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

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Mol Cell Biol. 1987 May; 7(5): 1612-1622

DNA sequence-directed nucleosome reconstitution on 5S RNA genes of Xenopus laevis.

ABSTRACT

Nucleosomes were reconstituted in vitro with several singly end-labeled restriction fragments derived from a cloned somatic-type 5S RNA gene of Xenopus laevis and purified nucleosome core particles from Xenopus cultured cells or chicken erythrocytes. Nucleosome locations were determined by digestion of the reconstitutes with exonuclease III and DNase I and were the same for all fragments investigated, extending from 20 base pairs (bp) within the 5S gene to 80 bp beyond the 3' end of the gene. Both core particles and crude nuclear extracts gave equivalent results, suggesting that no factors other than the core histones are responsible for recognition of DNA sequence during reconstitution. The histone octamer and the 5S gene-specific transcription factor TFIIIA both bind to the same region and face of 5S DNA, and nucleosome reconstitution on the 5S gene excluded binding of TFIIIA. The helical repeat of somatic-type 5S DNA in solution was measured by the band shift method and was 10.5 to 10.6 bp per turn over the region of the TFIIIA-binding site. The difference in helical repeat between DNA in solution and on the surface of the nucleosome (10.0-bp spacing between DNase I cutting sites) may explain the linking number paradox.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Vitolo, J. M., Yang, Z., Basavappa, R., Hayes, J. J. (2004). Structural Features of Transcription Factor IIIA Bound to a Nucleosome in Solution. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24: 697-707 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Vassetzky, Y., Hair, A., Méchali, M. (2000). Rearrangement of chromatin domains during development in Xenopus. Genes Dev. 14: 1541-1552 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Sera, T., Wolffe, A. P. (1998). Role of Histone H1 as an Architectural Determinant of Chromatin Structure and as a Specific Repressor of Transcription on Xenopus Oocyte 5S rRNA Genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 18: 3668-3680 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Howe, L., Ausió, J. (1998). Nucleosome Translational Position, Not Histone Acetylation, Determines TFIIIA Binding to Nucleosomal Xenopus laevis 5S rRNA Genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 18: 1156-1162 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Englander, E. W., Howard, B. H. (1995). Nucleosome Positioning by Human Alu Elements in Chromatin. J. Biol. Chem. 270: 10091-10096 [Abstract] [Full Text]