This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mai, X.
Right arrow Articles by Struhl, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mai, X.
Right arrow Articles by Struhl, K.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Molecular and Cellular Biology, September 2000, p. 6668-6676, Vol. 20, No. 18
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Preferential Accessibility of the Yeast his3 Promoter Is Determined by a General Property of the DNA Sequence, Not by Specific Elements

Xuhong Mai, Susanna Chou, and Kevin Struhl*

Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115

Received 13 April 2000/Returned for modification 29 May 2000/Accepted 7 June 2000

Yeast promoter regions are often more accessible to nuclear proteins than are nonpromoter regions. As assayed by HinfI endonuclease cleavage in living yeast cells, HinfI sites located in the promoters of all seven genes tested were 5- to 20-fold more accessible than sites in adjacent nonpromoter regions. HinfI hypersensitivity within the his3 promoter region is locally determined, since it was observed when this region was translocated to the middle of the ade2 structural gene. Detailed analysis of the his3 promoter indicated that preferential accessibility is not determined by specific elements such as the Gcn4 binding site, poly(dA-dT) sequences, TATA elements, or initiator elements or by transcriptional activity. However, progressive deletion of the promoter region in either direction resulted in a progressive loss of HinfI accessibility. Preferential accessibility is independent of the Swi-Snf chromatin remodeling complex, Gcn5 histone acetylase complexes Ada and SAGA, and Rad6, which ubiquitinates histone H2B. These results suggest that preferential accessibility of the his3 (and presumably other) promoter regions is determined by a general property of the DNA sequence (e.g., base composition or a related feature) rather than by defined sequence elements. The organization of the compact yeast genome into inherently distinct promoter and nonpromoter regions may ensure that transcription factors bind preferentially to appropriate sites in promoters rather than to the excess of irrelevant but equally high-affinity sites in nonpromoter regions.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Dept. of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard University, Boston, MA 02115. Phone: (617) 432-2104. Fax: (617) 432-2529. E-mail: kevin{at}hms.harvard.edu.

Molecular and Cellular Biology, September 2000, p. 6668-6676, Vol. 20, No. 18
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Kotekar, A. S., Weissman, J. D., Gegonne, A., Cohen, H., Singer, D. S. (2008). Histone Modifications, but Not Nucleosomal Positioning, Correlate with Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Promoter Activity in Different Tissues In Vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol. 28: 7323-7336 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Miele, V., Vaillant, C., d'Aubenton-Carafa, Y., Thermes, C., Grange, T. (2008). DNA physical properties determine nucleosome occupancy from yeast to fly. Nucleic Acids Res 36: 3746-3756 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Liu, X., Lee, C.-K., Granek, J. A., Clarke, N. D., Lieb, J. D. (2006). Whole-genome comparison of Leu3 binding in vitro and in vivo reveals the importance of nucleosome occupancy in target site selection. Genome Res 16: 1517-1528 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kim, Y., McLaughlin, N., Lindstrom, K., Tsukiyama, T., Clark, D. J. (2006). Activation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae HIS3 Results in Gcn4p-Dependent, SWI/SNF-Dependent Mobilization of Nucleosomes over the Entire Gene. Mol. Cell. Biol. 26: 8607-8622 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Morohashi, N., Yamamoto, Y., Kuwana, S., Morita, W., Shindo, H., Mitchell, A. P., Shimizu, M. (2006). Effect of Sequence-Directed Nucleosome Disruption on Cell-Type-Specific Repression by {alpha}2/Mcm1 in the Yeast Genome. Eukaryot Cell 5: 1925-1933 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Wang, J.-P. Z., Widom, J. (2005). Improved alignment of nucleosome DNA sequences using a mixture model. Nucleic Acids Res 33: 6743-6755 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Rao, B., Shibata, Y., Strahl, B. D., Lieb, J. D. (2005). Dimethylation of Histone H3 at Lysine 36 Demarcates Regulatory and Nonregulatory Chromatin Genome-Wide. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25: 9447-9459 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Wade, J. T., Reppas, N. B., Church, G. M., Struhl, K. (2005). Genomic analysis of LexA binding reveals the permissive nature of the Escherichia coli genome and identifies unconventional target sites. Genes Dev. 19: 2619-2630 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Lee, M. P., Howcroft, K., Kotekar, A., Yang, H. H., Buetow, K. H., Singer, D. S. (2005). ATG deserts define a novel core promoter subclass. Genome Res 15: 1189-1197 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Reid, J. L., Moqtaderi, Z., Struhl, K. (2004). Eaf3 Regulates the Global Pattern of Histone Acetylation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24: 757-764 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Mason, P. B., Struhl, K. (2003). The FACT Complex Travels with Elongating RNA Polymerase II and Is Important for the Fidelity of Transcriptional Initiation In Vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23: 8323-8333 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Valerius, O., Brendel, C., Wagner, C., Krappmann, S., Thoma, F., Braus, G. H. (2003). Nucleosome Position-Dependent and -Independent Activation of HIS7 Expression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by Different Transcriptional Activators. Eukaryot Cell 2: 876-885 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Braastad, C. D., Han, Z., Hendrickson, E. A. (2003). Constitutive DNase I Hypersensitivity of p53-Regulated Promoters. J. Biol. Chem. 278: 8261-8268 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kim, Y., Clark, D. J. (2002). SWI/SNF-dependent long-range remodeling of yeast HIS3 chromatin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99: 15381-15386 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Deckert, J., Struhl, K. (2002). Targeted Recruitment of Rpd3 Histone Deacetylase Represses Transcription by Inhibiting Recruitment of Swi/Snf, SAGA, and TATA Binding Protein. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22: 6458-6470 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Ng, H. H., Robert, F., Young, R. A., Struhl, K. (2002). Genome-wide location and regulated recruitment of the RSC nucleosome-remodeling complex. Genes Dev. 16: 806-819 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Anderson, J. D., Widom, J. (2001). Poly(dA-dT) Promoter Elements Increase the Equilibrium Accessibility of Nucleosomal DNA Target Sites. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21: 3830-3839 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Deckert, J., Struhl, K. (2001). Histone Acetylation at Promoters Is Differentially Affected by Specific Activators and Repressors. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21: 2726-2735 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Li, B., Reese, J. C. (2001). Ssn6-Tup1 Regulates RNR3 by Positioning Nucleosomes and Affecting the Chromatin Structure at the Upstream Repression Sequence. J. Biol. Chem. 276: 33788-33797 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»