Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, November 1998, p. 6340-6352, Vol. 18, No. 11
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Heat Shock Element Architecture Is an Important Determinant in
the Temperature and Transactivation Domain Requirements for Heat
Shock Transcription Factor
Nicholas
Santoro,
Nina
Johansson,
and
Dennis J.
Thiele*
Department of Biological Chemistry, The
University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
48109-0606
Received 16 June 1998/Accepted 27 July 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
The baker's yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae possesses a
single gene encoding heat shock transcription factor (HSF), which is required for the activation of genes that participate in stress protection as well as normal growth and viability. Yeast HSF (yHSF) contains two distinct transcriptional activation regions located at the
amino and carboxyl termini. Activation of the yeast metallothionein gene, CUP1, depends on a nonconsensus heat shock element
(HSE), occurs at higher temperatures than other heat shock-responsive genes, and is highly dependent on the carboxyl-terminal transactivation domain (CTA) of yHSF. The results described here show that the noncanonical (or gapped) spacing of GAA units in the CUP1
HSE (HSE1) functions to limit the magnitude of CUP1
transcriptional activation in response to heat and oxidative stress.
The spacing in HSE1 modulates the dependence for transcriptional
activation by both stresses on the yHSF CTA. Furthermore, a previously
uncharacterized HSE in the CUP1 promoter, HSE2, modulates
the magnitude of the transcriptional activation of CUP1,
via HSE1, in response to stress. In vitro DNase I footprinting
experiments suggest that the occupation of HSE2 by yHSF strongly
influences the manner in which yHSF occupies HSE1. Limited
proteolysis assays show that HSF adopts a distinct protease-sensitive conformation when bound to the CUP1
HSE1, providing evidence that the HSE influences DNA-bound HSF
conformation. Together, these results suggest that CUP1
regulation is distinct from that of other classic heat shock genes
through the interaction of yHSF with two nonconsensus HSEs. Consistent
with this view, we have identified other gene targets of yHSF
containing HSEs with sequence and spacing features similar to those of
CUP1 HSE1 and show a correlation between the spacing of the
GAA units and the relative dependence on the yHSF CTA.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
All organisms possess a highly
conserved response to elevated temperatures and to a variety of
chemical and physiological stresses commonly designated as the heat
shock response (38). In eukaryotic cells this response
involves the rapid activation of a transcription factor known as heat
shock transcription factor (HSF) (70). Once activated, HSF
induces the expression of genes whose products ensure the survival of
the cell during stressful conditions by providing defense against
general protein damage. These heat shock proteins (Hsps) also play
essential roles in the synthesis, transport, translocation,
proteolysis, and proper folding of proteins under both normal and
stressful conditions (38). Although the heat shock
response is conserved among eukaryotes, both the number and
overall sequence of HSFs vary widely among different species. Yeasts
(Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Schizosaccharomyces pombe, and Kluyveromyces lactis) and Drosophila
melanogaster appear to have a single HSF gene, whereas most
vertebrates and higher plants possess multiple HSF genes: at
least three HSF genes have been isolated from the human, mouse,
chicken, and tomato genomes (15, 23, 28, 40, 41, 44, 50, 51, 53,
60, 69). Despite sequence divergence, all members of the HSF
family have two highly conserved features: a helix-turn-helix DNA
binding domain and coiled-coil hydrophobic repeat domains which mediate the trimerization of HSF (26, 45, 66).
A key step in the induction of heat shock gene transcription is the
interaction of HSF with a short, highly conserved cis-acting DNA sequence, the heat shock element (HSE) found in the promoters of
HSF-responsive genes. All HSEs contain multiple copies of the repeating
5-bp sequence 5'-nGAAn-3' (where n is any nucleotide) arranged in
alternating orientation (2, 71). The number of pentameric
units in an HSE can vary; while a minimum of three is thought to be
required for heat-inducible expression, some HSEs harbor eight
contiguous inverted repeats (19). Furthermore, the degree of
homology of each pentameric unit to the consensus nGAAn motif can vary,
as can the nature of the initial pentamer, beginning with either GAA or
its complement TTC, with the latter displaying significantly higher
levels of biological activity in yeast cells and the capability to bind
two HSF trimers instead of one (4). A functional HSE can
tolerate a 5-bp insertion between repeating units, provided that the
spacing and orientation of the pentameric elements are maintained
(2). The binding of HSF to DNA has been shown to be highly
cooperative, and deviations from the nGAAn consensus sequence may be
tolerated in vivo because multiple HSEs foster cooperative interactions
between multiple HSF trimers (4, 65, 72). These variations
in the sequence of the binding site can influence the affinity of HSF
for the HSE(s) of a particular heat shock gene, thereby influencing the level of transcriptional activation, and ultimately fine-tune the
nature of the heat shock gene response.
The existence of multiple HSF species in higher eukaryotes suggests
that HSF isoforms may have specialized functions that can be triggered
by distinct stimuli or may activate specific target genes. For example,
in human K562 erythroleukemia cells, HSF2 responds to hemin treatment
and is constitutively active in mouse embryonal carcinoma cells and at
the blastocyst stage during embryogenesis and spermatogenesis (46,
55). These observations are consistent with HSF2 functioning as a
regulator of heat shock gene expression during development and
differentiation, such as its potential regulation of the
hsp70.2 gene during spermatogenesis (33, 49).
Human HSF1 responds to thermal stress and other stresses at the level
of trimerization, phosphorylation and DNA binding to activate
transcription of Hsp genes (16, 48, 74). Consistent with the
possibility that distinct mammalian HSF isoforms activate different
target genes, mouse HSF1 (mHSF1) utilizes a higher degree of
cooperativity in DNA binding and demonstrates a preference for HSEs
containing four to five pentamers, while mHSF2 has a binding preference
for HSEs containing only two to three pentamers (30). This
notion is further supported by a recent functional analysis of human
HSF1 and HSF2 expressed in yeast, which showed that HSF1 bound with
highest affinity to and activated transcription most potently from the
SSA3 promoter, which has an extended array of pentameric
elements in the HSE (35). On the other hand, HSF2 bound with
highest affinity to and activated transcription most potently from the
yeast metallothionein gene, CUP1, which has only three
pentamers in HSE1 and has a gap between the last two pentamers and an
A-to-G substitution (GAG) in the last pentameric unit (35).
Yeast cells utilize the single essential HSF to activate the expression
of a wide variety of genes in response to heat and other stresses and
to coordinate the expression of genes required for growth under normal
physiological conditions. The DNA binding domain of yeast HSF (yHSF)
may be more conformationally flexible than HSF1 or HSF2 from higher
eukaryotes (20) and allow a wide range of distinct
interactions of the DNA binding domain with HSEs. The observation that
a single amino acid substitution in the DNA binding domain of yHSF
alters the specificity of HSF on different promoters is consistent with
this idea (54). A feature distinguishing yHSF from HSFs of
higher eukaryotes is the presence of two transactivation domains
which respond differentially to heat shock (42, 56). Studies
of a synthetic HSE-lacZ reporter gene suggested that the
yHSF amino-terminal activation domain mediates a transient response to
elevated temperatures, while the carboxyl-terminal activation domain
(CTA) is required to regulate both a transient and a sustained response
(56). Both activation domains are restrained under normal
growth conditions by intramolecular interactions with the DNA binding
domain, the trimerization domain, and a short conserved element,
denoted CE2 (5, 14, 28, 42, 56). The presence of two
activation domains in yHSF may provide additional levels of regulation
or selectivity in gene activation. Previous studies have established
that the CUP1 gene is transcriptionally activated by yHSF
via heat and oxidative stress (36, 63). Interestingly,
expression of CUP1 in response to heat shock and oxidative
stress exhibits a strong requirement for the CTA of HSF (36,
63). In contrast, this region is largely dispensable for the heat
shock activation of the SSA1 and SSA3 genes,
encoding members of the Hsp70 family (63). It is interesting that in addition to the differential requirement for the CTA of yHSF,
activation of CUP1 by yHSF differs from that of typical heat
shock genes in that the robust activation of CUP1 requires a
temperature of 39 rather than 37°C (63).
The CUP1 promoter HSE is thought to be atypical in that it
contains only one HSE (HSE1) composed of three pentameric units. A
compilation of HSEs from many organisms demonstrated that for promoters
that contain an HSE composed of three pentameric units, additional
flanking HSEs are present (4, 43). Furthermore, HSE1
deviates significantly from consensus HSEs in that there is a gap
between the second and third pentamers; however, the gap preserves both
the spacing and the orientation between these two repeats. Since
yHSF-dependent activation of CUP1 and the SSA genes is distinct, we have carried out a detailed analysis of CUP1 gene expression to understand how yHSF regulates the
activation of genes via distinct HSEs and with distinct transactivation
domain requirements. We present evidence for a second nonconsensus HSE in the CUP1 promoter, HSE2, which serves to modulate the
transcriptional activation of CUP1 in response to both heat
and oxidative stress. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the nature of
HSE1 plays a crucial role in the dependence on the yHSF CTA for
CUP1 activation by heat stress. The expression of two
additional yeast genes which contain a gapped HSE is also strongly
dependent on the yHSF CTA. Chymotrypsin sensitivity assays show that
the arrangement of pentameric units in the CUP1 HSE1 affects
the conformation of DNA-bound yHSF and suggests that at least part of
the distinct features of CUP1 activation by yHSF may be due
to the generation of specific yHSF structures by the HSE. Therefore,
this work demonstrates that yeast cells activate and fine-tune the
expression of a wide variety of target genes via a single HSF isoform,
in part by virtue of the nature of the yHSF binding sites and distinct
transactivation domain requirements.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Strains and growth conditions.
S. cerevisiae
MCY1093, a gift from Marian Carlson, was used as the wild-type parental
strain throughout this study and is designated DTY123. Strain PS145 (a
gift from Hillary Nelson) contains a deletion of the endogenous yHSF
gene (60). The HSF(1-583) strain, DTY179, has been
previously described (63). Cell culture conditions for
inducing CUP1 expression by heat shock and oxidative stress
using menadione treatment were as previously described (36,
63). All CUP1-lacZ fusion plasmids are URA3
based, and all strains were grown in synthetic complete medium minus
uracil unless otherwise specified. Strain DTY123skn7 is isogenic to
DTY123 and carries a hisG-URA3-hisG (1) disrupted
SKN7 gene (10). The SKN7 gene was
disrupted following previous protocols (11) by transforming
DTY123 with an SKN7/hisG-URA3-hisG fragment that was released from plasmid pBS:SKN7:URA3 by
XbaI-XhoI digestion. The chromosomal arrangement
of this disrupted skn7 allele was confirmed by both PCR and
the increased sensitivity of the skn7 disruption strain to
tert-butyl hydroperoxide (37).
Plasmids.
All plasmids are numbered according to the 5' and
3' termini of the CUP1 insert; numbering is relative to the
start site of CUP1 transcription. Plasmids containing
mutations in the CUP1 HSE that are used for RNA analyses of
gene expression are denoted with "m" to distinguish them from
plasmids containing mutations in the CUP1 HSE that are used
for DNA binding analyses, which are denoted with "M." For analyzing
regions of the CUP1 promoter important for CUP1
activation by HSF, restriction enzyme-generated fragments of the
CUP1 promoter containing different 5' upstream termini but
all extending through the 12th codon of CUP1
(BspHI site at +105 from the transcription start site) were
ligated into the lacZ fusion vector YEp357R
(39). Plasmid pYEpCUP1-807 was generated by using
a BspHI-BspHI CUP1 fragment
from plasmid pGEXa (63). Plasmids pYEpCUP1-393,
