Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Mol Cell Biol, July 1998, p. 4197-4208, Vol. 18, No. 7
Department of Molecular Genetics, The
University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
77030,1 and
Center for Neuronal
Survival, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2B4,
Canada2
Received 5 February 1998/Returned for modification 3 March
1998/Accepted 27 April 1998
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Two Domains Unique to Osteoblast-Specific Transcription Factor
Osf2/Cbfa1 Contribute to Its Transactivation Function and Its
Inability To Heterodimerize with Cbf


SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
SUMMARY
|
|
|---|
Osf2/Cbfa1, hereafter called Osf2, is a member of the Runt-related
family of transcription factors that plays a critical role during
osteoblast differentiation. Like all Runt-related proteins, it contains
a runt domain, which is the DNA-binding domain, and a C-terminal
proline-serine-threonine-rich (PST) domain thought to be the
transcription activation domain. Additionally, Osf2 has two
amino-terminal domains distinct from any other Runt-related protein. To
understand the mechanisms of osteoblast gene regulation by Osf2, we
performed an extensive structure-function analysis. After defining a
short Myc-related nuclear localization signal, a deletion analysis
revealed the existence of three transcription activation domains and
one repression domain. AD1 (for activation domain 1) comprises the
first 19 amino acids of the molecule, which form the first domain
unique to Osf2, AD2 is formed by the glutamine-alanine (QA) domain, the
second domain unique to Osf2, and AD3 is located in the N-terminal half
of the PST domain and also contains sequences unique to Osf2. The
transcription repression domain comprises the C-terminal 154 amino
acids of Osf2. DNA-binding, domain-swapping, and protein interaction
experiments demonstrated that full-length Osf2 does not interact with
Cbf
, a known partner of Runt-related proteins, whereas a deletion
mutant of Osf2 containing only the runt and PST domains does. The QA
domain appears to be responsible for preventing this
heterodimerization. Thus, our results uncover the unique functional
organization of Osf2 by identifying functional domains not shared with
other Runt-related proteins that largely control its transactivation
and heterodimerization abilities.
INTRODUCTION
|
|
|---|
The Runt/Cbfa family of proteins comprises a group of transcription factors that have recently emerged as major regulators of organogenesis in invertebrates and vertebrates. This family includes Runt and Lozenge, two Drosophila proteins (7, 20), and Cbfa1, Cbfa2, and Cbfa3 in mice and humans (3, 5, 33). In addition, Runt homologs have been identified in Caenorhabditis elegans and sea urchins (6, 16). This evolutionary conservation further underscores the biological importance of these proteins. Genetic and biochemical analyses with Drosophila melanogaster, mice, and humans have shown that runt and lozenge in Drosophila and Cbfa2 and Osf2/Cbfa1, hereafter called Osf2, in mice and humans play crucial roles in organogenesis processes such as neurogenesis, eye development, hematopoiesis, and skeletogenesis, respectively (7, 10, 20, 21, 24, 29, 35, 36).
The mechanism by which each of these transcription factors controls
different cell differentiation programs and organogenesis processes
remains largely unknown. All of the Runt-related proteins have a common
128-amino-acid motif called the runt domain, which is their DNA-binding
domain (18, 19, 25). They bind to the consensus site
5'TGT/cGGT3' (28), found in the control regions of numerous
genes involved in various developmental processes. These proteins are
capable of binding to DNA as monomers, but it has been shown that both
Runt and Cbfa2 (formerly known as AML1), can heterodimerize with a
ubiquitously expressed partner protein called Cbf
(13,
34). Cbf
does not directly bind to DNA but increases the
affinity of Runt and Cbfa2 for DNA (4, 13).
Our long-standing interest in understanding the molecular mechanisms controlling osteoblast differentiation led us to the recent characterization of Osf2 as an osteoblast-specific Cbfa protein (10). During embryogenesis, Osf2 transcripts appear initially in cells of the mesenchymal condensations that prefigure the skeleton and are subsequently expressed exclusively in cells of the osteoblastic lineage (10). Inactivation of the Cbfa1 gene in mice demonstrates that Osf2 is an essential factor in osteoblast differentiation (21, 36). Indeed, in its absence, mesenchymal cells are correctly positioned and proliferate but fail to differentiate into osteoblasts, resulting in a total absence of ossification. Moreover, mice heterozygous for Cbfa1 inactivation have a delay in ossification, recapitulating the phenotype of a classical mouse mutant termed cleidocranial dysplasia (ccd) (42, 43). In humans also, there is a skeletal disorder called CCD, and the phenotype of patients is similar to that observed in mouse ccd (17). CCD patients have been shown to have either deletion, insertion, or missense mutations in the CBFA1 gene that abolish binding of Osf2 to DNA (24, 29). Taken together, these results demonstrated that Osf2 is a key regulator of skeletogenesis whose function is nonredundant with the function of other genes and whose level of expression must be kept within tight limits.
