Previous Article | Next Article 
Mol Cell Biol, January 1998, p. 69-77, Vol. 18, No. 1
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Multiple Roles for the MyoD Basic Region in
Transmission of Transcriptional Activation Signals and Interaction
with MEF2
Brian L.
Black,
Jeffery D.
Molkentin,
and
Eric N.
Olson*
Department of Molecular Biology and Oncology,
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
75235
Received 25 July 1997/Returned for modification 22 September
1997/Accepted 13 October 1997
 |
ABSTRACT |
Establishment of skeletal muscle lineages is controlled by the MyoD
family of basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factors. The
ability of these factors to initiate myogenesis is dependent on two
conserved amino acid residues, alanine and threonine, in the basic
domains of these factors. It has been postulated that these two
residues may be responsible for the initiation of myogenesis via
interaction with an essential myogenic cofactor. The myogenic bHLH
proteins cooperatively activate transcription and myogenesis through
protein-protein interactions with members of the myocyte enhancer
factor 2 (MEF2) family of MADS domain transcription factors. MyoD-E12
heterodimers interact with MEF2 proteins to synergistically activate
myogenesis, while homodimers of E12, which lack the conserved alanine
and threonine residues in the basic domain, do not interact with MEF2.
We have examined whether the myogenic alanine and threonine in the MyoD
basic region are required for interaction with MEF2. Here, we show that
substitution of the MyoD basic domain with that of E12 does not prevent
interaction with MEF2. Instead, the inability of alanine-threonine
mutants of MyoD to initiate myogenesis is due to a failure to transmit transcriptional activation signals provided either from the MyoD or the
MEF2 activation domain. This defect in transcriptional transmission can
be overcome by substitution of the MyoD or the MEF2 activation domain
with the VP16 activation domain. These results demonstrate that
myogenic bHLH-MEF2 interaction can be uncoupled from transcriptional
activation and support the idea that the myogenic residues in myogenic
bHLH proteins are essential for transmission of a transcriptional
activation signal.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
During skeletal muscle development
and differentiation, numerous muscle-specific genes are expressed.
Members of the myocyte enhancer factor 2 (MEF2) family of transcription
factors play an important role in the activation of muscle-specific
genes. There are four members of the MEF2 family in vertebrates which are the products of separate genes, mef2a, mef2b,
mef2c, and mef2d (6, 9, 18, 26-28, 31, 37,
47). MEF2 factors belong to the MADS
(MCM1-Agamous-Deficiens-serum response factor) box family of
transcription factors (41). The MADS domain and the adjacent
MEF2 domain are highly conserved and comprise the first 86 amino acids
of each MEF2 protein. These two domains mediate DNA binding and
dimerization and together define the MEF2 subclass of MADS domain
proteins (36). MEF2 proteins bind as homo- and heterodimers
to an A/T-rich DNA consensus sequence present in the control regions of
nearly all muscle-specific genes (10, 14).
Targeted disruption of the mef2c gene in the mouse results
in embryonic lethality due to severe cardiac defects (21).
Because of this early lethality and because of the genetic redundancy resulting from four mef2 genes in the mouse, the requirement
for mef2 gene products in skeletal myogenesis in vivo has
been difficult to assess. However, Drosophila melanogaster
contains only a single mef2 gene product (19,
34). P-element-mediated disruption of this mef2 gene
results in the loss of differentiated muscle cells from all muscle
lineages in the fly, demonstrating the requirement for MEF2 protein in
the differentiation of skeletal muscle (5, 20, 38).
The MyoD family of myogenic basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription
factors is also essential for the control of the myogenic program.
There are four myogenic bHLH proteins, which are all capable of
conversion of nonmuscle cells into terminally differentiated myotubes
when transfected into nonmuscle cells in culture (35). The
myogenic bHLH factors function as heterodimers with a second class of
ubiquitously expressed bHLH proteins known as E proteins (such as E12).
These factors heterodimerize through their helix-loop-helix (HLH)
domains, and their basic domains mediate binding to a consensus DNA
sequence, CANNTG, known as an E box (8, 17, 33).
While E12-MyoD heterodimers are capable of converting nonmuscle cells
to differentiated myotubes, E12 homodimers are incapable of this
effect. Numerous studies have been conducted to determine the protein
sequences responsible for the myogenic activity of the myogenic bHLH
factors. Substitution of the basic domain of MyoD with that of E12, in
a mutant known as MyoD-E12basic, renders MyoD nonmyogenic (11, 12,
44). Similar results have also been obtained with myogenin and
myf-5 (7, 46). This myogenic activity has been mapped to two
amino acid residues in the core of the MyoD basic domain and one amino
acid residue in the junction region of the first helix of MyoD
(12). Substitution of the myogenic alanine and threonine in
the basic domains of the myogenic bHLH factors with the corresponding
two asparagines of E12 renders the myogenic bHLH factors inactive
(7, 12, 46). The myogenic activity of these two amino acid
residues is also clearly demonstrated by the mutation of the asparagine
residues in the MyoD-E12basic mutant back to the alanine and threonine
residues normally found in MyoD. This revertant mutant, known as
MyoD-E12basic(AT), has full myogenic activity restored (12).
Since the MyoD-E12basic mutant binds DNA, it has been postulated that
its inability to activate myogenesis is due to a failure of this mutant
to interact with an essential myogenic cofactor (11, 12, 40,
44). According to this model, the alanine and threonine would be
required for the myogenic bHLH proteins to adopt a conformation
compatible with the recruitment of an essential myogenic cofactor.
Recent evidence has suggested that MEF2 proteins may be the cofactors
required for myogenic activation by MyoD. This hypothesis stems from
the observations that MEF2 proteins serve as transcriptional cofactors
for members of the myogenic and neurogenic bHLH families (1, 15,
25, 29, 31). MEF2 and MyoD family members associate through
direct physical interaction to synergistically activate transcription
and myogenesis (15, 29, 31). This interaction occurs via
association of these two heterologous classes of transcription factors
through their DNA-binding and dimerization motifs (15, 29).
Synergistic activation of transcription by these two factors requires
only one factor to be bound to DNA. The bound factor is then capable of
recruiting the other factor through protein-protein interactions
(29). While MEF2 proteins can potently synergize with
myogenic bHLH-E12 heterodimers, these proteins cannot activate transcription in collaboration with E12 homodimers (1, 29).
In this study, we investigated the role of the MyoD basic region in
mediating interaction with MEF2 and in transcriptional activation. We
show that the myogenic residues, alanine and threonine, in the basic
domain are required for MyoD to synergistically activate transcription
with MEF2, but they are not required for interaction with MEF2. These
findings suggest a two-step model for transcriptional synergy. In step
1 of this model, MyoD and MEF2 must form a complex which then acquires
transcriptional competence through a mechanism dependent on the MyoD
basic region. The requirement of the MyoD basic region for step 2, transmission of the transcriptional activation signal, can be bypassed
through substitution of the MyoD or the MEF2 activation domain with the
constitutive activation domain of herpesvirus viral protein 16 (VP16).
These results demonstrate that the myogenic amino acid residues in the
basic region of the myogenic bHLH factors are essential for
transmission of a transcriptional activation signal and support the
notion that cofactor binding alone cannot mediate myogenesis in the
absence of transmission of the transcriptional activation signal.
Furthermore, these results support a model of transcriptional
activation in which a cofactor activates transcription through
protein-protein interactions by relaying its activation signal
through its DNA-bound partner.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plasmids.