pYEpCUP1-241, and pYEpCUP1-167 were generated by using
BamHI-, EcoRV-, and
XbaI-BspHI CUP1 fragments, respectively, from plasmid pYep336 (12). Mutant
CUP1 promoter plasmids pYEpCUP1HSE1P,
pYEpCUP1HSE2m, and pYEpCUP1ACEm were generated by using a
Chameleon double-stranded site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La
Jolla, Calif.), plasmid pYEpCUP1-393, and the following
oligonucleotides: CUP1HSE1P
131/
172
(5'-CGGAAAAGACGCATCGCTCTGGAAGCTTCTAGAAGAAATGCC-3'), CUP1HSE2m
(5'-GCGATGCGTCTTTTTCGCTAAACCGTTTCAGCAAAAAAGACTACC-3'), and
CUP1Acem (5'-GCGATGCGTCTTTTCCCGTGAACCGTTCCAGC-3'). By
the same procedure, plasmid pYEpCUP1HSE1m and oligonucleotide
CUP1HSE2m were used to generate pYEpCUP1HSE1m2m.
Plasmids pHSE-WT and pHSE-M were used to prepare identical-sized
CUP1 electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) probes;
pHSE-M contains a mutation in CUP1 HSE1, and both plasmids
were described previously (63). Plasmids pHSE-2M and
pHSE-1M2M contain a CUP1 fragment identical in size to that
of pHSE-WT and pHSE-1M, all four plasmids contain CUP1 sequences from
183 to
80 cloned into the EcoRV site of
pBluescript SK+. pHSE-2M was constructed by ligating a PCR
product derived from plasmid pYEpCUP1HSE2m into the
EcoRV site of pBluescript SK+. pHSE-1M2M was
constructed by ligating a PCR product derived from plasmid
pYEpCUP1HSE1m2m into the EcoRV site of pBluescript SK+. The ability of HSEs from various genes to function as
heat-inducible upstream activation sequences (UAS) was tested using the
CYC1-lacZ fusion plasmid pCM64, a gift from Charles Moehle.
Plasmid pBS:SKN7:URA3 was constructed as follows. The
hisG-URA3-hisG cassette (1) was removed from
plasmid pNKY51 by BglII-BamHI digestion, filled
in, and ligated into plasmid pBS:SKN7 (a generous gift from Richard
Stewart) which had been digested with StyI-MscI. The StyI-MscI digestion removes nucleotides that
code for approximately 480 of the 622 amino acids of SKN7
from plasmid pBS:SKN7. Digestion of pBS:SKN7:URA3 with
XbaI-XhoI produces a fragment containing the
hisG-URA3-hisG cassette with SKN7 sequence
flanking each end. To facilitate the purification of full-length yHSF
from Escherichia coli, plasmid pET3d-HSF-His6, which
contains a six-His tag added to the carboxy terminus of the yHSF open
reading frame cloned into pET3d, was constructed. The following
plasmids were utilized for making antisense RNA probes by using T7 RNA
polymerase and for RNase protection assays. Plasmids pKSACT1 and
pKSlacZ, for determining CUP1-lacZ and ACT1 mRNA
levels, were described elsewhere (32). Plasmid pKSSSA3 was
constructed by ligating a 159-bp EcoRI-HincII fragment from the SSA3 gene into the
EcoRI-SmaI sites of pBluescript KS+.
Plasmid pSKCUP1 was constructed by inserting a 149-bp
EcoRI-BamHI fragment from the CUP1
gene into the same sites of pBluescript SK+. pSKHSC82 was
constructed by ligating a PCR product containing a 115-bp fragment of
the HSC82 gene to which EcoRI-BamHI
sites were introduced into the same sites of pBluescript
SK+. Plasmid pSKHSP82 was constructed by ligating a PCR
product containing a 109-bp fragment of the HSP82 gene to
which EcoRI-BamHI sites were introduced into the
same sites of pBluescript SK+. The latter two plasmids were
used to generate antisense RNA probes which hybridize specifically to
HSC82 or HSP82 mRNA spanning positions +2161 to
+2275 and +2196 to +2305, respectively, in the 3' untranslated regions
of both genes (18, 25).
RNA isolation and RNase protection analyses.
RNA from either
control, heat shock-treated, or menadione-treated cells was isolated as
previously described (36, 63). 32P-labeled
antisense CUP1, HSC82, and HSP82 RNAs
were produced from BamHI-linearized plasmids. The
ACT1 mRNA level was used as a control for normalization for
quantitation of RNase protection products throughout this study. RNase
protection samples were separated on 6% acrylamide gels; radioactive
bands on the dried gels were quantitated by using a PhosphorImager SP
and IPLab Gel software (Molecular Dynamics) as described elsewhere
(29).
In vitro DNA binding studies.
EMSAs were carried out as
described previously (57, 59, 63). Plasmids pHSE-WT, pHSE-M,
and pHSE-1M,2M were used to prepare CUP1 HSEWT (wild-type
HSE), HSE1M, and HSE1M,2M probes for EMSA by digesting with
EcoRI and HindIII and filling in the 103-bp fragments with the Klenow fragment and [
-32P]dATP.
Yeast extracts for EMSA were prepared from cells by glass bead
disruption in 50 mM Tris-Cl (pH 7.5)-1 mM EDTA-protease inhibitors as
previously described (63). Binding reactions were for 30 min
at room temperature; the binding buffer was previously described (57, 59). Protein levels in yeast extracts was measured by using the Bio-Rad protein assay (Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.).
Radiolabeled probes were purified by nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (PAGE), and probe concentrations were determined
spectrophotometrically by UV light absorbance at 260 nm. Quantitative
DNA binding studies were carried out, and apparent
Kd (Kd,app) and Hill
coefficients were determined as described previously (29).
Competitive DNA binding assays using CUP1 HSEWT, HSE1M, and
HSE1M,2M probes were carried out as previously described (57,
59). Purified yHSF and 0.1 nM probe were used for all
Kd,app determinations, and a 4% polyacrylamide
gel system with a high cross-linking ratio, 5.6:1, of acrylamide to
bisacrylamide was used (62) for all assays with purified
yHSF. These gels were run at 4°C and contained 0.5× Tris-borate-EDTA
10% glycerol, and 0.1% Nonidet P-40 (NP-40); the running buffer also
contained 0.5× Tris-borate-EDTA and 0.1% NP-40. Following
electrophoresis, EMSA gels were fixed (10% acetic, 10% methanol),
dried, exposed to X-ray film, and subjected to PhosphorImager analysis.
The DNase I footprinting reactions were carried out as for the EMSA
DNA-binding reactions except that after the binding incubation,
1/10
volume of a buffer containing 25 mM MgCl
2 and 20 mM
CaCl
2 and 1 µl of a 1:2,000 dilution of DNase I (10 U/ml;
Boehringer
Mannheim, Indianapolis, Ind.) were added, and the mixture
was
incubated for 1 min. DNase I digestion was terminated by the
addition
of 1/10 volume of 250 mM EDTA and loaded immediately onto an
EMSA
gel (
65). Radioactive bands were excised from the EMSA
gel,
DNA ethanol precipitated, and fractionated on denaturing
polyacrylamide
gels (
47). The gels were dried and exposed to
X-ray film and
PhosphorImager screens.
Limited proteolysis of yHSF-HSE complexes.
The proteolytic
clipping band shift assay (52) was carried out as previously
described (22, 64). Briefly, purified yHSF-DNA complexes
formed at room temperature for 30 min were subjected to limited
proteolysis with chymotrypsin (amounts of chymotrypsin and lengths of
incubation are indicated in figure legends). Binding reactions and the
gel system used for these limited proteolysis experiments were
identical to those described above used in
Kd,app determinations. The chymotrypsin
(Worthington Biochemical Corporation) was diluted into water just
before use. Chymostatin (Boehringer Mannheim) was used to terminate
reactions in the limited proteolytic time course assays. Fixed-time
limited proteolysis assays were terminated by direct loading to EMSA
gels. Following electrophoresis, EMSA gels were fixed (10% acetic,
10% methanol), dried, exposed to X-ray film, and subjected to
PhosphorImager analysis. The amount of yHSF-DNA complexes and free
probe remaining after limited proteolysis was quantitated by
PhosphorImager analysis of the dried gels.
Expression and purification of yHSF from E. coli.
Full-length yHSF was expressed and purified by standard protocols
(3), with minor modifications. Six liters of freshly transformed E. coli BL21(DE3)pLysS cells containing plasmid
pET3d-HSF-His6 was grown in Superbroth (Digene Diagnostics, Beltsville,
Md.) at 37°C to an A600 of 0.8. Isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside was added to a final
concentration of 0.4 mM, and induction was carried out at 25°C for
approximately 6 h. Cells were harvested, and cell pellets were
frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at
80°C. All subsequent steps
in this purification were carried out at 4°C. Cell pellets were
thawed in the presence of protease inhibitor cocktail (3);
cells were resuspended in approximately 100 ml of breaking buffer (50 mM sodium phosphate [pH 8], 300 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol) and broken by
one passage through a French pressure cell (SLM Aminco, Champaign,
Ill.) at 16,000 lb/in2. The cell extract was centrifuged
for 30 min at 30,000 × g, the pH of the supernatant
was adjusted to approximately 8, and incubation continued for 30 min
with gentle mixing at 4°C in batch, using 3 ml of packed
Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) resin (Qiagen, Chatsworth, Calif.) per
50 ml of extract. The resin was washed twice by centrifugation at 500 rpm in a RT6000B swinging-bucket centrifuge (Sorvall, Wilmington, Del.)
at 4°C with wash buffer 1, which was identical to breaking buffer
except that it contained 500 mM NaCl and 5 mM imidazole. The resin was
then washed once with wash buffer 2, which was identical to wash buffer
1 except that it contained 10 mM imidazole. The resin was pooled, and
elution of yHSF was effected by two successive incubations with 6 ml of
elution buffer (identical to wash buffer 1 except that it contained 200 mM imidazole) for 15 min with gentle mixing. The eluted sample was
aliquoted, frozen by using liquid nitrogen, and stored at
80°C. HSF
was further purified by gel filtration chromatography on a Superose 6 HR10/30 column (Pharmacia, Piscataway, N.J.). Procedures for
calibration and FPLC (fast protein liquid chromatography) purification
using the Superose 6 column (31, 59, 68) and the
chromatography buffer (68) have been described elsewhere.
Briefly, the Ni-NTA resin eluate was thawed and adjusted to 0.1 mM
EDTA-0.1 mM EGTA-0.1% NP-40 immediately prior to injection of 0.2 ml
onto the Superose column. The column chromatography buffer was modified
by the addition of 0.1% NP-40, the column was run at 0.3 ml/min, and
0.3-ml fractions were taken. After binding of the centrifuged cell
lysate to the Ni-NTA resin, the protease inhibitor mix was replaced by
the single protease inhibitor Pefabloc (Boehringer Mannheim). Pefabloc
was used in all buffers for all remaining steps. HSF eluted at
approximately 12 ml (fractions 37 to 45), immediately before the
position where the thyroglobulin standard (660 kDa) elutes. The
purified yHSF was stable at 0°C for several weeks.
Protein extraction and immunoblotting.
Whole-cell protein
extracts for immunoblotting were prepared exactly as described
previously (35) by glass bead extraction using sodium
dodecyl sulfate (SDS) harvest buffer (0.5% SDS, 10 mM Tris-HCl [pH
7.4], 1 mM EDTA) containing protease inhibitors. Protein concentration
was determined by the Bradford assay (Bio-Rad). Extracts were resolved
by SDS-PAGE (10% gel), transferred to nitrocellulose, and
immunoblotted under standard conditions. Immunoblotting was carried out
with reagents and protocols from Amersham, using anti-yHSF polyclonal
antiserum (a gift from P. Sorger), Hsc82/Hsp82p polyclonal antibody (a
gift from S. Lindquist), Ssa3/Ssa4p polyclonal antibody (a gift
from E. Craig), and monoclonal antibodies against phosphoglycerate kinase (Pgk1p; Molecular Probes, Eugene, Oreg.). Proteins of interest were detected by using the Renaissance chemiluminescence detection system (NEN Life Sciences, Boston, Mass.). Band intensity was estimated
using NIH Image version v1.61.
 |
RESULTS |
The CUP1 promoter harbors two nonconsensus HSEs.
We previously identified a single HSE in the CUP1 promoter
required for transcriptional activation in response to heat shock, glucose starvation, and superoxide radical generation (36,
63). Transcription of CUP1 via this HSE is distinct
from that of HSP70 genes in its requirement for the yHSF CTA
and for heat shock at 39 rather than 37°C (63). To
identify other regulatory sites that might function in the
transcriptional activation of CUP1 by yHSF, we fused a
series of CUP1 promoter deletion mutants to the
lacZ gene in YEp357R and analyzed expression from these
plasmids by RNase protection experiments (Fig.
1). DNA sequences between
807 and
241
of the CUP1 promoter do not appear to contribute to the
magnitude of CUP1 activation in response to either heat shock or menadione treatment (Fig. 1). Deletion of this segment of DNA
increases the basal level of CUP1 expression approximately fourfold (Fig. 1). Truncation of the CUP1 promoter to
163,
which destroys the first pentameric unit in HSE1, also increased basal transcription fourfold compared to longer promoter fragments but essentially eliminated the activation of CUP1 by HSF in
response to both heat shock and oxidative stress (pYEpCUP1-163
[Fig. 1]). Analysis of the 3' CUP1 promoter region showed
that deletions of the CUP1 transcribed region to +9 from the
start site of transcription had no significant effect on the magnitude
of the transcriptional activation of CUP1 in response to
heat shock or oxidative stress (data not shown).