In contrast to the wealth of knowledge available for other members of this family, such as runt and Cbfa2, nothing is known about the molecular mechanisms by which Osf2 controls osteoblast gene expression and differentiation. A comparison of Osf2 and the other Runt-related proteins reveals that Osf2 contains three domains that are not present in other Runt-related and Cbfa proteins (Fig. 1). The first is a stretch of 19 amino acid residues at the amino terminus absent from the original cDNA of Cbfa1 (10, 33). The second is a unique glutamine-alanine domain (QA domain) located N terminal to the runt domain. This domain contains 29 glutamine residues in a row followed by a stretch of 18 alanine residues. Mutational analysis in CCD patients suggests that the length of the alanine stretch within the QA domain influences the transcriptional activity of the protein, although the phenotype of the patients is different from the classical CCD phenotype (29). Finally, there is a stretch of 27 amino acids in the proline-serine-threonine-rich (PST) domain that has no homology with sequences present in the PST domains of other Runt-related proteins. These findings suggest that these unique structural domains may contribute to the osteoblast-specific functions of Osf2.
|
To understand the mechanisms by which Osf2 controls osteoblast differentiation, we embarked on a search for domains responsible for nuclear localization and transcriptional functions, as well as for domains involved in regulating heterodimerization. Our analysis shows that Osf2 has a unique functional organization among Runt-related proteins. Indeed, the first 19 amino acids and the QA domain largely control the transactivation function, and the QA domain additionally prevents heterodimerization of Osf2. This finding might now be used to decipher the mechanisms by which Osf2 controls osteoblast differentiation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|
|---|
Plasmids.
The Osf2 cDNA cloned in pBluescript KS(
) and
pCMV5 (10) was used for generating deletion constructs in
the pCMV5 expression vector. Osf2 lacking the 9-amino-acid nuclear
localization signal (NLS) sequence (Osf2
NLS) was generated by a
two-step PCR strategy (2) using the oligonucleotides
5'GGACGGTCCCCGGGAAGACTCTAAACCTAGTTTG3' (NLS-F) and
5'AGGTTTAGAGTCTTCCCGGGGACCGTCCACTG3' (NLS-R).
Osf2
1-108 was generated by inserting a 1,275-bp NcoI
fragment of the Osf2 coding sequence in pCMV5, with the ATG codon
within the NcoI site serving as a translational initiator.
1-38 was generated by inserting an 1,856-bp PstI fragment
in PstI-digested pCMV5, with the ATG codon immediately
downstream of the PstI site intended to serve as a
translational initiator.
1-19 was generated by PCR amplification of
the 5' region of the Osf2 coding sequence with the primers 5'TCAATCGATGACTATGGATCCGAGCACCAGC3' (DEL5'F) and
5'CGGGGACCGTCCACTG3' (R3); the PCR product was digested with
BstEII, and the resulting 5'-end/BstEII fragment
was ligated to
1-38, which was digested with MluI (end
filled) and BstEII. The ATG codon (underlined) in the DEL5'F
primer served as the initiator of translation. The QA domain was
deleted (
49-96) by removing the FspI-NotI and
NotI-NotI fragments from pCMV5-Osf2 followed by
end filling and religation, and
82-96 was generated by removing the
NotI fragment from pCMV5-Osf2 followed by religation. A
PCR-amplified molecule that has the Osf2 coding sequence with a 24-bp
internal deletion (caused by an error during amplification by
Taq polymerase) was cloned in pCMV5 to get
89-96.
Osf2Ala27 was generated by replacing the NotI fragment from
the Osf2 coding region with a synthetic double-stranded oligonucleotide
that would code for 27 alanine residues.
(1-38, 82-96) was made by
removing the NotI fragment from
1-38 followed by
religation.