The expression plasmids for E12 (29),
myogenin (3), MyoD (3), MEF2C (3),
MyoD-E12basic (29), MyoD-E12basic(AT) [also called
MyoD-E12(AT)] (29), mutant MEF2C KR23,24ID (30), and MEF2C-VP16 (also called 1-117/VP16) (1) are described
elsewhere. Plasmids pCITE.E12 and pCITE.myogenin were used for in vitro
translation of the E12 and myogenin cDNAs and contain the full-length
open reading frames of each of the cDNAs cloned as fusion proteins into
the translational enhancement vector pCITE-2A (Novagen). The reporter
plasmid 4RtkCAT contains four tandem copies of the right E box from the
muscle creatine kinase (MCK) enhancer (43). The GAL4-MEF2C
bait plasmid, GAL(DBD)-MEF2C, used in trihybrid analyses encodes amino
acids 1 to 143 of MEF2C fused at the amino terminus to amino acids 1 through 147 of yeast GAL4 (30). The GAL4-E12 bait plasmid,
GAL(DBD)-E12, and the GAL4-dependent reporter plasmid, pG5E1bCAT, which
contains five tandem copies of the GAL4 binding site, have been
described elsewhere (29). Plasmid E12-VP16 was a gift from
Richard Baer and contains the E12 cDNA sequence from the E2-5 gene
fused to the VP16 activation domain. The MyoD-VP16, MyoD-E12basic-VP16,
and MyoD-E12basic(AT)-VP16 fusion plasmids encode the initiating
methionine and bHLH domains of MyoD or the MyoD mutants fused to the
activation domain of VP16. The MyoD bHLH fragments were generated by
PCR from the full-length expression constructs encoding each of the
cDNAs, using the PCR primers
5'-GCGCGAATTCAAGCTTATGGAGAAGCGCAAGACCACCAAC-3' and
5'-GCGCGCGAATTCGGGCGCGGCGTCCTGGTC-3'. PCRs were conducted with the TaKaRa (Takara Shuzo Co., Ltd.) high-fidelity polymerase to
reduce the potential for PCR-generated errors. The PCR primers used
contained HindIII and EcoRI restriction
enzyme clamps to facilitate subsequent cloning steps into the
expression plasmid pCDNAI/amp (Invitrogen). Each of the constructs was
sequenced on both strands, using an ABI 373 automated DNA sequencer, to confirm that the intended fusion constructs were correctly generated and that no unintentional mutations were introduced by the PCR.
DNA binding and immunoprecipitation assays.
The ability of
myogenin-E12 and MEF2C to associate with each other while both factors
were bound to DNA was examined by a coprecipitation assay. For this
assay, the MCK right E box (5'-CCCAACACCTGCTGCCTGAG-3') or
the MCK MEF2 site (5'-CTCTAAAAATAACCCT-3') was labeled with biotin. Oligonucleotides were labeled with biotin by incubating the
following together at 37°C for 1 h in a 30-µl reaction volume: 500 pmol of sense-strand oligonucleotide, 8 µl of biotin-16-dUTP, 2 µl of terminal deoxythymidine transferase (25 U/µl), and 6 µl of
5× tailing buffer. Likewise, the MCK right E-box and MCK MEF2 sites
were labeled with 32P by incubating the following together
at 37°C for 30 min in a 30-µl reaction volume: 60 pmol of
sense-strand oligonucleotide, 3 µl of 10× polynucleotide kinase
buffer, 1 µl of polynucleotide kinase (10 U/µl), and 12 µl of
[
-32P]rATP. After labeling, oligonucleotides were
purified by using a Qiagen tip-5 column and were annealed to unlabeled
antisense oligonucleotides to make double-stranded DNA probes.
Unlabeled MEF2C and myogenin-E12 cDNAs were transcribed and translated
in vitro by using a TNT kit (Promega) for 2 h at 30°C according
to the manufacturer's recommendations. Briefly, plasmids pCITE.E12 and
pCITE.myogenin (400 ng of each) were cotranscribed and translated in a
12.5-µl reaction volume, while 300 ng of MEF2C or mutant MEF2C cDNA
in plasmid pCDNAI/amp (Invitrogen) was transcribed and translated in a
12.5-µl reaction volume. Transcription reactions were conducted with
the bacteriophage T7 RNA polymerase. Binding reactions were conducted
by mixing 1 µl of biotin-labeled E box (16 pmol) and 2 µl of
32P-labeled MEF2 site (4 pmol; 105 cpm) (or
vice versa) with 5 µl of TNT lysate containing the appropriate proteins or unprogrammed lysate and electrophoretic mobility shift assay buffer in a 30-µl reaction mixture and incubating the mixture at 25°C for 30 min (the buffer and binding conditions have been described elsewhere [32]). Following binding, the
reaction mixtures were immunoprecipitated in a 200-µl reaction
mixture by using streptavidin-conjugated agarose for 1 h at 4°C.
Immunoprecipitates were washed three times with immunoprecipitation
buffer (29), and pellets were analyzed for total
radioactivity in a scintillation counter.
Cell culture and transfections.
10T1/2 cells were maintained
in Dulbecco modified Eagle medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal
calf serum (FCS). Transfections were performed by calcium phosphate
precipitation as described elsewhere (3). Briefly, for
transient transfections, 60-mm-diameter dishes were seeded at 25%
confluence in DMEM plus 10% FCS and without antibiotics 16 h
prior to transfection. The cells were then transfected for 16 h,
washed once with phosphate-buffered saline, and incubated in DMEM plus
10% FCS for 24 h before harvesting. In each transfection, 6 µg
of plasmid DNA was transfected by mixing it with 0.167 ml of 0.25 M
CaCl2 and 0.167 ml of 2× BBS (50 mM BES, 250 mM NaCl, 1.5 mM Na2HPO4 [pH 6.95]) and adding this mixture to the cells.
CAT assays.
Transfected cells were harvested, and cellular
extracts were prepared by sonication and heat inactivation as described
previously (2). Cell lysates were then quantitated for total
protein (23), and an equivalent amount of cell lysate
(normalized for total protein) from each transfection was assayed for
chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) activity as described elsewhere
(2). Reactions were conducted for 5 h at 37°C.
Conversion to acetylated forms was analyzed by thin-layer
chromatography and quantitated by PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics)
analysis.
 |
RESULTS |
Myogenin-E12 associates with MEF2 while both are bound to DNA.
Previous results have shown that myogenin interacts with MEF2C to
synergistically activate transcription and to augment myogenic conversion (29). Likewise, the neuron-specific bHLH
transcription factor MASH1 interacts with MEF2 to synergistically
activate transcription (1). These previous studies
demonstrated that bHLH heterodimers and MEF2 can interact when neither
factor is bound to DNA or when only one factor is bound to DNA. When
only one factor is bound to DNA, it can recruit the other factor via
protein-protein interactions to synergistically activate transcription
(1, 29, 31).
Since the DNA-binding domains of myogenin and MEF2 mediate their
interaction with each other, we were interested in whether the two
proteins could physically interact while both factors were bound to
DNA. To test this, we designed a coprecipitation strategy where a
positive signal could be obtained only if both factors were bound to
each other and to DNA at the same time. To do this, we labeled an E box
with biotin and a MEF2 site with 32P. The biotinylated E
box could then be efficiently precipitated by using avidin-conjugated
agarose. However, the MEF2 site labeled with 32P could not
be precipitated with avidin-conjugated agarose since it lacked a biotin
moiety. We reasoned that if myogenin-E12 heterodimers and MEF2
molecules were added to the reaction mixture containing both labeled
DNA probes, each would bind to its respective site. If
32P-labeled probe was coprecipitated with the
avidin-conjugated agarose, this would indicate that MEF2 and
myogenin-E12 were physically associated with each other while bound to
their DNA-binding sites. A schematic representation of the experiment
is shown in Fig. 1A. The results showed
that the 32P-labeled MEF2 site was precipitated only when
both myogenin-E12 and MEF2C were present in the reaction mixture.