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Analysis of CUP1 promoter sequences required
for heat shock and oxidative stress-inducible transcription. Total RNA
was isolated from transformants of strain DTY123 harboring the
indicated CUP1-lacZ promoter derivatives, and steady-state
mRNA levels for lacZ and ACT1 (indicated with
arrows) were analyzed by RNase protection experiments. Values for
normalized expression were determined before (control [C]; 27°C)
and after heat shock (HS; 39°C) or menadione treatment (MD; 500 µM). Heat shock was carried out for 20 min; cells were exposed to
menadione for 1 h. Quantitation was carried out with a
PhosphorImager, and in each case the CUP1-lacZ mRNA level
was normalized to the respective ACT1 mRNA level. The values
represent averages of three separate determinations ± standard
deviations. The graph indicates the normalized expression levels of
CUP1-lacZ mRNA detected in each lane. Nucleotide numbers
refer to positions relative to the start site of transcription of the
CUP1 gene; vector represents YEp357R.
|
|
Based on the observation that DNA sequences upstream of

241 are not
required for heat shock induction of
CUP1, we investigated
whether the
CUP1 HSE1 alone was sufficient to function as a
heat-inducible
UAS. The HSEs from the
SSA1,
SSA3, and
SSA4 genes were previously
shown to be
sufficient to function as heat-inducible UASs (
6,
73). DNA
sequences encompassing the
CUP1 HSEs from

168 to

141
or

168 to

116 from the transcription start site were unable
to
activate heat-induced transcription when fused to the yeast
CYC1 basal promoter, while the
SSA3 HSE strongly
activated heat-induced
transcription in this context (data not shown).
Longer fragments
of the wild-type
CUP1 promoter (

393 to

91,

183 to

79,

393
to

1, or

168 to

1 from transcription
start) were also unable
to activate transcription in this context,
implicating a requirement
for specific
CUP1 basal promoter
elements for yHSF-mediated activation
of
CUP1. Therefore,
the
CUP1-lacZ fusions used throughout this
study contain the
CUP1 HSE and basal promoter fused to
lacZ.
In contrast to the HSEs found within the
SSA1 and
SSA3 promoters, the
CUP1 HSE1 contains only three
pentameric units, with
a gap between the second and third units (Fig.
2A). However, DNase
I footprinting and
methylation interference analyses have shown
that the HSF trimer
interacts with all three pentameric sites
(
2,
63). Since a
200-fold molar excess of an oligonucleotide
containing sequences
adjacent to HSE1 (

141 to

107) competes
for the binding of yHSF in
crude extracts with a probe containing

241 to +37 of the
CUP1 promoter (
54), we investigated whether
a
second nonconsensus HSE, HSE2 (Fig.
2A), might function in
CUP1 transcriptional activation. The two HSEs are similar in
that both
contain only three GAA units and both start with TTC.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Mutagenesis of HSE1 or HSE2 alters stress-responsive
expression from the CUP1 promoter. (A) Diagrammatic
representation of the CUP1 promoter, indicating the
positions of HSEs and the sequence from 170 to 100 (relative to the
transcription initiation site). The nucleotide changes generating
mutations in either HSE1, HSE2, or Ace1 sites are shown. Shaded regions
delineating the limits of the GAA units of each HSE are numbered, and
nucleotide changes for each mutant are displayed in the shaded regions.
GAA units are underlined in the CUP1 sequence; the
high-affinity Ace1p site (29) which partially overlaps HSE2
is overlined. (B) RNase protection analysis of the transcriptional
activation from CUP1-lacZ promoter derivatives containing
mutations in HSE1 and HSE2. Heat shock (HS) was carried out at 39°C
for 20 min. Controls (C) were not heat shocked. Below the RNase
protection data are schematic representations of the
CUP1-lacZ promoter derivatives. HSE1 and HSE2 are boxed;
mutations in the GAA units of HSE1 or HSE2 (m) and the mutation which
fills in the gap in HSE1 (P) are indicated. The histogram shows the
normalized expression levels of CUP1-lacZ mRNA detected in
each assay.
|
|
CUP1 HSE architecture and arrangement modulates
transcriptional potency.
To determine whether the gap in
the CUP1 HSE1 or the putative HSE2 plays a role in the
regulation of CUP1 transcription in response to heat stress,
expression from CUP1 promoters with mutationally altered
HSE1 and HSE2 elements (summarized in Fig. 2A) was analyzed by
RNase protection. Two strategies were adopted. First, the spacing in HSE1 was altered to match the consensus HSEs such as those found in
the SSA1 and SSA3 promoters. Second, the putative
HSE2 was mutagenized within each pentamer at positions known to be essential for HSF binding to consensus HSEs (19). Conversion of the gapped CUP1 HSE1 to an HSE with four GAA repeats,
designated HSE1 "perfect" (HSE1P/2), resulted in 3.9- and 3.6-fold
increases in CUP1 activation in response to both heat
shock and oxidative stress (data not shown), respectively, compared to
the wild type (Fig. 2B). Mutagenesis of HSE2 (HSE1/2m [Fig.
2]) resulted in a 3.5-fold increase in the transcriptional activation
of CUP1 in response to heat shock and oxidative stress (data
not shown) compared to the wild type (Fig. 2B). This hyperactivation
depended on the functional integrity of HSE1, as demonstrated by the
inactivity of the double mutant HSE1m/2m (Fig. 2B). Combination of
the two mutations (HSE1P/2m) did not result in any significant
difference in expression as compared to the CUP1
HSE1P/2 promoter (Fig. 2B). Mutation of HSE1 alone
(HSE1m/2 [Fig. 2A]) also resulted in a CUP1-lacZ
fusion that was transcriptionally inactive to both heat shock and
oxidative stress (Fig. 2B and data not shown), confirming our previous
results demonstrating the requirement for HSE1 in the stress induction
of CUP1 (36, 63). These results with either
double mutation (HSE1P/2m and HSE1m/2m) demonstrate that modulation of the transcriptional activation of CUP1 through
HSE2 is highly dependent on the nature of HSE1.
Based on the results obtained with the HSE1P
CUP1-lacZ
fusion, we synthesized oligonucleotides spanning the HSE1P mutation
to
determine whether HSE1P could confer heat shock-inducible expression
to
the
CYC1 basal promoter. An oligonucleotide containing the
HSE1P mutation and spanning from