258-528 was made by removal of the
BsmI-BsmI and BsmI-XbaI
fragments from pCMV5-Osf2 followed by religation.
GASEL was generated by the two-step PCR strategy (2) using the
oligonucleotides 5'AAGAAGAGCCAGGCAGGCCCTTTTTCAGACCCCAG3'
(
GASEL-1) and 5'CTGAAAAAGGGCCTGCCTGGCTCTTCTTACTGAG3' (
GASEL-2).
The constructs GAL4-6× VWRPY-VP16 and GAL4-6× GASEL-VP16 were made by
inserting synthetic double-stranded oligonucleotides (that would code
for six copies of either the VWRPY or the GASEL sequence) at the
Asp718 site, between sequences coding for GAL4DBD and the
VP16 activation domain. The TLE2 expression construct was obtained by
digesting a TLE2 cDNA with EcoRV and
XbaI followed by ligation to pcDNA3 cut with the same
enzymes. Osf2
C12 was generated by inserting an EcoRI
fragment (obtained from pCMV5-Osf2) into pCMV5 cut with the same
enzyme. The reporter plasmid p6OSE2luc has been previously described
(9), and the pGAL4SVluc reporter plasmid (which has a
luciferase reporter gene driven by five copies of the GAL4 upstream
activation sequence [UASG] and the simian virus 40 minimal promoter) was obtained from Jennifer Philhower, Science Park
Research Division, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Smithville, Tex.
For bacterial expression of recombinant proteins, the coding sequences
for Cbfa2 and Cbf
(amino acids 7 to 182) were cloned downstream and
in frame with a sequence coding for six histidine residues in pTrcHis
vectors (Invitrogen). The His-Osf2 expression construct has been
previously described (10). The GST-Osf2 expression construct
was generated by inserting the Osf2 coding sequence downstream of the
glutathione S-transferase (GST) coding sequence in the
expression vector pGEX-2T. For the domain-swapping experiment, the
chimeric construct 1.2.2 was generated by PCR-amplifying fragments of
Osf2 and Cbfa2 coding sequences and ligating them in frame to a
sequence coding for six histidine residues in the vector pV2a
(46).
N19.1.1 was made by removing a BamHI
fragment at the 5' end of the Osf2 coding sequence followed by
religation of the His-Osf2 expression construct.
.runt.PST was made
by inserting a 1,275-bp NcoI fragment in the pTrcHis vector.
For in vitro binding assays, the Cbf
coding sequence (amino acids 7 to 182) was cloned in frame with the GST coding sequence in pGEX-2T.
The integrity of all constructs was verified by DNA sequencing.
For in vitro transcription and translation, Osf2Met69 was
generated by deletion of the 189-bp 5'-end/DraI fragment of
the original Osf2 cDNA. The Osf2Met1 [the original Osf2
cDNA cloned in pBluescript II KS(
)] and Osf2Met69
constructs were transcribed and translated in vitro with the TNT kit (Promega), according to the manufacturer's
instructions, and the labeled proteins were analyzed by sodium dodecyl
sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE).
Cell culture and DNA transfection.
The kidney cell line COS7
was grown in Dulbecco modified Eagle medium (DMEM)-10% fetal bovine
serum, and NIH 3T3 cells were grown in DMEM-10% calf serum (Gibco
BRL). Cells (3 × 105/dish) were transfected by the
calcium phosphate coprecipitation method (2) with 5 µg of
reporter plasmid (p6OSE2luc or pGAL4SVluc), 5 µg of expression
construct, and 2 µg of pRSV
gal. Following transfection, the cells
were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and incubated
with the appropriate medium for 24 h. Cells were harvested in 0.3 ml of 0.25 M Tris-HCl, lysed by three cycles of freezing and thawing,
and subjected to a colorimetric
-galactosidase activity assay, with
resorufin-
-D-galactopyranoside (Sigma) as the substrate.
Twenty microliters of cell extract was used for measuring luciferase
activity with a Monolight 2010 luminometer (Analytical Luminescence
Laboratory) using D-luciferin substrate in luciferase
reaction buffer (100 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.8], 5 mM ATP, 15 mM
MgSO4, 1 mM dithiothreitol [DTT]). Luciferase activity values were adjusted to
-galactosidase values to normalize for transfection efficiency.