Essentially no counts above background were precipitated if only
myogenin-E12 or only MEF2C was included in the assay. Likewise, if a
MEF2C mutant (KR23,24ID) that is deficient in its ability to bind DNA (30) but still capable of interaction with myogenin-E12
(4) was included in the reaction mixture, few counts above
background were coprecipitated. Furthermore, if a mutant MEF2 site
which fails to bind MEF2 was used in this assay, no counts above
background were precipitated (data not shown).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Double-DNA binding assay for MEF2C and myogenin.
Biotin-labeled E-box probe and 32P-labeled MEF2 site probe
(A) or biotin-labeled MEF2 site probe and 32P-labeled E-box
probe (B) were mixed with either wild-type (wt) or mutant MEF2C and
myogenin-E12 proteins transcribed and translated in vitro. A dash
indicates the use of unprogrammed reticulocyte in place of MEF2, E12,
or myogenin-containing lysate. Complexes were immunoprecipitated with
avidin-conjugated agarose and were washed three times. Radioactive
counts from the 32P-labeled probes were measured in a
scintillation counter. 32P-labeled probe can be
precipitated by the avidin-conjugated agarose only if protein-protein
interaction occurs. The data are expressed as the counts per minute
precipitated minus the background counts per minute precipitated in the
presence of unprogrammed lysate alone. The background in panel A was
1,174 cpm, and the background in panel B was 385 cpm. The results shown
are from representative experiments. For the experiments shown in both
panels, similar results were obtained in three separate
immunoprecipitations using three separate preparations of in
vitro-translated proteins and labeled probes. The MEF2C mutant used
(KR23,24ID) interacts with myogenin-E12 heterodimers (4) but
is incapable of binding DNA (30). The schematic
representations at the right show how the 32P-labeled
probes are coimmunoprecipitated by the avidin-conjugated agarose in
these experiments.
|
|
In this assay, the
32P- and biotin-labeled DNA-binding
sites were used in molar excess to the in vitro-translated proteins.
In
this regard, the efficiency of the coprecipitation was high
since
approximately 5% of the total counts from the
32P-labeled
sites included in the assay were specifically precipitated.
We estimate
this amount of precipitated counts to indicate that
between 50 and
100% of the MEF2 and MyoD-E12 proteins included
in the assay were
associated with each other and with the DNA-binding-site
probes.
We also reversed the probes and examined the ability of
avidin-conjugated agarose to coprecipitate a
32P-labeled E
box along with a biotinylated MEF2 site in the presence
of myogenin-E12
heterodimers and MEF2C protein (Fig.
1B). In this
experiment, a
significant number of counts from
32P-labeled sites were
precipitated only in the presence of wild-type
MEF2C and myogenin-E12.
Together, these results demonstrate that
MEF2 and myogenin-E12 can
physically associate with each other
while both factors are bound to
DNA.
Analysis of MyoD-E12 and MEF2 interactions in vivo.
It has
also been demonstrated previously that myogenin-E12 heterodimers can
synergistically activate transcription in collaboration with MEF2C. We
were interested in whether the MyoD-E12 interaction with MEF2 and
transcriptional synergy in collaboration with MEF2 could be uncoupled.
To investigate this question, we examined the ability of heterodimers
of E12 with myogenin, MyoD, and two mutants of MyoD to associate with
MEF2 and to activate transcription in collaboration with MEF2. The
sequences of the basic domains of these mutants are shown in Fig.
2. The first mutant which we examined,
MyoD-E12basic, contains the basic domain of E12 substituted for the
basic domain of MyoD (11, 12, 44). The failure of this
mutant to activate myogenic transcription has been mapped to two amino
acid residues (alanine and threonine) in the core of the basic domain
(7, 12). It has been postulated that the failure of this
mutant to activate myogenic transcription may be due to its inability
to associate with an essential myogenic cofactor (11, 12, 40,
44). Since we have shown previously that MEF2 serves as a
cofactor for myogenic bHLH factors (29), we examined the
ability of the MyoD-E12basic mutant to associate and collaborate with
MEF2. The second mutant which we examined, MyoD-E12basic(AT), contains
the basic domain of E12 substituted for the MyoD basic domain as in
MyoD-E12basic except that the two asparagine residues in the E12 basic
domain have been replaced with the alanine and threonine residues
normally found in the MyoD basic domain (12). This mutant
serves as a myogenic revertant since it regains the ability to activate
myogenic transcription (12).

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Amino acid sequences of the basic regions examined in
this study. The basic domains of MyoD, MyoD-E12basic,
MyoD-E12basic(AT), and E12 are indicated at the top. The myogenic
residues alanine-114 and threonine-115 of the MyoD basic region and the
corresponding asparagine residues of the E12 basic domain are boxed.
The junction sequence of the first helix follows the basic domain.
|
|
We used an in vivo trihybrid analysis to test the abilities of
myogenin, MyoD, and the MyoD mutants to interact with MEF2C
and to
synergistically activate transcription with MEF2C (Fig.
3A). The results of this analysis are
shown in Fig.
3B. Myogenin,
MyoD, and MyoD-E12basic(AT) interacted
strongly with MEF2C and
MEF2C-VP16 to activate transcription, as
predicted. Surprisingly,
the positive control mutant MyoD-E12basic also
interacted with
MEF2C-VP16 (lane 15) to activate transcription nearly
as well
as wild-type myogenin, MyoD, and MyoD-E12basic(AT) (lanes 13,
14, and 16). However, the MyoD-E12basic mutant was incapable of
activating transcription in collaboration with wild-type MEF2C
(lane
10), whereas myogenin, MyoD, and MyoD-E12basic(AT) strongly
activated
transcription through interaction with MEF2C (lanes
8, 9, and 11). We
interpret these results to indicate that MEF2C
interacts with the
MyoD-E12basic mutant but fails to transmit
its activation signal
through this mutant basic domain.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Interaction between myogenic bHLH proteins and MEF2C
detected by an in vivo trihybrid assay. (A) Schematic representation of
the trihybrid assay used in these experiments. In panel B, 10T1/2 cells
were transfected with the GAL4-dependent CAT reporter plasmid pG5E1bCAT
and the indicated expression plasmids. Plasmids included are indicated
by name or with a plus sign and are described in Materials and Methods.
A minus sign indicates that the parent expression vector without a cDNA
insert was used. The results in panel B show the fold activation in CAT
activity compared to that for reporter plus GAL(DBD)-E12 bHLH alone.
Extracts were serially diluted such that each sample yielded activity
in the linear range of the assay. Total extract was held constant in
the serial dilutions by using lysate from untransfected 10T1/2 cells.
Results of a representative experiment are shown; similar results were
achieved in three independent transfections and analyses. MyoD-wt,
wild-type MyoD.
|
|
These results support a model whereby the MEF2 activation signal must
be transmitted through the bound bHLH heterodimer and
not through
direct activation of the transcription initiation
complex.
MyoD-E12basic is incapable of transmitting the transcriptional
activation signal provided by MEF2 when MEF2 is bound only through
protein-protein interactions. This defect in activation can be
overcome
by the addition of the acidic activation domain of VP16,
which can
directly activate the basal transcriptional machinery
when associated
with the GAL(DBD)-E12 bait through the trihybrid
interaction (
16,
22,
39). The synergy between MyoD-E12basic,
GAL(DBD)-E12, and
MEF2C-VP16 observed in lane 15 was due to protein-protein
interactions
mediated by the MADS and MEF2 domains of MEF2C. The
observed synergy
was not a result of interaction between E12 and
the VP16 sequences in
MEF2C-VP16 since E12-E12 homodimers failed
to interact with MEF2C-VP16
(lane 12) and since VP16 when expressed
alone or when fused to other
unrelated proteins failed to activate
transcription in association with
E12-MyoD-E12basic heterodimers
(data not shown). The hypothesis that
the MyoD-E12basic mutant
is defective in transmission of an activation
signal is consistent
with the results shown in lanes 3 through 6, where
myogenin, MyoD,
and the MyoD-E12 basic(AT) revertant were capable
of activating
transcription when associated with the GAL(DBD)-E12 bait
in the
absence of MEF2C or MEF2C-VP16 whereas the MyoD-E12basic mutant
was dramatically reduced in its ability to activate transcription
in
this analysis. The inability of the MyoD-E12basic mutant to
activate
transcription in the presence of GAL(DBD)-E12 is not
due to a failure
to dimerize since fusion of the VP16 activation
domain directly to
MyoD-E12basic results in transcriptional activation
to a level similar
to that observed with MyoD and MyoD-E12basic(AT)
fused to VP16 (data
not shown).