168 to

116 or from

168
to

141 of the
CUP1 promoter potently activated the
CYC1-lacZ reporter
in response to heat shock (data not
shown). Therefore, the requirement
for the basal promoter region in the
yHSF-mediated transcriptional
activation of
CUP1 in response
to heat shock can be dispensed
with by using a canonical HSE but not
the
CUP1 HSE1.
The activation of
CUP1 by heat shock and oxidative stress
has been previously shown to be independent of the Cu ion-dependent
transcription factor, Ace1p (
54,
63). However, a
high-affinity
Ace1 binding site overlaps the TTC and partially overlaps
the
second GAA unit in HSE2 (Fig.
2A), and the HSE2 mutation converts
the GAA to AAA, disrupting one nucleotide in this Ace1p site.
We
therefore analyzed transcriptional activation from a
CUP1-lacZ fusion which destroys the high-affinity Ace1p site
that overlaps
the HSE2 sequence but does not mutate HSE2 (Fig.
2A,
Ace1m). Activation
of the Ace1m
CUP1-lacZ fusion in response
to heat stress was indistinguishable
from the wild-type promoter (data
not shown). Therefore, the increased
transcriptional activation
observed for the HSE1/2m
CUP1-lacZ fusion gene is
independent of activation by Ace1p.
Another stress-responsive transcription factor found in
S. cerevisiae, Skn7p, possesses significant
homology to the DNA binding
domain of yHSF (
9)
and binds to a GAA-containing sequence of
the
TRX2 promoter
(
37). Therefore, we investigated whether the
increased
transcriptional response of the HSE1P/2 and HSE1/2m
CUP1-lacZ promoters might be due to Skn7p-mediated
activation.
The heat shock responses of both wild-type and mutant
CUP1-lacZ fusions in a
skn7 disruption strain
were indistinguishable from
that of the wild-type
SKN7
strain (data not shown). Taken together,
these results demonstrate that
the modulation of
CUP1 expression
in response to heat shock
is mediated by HSF, HSE1, and HSE2.
The architecture of CUP1 HSEs imparts specificity to
the mode of activation of CUP1.
Transcriptional
activation of CUP1 by yHSF differs from that of
SSA3 in that CUP1 activation requires an optimal
heat shock temperature of 39 rather than 37°C (63).
Furthermore, CUP1 expression in response to heat shock is
highly dependent on the CTA of yHSF, whereas the SSA1 and
SSA3 promoters are much less dependent on this domain.
To determine if HSE1 and HSE2 are determinants in these features
of CUP1 transcriptional activation, we compared expression from the wild-type and mutationally altered
CUP1-lacZ fusion genes at 37 and 39°C (Fig.
3A). Consistent with
previous results (63), activation of CUP1 at
37°C was only 25% of that observed at 39°C (Fig. 3A).
Interestingly, the generation of either HSE1P or HSE2M did not alter
the temperature induction profile of CUP1; that is,
expression of both derivatives was maximal at 39°C. Both mutations,
however, change the efficacy of transcription at 37°C. The
HSE1/2m and HSE1P/2 CUP1 derivatives give rise to a
level of heat shock-inducible transcription at 37°C that is comparable to that observed for the wild-type fusion at 39°C
(Fig. 3A). Therefore, both HSE2 and the gap between pentamers 2 and 3 in HSE1 act to limit the expression of CUP1 at a
temperature where many other HSF-responsive genes are near maximal
expression.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
CUP1 promoter HSE mutations alter the
temperature response and obviate the requirement for the yHSF CTA. (A)
The HSE1P and HSE2m CUP1-lacZ fusions lower the
temperature threshold for transcriptional activation of
CUP1. The steady-state levels of CUP1-lacZ mRNA
from the wild-type, HSE1P, and HSE2m fusions were analyzed before
(control [C]; 27°C) and after heat shock (HS) at either 37 or
39°C for 20 min. ACT1 and CUP1-lacZ mRNA levels
were assayed and quantitated as described for Fig. 1. Below the data
are schematic representations of the CUP1-lacZ promoter
derivatives assayed in this RNase protection experiment and normalized
expression levels of CUP1-lacZ mRNA. Details of the
mutations in the CUP1 HSEs are given in Fig. 2. (B) The
HSE1P but not the HSE2m CUP1-lacZ fusion reduces dependency
of CUP1 transcriptional activation on the yHSF CTA.
Experiments were carried out as described for panel A except that the
CUP1-lacZ fusions were also assayed in a yeast strain
containing the HSF(1-583) allele. (C) HSC82 and
HSP82 possess similar GAA unit arrangements in HSE1, with a
gap between units 2 and 3; SSA3 contains a contiguous array
of 5-bp units. (D) Deletion of the HSF carboxyl-terminal activation
domain results in severe reduction in Hsp82/Hsc82 protein levels, while
Ssa3/Ssa4 protein levels are only moderately affected, as determined by
Western blot analysis of Hsp82/Hsc82, Ssa3/Ssa4, and Pgk1 protein
levels in yeast strains containing either wild-type HSF or HSF(1-583).
Yeast cells were heat shocked (HS) at 39°C for 1 h, and extracts
were prepared by glass bead disruption as described in Materials and
Methods. Samples were subjected to SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted with
polyclonal antisera to Hsp82/Hsc82, Ssa3/Ssa4, and Pgk1. Pgk1 levels
were used for normalizing sample loads.
|
|
Isogenic wild-type HSF and HSF(1-583) cells harboring wild-type and
mutant
CUP1-lacZ fusions were analyzed to ascertain
whether
HSE1 or HSE2 plays a role in the dependence of
CUP1
transcriptional
activation on the yHSF CTA. As shown in Fig.
3B and
consistent
with previous analyses (
36,
63), heat shock
activation of
the wild-type
CUP1-lacZ reporter in the
HSF(1-583) strain is greatly
reduced (approximately 70%) compared to a
strain with wild-type
HSF. In contrast, heat shock activation of the
HSE1P
CUP1-lacZ reporter in the HSF(1-583) strain is reduced
only 43% compared
to a strain with wild-type HSF. These results
suggest that the
gapped HSE1 plays a critical role in determining the
degree of
dependence of
CUP1 expression in response to heat
shock on the
HSF CTA. Transcription from the HSE1P/2
CUP1 promoter derivative
was hyperactivated in the
HSF(1-583) strain, exhibiting approximately
threefold greater
activation than the wild-type promoter in the
wild-type HSF strain
(Fig.
3B). In contrast to expression in a
wild-type HSF strain, the
HSE1/2m reporter expression is greatly
reduced in the HSF(1-583)
strain, with an induction approximately
equal to that observed for the
wild-type reporter in the HSF(1-583)
strain (Fig.
3B). This finding
suggests that the transcriptional
activation observed for the
HSE1/2m promoter under stress conditions
is dependent on the
interaction of yHSF with HSE1. Similar results
were obtained in
response to oxidative stress using the wild-type,
HSE1/2m, and
HSE1P/2 reporter plasmids in the HSF(1-583) strain
and wild-type
HSF strain (data not shown). The data for the HSF(1-583)
strain suggest
that the HSE1P promoter increases the ability of
the amino-terminal
activation domain of HSF to activate
CUP1 expression.
Since
the HSF(1-583) protein completely lacks a CTA, the results
in Fig.
3B
suggest that the gapped HSE1 plays a critical role
in determining the
contribution of the amino-terminal activation
domain of HSF to the
magnitude of
CUP1 expression in response
to both heat shock
and oxidative stress.
To ascertain whether the correlation between a gapped HSE architecture
and higher dependence on the yHSF CTA is a general
phenomenon,
other Hsp gene promoters with similarly organized
HSEs were examined.
Inspection of HSEs found in the promoters
of
HSP82,
HSC82, and
CUP1 suggests that nonconsensus HSEs
may
be commonly used for transcriptional responses to heat shock.
Previous analysis of the HSE1 from the
HSC82 and
HSP82 promoters
(
8,
18,
24,
25) showed that, like
the
CUP1 HSE1, they
are composed of only three
pentameric units containing a gap between
pentamers 2 and 3, with
all three sites properly oriented and
spaced (Fig.
3C). Based on these
observations, we measured the
heat-induced levels of endogenous
CUP1,
HSC82, and
HSP82 mRNAs
to
determine if these genes exhibit a strong dependence on the
yHSF CTA.
Heat shock-induced expression of the
CUP1 and
HSC82 genes in the HSF(1-583) strain are most affected, with
heat shock
transcription being only 23 and 24%, respectively, of that
observed
in an isogenic wild-type HSF strain. Expression of
HSP82 in the
HSF(1-583) strain is only 37% of that in the
wild-type HSF strain,
while heat shock expression of
SSA3 in
the HSF(1-583) strain was
least affected by the loss of the yHSF CTA
(56% of the level in
wild-type strain). This result with
SSA3 is identical to that
observed with the HSE1P/2
reporter in Fig.
3B, where 56% of the
steady-state expression level in
the HSF(1-583) background was
retained compared to that present in the
HSF wild-type strain.
To determine whether there are significant
physiological consequences
for the reduction in the magnitude of
transcriptional activation
for the
HSP82,
HSC82,
and
SSA3 genes in the HSF(1-583) strain,
the levels of these
proteins in control and heat-shocked cells
were determined by
immunoblotting. Consistent with the steady-state
RNA measurements for
the
HSP82 and
HSC82 genes demonstrating a
strong
requirement for the HSF CTA in heat-induced expression
of these two
genes, protein levels of both Hsp90 isoforms were
severely diminished
(80 to 90%) in HSF(1-583) cells (Fig.
3D).
In contrast, the levels
of Ssa3/Ssa4 proteins were only slightly
reduced (10 to 20%) in
HSF(1-583) cells (Fig.
3D). These results
strongly suggest that heat
shock-induced expression from promoters
containing contiguous HSEs is
less dependent on the yHSF CTA than
expression from promoters with
gapped HSEs.
yHSF binding to HSE2 modulates interactions at HSE1.
The data
described here implicate the presence of a second CUP1 HSE,
HSE2, in the modulation of CUP1 transcription that is dependent on both yHSF and the nonconsensus HSE1. To ascertain whether
yHSF interacts directly with HSE2 and whether this interaction might
modulate the occupancy of HSE1, in vitro DNA binding studies were
carried out. Since yeast cells express two proteins (10, 21)
bearing homology to the yHSF DNA binding domain that appear to play no
role in CUP1 regulation but which may confound in vitro DNA
binding studies, full-length yHSF was expressed in and purified from
E. coli. To facilitate the purification of yHSF for DNA
binding studies, we constructed a yHSF allele in which a
His6 tag was placed at the carboxyl terminus of the coding
region. This HSF-His6 protein fully complemented the
viability defect associated with disruption of the single endogenous
yHSF gene at both 30 and 37°C (data not shown). yHSF was obtained
after sequential purification on Ni-NTA agarose and FPLC Superose-6
chromatography (31, 59, 68). Purified yHSF migrated on a
Coomassie blue-stained SDS-polyacrylamide gel at approximately 150 kDa
and comigrated with HSF present in whole-cell yeast extracts from
non-heat-shocked cells, as detected by Western blot analysis (Fig.
4A and B). Furthermore, purified yHSF
specifically bound to the CUP1 promoter in a manner similar to yHSF present in crude cell extracts from non-heat-shocked cells (Fig. 4C). The amount of yHSF from crude cell extracts binding to
CUP1 DNA is lower than that in the recombinant yHSF samples due to the low abundance of endogenous yHSF in the cell extracts used
in the binding reaction.