Generation of recombinant fusion proteins, nuclear extract
preparation, DNA-binding assays, and in vitro binding assays.
For
protein production, bacterial cells were induced with 2 mM IPTG
(isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside), and the
oligohistidine fusion proteins were enriched with Ni-nitrilotriacetic
acid agarose resin (Qiagen) per the manufacturer's guidelines. Nuclear
extracts were prepared from COS7 cells according to the method of
Schreiber et al. (41). DNA-binding assays were performed
with 5 fmol of 32P-labeled double-stranded OSE2
oligonucleotides (9) in a buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM EGTA, 0.05% Nonidet P-40 (NP-40), 5 mM DTT, and 2 µg
of poly(dI-dC) · poly(dI-dC), with equivalent amounts of
wild-type or mutant proteins. DNA-binding reactions with nuclear
extracts were performed in a buffer containing 5% glycerol, 100 mM
NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 0.1% NP-40, 2 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 2.5 µg of Leupeptin per ml, and 2.5 µg of Pepstatin per ml. The
reaction mixtures were incubated for 10 min at room temperature and
then electrophoresed on a 5% polyacrylamide gel (10). For
in vitro binding assays, the GST and GST-Cbf
proteins were eluted
from glutathione-Sepharose beads with reduced glutathione or used as
such bound to the beads. The proteins were checked for purity and
quantified before use. 35S-labeled Osf2 and Cbfa2 were
synthesized in rabbit reticulocyte lysate by coupled in vitro
transcription and translation (TNT kit; Promega).
Typically, 100 ng of GST or GST-Cbf
protein bound to
glutathione-agarose beads was used for each assay, while the amount of
labeled protein in the assay was determined by fluorography. The in
vitro binding assay was carried out as described previously (2).
Cellular fractionation, immunoblot, and immunofluorescence
analyses.
COS7 cells (106) were transfected with
either wild-type Osf2 or Osf2
NLS by the calcium phosphate
coprecipitation method (2). Cytoplasmic and nuclear
fractions were prepared from transfected cells, separated by SDS-PAGE,
and subjected to immunoblot analysis with rabbit polyclonal anti-Osf2
antibody (generated against the peptide sequence SFFWDPSTSRRFSPPS,
present at the N terminus of Osf2) and horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) followed by
ECL detection (Amersham). For immunofluorescence, 2 days after
transfection the cells were plated on slides, washed with PBS buffer,
and fixed in 3.7% formaldehyde at room temperature for 10 min followed
by permeabilization with 0.1% Triton X-100. Blocking was done for 30 min in 5% goat serum-3% bovine serum albumin. The cells were
incubated with anti-Osf2 antibody at a dilution of 1:150 in blocking
buffer for 1 h at room temperature, followed by a wash with
blocking buffer and then with PBS. Rhodamine-conjugated goat
anti-rabbit IgG was then used at a dilution of 1:10,000. Slides were
mounted with 50% glycerol, and the staining pattern of Osf2 was
visualized by confocal microscopy.
RESULTS
|
|
|---|
Identification of a Myc-related NLS in Osf2. To identify a transcription activation domain(s) in Osf2 through a deletion mutagenesis approach, we first delineated the shortest possible NLS in Osf2. The NLS was originally assigned to a broad region of the protein containing the runt domain and the entire PST domain of Cbfa1 (26). To define a shorter NLS, we compared the sequence of Osf2 to known NLS sequences. Stretches of basic amino acid residues have been shown to be responsible for targeting proteins to the nucleus (8, 32). We found, overlapping the runt and PST domains of Osf2, a stretch of 9 amino acids (PRRHRQKLD), including five basic residues (in boldface type), that is highly homologous to the known NLS of c-Myc (Fig. 2A). This sequence contains a short motif, RRHR, that has been shown to be responsible for nuclear localization of various proteins (32). Moreover, this 9-amino-acid sequence is present at the same location in several other Runt-related proteins (CBFA2, Cbfa2, CBFA3, and SpRunt-1) (Fig. 2A), suggesting that this stretch of amino acids may act as a common NLS in these proteins.