To further examine the ability of the MyoD-E12basic mutant to interact
with MEF2C and to determine whether MyoD and the mutants
of MyoD could
transmit an activation signal through a MEF2 factor
bound to DNA via
the GAL4 DNA-binding domain, we performed an
additional trihybrid
analysis using GAL(DBD)-MEF2C as the bait
(Fig.
4A). The GAL4 fusion encoded amino acids
1 to 143 of MEF2C,
which lacks a transactivation domain
(
30). Thus, in this trihybrid
analysis, the only
transactivation domains present were provided
by the MyoD proteins
interacting with MEF2C. The results presented
in Fig.
4B clearly show
that the MyoD-E12basic mutant was incapable
of activation in
collaboration with MEF2C (lane 4), while this
mutant fused to the
activation domain of VP16 (lane 8) synergized
with MEF2C to activate
transcription. As predicted, wild-type
MyoD and the revertant mutant,
MyoD-E12basic(AT), were capable
of transcriptional synergy in
collaboration with MEF2C both as
full-length proteins and as VP16
fusions. Again, we interpret
these results to indicate that the
MyoD-E12basic mutant interacts
with MEF2C but cannot activate
transcription due to a defect in
transmission of the activation event;
this defect can be overcome
by fusion to the VP16 activation domain.
The interaction and activation
observed for the wild-type and mutant
MyoD molecules in lanes
7 through 9 were due to interaction of the
GAL(DBD)-MEF2C bait
with the bHLH portion of MyoD and not due to direct
interaction
with VP16 since E12-VP16 did not activate transcription
(lane
6). The MyoD-E12basic mutant failed to synergize with this
full-length
MEF2C fused to GAL4, but it did not prevent full-length
MEF2C
from activating transcription on its own (data not shown). Taken
together with the results of Fig.
3, this result indicates that
the
MyoD-E12basic mutant can block transcriptional transmission
provided by
the activation domain of MEF2C only when MyoD-E12basic
is bound to DNA
and not when MEF2 is the DNA-bound factor.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
In vivo trihybrid analysis of transcriptional synergy
mediated by the MEF2C amino terminus. (A) Schematic representation of
the trihybrid assay used in these experiments. In panel B, 10T1/2 cells
were cotransfected with the GAL4-dependent CAT reporter plasmid
pG5E1bCAT, GAL(DBD)-MEF2C, which encodes amino acids 1 to 143 of MEF2C,
and E12 expression plasmid. Also included were the indicated bHLH
expression plasmids. The presence of GAL(DBD)-MEF2C and E12 is
indicated with a plus sign. The absence of a cDNA-encoding plasmid and
the presence of the parent expression vector are denoted by a minus
sign. The mean fold activation in CAT activity compared to that for
reporter alone from four independent transfections and analyses is
shown.
|
|
Transcriptional activation occurs through MyoD-E12 bound to the E
box.
Next, we examined the ability of MyoD and the MyoD mutants to
activate the transcription of an E-box-dependent reporter plasmid (Fig.
5A). Each of these proteins has been
shown previously to bind to the MCK E box present in this plasmid
(12). MyoD and MyoD-E12basic(AT) both activated the reporter
greater than 25-fold over the activity of the reporter alone, while the
MyoD-E12basic mutant activated the reporter only 6-fold, indicating
that this mutant was largely defective in transcriptional activation.
However, when fused to the VP16 activation domain, the MyoD-E12basic
mutant strongly activated transcription of the reporter to a level
similar to those seen for MyoD-VP16 and MyoD-E12basic(AT)-VP16 (Fig.
5A). These observations are consistent with previous reports indicating that the MyoD-E12basic mutant was inefficient in activation of this
reporter plasmid whereas MyoD-E12basic-VP16 was capable of transcriptional activation (12, 44).

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Transcriptional activation of an E-box-dependent
reporter by MyoD and MEF2. 10T1/2 cells were transiently transfected
with the E-box-dependent reporter 4RtkCAT along with the indicated
expression vectors. Plasmids are described in Materials and Methods.
(A) Ability of MyoD or the MyoD mutants to activate the reporter as
either full-length or VP16 fusion proteins. The data show that the
activation defect in MyoD-E12basic is overcome by the fusion of the
VP16 activation domain. Values are expressed as the fold induction of
CAT activity over the activity of the reporter alone. The results shown
represent the mean fold activation obtained in four independent
transfections and analyses. (B) Ability of either MEF2C or MEF2-VP16 to
activate transcription in collaboration with MyoD or the MyoD mutants
bound to the E boxes in the reporter. Wild-type MEF2C was unable to
activate transcription through the MyoD-E12basic mutant bound to DNA
(lane 4), whereas MEF2-VP16 activated transcription in collaboration
with MyoD-E12basic to the same extent as with wild-type MyoD (lane 8).
The results shown are from a representative experiment. Similar results
were obtained in two independent transfections and analyses. The
diagrams at the right illustrate how we envision that transcriptional
activation occurs.
|
|
Using this same E-box-dependent reporter plasmid, we analyzed the
ability of MEF2C or MEF2C-VP16 to activate transcription
in
collaboration with MyoD, using the bound MyoD-E12 heterodimer
as a
platform for activation (Fig.
5B). As predicted, strong transcriptional
activation was observed for MyoD and MyoD-E12basic(AT) in the
presence
of MEF2C (lanes 3 and 5). However, only weak activation
was observed in
the presence of MyoD-E12basic and MEF2C (lane
4). Once again, the lack
of transcriptional activation by MEF2C
in the presence of MyoD-E12basic
was overcome by fusion of the
VP16 activation domain to MEF2C (lane 8).
In the presence of MEF2C-VP16,
all three of the MyoD molecules
activated transcription to similar
levels (lanes 7 through 9). While
fusion of the VP16 activation
domain was able to overcome the
transactivation defect in the
MyoD-E12basic mutant, MyoD-E12basic-VP16
is incapable of activating
the myogenic program (
12,
44).
The failure of MyoD-E12basic-VP16
to activate myogenesis indicates that
while this fusion protein
is capable of interaction and activation in
collaboration with
MEF2, it is incapable of initiating myogenesis.
These results
again support the notion that the MyoD-E12basic mutant is
incapable
of transmitting a transcriptional activation signal provided
by
MEF2 when MEF2 is bound only through protein-protein interactions
and suggest that the MEF2 activation signal must be transmitted
through
the bound bHLH heterodimer.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The role of the basic regions of the myogenic bHLH factors has
been the focus of intense interest because these factors can initiate
myogenesis in a wide variety of cell types, while other bHLH factors
cannot initiate myogenesis even though they bind to the same DNA
sequence. Since this myogenic activity has been mapped to the basic
regions of these factors, detailed analysis of this domain in the
myogenic bHLH factors has provided insight into the mechanisms of
cell-type-specific transcription mediated by protein-protein
interactions and protein conformation. The results of this study
demonstrate that the myogenic defect in the MyoD-E12basic mutant is not
due to a failure to interact with MEF2 factors. This mutant interacts
with MEF2C to activate transcription as well as wild-type MyoD if
either MEF2C or MyoD-E12basic has the constitutive VP16 activation
domain substituted for its own activation domain (Fig. 3 to 5).
