is not required for transcription. These data provide a comprehensive analysis of the direct, indirect, and combinatorial requirements for these two global transcription factors.

Snf1 protein kinase regulates Adr1 binding to chromatin but not transcription activation

The yeast transcriptional activator Adr1 controls the expression of genes required for ethanol, glycerol, and fatty acid utilization. We show that Adr1 acts directly on the promoters of ADH2, ACS1, GUT1, CTA1, and POT1 using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. The yeast homolog of the AMP-activated protein kinase, Snf1, promotes Adr1 chromatin binding in the absence of glucose, and the protein phosphatase complex, Glc7.Reg1, represses its binding in the presence of glucose. A post-translational process is implicated in the regulation of Adr1 binding activity. Chromatin binding by Adr1 is not the only step in ADH2 transcription that is regulated by glucose repression. Adr1 can bind to chromatin in repressed conditions in the presence of hyperacetylated histones. To study steps subsequent to promoter binding we utilized miniAdr1 transcription factors to characterize Adr1-dependent transcription in vitro. Yeast nuclear extracts prepared from glucose-repressed and glucose-derepressed cells are equally capable of supporting miniAdr1-dependent transcription and pre-initiation complex formation. Nuclear extracts prepared from a snf1 mutant support miniAdr1-dependent transcription but are partially defective in the formation of pre-initiation complexes with Mediator components being particularly depleted. We conclude that Snf1 regulates Adr1-dependent transcription primarily at the level of chromatin binding.

Adr1 and Cat8 synergistically activate the glucose-regulated alcohol dehydrogenase gene ADH2 of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Glucose-repressible alcohol dehydrogenase II, encoded by the ADH2 gene of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, is transcriptionally controlled by the activator Adr1, binding UAS1 of the control region. However, even in an adr1 null mutant, a substantial level of gene derepression can be detected, arguing for the existence of a further mechanism of activation. Here it is shown that the previously identified UAS2 contains a distantly related variant of the carbon source-responsive element (CSRE) initially found upstream of gluconeogenic genes. In a mutant defective for the CSRE-binding factor Cat8, derepression of an ADH2-lacZ fusion was reduced to about 12% of the wild-type level. Gene expression in a cat8 adr1 double mutant decreased almost to the basal level of the glucose-repressed promoter. CSRE(ADH2) present in a single copy turned out to be a weak UAS element, while a significant synergism of gene activation was found in the presence of at least two copies. Its importance for regulated gene activation was confirmed by site-directed mutagenesis of the CSRE in the natural ADH2 control region. Direct binding of Cat8 to CSRE(ADH2) could be shown by electrophoretic retardation of the corresponding protein/DNA complex in the presence of a specific antibody. In contrast to what was shown previously for CSRE sequence variants, no significant influence of the isofunctional activator Sip4 on CSRE(ADH2) was detected. In conclusion, these results show a derepression of ADH2 by synergistically acting regulators Adr1 (interacting with UAS1) and Cat8, binding to UAS2 (=CSRE(ADH2)).

Evolution of a glucose-regulated ADH gene in the genus Saccharomyces

To determine when a glucose-repressed alcohol dehydrogenase isozyme and its regulatory gene, ADR1, arose during evolution, we surveyed species of the genus Saccharomyces for glucose-repressed ADH isozymes and for ADR1 homologues. Glucose-repressed ADH isozymes were present in all species of Saccharomyces sensu strictu and also in Saccharomyces kluyveri, the most distant member of the Saccharomyces clade. We cloned and characterized ADH promoters from S. bayanus, S. douglasii, and S. kluyveri. The ADH promoters from S. bayanus and S. douglasii had conserved sequences, including upstream regulatory elements, and an extended polydA tract. The expression of a reporter gene driven by the S. bayanus promoter was glucose-repressed and dependent on the major activator of transcription, ADR1, when it was introduced into S. cerevisiae. One S. kluyveri promoter was also glucose-repressed and ADR1-dependent in S. cerevisiae. The other S. kluyveri ADH promoter was expressed constitutively and was ADR1-independent. Although showing little sequence conservation with the S. cerevisiae ADH2 promoter, the glucose-repressed S. kluyveri promoter contains numerous potential binding sites for Adr1. The glucose-repressed ADH from S. kluyveri is a mitochondrial isozyme most closely related to S. cerevisiae ADHIII. ADR1 homologues from S. douglasii and S. paradoxus contain a trinucleotide repeat encoding polyAsn that is lacking in S. cerevisiae and S. bayanus. No ADR1 homologue could be detected in S. kluyveri, suggesting that the potential for Adr1 regulation may have arisen first, before ADR1 evolved.

Post-translational regulation of Adr1 activity is mediated by its DNA binding domain

ADR1 encodes a transcriptional activator that regulates genes involved in carbon source utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. ADR1 is itself repressed by glucose, but the significance of this repression for regulating target genes is not known. To test if the reduction in Adr1 levels contributes to glucose repression of ADH2 expression, we generated yeast strains in which the level of Adr1 produced during growth in glucose-containing medium is similar to that present in wild-type cells grown in the absence of glucose. In these Adr1-overproducing strains, ADH2 expression remained tightly repressed, and UAS1, the element in the ADH2 promoter that binds Adr1, was sufficient to maintain glucose repression. Post-translational modification of Adr1 activity is implicated in repression, since ADH2 derepression occurred in the absence of de novo protein synthesis. The N-terminal 172 amino acids of Adr1, containing the DNA binding and nuclear localization domains, fused to the Herpesvirus VP16-encoded transcription activation domain, conferred regulated expression at UAS1. Nuclear localization of an Adr1-GFP fusion protein was not glucose-regulated, suggesting that the DNA binding domain of Adr1 is sufficient to confer regulated expression on target genes. A Gal4-Adr1 fusion protein was unable to confer glucose repression at GAL4-dependent promoters, suggesting that regulation mediated by ADR1 is specific to UAS1.

