MCB
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
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 Deckert, J.
Right arrow Articles by Struhl, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Deckert, J.
Right arrow Articles by Struhl, K.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Molecular and Cellular Biology, April 2001, p. 2726-2735, Vol. 21, No. 8
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.8.2726-2735.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Histone Acetylation at Promoters Is Differentially Affected by Specific Activators and Repressors

Jutta Deckert and Kevin Struhl*

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

Received 28 November 2000/Returned for modification 17 January 2001/Accepted 22 January 2001

We analyzed the relationship between histone acetylation and transcriptional regulation at 40 Saccharomyces cerevisiae promoters that respond to specific activators and repressors. In accord with the general correlation between histone acetylation and transcriptional activity, Gcn4 and the general stress activators (Msn2 and Msn4) cause increased acetylation of histones H3 and H4. Surprisingly, Gal4-dependent activation is associated with a dramatic decrease in histone H4 acetylation, whereas acetylation of histone H3 is unaffected. A specific decrease in H4 acetylation is also observed, to a lesser extent, at promoters activated by Hap4, Adr1, Met4, and Ace1. Activation by heat shock factor has multiple effects; H4 acetylation increases at some promoters, whereas other promoters show an apparent decrease in H3 and H4 acetylation that probably reflects nucleosome loss or gross alteration of chromatin structure. Repression by targeted recruitment of the Sin3-Rpd3 histone deacetylase is associated with decreased H3 and H4 acetylation, whereas repression by Cyc8-Tup1 is associated with decreased H3 acetylation but variable effects on H4 acetylation; this suggests that Cyc8-Tup1 uses multiple mechanisms to reduce histone acetylation at promoters. Thus, individual activators confer distinct patterns of histone acetylation on target promoters, and transcriptional activation is not necessarily associated with increased acetylation. We speculate that the activator-specific decrease in histone H4 acetylation is due to blocking the access or function of an H4-specific histone acetylase such as Esa1.

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

Molecular and Cellular Biology, April 2001, p. 2726-2735, Vol. 21, No. 8
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.8.2726-2735.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. J. Virol. Eukaryot. Cell
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. All ASM Journals

Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.