However, despite the fact that MyoD-E12 basic interacts with MEF2C, it
cannot activate transcription on its own or in collaboration with MEF2C
due to a defect in transmission of transcriptional activation signals
(Fig. 3 to 5). The observation that the alanine and threonine present
in the MyoD basic domain are not essential for MEF2 interaction is
consistent with previously published results that MASH1, which lacks
the alanine and threonine, effectively interacts with MEF2 factors to
synergistically activate transcription (1, 25).
While MyoD-E12basic/E12 heterodimers efficiently interact with MEF2C,
E12 homodimers fail to interact with MEF2C even if the VP16 activation
domain is present. This result suggests that the basic domains alone
are not sufficient to mediate the interaction with MEF2 since the basic
domains are the same in these two dimers. The interaction of MyoD with
MEF2 probably requires sequences present in both the basic and HLH
domains of MyoD. We know that an HLH domain alone is not sufficient to
mediate the interaction with MEF2 since neither Id, an HLH protein
which lacks a basic domain, nor a MyoD mutant with the basic domain
deleted will interact with MEF2C even though these factors efficiently
dimerize with E12 (4).
Previously published work has shown that myogenic bHLH factors can
collaborate with MEF2 to synergistically activate transcription when
only one factor is bound to DNA (29, 31). However, many muscle-specific promoters and enhancers contain MEF2 sites and E boxes
in proximity to one another, suggesting that both classes of
transcription factors may be bound to DNA at the same time while
interacting with each other. The results of Fig. 1 show that MEF2C and
myogenin can interact with each other while both are bound to DNA. This
result demonstrates the multifunctional nature of the DNA-binding and
dimerization motifs of these transcription factors since these domains
mediate DNA binding at the same time that they are facilitating
protein-protein interactions with heterologous classes of transcription
factors. The notion that MEF2 and myogenic bHLH factors associate with
each other while they are bound to DNA is also interesting since this
result suggests that the proximity of MEF2 sites and E boxes in
muscle-specific regulatory regions may serve to bring these two classes
of DNA-binding factors into high local concentration at or near
muscle-specific promoters. Alternatively, both MEF2 and myogenic bHLH
factors bound to DNA may stabilize the protein-protein interactions
between them to more efficiently activate transcription.
Previously, the explanations that have been postulated to account for
the activation defect in the MyoD-E12basic mutant have focused on the
idea that a myogenic cofactor is essential for myogenic bHLH-mediated
activation of transcription and that basic domain mutants are unable to
interact with such a cofactor (7, 11, 12, 40, 44). Fusion of
the VP16 activation domain to MyoD-E12basic overcomes the
transactivation defect in that mutant, suggesting that the constitutive
activation domain of VP16 may circumvent the need for an essential
myogenic cofactor, thereby allowing transcriptional activation
(12, 44). The results of this study support the notion that
the defect in MyoD-E12basic is due to a conformational change
negatively influencing the conformation of MyoD rather than its ability
to interact with an essential cofactor. This idea is supported further
by the crystal structure of MyoD-E12 heterodimers bound to DNA, which
shows that the alanine and threonine of the basic domain are not
exposed on the surface of the molecule, making the direct contact of
these two residues with a cofactor unlikely (24). The
crystal structure suggests instead that the alanine and threonine are
required for the proper conformation of the MyoD protein such that when
they are mutated, the overall conformation of the molecule is affected,
rendering it transcriptionally inactive (24). The results of
this study support the idea that the MyoD-E12basic mutant contains a
conformational defect preventing transcriptional activation regardless
of whether it is bound to DNA since GAL4 fusions of MyoD-E12basic (Fig.
3) and MyoD-E12basic associated with MEF2 bound to DNA (Fig. 4) are also incapable of transmitting a transcriptional activation signal. This transactivation defect in the MyoD-E12basic mutant likely results
from a defective conformation due to sequences in both the basic and
HLH domains since the E12 basic domain is not transcriptionally deficient in the context of native E12. However, the E12 basic region
when juxtaposed with the MyoD HLH domain results in defective transcriptional transmission.
The failure of MyoD-E12basic to activate transcription in collaboration
with MEF2C originally suggested to us that MyoD-E12basic probably
failed to interact with MEF2C (29). The results of this
study confirm that MyoD-E12basic cannot collaborate with MEF2C to
activate transcription but show that the failure to activate transcription is not due to an inability to interact with MEF2 proteins
but rather is due to a failure to transmit a signal required for the
activation of transcription. The ability of VP16 fused to MEF2C to
overcome this activation defect likely is due to the constitutive
nature of VP16 activation. VP16 can directly stimulate activated
transcription through direct contact with the transcription initiation
complex (16, 22, 39). Even though fusion of the VP16
activation domain to basic domain mutants of the myogenic bHLH factors
overcomes the transcriptional transmission defect, these VP16 fusions
are still unable to initiate myogenesis in transfected cells (12,
40, 44, 46). There are several possible explanations to account
for this observation. The first is that MyoD-E12basic cannot interact
with another myogenic cofactor other than MEF2 which is required to
initiate myogenesis. Another possibility is that while
MyoD-E12basic-VP16 can activate transcription through the multimerized
E boxes present in the reporter plasmid 4RtkCAT, it may be unable to
efficiently bind to or activate transcription through all E boxes
present in essential muscle-specific genes. Finally, specific
repression of MyoD-E12basic may occur on muscle-specific enhancers
preventing activation of the myogenic program due to specific
cis-acting repressor sequences which target the E12 basic domain and inhibit activation of those genes (45).
In addition to MEF2 proteins, there may be other factors which interact
with MyoD and with MyoD-E12basic. Some of these factors may be able to
overcome the activation defect present in MyoD-E12basic through
protein-protein interactions and direct activation of the basal
transcriptional machinery. This notion stems from the observation that
while MyoD-E12basic is defective in transcriptional activation in
10T1/2 and most other cell types, there are some cell types in which
MyoD-E12basic has the ability to activate transcription of reporter
genes without a constitutive activation domain fused to MyoD-E12basic
(44). If this is the case, the absence of such a factor
still cannot account for the entire defect in the MyoD-E12basic mutant
since this mutant remains nonmyogenic even in cell types where it is
transcriptionally active (44).
The results of the present study suggest a model for activation in
which MEF2 functions as a transcriptional cofactor for MyoD while MyoD
is bound to DNA (Fig. 6). Both the MyoD
and MEF2 transactivation signals are transmitted to the transcription
initiation complex via a mechanism dependent on the myogenic residues
in the MyoD basic domain (Fig. 6A). Mutation or substitution of the MyoD basic domain with the basic domain of E12 allows interaction to
occur but blocks the transmission of the activation signal (Fig. 6B).
This block in activation can be overcome by the addition of the VP16
activation domain (Fig. 6C) which can directly associate with
components of the transcription initiation complex to activate transcription (16, 22, 39, 42). The block in transcriptional transmission likely occurs as a result of a conformational change in
MyoD which prevents activation. This may result from a failure of the
MyoD-E12basic mutant to properly remodel chromatin in such a way that
transcriptional activation occurs. This hypothesis is supported by
recent observations that wild-type MyoD initiates extensive chromatin
remodeling when bound to muscle-specific control regions
(13). Alternatively, MyoD-E12basic may support interaction with a repressor protein which can block the activation signals provided by both MEF2 and MyoD but not the activation signal
transmitted by VP16 when MyoD-E12basic is the DNA-bound factor, or the
MyoD basic domain may mediate a covalent modification of the basal transcriptional machinery required for activation to occur. These results suggest a novel mechanism for the activation of transcription in which a transcriptional activator synergistically activates transcription through protein-protein interaction and relies on its
DNA-bound cofactor to relay its activation signal to the basal transcription initiation complex.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Hypothetical model of transcriptional activation
mediated by MEF2 bound to MyoD. (A) MEF2 relays its activation signal
to the myogenic bHLH factor, which then transmits both its own
activation signal and that of MEF2 to the transcription initiation
complex. This transcriptional transmission is dependent on the myogenic
residues, alanine and threonine, in the myogenic factor's basic
domain. (B) MEF2 sends its activation signal to the basic domain of E12
substituted into the myogenic bHLH factor (E12basic), but the E12 basic
domain substitution is unable to transmit that activation signal or its
own activation signal to the initiation complex due to a conformational
defect. (C) VP16 directly activates the transcription initiation
complex, thus bypassing the transcriptional block caused by E12 basic
domain. The E12basic mutant is unable to transmit its own activation
signal because it lacks the myogenic residues.
|
|
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Andrew Lassar (Harvard University) and Richard Baer (UT
Southwestern) for plasmid constructs and Mike Perry for critical review
of the manuscript. We appreciate the technical assistance provided by
Kathy Kunkle.