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Purification of yHSF from E. coli. (A)
Coomassie blue-stained SDS-8% polyacrylamide gel of the purified
full-length yHSF protein. Molecular mass markers, in kilodaltons, are
indicated on the left. Stages in the purification, described in
Materials and Methods, are indicated on the top. The right-most lane
contains yeast extract which was used for size comparison for Western
blotting analysis. (B) yHSF analysis by Western blotting. The same
samples used to load the gel shown in panel A were electrophoresed and
subjected to immunoblotting with polyclonal anti-yHSF antiserum.
Purified yHSF, which comigrates with HSF present in non-heat-shocked
yeast cell extract, is indicated by the arrowhead. (C) EMSA of purified
yHSF. Lane 1 contains no yHSF protein; lanes 2 and 3 contain purified
yHSF; lanes 4 and 5 contain crude yeast extract prepared from
non-heat-shocked cells by glass bead disruption as described in
Materials and Methods. EMSAs were carried out as described in Materials
and Methods. All lanes contain 1 ng of 32P-labeled
CUP1 HSEWT probe with or without the CUP1
competitor DNA, at 30-fold molar excess, indicated above the gel.
|
|
The dissociation constants for yHSF-
CUP1 promoter complexes
were determined by quantitative EMSAs. As shown in Fig.
5, yHSF
interacts with the
CUP1 promoter fragment encompassing HSE1 and
HSE2 with a
Kd,app of (3.7 ± 0.5) × 10
9
M. Since the
CUP1 HSE1P/2 derivative gave rise to
increased expression
in response to stress and this expression was less
dependent on
the yHSF CTA, we determined whether these effects were due
to
an increase in binding affinity of yHSF for the
CUP1
HSE1P promoter.
yHSF bound to the
CUP1 HSE1P/2 probe
with a
Kd,app of
(3.4 ± 0.9) × 10
9 M, demonstrating that yHSF does not have a
significantly higher
affinity for the
CUP1 HSE1P
compared to the wild-type promoter.
The apparent affinity of yHSF for
the
CUP1 HSE2M probe, (4.0 ±
0.2) × 10
9
M, was not significantly different from that for either the
CUP1 HSEWT or
CUP1 HSE1P. Furthermore, no
difference was observed in
the apparent Hill coefficients obtained for
the three
CUP1 promoter
sequences (approximately 1.5),
suggesting a lack of differences
in yHSF binding cooperativity to these
three
CUP1 promoter derivatives.
This Hill coefficient is
highly reproducible, and the intermediate
value for the apparent Hill
coefficient of between 1 and 2 suggests
that one yHSF trimer may bind
stably, and a second may bind only
weakly or partially, to the
CUP1 HSE1. Since the
SSA3 and
CUP1 promoters also exhibit marked differences in heat shock-inducible
gene
expression as a function of their HSEs, we explored whether
yHSF
exhibits different binding affinities for these two promoters.
In three
independent experiments, differences in neither affinity
nor binding
cooperativity were observed (data not shown). Therefore,
it does not
appear that the differences in heat shock-responsive
expression between
the
CUP1 HSE1P,
CUP1 HSE2M, and
SSA3
promoters
and the
CUP1 HSEWT promoter are due to differences
in the affinity
of yHSF for the HSEs or in binding cooperativity.
Rather, differences
may be due to binding site context-dependent
alterations in bound
HSF or interactions with other factors.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Binding affinity of yHSF for the CUP1
promoter. (A) Results of representative EMSAs of the CUP1
HSEWT (top) CUP1 HSE1P (middle), and CUP1 HSE2M
(bottom) promoter fragments titrated with increasing amounts of
purified yHSF (lanes 1 through 9). yHSF concentrations used were
5.5 × 10 10, 9.6 × 10 10,
1.6 × 10 9, 2.9 × 10 9, 5 × 10 9, 8.9 × 10 9, 1.5 × 10 8, 2.7 × 10 8, and 4.8 × 10 8 M for lanes 1 through 9, respectively. Lane 10 contains the free probe. The probe concentration in each reaction was
0.1 nM. Positions of the free probe (F) and yHSF-DNA complex (B) are
indicated. (B) Graphical representation of the quantitation of the
protein titration plots in panel A. The data were quantitated with a
PhosphorImager and then plotted and analyzed as described previously
(29) and in Materials and Methods. The
Kd,app for each probe was derived from at least
three independent determinations and is the average ± standard
deviation. Kd,apps were (3.7 ± 0.5) × 10 9 M for the CUP1 HSEWT probe (3.4 ± 0.9) × 10 9 M for the CUP1 HSE1P probe, and
(4.0 ± 0.2) × 10 9 M for the CUP1 HSE2M
probe. Each data point for each probe is taken from the average of at
least three independent determinations. The line is drawn only through
the data points for the CUP1 HSEWT probe.
|
|
EMSAs using yHSF and
CUP1 promoter mutations strongly
suggest that yHSF binds to HSE2, albeit with a very low efficiency
compared
to HSE1 (data not shown). To precisely map the site of
interaction
of yHSF with the
CUP1 HSE2, DNase I footprinting
analysis was
performed with the
CUP1 HSEWT probe (Fig.
6A). At low yHSF concentrations
(Fig.
6A,
lane 2), strong protection over a region encompassing
HSE1, from

172
to

143, was observed. Binding of yHSF to HSE1
is accompanied by DNase
I hypersensitivity at several positions
upstream of position

172.
Additionally, at this concentration
of yHSF (14 nM), there is modest
protection over the region corresponding
to
CUP1 HSE2. At a
sevenfold-higher concentration of yHSF, however,
this DNase I
cleavage pattern is altered in several distinct ways
(Fig.
6A, lane 3).
First, HSE2 is strongly protected from DNase
I cleavage by yHSF from
positions

134 to

120 on the bottom strand.
Second, three sites of
DNase I hypersensitivity within or flanking
HSE2, at positions

123,

127, and

140, are observed (Fig.
6A).
Third, concomitant with more
complete occupation of HSE2, there
is a marked increase in DNase I
cleavage at several positions
in the 3' end of HSE1, including

148,

152,

154, and

155. Therefore,
occupation of the lower-affinity
HSE2 site by yHSF appears to
alter the interaction of yHSF with HSE1.

View larger version (99K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
DNase I footprinting analysis of yHSF bound to the
CUP1 promoter. The 32P-labeled CUP1
promoter fragments used in DNase I footprinting reactions are described
in Materials and Methods, and the sequence of CUP1
encompassing HSE1 and HSE2 is shown in Fig. 2A. The concentration of
CUP1 probe in all binding reactions was 0.6 nM, and the
probes were labeled at the 5' end on the bottom strand. Binding
reactions were set up, and after 30 min at room temperature, DNase I
was added as described in Materials and Methods. The reactions were
terminated and loaded directly onto the modified EMSA gels used for
Kd determinations. DNA was eluted from the
protein-DNA complexes in the EMSA gel, denatured, and loaded on a
standard DNA sequencing gel as described in Materials and Methods. (A)
DNase I footprinting of the wild-type CUP1 probe. On the
left are the reference DNA sequencing reactions showing the sequence of
the bottom strand of the CUP1 promoter (for the actual
sequence, see Fig. 2A). HSE1 and HSE2 are shown diagrammatically in
boxes, the size of each box corresponding to the limits of the three
pentameric GAA units in each HSE. The panel on the right shows DNase I
footprinting samples: lane 1, DNase I cleavage products generated in
the absence of protein; lanes 2 and 3, 0.1 µg (14 nM) and 0.7 µg
(98 nM) of yHSF, respectively, added to the binding reactions. Symbols
on the right of the DNase I footprinting panel: solid circles labeled
120, 126, and 133 represent the position of the second nucleotide
in each pentameric nGAAn unit of HSE2; open squares (not labeled with
numbers) represent DNase I-hypersensitive sites; solid dashes labeled
172 and 143 represent the boundary of HSE1. Numbering indicates
nucleotide position relative to the start site of transcription. (B)
DNase I footprinting of the CUP1 HSE2M mutant probe.
Descriptions and symbols are identical to those for panel A except that
lane 4 represents 1.5 µg (210 nM) of yHSF added to the binding
reaction.
|
|
To verify the specificity of yHSF occupation of HSE2 and the effect of
yHSF binding to HSE2 on HSE1 binding, DNase I footprinting
was carried
out with the
CUP1 HSE2M probe (Fig.
6B). The complete
lack
of protection observed over HSE2, even at high yHSF concentrations,
demonstrates the specificity of the interaction of yHSF with HSE2
(compare

134 through

120 in Fig.
6A and B). The 5' boundary
of the
protected region over HSE1 is identical to that of the
HSEWT probe
(

172 [Fig.
6]). However, in contrast to the wild-type
CUP1 probe, there are no alterations in the protection over
HSE1
as more yHSF is added (compare

148 through

155 in Fig.
6A and
B). However, the extent of the protected region over HSE1 decreased,
and the three hypersensitive sites observed with the wild-type
CUP1 probe were abolished (compare Fig.
6A and B).
Furthermore,
the major cleavage site at

143 (Fig.
6B) and the
residues immediately
upstream of this site, TCG (bottom strand,

144
to

146) are no
longer protected (compare Fig.
6A and B). Therefore,
yHSF bound
at HSE2 may facilitate the binding of yHSF to the third
pentameric
unit (GAG) of HSE1.
HSF adopts distinct conformations when bound to consensus and
atypical HSEs.
So far, our results show that differences in the
transcriptional activity of the CUP1 promoter derivatives
cannot be attributed to any changes in either the binding affinity or
the cooperativity with which yHSF binds these DNA sequences. To more
directly assess whether the differences in transcriptional activation
from the CUP1 promoter derivatives are due to changes in the
conformation of DNA-bound HSF, protease sensitivity assays were carried
out with purified yHSF bound to the CUP1 HSEWT, HSE1P, and
HSE2M DNA fragments. The proteolytic clipping band shift assay
(52) utilizes limited proteolysis of DNA-bound protein and
has been used to probe the structure of transcription factor-DNA
complexes (22, 52, 64). HSF-CUP1 HSE complexes
were subjected to limited proteolysis by incubation with increasing
concentrations of chymotrypsin, and the resulting complexes were
separated on EMSA gels (Fig. 7A). The
differences in sensitivity to digestion of the HSF-HSEWT and HSF-HSE1P
complexes were striking. The HSF-HSE1P complex was routinely more
resistant to chymotrypsin treatment than either the HSF-HSEWT or
HSF-HSE2M complex (compare lanes 3, 8, and 13 in Fig. 7A). There is
approximately an order of magnitude difference in the amount of
chymotrypsin required to obtain similar levels of proteolytic
sensitivity for the HSEWT and HSE1P. The sensitivities of the HSF-HSEWT
and HSF-HSE2M complexes were nearly indistinguishable, suggesting that
the major determinant in the chymotrypsin sensitivity of the DNA-bound
yHSF is HSE1. Addition of chymostatin to the binding reactions prior to
chymotrypsin resulted in complexes which were completely resistant to
chymotrypsin (Fig. 7A; compare lanes 5, 10, and 15 with lanes 1, 6, and
11). There were no obvious differences in the pattern of products
generated by chymotrypsin digestion of yHSF bound to the HSEWT,
HSE1P, or HSE2M (Fig. 7A and data not shown). The data in Fig. 7B shows
that the difference in chymotrypsin sensitivity between the
HSF-HSE1P and HSF-HSEWT and HSF-HSE2M can also be observed
in the rate of proteolysis of these complexes. After 12 min
of chymotrypsin digestion, the HSF-HSEWT and HSF-HSE2M complexes
are almost completely degraded whereas approximately 25% of
the HSF-HSE1P complex remains (Fig. 7B). Thus, the HSF-HSE1P complex
adopts a conformation distinct from the HSF-HSEWT and HSF-HSE2M
complexes which can be demonstrated as differences in both the
concentration and rate of limited digestion with chymotrypsin (Fig. 7).