Factors affecting Saccharomyces cerevisiae ADH2 chromatin remodeling and transcription

The chromatin structure of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ADH2 gene is modified during the switch from repressing (high glucose) to derepressing (low glucose) conditions of growth. Loss of protection toward micrococcal nuclease cleavage for the nucleosomes covering the TATA box and the RNA initiation sites (-1 and +1, respectively) is the major modification taking place and is strictly dependent on the presence of the transcriptional activator ADR1. To identify separate functions involved in the transition from a repressed to a transcribing promoter, we have analyzed the ADH2 chromatin organization in various genetic backgrounds. Deletion of the CCR4 gene coding for a general transcription factor impaired ADH2 expression without affecting chromatin remodeling. Growing yeast at 37 degrees C also resulted in chromatin remodeling at the ADH2 locus even under glucose repressing conditions. However, although this temperature-induced remodeling was dependent on the ADR1 protein, no ADH2 mRNA was observed. In addition, inactivating RNA polymerase II (and therefore, elongation) was found to have no effect on the ability to reconfigure nucleosomes. Taken together, these data indicate that chromatin remodeling by itself is insufficient to induce transcription at the ADH2 promoter.

ADR1 activation domains contact the histone acetyltransferase GCN5 and the core transcriptional factor TFIIB

The yeast transcriptional activator ADR1, which is required for ADH2 and peroxisomal gene expression, contains four separable and partially redundant activation domains (TADs). Mutations in ADA2 or GCN5, encoding components of the ADA coactivator complex involved in histone acetylation, severely reduced LexA-ADR1-TAD activation of a LexA-lacZ reporter gene. Similarly, the ability of the wild-type ADR1 gene to activate an ADH2-driven promoter was compromised in strains deleted for ADA2 or GCN5. In contrast, defects in other general transcription cofactors such as CCR4, CAF1/POP2, and SNF/SWI displayed much less or no effect on LexA-ADR1-TAD activation. Using an in vitro protein binding assay, ADA2 and GCN5 were found to specifically contact individual ADR1 TADs. ADA2 could bind TAD II, and GCN5 physically interacted with all four TADs. Both TADs I and IV were also shown to make specific contacts to the C-terminal segment of TFIIB. In contrast, no significant binding to TBP was observed. TAD IV deletion analysis indicated that its ability to bind GCN5 and TFIIB was directly correlated with its ability to activate transcription in vivo. ADR1 TADs appear to make several contacts, which may help explain both their partial redundancy and their varying requirements at different promoters. The contact to and dependence on GCN5, a histone acetyltransferase, suggests that rearrangement of nucleosomes may be one important means by which ADR1 activates transcription.

Isolation and identification of genes activating UAS2-dependent ADH2 expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Two cis-acting elements have been identified that act synergistically to regulate expression of the glucose-repressed alcohol dehydrogenase 2 (ADH2) gene. UAS1 is bound by the trans-activator Adr1p. UAS2 is thought to be the binding site for an unidentified regulatory protein. A genetic selection based on a UAS2-dependent ADH2 reporter was devised to isolate genes capable of activating UAS2-dependent transcription. One set of UAS2-dependent genes contained SPT6/CRE2/SSN20. Multicopy SPT6 caused improper expression of chromosomal ADH2. A second set of UAS2-dependent clones contained a previously uncharacterized open reading frame designated MEU1 (Multicopy Enhancer of UAS2). A frame shift mutation in MEU1 abolished its ability to activate UAS2-dependent gene expression. Multicopy MEU1 expression suppressed the constitutive ADH2 expression caused by cre2-1. Disruption of MEU1 reduced endogenous ADH2 expression about twofold but had no effect on cell viability or growth. No homologues of MEU1 were identified by low-stringency Southern hybridization of yeast genomic DNA, and no significant homologues were found in the sequence data bases. A MEU1/beta-gal fusion protein was not localized to a particular region of the cell. MEU1 is linked to PPR1 on chromosome XII.

Conserved regulation of the Hansenula polymorpha MOX promoter in Saccharomyces cerevisiae reveals insights in the transcriptional activation by Adr1p

The Hansenula polymorpha MOX gene encodes a peroxisomal enzyme that catalyzes the first step of the highly specialized methanol metabolism. MOX is strongly transcribed in cells growing in methanol and completely repressed in glucose. We show here that the MOX promoter confers a glucose-repressible expression upon a lacZ reporter gene in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, an unrelated yeast species that lacks the methanol metabolism. Repression was mediated by a 200-bp region of the MOX promoter, termed MOX-B, and was counteracted by Adr1p, a transcription factor involved in the derepression of S. cerevisiae genes encoding peroxisomal proteins, the class to which MOX belongs. Binding of Adr1p to MOX-B was demonstrated by gel retardation and DNaseI-footprinting, and Adr1p was shown to interact with a DNA region containing only a half of the putative Adr1p consensus binding site. Our findings suggest that Adr1p is a conserved regulator for genes encoding peroxisomal proteins at least in other yeast species, and that its interaction with the DNA is dependent on the promoter context.