This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of
Health, the Muscular Dystrophy Association, the Robert A. Welch
Foundation, and the Human Frontiers Science Foundation (to E.N.O.).
B.L.B. and J.D.M. were supported by postdoctoral fellowships from the
American Cancer Society and the National Institutes of Health,
respectively.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Molecular Biology and Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX 75235-9148. Phone:
(214) 648-1187. Fax: (214) 648-1196. E-mail:
eolson{at}hamon.swmed.edu.
Present address: Department of Pediatrics, Division of Molecular
Cardiovascular Biology, Children's Hospital of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,
OH 45229.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Black, B. L.,
K. L. Ligon,
Y. Zhang, and E. N. Olson.
1996.
Cooperative transcriptional activation by the neurogenic bHLH protein MASH1 and members of the MEF2 family.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:26659-26663[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Black, B. L., and D. S. Lyles.
1992.
Vesicular stomatitis virus matrix protein inhibits host cell-directed transcription of target genes in vivo.
J. Virol.
66:4058-4064[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Black, B. L.,
J. F. Martin, and E. N. Olson.
1995.
The mouse MRF4 promoter is trans-activated directly and indirectly by muscle-specific transcription factors.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:2889-2992[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
| Black, B. L., and E. N. Olson.
Unpublished observations.
|
| 5.
|
Bour, B. A.,
M. A. O'Brien,
W. L. Lockwood,
E. S. Goldstein,
R. Bodmer,
P. H. Taghert,
S. M. Abmayr, and H. T. Nguyen.
1995.
Drosophila MEF2, a transcription factor that is essential for myogenesis.
Genes Dev.
9:730-741[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Breibart, R.,
C. Liang,
L. B. Smoot,
D. Laheru,
V. Mahdavi, and B. Nadal-Ginard.
1993.
A fourth human MEF-2 transcription factor, hMEF2D, is an early marker of the myogenic lineage.
Development
118:1095-1106[Abstract].
|
| 7.
|
Brennan, T. J.,
T. Chakraborty, and E. N. Olson.
1991.
Mutagenesis of the myogenin basic region identifies an ancient protein motif critical for activation of myogenesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:5675-5679[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Brennan, T. J., and E. N. Olson.
1990.
Myogenin resides in the nucleus and acquires high affinity for a conserved enhancer element on heterodimerization.
Genes Dev.
4:582-595[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Chambers, A. E.,
S. Kotecha,
N. Towers, and T. J. Mohun.
1992.
Muscle-specific expression of SRF-related genes in the early embryo of Xenopus laevis.
EMBO J.
11:4981-4991[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Cserjesi, P., and E. N. Olson.
1991.
Myogenin induces muscle-specific enhancer binding factor MEF-2 independently of other muscle-specific gene products.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:4854-4862[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Davis, R. L.,
P.-F. Cheng,
A. B. Lassar, and H. Weintraub.
1990.
The MyoD binding domain contains a recognition code for muscle-specific gene activation.
Cell
60:733-746[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Davis, R. L., and H. Weintraub.
1992.
Acquisition of myogenic specificity by replacement of three amino acid residues from MyoD into E12.
Science
256:1027-1030[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Gerber, A. N.,
T. R. Klesert,
D. A. Bergstrom, and S. J. Tapscott.
1997.
Two domains of MyoD mediate transcriptional activation of genes in repressive chromatin: a mechanism for lineage determination in myogenesis.
Genes Dev.
11:436-450[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Gossett, L. A.,
D. J. Kelvin,
E. A. Sternberg, and E. N. Olson.
1989.
A new myocyte-specific enhancer-binding factor that recognizes a conserved element associated with multiple muscle-specific genes.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:5022-5033[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Kaushal, S.,
J. W. Schneider,
B. Nadal-Ginard, and V. Mahdavi.
1994.
Activation of the myogenic lineage by MEF2A, a factor that induces and cooperates with MyoD.
Science
266:1236-1240[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Kobayashi, N.,
T. G. Boyer, and A. J. Berk.
1995.
A class of activation domains interacts directly with TFIIA and stimulates TFIIA-TFIID-promoter complex assembly.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:6465-6473[Abstract].
|
| 17.
|
Lassar, A. B.,
R. L. Davis,
W. E. Wright,
T. Kadesch,
C. Murre,
A. Voronova,
D. Baltimore, and H. Weintraub.
1991.
Functional activity of myogenic bHLH proteins requires hetero-oligomerization with E12/E47-like proteins in vivo.
Cell
66:305-315[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Leifer, D.,
D. Krainc,
Y. T. Yu,
J. C. McDermott,
R. Breibart,
J. Heng,
R. L. Neve,
B. Kosofsky,
B. Nadal-Ginard, and S. A. Lipton.
1993.
MEF2C, a MADS/MEF2-family transcription factor expressed in a laminar distribution in cerebral cortex.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
90:1546-1550[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Lilly, B.,
S. Galewski,
A. B. Firulli,
R. A. Schulz, and E. N. Olson.
1994.
mef2: a MADS gene expressed in the differentiating mesoderm and the somatic muscle lineage during Drosophila embryogenesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:5662-5666[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Lilly, B.,
B. Zhao,
G. Ranganayakulu,
B. M. Paterson,
R. A. Schulz, and E. N. Olson.
1995.
Requirement of MADS domain transcription factor D-MEF2 for muscle formation in Drosophila.
Science
267:688-693[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Lin, Q.,
J. J. Schwarz,
C. Bucana, and E. N. Olson.
1997.
Control of mouse cardiac morphogenesis and myogenesis by the myogenic transcription factor MEF2C.
Science
276:1404-1407[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Lin, Y.-S., and M. R. Green.
1991.
Mechanisms of action of an acidic transcriptional activator in vitro.
Cell
64:971-981[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Lowry, O. H.,
N. J. Rosebrough,
A. L. Farr, and R. J. Randall.
1951.
Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent.
J. Biol. Chem.
193:265-275[Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Ma, P. C. M.,
M. A. Rould,
H. Weintraub, and C. O. Pabo.
1994.
Crystal structure of MyoD bHLH domain-DNA complex: perspectives on DNA recognition and implications for transcriptional activation.
Cell
77:451-459[Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Mao, Z., and B. Nadal-Ginard.
1996.
Functional and physical interactions between mammalian achaete-scute homolog 1 and myocyte enhancer factor 2A.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:14371-14375[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Martin, J. F.,
J. M. Miano,
C. M. Hustad,
N. G. Copeland,
N. A. Jenkins, and E. N. Olson.
1994.
A Mef2 gene that generates a muscle-specific isoform via alternative mRNA splicing.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:1647-1656[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Martin, J. F.,
J. J. Schwarz, and E. N. Olson.
1993.
Myocyte enhancer factor (MEF) 2C: a tissue-restricted member of the MEF-2 family of transcription factors.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
90:5282-5286[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
McDermott, J. C.,
M. C. Cardoso,
Y. T. Yu,
V. Andres,
D. Leifer,
D. Krainc,
S. A. Lipton, and B. Nadal-Ginard.
1993.
hMEF2C gene encodes skeletal muscle- and brain-specific transcription factors.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:2564-2577[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Molkentin, J. D.,
B. L. Black,
J. F. Martin, and E. N. Olson.
1995.