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
yHSF binds to the CUP1 HSEWT, HSE1P, and
HSE2M with distinct conformations. (A) The partial proteolysis with
chymotrypsin of the HSF-HSEWT complex is compared with that of the
HSF-HSE1P and HSF-HSE2M complexes. Binding reactions containing the
indicated probe were carried out exactly as described for Fig. 5 except
that all lanes contained 1.5 × 10 8 M HSF. Following
the standard binding assay, chymotrypsin was added to all reactions
except those in lanes 1, 6, and 11. The HSF-HSE complexes in lanes 2 through 4, 7 through 9, and 12 through 14 were digested with 0.01, 0.1, and 1 ng chymotrypsin, respectively. Binding reaction mixtures were
incubated for 10 min following chymotrypsin addition before loading
onto EMSA gels. The chymotrypsin inhibitor chymostatin (1 µg) was
added to the samples in lanes 5, 10, and 15 immediately prior to
chymotrypsin (1 ng) addition. Bound HSF-HSE complexes (B) and free
probe (F) are indicated. (B) Graphical representation of the results
from time course assays of partial proteolysis of HSF-HSE complexes.
Experimental conditions were as for panel A except that chymotrypsin
digestion (1 ng) was carried out for the indicated time followed by
chymostatin addition to terminate the digestion prior to loading onto
EMSA gels. The bound HSF-HSE complexes (B) and free probe (F) were
quantitated with a PhosphorImager and plotted. The data represent the
averages of two separate experiments.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Higher eukaryotic cells possess multiple distinct HSF isoforms,
encoded by different genes. This diversity is further increased through
differential splicing, responses to distinct stresses, and preferences
for binding to distinct arrangements of HSEs (70). In
contrast, the S. cerevisiae HSF is encoded by a single,
essential gene and binds to some HSEs constitutively, while binding to
other HSEs is induced in response to an environmental or
pharmacological stimulus (24, 27, 58). Furthermore, yHSF
differentially activates gene expression through the use of separate
amino- or carboxyl-terminal transactivation domains or by responding to distinct stressors (36, 42, 56, 63). Therefore, yHSF may represent a composite of the functions carried out by individual HSF
isoforms in higher eukaryotes. The observation that human HSF
isoforms are differentially functional when expressed in yeast cells
lacking the endogenous HSF gene further underscores this notion
(35).
To explore the mechanisms underlying the differential use of yHSF
transactivation domains for target gene activation, HSF-dependent activation of the CUP1 gene was investigated in detail.
CUP1 represents a heretofore atypical HSF-dependent gene in
that it contains a nonconsensus HSE in its promoter, requires heat
shock at 39°C for robust activation, as opposed to 37°C for other
HSF target genes, responds to superoxide radical generators for
HSF-mediated activation, and exhibits a strong requirement for the yHSF
CTA (36, 63). Here, we have demonstrated that the
CUP1 promoter harbors two HSEs, neither of which resembles
those found in typical HSF-responsive genes, such as SSA1 or
SSA3, in their fundamental architecture. Consistent with the
known interaction of HSF with HSEs as homotrimeric proteins, both the
CUP1 HSE1 and HSE2 harbor three repeats of the pentameric
element. Furthermore, the separation of CUP1 HSE1 and HSE2
by one helical turn provides a mechanism for potential interactions
between two DNA-bound HSF trimers on the same face of the DNA helix.
Although the CUP1 HSE1 contains three pentamers, the
distance of one helical turn between pentamers 2 and 3 allows occupancy
of major grooves on the DNA with a distinct geometry compared to
contiguous pentamers such as those found in SSA1 and
SSA3. Indeed, the generation of a CUP1 HSE1
derivative which mimics those found in SSA1 and
SSA3 (CUP1 HSE1P) results in stress-responsive
transcriptional activation characteristics which more closely resemble
these genes in terms of the temperature optimum, their reduced
dependence on the yHSF CTA, and ability to activate a heterologous
CYC1 basal promoter. One possible mechanism by which the
CUP1 HSE1P might enhance CUP1 expression is by
affecting the affinity of yHSF for DNA. However, our results suggest no significant difference in the apparent affinity of yHSF for the CUP1 promoter fragment containing HSE1P compared to HSE1WT.
Previous experiments have demonstrated that HSF-dependent activation of
CUP1 in response to heat and oxidative stress is absolutely dependent on HSE1 (36, 63). Here, we have shown that
although neither HSE1 nor HSE2 functions to activate heat-inducible
expression in the context of a fusion to the yeast CYC1 core
promoter, HSE2 plays an important role in modulating CUP1
expression through HSE1. The inability of HSE2 alone to function as an
activating HSE, even in the context of the CUP1 promoter,
may in part be due to its low affinity for yHSF, a consequence of the
altered spacing between each of the three pentamers (2, 30,
71). This architecture of HSE2 may also affect structural changes
in the CUP1 promoter DNA upon binding of yHSF. DNase I
treatment of yHSF-CUP1 promoter DNA complexes results in
hypersensitive sites within and adjacent to HSE2, suggesting that the
binding of yHSF to the CUP1 DNA induces conformational
changes in the DNA. Hypersensitive sites have been observed in DNase I
treatment of mHSF1- and mHSF2-HSE complexes (31). Although
HSE2 is incapable of autonomously driving yHSF-dependent
activation of CUP1 transcription and is bound by yHSF
with low affinity, the occupation of HSE2 has dramatic effects on
stress-dependent activation of CUP1 transcription and the
manner in which HSE1 is bound by yHSF. The generation of a form of HSE2
incapable of binding yHSF renders CUP1 heat inducible
transcription hyperactivated at 37 and 39°C, in a manner similar to
the conversion of CUP1 HSE1 to HSE1P. Furthermore, consistent with potential interactions between yHSF trimers bound both
at HSE1 and HSE2, DNase I footprinting assays demonstrate that the
occupation of HSE2 alters the manner in which yHSF is bound at HSE1.
Studies of the Drosophila hsp70 promoter have demonstrated the presence of a high- and a low-affinity HSE, the latter of which
plays a critical role in the heat-inducible transcriptional response
(65). It is interesting that an HSE found in the human prointerleukin 1-
gene, which consists of only two pentameric units,
fails to serve as a heat shock-inducible element but restrains expression from the promoter in response to heat shock jointly administered with the inducer, lipopolysaccharide (13). It
is thought that this may provide a mechanism to temper the
inflammatory response. Furthermore, Westwood et al. have
demonstrated the binding of Drosophila HSF to
chromosomal loci that far exceed the predicted number of heat
shock-inducible genes (67). These observations, taken
together with the data described here, suggest that in addition to
their role as gene-specific positive transcriptional regulatory elements, HSEs might modulate both HSF activity and the activity of
distinct cis-acting promoter elements. Similar
context-dependent activation or repression has been observed with the
retinoic acid receptor bound to its cognate DNA response element
(34).
The organization of the CUP1 HSE1 is very similar to that of
the HSE1 in the HSP82 and HSC82 genes. We found
that the heat shock induction of these three genes is highly dependent
on the yHSF CTA. Like CUP1, HSP82 and
HSC82 have multiple HSEs; however, others have shown that
only the HSE1 of HSP82 and HSC82 is
constitutively occupied in vivo (18). Giardina and Lis have
shown that there is a change in the in vivo footprint of the
HSP82 HSEs following heat shock (24). The changes
in HSF-DNA binding upon heat shock were seen mainly on the low-affinity
HSEs, HSE2 and HSE3 of HSP82. The binding of yHSF to these
weaker HSEs in the HSP82 promoter was transient, and these
sites were largely unoccupied once cells progressed through a recovery
stage and into the non-heat-shocked stage. It may be that a similar
situation occurs on the CUP1 promoter with HSE1 representing
the constitutively occupied HSE with HSE2 occupied only upon stress
induction. This is consistent with in vitro DNA binding studies
performed in this report showing that HSE2 is a low-affinity site. Our
DNase I footprinting assays demonstrate that the occupation of HSE2
alters the manner in which yHSF is bound at HSE1 and perhaps in vivo
occupancy of HSE2 following stress induction tempers the
transcriptional response of CUP1. The Hill coefficient for
the HSE2M was approximately 1.5, suggesting that a second trimer may be
only weakly bound to HSE1. The occupancy of HSE2 upon stress induction
may also act to stabilize yHSF bound to HSE1. Future in vivo
footprinting experiments will address these possibilities.
How do the specific architecture of HSE1 and the presence of HSE2
impart unique HSF-dependent regulatory characteristics to CUP1? One mechanism may be that HSF binds to the
CUP1 HSE1 with less cooperativity than for a large
contiguous HSE, thereby leading to a tempering of CUP1
expression. mHSF1 and mHSF2 differ in the potential for cooperative
interactions with HSEs: mHSF1 binds cooperatively to extended HSEs much
like that found in the SSA3 gene, and mHSF2 has a binding
preference for HSEs harboring two or three pentamers like that in the
CUP1 promoter (30, 31). Since the DNA binding
domain of yHSF may be more conformationally flexible than that of mHSF1
or mHSF2 (20), perhaps yHSF extracts binding site context
information to influence the level of cooperativity used to bind a
given promoter. However, our results suggest that yHSF binds to the
CUP1 HSE1WT, HSE1P, and HSE2M with nearly identical levels
of apparent cooperativity. It is also possible that when bound to HSE1,
HSF adopts a conformation that alters its interactions with the basal
transcription machinery in the core promoter of the CUP1
gene. Indeed, our results which demonstrate that a consensus HSE from
SSA3, or the CUP1 HSE1P but not the
CUP1 HSE1WT element, can confer heat-inducible expression to
the CYC1 basal promoter are consistent with a requirement
for the adaptation of distinct HSF conformations on the different HSEs.
Consistent with this idea, substitution of the Gcn4 leucine zipper
for the yHSF trimerization domain has recently demonstrated that the
oligomeric state of the DNA-bound HSF-Gcn4 chimeric protein depends on
the number and orientation of pentameric units within the HSE
(17). Therefore, it is possible that the HSE structure can
similarly influence the overall yHSF conformation. The in vitro DNA
binding, in vivo gene expression, and protease sensitivity assay
results described here are consistent with a change in the conformation
of DNA-bound yHSF. The digestion of yHSF-HSE complexes with
chymotrypsin shows that a yHSF surface is more readily accessible to
the protease in the yHSF-HSEWT complex than it is in the yHSF-HSE1P
complex. The ability of DNA to induce conformational changes in
transcription factors has been previously proposed for the nuclear
hormone receptors (61), the yeast pheromone/receptor
transcription factor (64), and nuclear factor NF-
B
(p50)2 (22). Therefore, it is possible that HSE
structure can similarly influence the conformation of yHSF, and perhaps
the extended linker region in yHSF facilitates such changes.
What might be the mechanisms by which HSEs with contiguous pentamers
exhibit a reduced dependence on the yHSF carboxyl-terminal activation
domain compared to CUP1? Since the CTA is known to harbor an
additional coiled-coil domain (14), it is conceivable that
this region (HSF584-833) is responsible for intermolecular interactions
that serve to stabilize yHSF trimers on the CUP1 promoter or
to augment interactions between yHSF trimers bound at HSE1 and HSE2. It
is also possible that yHSF receives context information from the HSE
that specifies which functional surfaces of yHSF will be presented to
the transcriptional machinery or to other, non-DNA binding regulatory
factors. The chymotrypsin sensitivity data suggest that a gapped HSE
such as the CUP1 HSE1 might induce a conformation of HSF
which more efficiently utilizes the C-terminal rather than the
N-terminal transactivation domain. The more canonical HSE such as HSE1P
might result in more of the HSF N-terminal than C-terminal
transactivation domain being presented to the transcriptional
machinery. A similar mechanism has been proposed to dictate whether the
glucocorticoid receptor functions through its response element as a
transcriptional activator or repressor (61). As we show
here, the architecture of HSEs in the CUP1,
HSC82, HSP82, and HSP70 family of
genes plays an important role in the features of the heat shock
transcriptional response. Perhaps the sequences of these promoter HSEs
have evolved to facilitate differential use of the yHSF transactivation
domains and thus impart distinct characteristics to the heat shock
transcriptional response. Although HSFs are regulated at many levels in