Cooperative activation of muscle gene expression by MEF2 and myogenic bHLH proteins.
Cell
83:1125-1136[Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Molkentin, J. D.,
B. L. Black,
J. F. Martin, and E. N. Olson.
1996.
Mutational analysis of the DNA binding, dimerization, and transcriptional activation domains of MEF2C.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:2627-2636[Abstract].
|
| 31.
|
Molkentin, J. D.,
A. B. Firulli,
B. L. Black,
J. F. Martin,
C. M. Hustad,
N. Copeland,
N. Jenkins,
G. Lyons, and E. N. Olson.
1996.
MEF2B is a potent transactivator expressed in early myogenic lineages.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:3814-3824[Abstract].
|
| 32.
|
Molkentin, J. D.,
D. Kalvakolanu, and B. E. Markham.
1994.
Transcription factor GATA-4 regulates cardiac muscle-specific expression of the -myosin heavy chain gene.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:4947-4957[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Murre, C.,
P. S. McCaw,
H. Vaessin,
M. Caudy,
L. Y. Jan,
J. N. Jan,
C. V. Cabrera,
J. N. Buskin,
S. D. Hauschka,
A. B. Lassar,
H. Weintraub, and D. Baltimore.
1989.
Interactions between heterologous helix-loop-helix proteins generate complexes that bind specifically to a common DNA sequence.
Cell
58:537-544[Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Nguyen, H. T.,
R. Bodmer,
S. M. Abmayr,
J. C. McDermott, and N. A. Spoerel.
1994.
D-mef2: a Drosophila mesoderm-specific MADS box-containing gene with a biphasic expression profile during embryogenesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:7520-7524[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Olson, E. N.
1990.
The MyoD family, a paradigm for development?
Genes Dev.
4:1454-1461[Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Olson, E. N.,
M. Perry, and R. A. Schulz.
1995.
Regulation of muscle differentiation by the MEF2 family of MADS box transcription factors.
Dev. Biol.
172:2-14[Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Pollock, R., and R. Treisman.
1991.
Human SRF-related proteins: DNA-binding properties and potential regulatory targets.
Genes Dev.
5:2327-2341[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Ranganayakulu, G.,
B. Zhao,
A. Dokodis,
J. D. Molkentin,
E. N. Olson, and R. A. Schulz.
1995.
A series of mutations in the D-MEF2transcription factor reveals multiple functions in larval and adult myogenesis in Drosophila.
Dev. Biol.
171:169-181[Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Roberts, S. G. E.,
I. Ha,
E. Maldanado,
D. Reinberg, and M. R. Green.
1993.
Interaction between an acidic activator and transcription factor TFIIB is required for transcriptional activation.
Nature
363:741-744[Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Schwarz, J. J.,
T. Chakraborty,
J. Martin,
J. Zhou, and E. N. Olson.
1992.
The basic region of myogenin cooperates with two transcription activation domains to induce muscle-specific transcription.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:266-275[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Shore, P., and A. D. Sharrocks.
1995.
The MADS-box family of transcription factors.
Eur. J. Biochem.
229:1-13[Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Triezenberg, S. J.,
R. C. Kingsbury, and S. L. McKnight.
1988.
Functional dissection of VP16, the trans-activator of herpes simplex virus immediate early gene expression.
Genes Dev.
2:718-729[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Weintraub, H.,
R. Davis,
D. Lockshon, and A. Lassar.
1990.
MyoD binds cooperatively to two sites in a target enhancer sequence: occupancy of two sites is required for activation.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
87:5623-5627[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Weintraub, H.,
V. J. Dwarki,
I. Verma,
R. Davis,
S. Hollenberg,
L. Snider,
A. Lassar, and S. J. Tapscott.
1991.
Muscle-specific transcriptional activation by MyoD.
Genes Dev.
5:1377-1386[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Weintraub, H.,
T. Genetta, and T. Kadesch.
1994.
Tissue-specific gene activation by MyoD: determination of specificity by cis-acting elements.
Genes Dev.
8:2203-2211[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Winter, B.,
T. Braun, and H.-H. Arnold.
1992.
Co-operativity of functional domains in the muscle-specific transcription factor Myf-5.
EMBO J.
11:1843-1855[Medline].
|
| 47.
|
Yu, Y. T.,
R. E. Breibart,
L. B. Smoot,
Y. Lee,
V. Mahdavi, and B. Nadal-Ginard.
1992.
Human myocyte-specific enhancer factor 2 comprises a group of tissue-restricted MADS box transcription factors.
Genes Dev.
6:1783-1798[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Mol Cell Biol, January 1998, p. 69-77, Vol. 18, No. 1
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Deng, H., Hughes, S. C., Bell, J. B., Simmonds, A. J.
(2009). Alternative Requirements for Vestigial, Scalloped, and Dmef2 during Muscle Differentiation in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Biol. Cell
20: 256-269
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Schramp, M., Ying, O., Kim, T. Y., Martin, G. S.
(2008). ERK5 promotes Src-induced podosome formation by limiting Rho activation. JCB
181: 1195-1210
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yafe, A., Shklover, J., Weisman-Shomer, P., Bengal, E., Fry, M.
(2008). Differential binding of quadruplex structures of muscle-specific genes regulatory sequences by MyoD, MRF4 and myogenin. Nucleic Acids Res
36: 3916-3925
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sparling, D. P., Griesel, B. A., Weems, J., Olson, A. L.
(2008). GLUT4 Enhancer Factor (GEF) Interacts with MEF2A and HDAC5 to Regulate the GLUT4 Promoter in Adipocytes. J. Biol. Chem.
283: 7429-7437
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Camp, S., De Jaco, A., Zhang, L., Marquez, M., De La Torre, B., Taylor, P.
(2008). Acetylcholinesterase Expression in Muscle Is Specifically Controlled by a Promoter-Selective Enhancesome in the First Intron. J. Neurosci.
28: 2459-2470
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Deldicque, L., Theisen, D., Bertrand, L., Hespel, P., Hue, L., Francaux, M.
(2007). Creatine enhances differentiation of myogenic C2C12 cells by activating both p38 and Akt/PKB pathways. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.
293: C1263-C1271
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Heidt, A. B., Rojas, A., Harris, I. S., Black, B. L.
(2007). Determinants of Myogenic Specificity within MyoD Are Required for Noncanonical E Box Binding. Mol. Cell. Biol.
27: 5910-5920
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Liang, C.-S., Kobiyama, A., Shimizu, A., Sasaki, T., Asakawa, S., Shimizu, N., Watabe, S.
(2007). Fast skeletal muscle myosin heavy chain gene cluster of medaka Oryzias latipes enrolled in temperature adaptation. Physiol. Genomics
29: 201-214
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Meissner, J. D., Chang, K.-C., Kubis, H.-P., Nebreda, A. R., Gros, G., Scheibe, R. J.
(2007). The p38{alpha}/beta Mitogen-activated Protein Kinases Mediate Recruitment of CREB-binding Protein to Preserve Fast Myosin Heavy Chain IId/x Gene Activity in Myotubes. J. Biol. Chem.
282: 7265-7275
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yu, X., Lin, J., Zack, D. J., Qian, J.
(2006). Computational analysis of tissue-specific combinatorial gene regulation: predicting interaction between transcription factors in human tissues. Nucleic Acids Res
34: 4925-4936
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Parker, M. H., Perry, R. L. S., Fauteux, M. C., Berkes, C. A., Rudnicki, M. A.
(2006). MyoD Synergizes with the E-Protein HEB{beta} To Induce Myogenic Differentiation. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 5771-5783
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Chang, J. H., Lin, K. H., Shih, C. H., Chang, Y. J., Chi, H. C., Chen, S. L.