response to stress, these studies demonstrate that promoter context
represents a further level for regulation of transcription during the
stress response.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank David Engelke and members of the Thiele lab for
critically reading the manuscript and for valuable suggestions. We thank J. José Bonner and David Gross for excellent advice
and suggestions. We gratefully acknowledge gifts of plasmids, yeast strains, and antiserum from Peter Sorger, Hillary Nelson, Charles Moehle, Richard Stewart, Susan Lindquist, and Elizabeth Craig. We thank
members of the Thiele lab for valuable discussions and advice during
the course of this work and Chen Kuang for helpful technical support.
This work was supported by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
fellowship U 914826-01-2 to Nicholas Santoro. Dennis J. Thiele is a
Burroughs Wellcome Toxicology Scholar.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Biological Chemistry, The University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0606. Phone: (734) 763-5717. Fax: (734) 763-4581. E-mail: dthiele{at}umich.edu.
Present address: MediCity Research Laboratory, University of Turku,
20520 Turku, Finland.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Alani, E.,
L. Cao, and N. Kleckner.
1987.
A method for gene disruption that allows repeated use of URA3 selection in the construction of multiply disrupted yeast strains.
Genetics
116:541-545[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Amin, J.,
J. Ananthan, and R. Voellmy.
1988.
Key features of heat shock regulatory elements.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8:3761-3769[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Ausubel, F. M.,
R. Brent,
R. E. Kingston,
D. D. Moore,
J. G. Seidman,
J. A. Smith, and K. Struhl (ed.).
1987.
Current protocols in molecular biology.
John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y.
|
| 4.
|
Bonner, J. J.,
C. Ballou, and D. L. Fackenthal.
1994.
Interactions between DNA-bound trimers of the yeast heat shock factor.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:501-508[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Bonner, J. J.,
S. Heyward, and D. L. Fackenthal.
1992.
Temperature-dependent regulation of a heterologous transcription activation domain fused to yeast heat shock transcription factor.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:1021-1030[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Boorstein, W. R., and E. A. Craig.
1990.
Structure and regulation of the SSA4 HSP70 gene of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
J. Biol. Chem.
265:18912-18921[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Boorstein, W. R., and E. A. Craig.
1990.
Transcriptional regulation of SSA3, an HSP70 gene from Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:3262-3267[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Borkovich, K. A.,
F. W. Farrelly,
D. B. Finkelstein,
J. Taulien, and S. Lindquist.
1989.
hsp82 is an essential protein that is required in higher concentrations for growth of cells at higher temperatures.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:3919-3930[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Brown, J. L.,
H. Bussey, and R. C. Stewart.
1994.
Yeast Skn7p functions in a eukaryotic two-component regulatory pathway.
EMBO J.
13:5186-5194[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Brown, J. L.,
S. North, and H. Bussey.
1993.
SKN7, a yeast multicopy suppressor of a mutation affecting cell wall -glucan assembly, encodes a product with domains homologous to prokaryotic two-component regulators and to heat shock transcription factors.
J. Bacteriol.
175:6908-6915[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Butler, G., and D. J. Thiele.
1991.
ACE2, an activator of yeast metallothionein expression which is homologous to SWI5.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:476-485[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Butt, T. R.,
E. Sternberg,
J. Herd, and S. T. Crooke.
1984.
Cloning and expression of a yeast copper metallothionein gene.
Gene
27:23-33[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Cahill, C. M.,
W. R. Waterman,
Y. Xie,
P. E. Auron, and S. K. Calderwood.
1996.
Transcriptional repression of the prointerleukin 1 gene by heat shock factor 1.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:24874-24879[Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Chen, Y.,
N. A. Barlev,
O. Westergaard, and B. K. Jakobsen.
1993.
Identification of the C-terminal activator domain in yeast heat shock factor: independent control of transient and sustained transcriptional activity.
EMBO J.
12:5007-5018[Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Clos, J.,
J. T. Westwood,
P. B. Becker,
S. Wilson,
K. Lambert, and C. Wu.
1990.
Molecular cloning and expression of a hexameric Drosophila heat shock factor subject to negative regulation.
Cell
63:1085-1097[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Cotto, J. J.,
M. Kline, and R. I. Morimoto.
1996.
Activation of heat shock factor 1 DNA binding precedes stress-induced serine phosphorylation. Evidence for a multistep pathway of regulation.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:3355-3358[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Drees, B. L.,
E. K. Grotkop, and H. C. M. Nelson.
1997.
The GCN4 leucine zipper can functionally substitute for the heat shock transcription factor's trimerization domain.
J. Mol. Biol.
273:61-74[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Erkine, A. M.,
C. C. Adams,
M. Gao, and D. S. Gross.
1995.
Multiple protein-DNA interactions over the yeast HSC82 heat shock gene promoter.
Nucleic Acids Res.
23:1822-1829[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Fernandes, M.,
H. Xiao, and J. T. Lis.
1994.
Fine structure analyses of the Drosophila and Saccharomyces heat shock factor-heat shock element interactions.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:167-173[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Flick, K. E.,
L. Gonzalez, Jr.,
C. J. Harrison, and H. C. Nelson.
1994.
Yeast heat shock transcription factor contains a flexible linker between the DNA-binding and trimerization domains. Implications for DNA binding by trimeric proteins.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:12475-12481[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Fujita, A.,
Y. Kikuchi,
S. Kuhara,
Y. Misumi,
S. Matsumoto, and H. Kobayashi.
1989.
Domains of the SFL1 protein of yeasts are homologous to Myc oncoproteins of yeast heat-shock transcription factor.
Gene
85:321-328[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Fujita, T.,
G. Nolan,
S. Ghosh, and D. Baltimore.
1992.
Independent modes of activation by the p50 and p65 subunits of NF- B.
Genes Dev.
6:775-787[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Gallo, G. J.,
H. Prentice, and R. E. Kingston.
1993.
Heat shock factor is required for growth at normal temperatures in the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:749-761[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Giardina, C., and J. T. Lis.
1995.
Dynamic protein-DNA architecture of a yeast heat shock promoter.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:2737-2744[Abstract].
|
| 25.
|
Gross, D. S.,
C. C. Adams,
S. Lee, and B. Stentz.
1993.
A critical role for heat shock transcription factor in establishing a nucleosome-free region over the TATA-initiation site of the yeast HSP82 heat shock gene.
EMBO J.
12:3931-3945[Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Harrison, C. J.,
A. A. Bohm, and H. C. Nelson.
1994.
Crystal structure of the DNA binding domain of the heat shock transcription factor.
Science
263:224-227[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Jakobsen, B. K., and H. R. Pelham.
1988.
Constitutive binding of yeast heat shock factor to DNA in vivo.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8:5040-5042[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Jakobsen, B. K., and H. R. B. Pelham.
1991.
A conserved heptapeptide restrains the activity of the yeast heat shock transcription factor.
EMBO J.
10:369-375[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Koch, K. A., and D. J. Thiele.
1996.
Autoactivation by a Candida glabrata copper metalloregulatory transcription factor requires critical minor groove interactions.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:724-734[Abstract].
|
| 30.
|
Kroeger, P. E., and R. I. Morimoto.
1994.
Selection of new HSF1 and HSF2 DNA-binding sites reveals difference in trimer cooperativity.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:7592-7603[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Kroeger, P. E.,
K. D. Sarge, and R. I. Morimoto.
1993.
Mouse heat shock transcription factors 1 and 2 prefer a trimeric binding site but interact differently with the HSP70 heat shock element.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:3370-3383[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Labbe, S.,
Z. Zhu, and D. J. Thiele.
1997.
Copper-specific transcriptional repression of yeast genes encoding critical components in the copper transport pathway.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:15951-15958[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Leppa, S.,
L. Pirkkala,
H. Saarento,
K. D. Sarge, and L. Sistonen.
1997.
Overexpression of HSF2- inhibits hemin-induced heat shock gene expression and erythroid differentiation in K562 cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:15293-15298[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Lipkin, S. M.,
C. A. Nelson,
C. K. Glass, and M. G. Rosenfeld.
1992.
A negative retinoic acid response element in the rat oxytocin promoter restricts transcriptional stimulation by heterologous transactivation domains.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:1209-1213[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Liu, X.-D.,
P. C. C. Liu,
N. Santoro, and D. J. Thiele.
1997.
Conservation of a stress response: human heat shock transcription factors functionally substitute for yeast HSF.
EMBO J.
16:6466-6477[Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Liu, X.-D., and D. J. Thiele.
1996.
Oxidative stress induces heat shock factor phosphorylation and HSF-dependent activation of yeast metallothionein gene transcription.
Genes Dev.
10:592-603[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Morgan, B. A.,
G. R. Banks,
W. M. Toone,
D. Raitt,
S. Kuge, and L. H. Johnston.
1997.
The Skn7 response regulator controls gene expression in the oxidative stress response of the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
EMBO J.
16:1035-1044[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Moritomo, R. I.,
A. Tissieres, and C. Georgopoulos (ed.).
1994.
The biology of heat shock proteins and chaperones.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 39.
|
Myers, A. M.,
A. Tzagoloff,
D. M. Kinney, and C. J. Lusty.
1986.
Yeast shuttle and integrative vectors with multiple cloning sites suitable for construction of lacZ fusions.
Gene
45:299-310[Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Nakai, A., and R. I. Morimoto.
1993.
Characterization of a novel chicken heat shock transcription factor, heat shock factor 3, suggests a new regulatory pathway.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:1983-1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Nakai, A.,
M. Tanabe,
Y. Kawazoe,
J. Inazawa,
R. I. Morimoto, and K. Nagata.
1997.
HSF4, a new member of the human heat shock factor family which lacks properties of a transcriptional activator.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:469-481[Abstract].
|
| 42.
|
Nieto-Sotelo, J.,
G. Wiederrecht,
A. Okuda, and C. S. Parker.
1990.
The yeast heat shock transcription factor contains a transcriptional activation domain whose activity is repressed under nonshock conditions.
Cell
62:807-817[Medline].
|
| 43.
|
Nover, L.
1987.
Expression of heat shock genes in homologous and heterologous systems.
Enzyme Microb. Technol.
9:129-192.
|
| 44.
|
Rabindran, S. K.,
G. Giorgi,
J. Clos, and C. Wu.
1991.
Molecular cloning and expression of a human heat shock factor, HSF1.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:6906-6910[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Rabindran, S. K.,
R. I. Haroun,
J. Clos,
J. Wisniewski, and C. Wu.
1993.
Regulation of heat shock factor trimer formation: role of a conserved leucine zipper.
Science
259:230-234[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Rallu, M.,
M. Loones,
Y. Lallemand,
R. Morimoto,
M. Morange, and V. Mezger.
1997.
Function and regulation of heat shock factor 2 during mouse embryogenesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:2392-2397[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 47.
|
Rhodes, D.
1989.
Analysis of sequence-specific DNA binding proteins, p. 177-198.
In
T. E. Creighton (ed.), Protein function: a practical approach. IRL Press, New York, N.Y.
|
| 48.
|
Sarge, K. D.,
S. P. Murphy, and R. I. Morimoto.
1993.