(2006). Myogenic Basic Helix-Loop-Helix Proteins Regulate the Expression of Peroxisomal Proliferator Activated Receptor-{gamma} Coactivator-1{alpha}. Endocrinology
147: 3093-3106
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Micheli, L., Leonardi, L., Conti, F., Buanne, P., Canu, N., Caruso, M., Tirone, F.
(2005). PC4 Coactivates MyoD by Relieving the Histone Deacetylase 4-Mediated Inhibition of Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2C. Mol. Cell. Biol.
25: 2242-2259
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ju, J.-S., Smith, J. L., Oppelt, P. J., Fisher, J. S.
(2005). Creatine feeding increases GLUT4 expression in rat skeletal muscle. Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
288: E347-E352
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zang, M.-X., Li, Y., Wang, H., Wang, J.-B., Jia, H.-T.
(2004). Cooperative Interaction between the Basic Helix-loop-helix Transcription Factor dHAND and Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2C Regulates Myocardial Gene Expression. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 54258-54263
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bhagavatula, M.R. K., Fan, C., Shen, G.-Q., Cassano, J., Plow, E. F., Topol, E. J., Wang, Q.
(2004). Transcription factor MEF2A mutations in patients with coronary artery disease. Hum Mol Genet
13: 3181-3188
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Schlaeger, T. M., Schuh, A., Flitter, S., Fisher, A., Mikkola, H., Orkin, S. H., Vyas, P., Porcher, C.
(2004). Decoding Hematopoietic Specificity in the Helix-Loop-Helix Domain of the Transcription Factor SCL/Tal-1. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 7491-7502
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Al-Khalili, L., Chibalin, A. V., Yu, M., Sjodin, B., Nylen, C., Zierath, J. R, Krook, A.
(2004). MEF2 activation in differentiated primary human skeletal muscle cultures requires coordinated involvement of parallel pathways. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol.
286: C1410-C1416
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Anderson, J. P., Dodou, E., Heidt, A. B., De Val, S. J., Jaehnig, E. J., Greene, S. B., Olson, E. N., Black, B. L.
(2004). HRC Is a Direct Transcriptional Target of MEF2 during Cardiac, Skeletal, and Arterial Smooth Muscle Development In Vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 3757-3768
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wang, L., Fan, C., Topol, S. E., Topol, E. J., Wang, Q.
(2003). Mutation of MEF2A in an Inherited Disorder with Features of Coronary Artery Disease. Science
302: 1578-1581
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Maeda, T., Chapman, D. L., Stewart, A. F. R.
(2002). Mammalian Vestigial-like 2, a Cofactor of TEF-1 and MEF2 Transcription Factors That Promotes Skeletal Muscle Differentiation. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 48889-48898
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Chen, S. L., Loffler, K. A., Chen, D., Stallcup, M. R., Muscat, G. E. O.
(2002). The Coactivator-associated Arginine Methyltransferase Is Necessary for Muscle Differentiation. CARM1 COACTIVATES MYOCYTE ENHANCER FACTOR-2. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 4324-4333
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wu, Z., Woodring, P. J., Bhakta, K. S., Tamura, K., Wen, F., Feramisco, J. R., Karin, M., Wang, J. Y. J., Puri, P. L.
(2000). p38 and Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinases Regulate the Myogenic Program at Multiple Steps. Mol. Cell. Biol.
20: 3951-3964
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Chen, S. L., Dowhan, D. H., Hosking, B. M., Muscat, G. E.O.
(2000). The steroid receptor coactivator, GRIP-1, is necessary for MEF-2C-dependent gene expression and skeletal muscle differentiation. Genes Dev.
14: 1209-1228
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Puri, P. L., Wu, Z., Zhang, P., Wood, L. D., Bhakta, K. S., Han, J., Feramisco, J. R., Karin, M., Wang, J. Y.J.
(2000). Induction of terminal differentiation by constitutive activation of p38 MAP kinase in human rhabdomyosarcoma cells. Genes Dev.
14: 574-584
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Xia, Y., McMillin, J. B., Lewis, A., Moore, M., Zhu, W. G., Williams, R. S., Kellems, R. E.
(2000). Electrical Stimulation of Neonatal Cardiac Myocytes Activates the NFAT3 and GATA4 Pathways and Up-regulates the Adenylosuccinate Synthetase 1 Gene. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 1855-1863
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Glick, E., Leshkowitz, D., Walker, M. D.
(2000). Transcription Factor BETA2 Acts Cooperatively with E2A and PDX1 to Activate the Insulin Gene Promoter. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 2199-2204
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Winter, B, Arnold, H.
(2000). Activated raf kinase inhibits muscle cell differentiation through a MEF2-dependent mechanism. J. Cell Sci.
113: 4211-4220
[Abstract]
-
Helms, A., Abney, A., Ben-Arie, N, Zoghbi, H., Johnson, J.
(2000). Autoregulation and multiple enhancers control Math1 expression in the developing nervous system. Development
127: 1185-1196
[Abstract]
-
Kophengnavong, T., Michnowicz, J. E., Blackwell, T. K.
(2000). Establishment of Distinct MyoD, E2A, and Twist DNA Binding Specificities by Different Basic Region-DNA Conformations. Mol. Cell. Biol.
20: 261-272
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lewis, A. L., Xia, Y., Datta, S. K., McMillin, J., Kellems, R. E.
(1999). Combinatorial Interactions Regulate Cardiac Expression of the Murine Adenylosuccinate Synthetase 1 Gene. J. Biol. Chem.
274: 14188-14197
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wilson-Rawls, J., Molkentin, J. D., Black, B. L., Olson, E. N.
(1999). Activated Notch Inhibits Myogenic Activity of the MADS-Box Transcription Factor Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2C. Mol. Cell. Biol.
19: 2853-2862
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lu, J., Webb, R., Richardson, J. A., Olson, E. N.
(1999). MyoR: A muscle-restricted basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor that antagonizes the actions of MyoD. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96: 552-557
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhao, M., New, L., Kravchenko, V. V., Kato, Y., Gram, H., di Padova, F., Olson, E. N., Ulevitch, R. J., Han, J.
(1999). Regulation of the MEF2 Family of Transcription Factors by p38. Mol. Cell. Biol.
19: 21-30
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
ZHANG, J., DEYOUNG, A., KASLER, H.G., KABRA, N.H., KUANG, A.A., DIEHL, G., SOHN, S.J., BISHOP, C., WINOTO, A.
(1999). Receptor-mediated Apoptosis in T Lymphocytes. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
64: 363-372
[Abstract]
-
Huang, J., Weintraub, H., Kedes, L.
(1998). Intramolecular Regulation of MyoD Activation Domain Conformation and Function. Mol. Cell. Biol.
18: 5478-5484
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kee, B. L., Murre, C.
(1998). Induction of Early B Cell Factor (EBF) and Multiple B Lineage Genes by the Basic Helix-Loop-Helix Transcription Factor E12. JEM
188: 699-713
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Xu, Q., Wu, Z.
(2000). The Insulin-like Growth Factor-Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase-Akt Signaling Pathway Regulates Myogenin Expression in Normal Myogenic Cells but Not in Rhabdomyosarcoma-derived RD Cells. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 36750-36757
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Dressel, U., Bailey, P. J., Wang, S-C. M., Downes, M., Evans, R. M., Muscat, G. E. O.
(2001). A Dynamic Role for HDAC7 in MEF2-mediated Muscle Differentiation. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 17007-17013
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Marshall, P., Chartrand, N., Worton, R. G.
(2001). The Mouse Dystrophin Enhancer Is Regulated by MyoD, E-box-binding Factors, and by the Serum Response Factor. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 20719-20726
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Mora, S., Pessin, J. E.
(2000). The MEF2A Isoform Is Required for Striated Muscle-specific Expression of the Insulin-responsive GLUT4 Glucose Transporter. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 16323-16328
[Abstract]
[Full Text]