Activation of heat shock gene transcription by heat shock factor 1 involves oligomerization, acquisition of DNA-binding activity, and nuclear localization and can occur in the absence of stress.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:1392-1407[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 49.
|
Sarge, K. D.,
O. K. Parke-Sarge,
J. D. Kirby,
K. E. Mayo, and R. I. Morimoto.
1994.
Expression of heat shock factor 2 in mouse testis: potential role as a regulator of heat-shock protein gene expression during spermatogenesis.
Biol. Reprod.
50:1334-1343[Abstract].
|
| 50.
|
Sarge, K. D.,
V. Zimarino,
K. Holm,
C. Wu, and R. I. Morimoto.
1991.
Cloning and characterization of two mouse heat shock factors with distinct inducible and constitutive DNA-binding ability.
Genes Dev.
5:1902-1911[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 51.
|
Scharf, K. D.,
S. Rose,
W. Zott,
F. Schoffl,
L. Nover, and F. Schoff.
1990.
Three tomato genes code for heat stress transcription factors with a region of remarkable homology to the DNA-binding domain of the yeast HSF.
EMBO J.
9:4495-4501[Medline].
|
| 52.
|
Schreiber, E.,
P. Matthias,
M. Muller, and W. Schaffner.
1988.
Identification of a novel lymphoid specific octamer binding protein (OTF-2B) by proteolytic clipping bandshift assay (PCBA).
EMBO J.
7:4221-4229[Medline].
|
| 53.
|
Schuetz, T. J.,
G. J. Gallo,
L. Sheldon,
P. Tempst, and R. E. Kingston.
1991.
Isolation of a cDNA for HSF2: evidence for two heat shock factor genes in humans.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:6911-6915[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Silar, P.,
G. Butler, and D. J. Thiele.
1991.
Heat shock transcription factor activates transcription of the yeast metallothionein gene.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:1232-1238[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 55.
|
Sistonen, L.,
K. D. Sarge,
B. Phillips,
K. Abravaya, and R. I. Morimoto.
1992.
Activation of heat shock factor 2 during hemin-induced differentiation of human erythroleukemia cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:4104-4111[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 56.
|
Sorger, P. K.
1990.
Yeast heat shock factor contains separable transient and sustained response transcriptional activators.
Cell
62:793-805[Medline].
|
| 57.
|
Sorger, P. K.,
G. Ammerer, and D. Shore.
1989.
Identification and purification of sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins, p. 199-224.
In
T. E. Creighton (ed.), Protein function: a practical approach. IRL Press, New York, N.Y.
|
| 58.
|
Sorger, P. K., and H. C. M. Nelson.
1989.
Trimerization of a yeast transcriptional activator via a coiled-coil motif.
Cell
59:807-813[Medline].
|
| 59.
|
Sorger, P. K., and H. R. Pelham.
1987.
Purification and characterization of a heat-shock element binding protein from yeast.
EMBO J.
6:3035-3041[Medline].
|
| 60.
|
Sorger, P. K., and H. R. B. Pelham.
1988.
Yeast heat shock factor is an essential DNA-binding protein that exhibits temperature-dependent phosphorylation.
Cell
54:855-864[Medline].
|
| 61.
|
Starr, D. B.,
W. Matsui,
J. R. Thomas, and K. R. Yamamoto.
1996.
Intracellular receptors use a common mechanism to interpret signaling information at response elements.
Genes Dev.
10:1271-1283[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 62.
|
Stevens, S. Y.,
P. C. Swanson, and G. D. Glick.
1994.
Application of the gel shift assay to study the affinity and specificity of anti-DNA autoantibodies.
J. Immunol. Methods
177:185-190[Medline].
|
| 63.
|
Tamai, K. T.,
X. Liu,
P. Silar,
T. Sosinowski, and D. J. Thiele.
1994.
Heat shock transcription factor activates yeast metallothionein gene expression in response to heat and glucose starvation via distinct signalling pathways.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:8155-8165[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 64.
|
Tan, S., and T. J. Richmond.
1990.
DNA binding-induced conformational change of the yeast transcriptional activator PRTF.
Cell
62:367-377[Medline].
|
| 65.
|
Topol, J.,
D. M. Ruden, and C. S. Parker.
1985.
Sequences required for in vitro transcriptional activation of a Drosophila hsp 70 gene.
Cell
42:527-537[Medline].
|
| 66.
|
Vuister, G. W.,
S. J. Kim,
A. Orosz,
J. Marquardt,
C. Wu, and A. Bax.
1994.
Solution structure of the DNA-binding domain of Drosophila heat shock transcription factor.
Nat. Struct. Biol.
1:605-614[Medline].
|
| 67.
|
Westwood, J. T.,
J. Clos, and C. Wu.
1991.
Stress-induced oligomerization and chromosomal relocalization of heat-shock factor.
Nature
353:822-827[Medline].
|
| 68.
|
Westwood, J. T., and C. Wu.
1993.
Activation of Drosophila heat shock factor: conformational change associated with a monomer-to-trimer transition.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:3481-3486[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 69.
|
Wiederrecht, G.,
D. Seto, and C. S. Parker.
1988.
Isolation of the gene encoding the S. cerevisiae heat shock transcription factor.
Cell
54:841-853[Medline].
|
| 70.
|
Wu, C.
1995.
Heat shock transcription factors: structure and regulation.
Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol.
11:441-469[Medline].
|
| 71.
|
Xiao, H., and J. T. Lis.
1988.
Germline transformation used to define key features of heat-shock response elements.
Science
239:1139-1142[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 72.
|
Xiao, H.,
O. Perisic, and J. T. Lis.
1991.
Cooperative binding of Drosophila heat shock factor to arrays of a conserved 5 bp unit.
Cell
64:585-593[Medline].
|
| 73.
|
Young, M. R., and E. A. Craig.
1993.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae HSP70 heat shock elements are functionally distinct.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:5637-5646[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 74.
|
Zuo, J.,
D. Rungger, and R. Voellmy.
1995.
Multiple layers of regulation of human heat shock transcription factor 1.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:4319-4330[Abstract].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, November 1998, p. 6340-6352, Vol. 18, No. 11
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Fujimoto, M., Oshima, K., Shinkawa, T., Wang, B. B., Inouye, S., Hayashida, N., Takii, R., Nakai, A.
(2008). Analysis of HSF4 Binding Regions Reveals Its Necessity for Gene Regulation during Development and Heat Shock Response in Mouse Lenses. J. Biol. Chem.
283: 29961-29970
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Guo, L., Chen, S., Liu, K., Liu, Y., Ni, L., Zhang, K., Zhang, L.
(2008). Isolation of Heat Shock Factor HsfA1a-Binding Sites in vivo Revealed Variations of Heat Shock Elements in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol
49: 1306-1315
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Trott, A., West, J. D., Klaic, L., Westerheide, S. D., Silverman, R. B., Morimoto, R. I., Morano, K. A.
(2008). Activation of Heat Shock and Antioxidant Responses by the Natural Product Celastrol: Transcriptional Signatures of a Thiol-targeted Molecule. Mol. Biol. Cell
19: 1104-1112
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Erkina, T. Y., Tschetter, P. A., Erkine, A. M.
(2008). Different Requirements of the SWI/SNF Complex for Robust Nucleosome Displacement at Promoters of Heat Shock Factor and Msn2- and Msn4-Regulated Heat Shock Genes. Mol. Cell. Biol.
28: 1207-1217
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Barchetta, S., La Terza, A., Ballarini, P., Pucciarelli, S., Miceli, C.
(2008). Combination of Two Regulatory Elements in the Tetrahymena thermophila HSP70-1 Gene Controls Heat Shock Activation. Eukaryot Cell
7: 379-386
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sakurai, H., Takemori, Y.
(2007). Interaction between Heat Shock Transcription Factors (HSFs) and Divergent Binding Sequences: BINDING SPECIFICITIES OF YEAST HSFs AND HUMAN HSF1. J. Biol. Chem.
282: 13334-13341
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Widlak, W., Vydra, N., Malusecka, E., Dudaladava, V., Winiarski, B., Scieglinska, D., Widlak, P.
(2007). Heat shock transcription factor 1 down-regulates spermatocyte-specific 70 kDa heat shock protein expression prior to the induction of apoptosis in mouse testes. GENES CELLS
12: 487-499
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Eastmond, D. L., Nelson, H. C. M.
(2006). Genome-wide Analysis Reveals New Roles for the Activation Domains of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Heat Shock Transcription Factor (Hsf1) during the Transient Heat Shock Response. J. Biol. Chem.
281: 32909-32921
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Erkina, T. Y., Erkine, A. M.
(2006). Displacement of Histones at Promoters of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Heat Shock Genes Is Differentially Associated with Histone H3 Acetylation.. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 7587-7600
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Diaz-Martin, J., Almoguera, C., Prieto-Dapena, P., Espinosa, J. M., Jordano, J.
(2005). Functional Interaction between Two Transcription Factors Involved in the Developmental Regulation of a Small Heat Stress Protein Gene Promoter. Plant Physiol.
139: 1483-1494
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Yamamoto, A., Mizukami, Y., Sakurai, H.
(2005). Identification of a Novel Class of Target Genes and a Novel Type of Binding Sequence of Heat Shock Transcription Factor in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 11911-11919
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Tkach, J. M., Glover, J. R.
(2004). Amino Acid Substitutions in the C-terminal AAA+ Module of Hsp104 Prevent Substrate Recognition by Disrupting Oligomerization and Cause High Temperature Inactivation. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 35692-35701
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hahn, J.-S., Hu, Z., Thiele, D. J., Iyer, V. R.
(2004). Genome-Wide Analysis of the Biology of Stress Responses through Heat Shock Transcription Factor. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 5249-5256
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shaner, L., Trott, A., Goeckeler, J. L., Brodsky, J. L., Morano, K. A.
(2004). The Function of the Yeast Molecular Chaperone Sse1 Is Mechanistically Distinct from the Closely Related Hsp70 Family. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 21992-22001
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hashikawa, N., Sakurai, H.
(2004). Phosphorylation of the Yeast Heat Shock Transcription Factor Is Implicated in Gene-Specific Activation Dependent on the Architecture of the Heat Shock Element. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 3648-3659
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Rojas, A., Almoguera, C., Carranco, R., Scharf, K.-D., Jordano, J.
(2002). Selective Activation of the Developmentally Regulated Ha hsp17.6 G1 Promoter by Heat Stress Transcription Factors. Plant Physiol.
129: 1207-1215
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Tachibana, T., Astumi, S., Shioda, R., Ueno, M., Uritani, M., Ushimaru, T.
(2002). A Novel Non-conventional Heat Shock Element Regulates Expression of MDJ1 Encoding a DnaJ Homolog in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 22140-22146
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ahn, S.-G., Liu, P. C.C., Klyachko, K., Morimoto, R. I., Thiele, D. J.
(2001). The loop domain of heat shock transcription factor 1 dictates DNA-binding specificity and responses to heat stress. Genes Dev.
15: 2134-2145
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bonner, J. J., Carlson, T., Fackenthal, D. L., Paddock, D., Storey, K., Lea, K.
(2000). Complex Regulation of the Yeast Heat Shock Transcription Factor. Mol. Biol. Cell
11: 1739-1751
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lee, S., Carlson, T., Christian, N., Lea, K., Kedzie, J., Reilly, J. P., Bonner, J. J.
(2000). The Yeast Heat Shock Transcription Factor Changes Conformation in Response to Superoxide and Temperature. Mol. Biol. Cell
11: 1753-1764
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Carranco, R., Almoguera, C., Jordano, J.
(1999). An Imperfect Heat Shock Element and Different Upstream Sequences Are Required for the Seed-Specific Expression of a Small Heat Shock Protein Gene. Plant Physiol.
121: 723-730
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Liu, X.-D., Morano, K. A., Thiele, D. J.
(1999). The Yeast Hsp110 Family Member, Sse1, Is an Hsp90 Cochaperone. J. Biol. Chem.
274: 26654-26660
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lin, J. T., Lis, J. T.
(1999). Glycogen Synthase Phosphatase Interacts with Heat Shock Factor To Activate CUP1 Gene Transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol.
19: 3237-3245
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shinyashiki, M., Chiang, K. T., Switzer, C. H., Gralla, E. B., Valentine, J. S., Thiele, D. J., Fukuto, J. M.
(2000). The interaction of nitric oxide (NO) with the yeast transcription factor Ace1: A model system for NO-protein thiol interactions with implications to metal metabolism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97: 2491-2496
[Abstract]
[Full Text]