|
NLS) was cloned in the pCMV5
expression vector (Fig. 2B) and checked for its ability to
activate transcription from p6OSE2luc, a construct containing six
copies of a canonical Osf2 binding site (OSE2) (9) in COS7 cells that do not express the Cbfa genes (23). Osf2
NLS
failed to drive expression of the luc reporter, while
wild-type Osf2 did activate transcription under the same conditions
(Fig. 2C). To determine if this lack of transactivation by Osf2
NLS
was due to the inability of the mutant protein to be translocated to
the nucleus, we performed cellular fractionation and immunolocalization analyses. Extracts from transfected cells were separated into nuclear
and cytosolic fractions and subjected to immunoblot analysis with a
polyclonal antibody directed against Osf2. The wild-type protein was
found predominantly in the nuclear fraction, whereas Osf2
NLS was
found only in the cytosolic fraction (Fig. 2D). Lastly, indirect
immunofluorescence analysis of transfected cells revealed the presence
of the wild-type protein in the nucleus, while Osf2
NLS was localized
in the cytosol (Fig. 2E). Thus, these experiments identify the
9-amino-acid stretch (PRRHRQKLD) as a sequence
necessary for nuclear localization of Osf2.
The first 19 amino acids comprise one activation domain. Osf2 has a longer 5' end than the originally described Cbfa1 (10, 33). Analysis of the genomic structure of the gene has shown that the 5' end of Osf2 is located in an additional exon, whereas the originally proposed 5' end of Cbfa1 is located at the 3' end of a large intron that contains a cryptic splice acceptor site (11).
The 5' end of Osf2 has two ATG codons in frame with the predicted coding sequence. The one at position 1 (Met1) is in a poor context for translational initiation, whereas the one at position 69 (Met69) is in an appropriate context for translational initiation (22). To test the respective efficiencies of these two potential translational initiators, we generated two constructs, one containing both ATG codons (Osf2Met1) and the other containing only the second ATG codon (Osf2Met69), and tested them in an in vitro transcription-translation assay. As shown in Fig. 3A, Met69 is by far the best translational initiator.
|
1-108) resulted in a fivefold
decrease in the transactivation ability of the protein in both cell
lines (Fig. 3B). Given the fact that haploinsufficiency of
Cbfa1 causes ccd in mice and humans, this
decrease in the transactivation function of Osf2 is biologically significant. This result suggested that, unlike what has been proposed
for Cbfa2 (4), the transactivation function of Osf2 is
located not only in the PST domain but also in the N-terminal part of
the molecule, prompting us to generate additional deletion mutants of
this region of Osf2.
A deletion of the first 38 amino acid residues (
1-38), which left
only the QA, runt, and PST domains intact, led to a 3.4-fold decrease
in transactivation. This region is made up of two parts: the first 19 amino acids, which are unique to Osf2 and are not present in the
partial Cbfa1 cDNA initially identified (33), and
the next 21 amino acids, which show a high degree of similarity (85%)
with the corresponding amino acids of Cbfa2 (Fig. 1). Interestingly, deletion of the first 19 amino acids (
1-19) resulted in a fourfold decrease in the transactivation ability of Osf2 in both cell lines, indicating that they constitute a transactivation domain unique to
Osf2, called AD1 (for activation domain 1). Electrophoretic mobility
shift assays (EMSA) performed with equal amounts of nuclear extracts
from COS7 cells transfected with the various deletion constructs showed
that all of the mutant proteins were expressed to comparable levels and
were capable of binding to the DNA (Fig. 3C).
The QA domain is a second activation domain.
Next, we analyzed
the transactivation function of another domain unique to Osf2, the QA
domain. Deletion of the QA domain alone (
49-96) resulted in a
fourfold decrease in the transactivation ability of the protein,
indicating that the QA domain has a transactivation function. For that
reason, we called this region AD2. To assess the relative importance of
the glutamine and alanine residues in the QA domain, we generated
additional mutants of Osf2 (Fig. 3B). A deletion of 8 of the 18 alanines (
89-96) did not affect the transactivation function of
Osf2. This is in agreement with genetic analysis demonstrating that a
similar polymorphism does not cause phenotypic abnormalities in humans
(29). A deletion of 15 of the 18 alanine residues (
82-96)
also had no effect on the transactivation function of Osf2. In
contrast, an expansion of the alanine stretch (27 alanine residues),
identical to that observed in a CCD patient (29), led to a
complete abrogation of Osf2 transactivation function in both cell
lines, indicating that the mechanism by which this mutation causes a
CCD phenotype is an alteration of the transactivation function of Osf2.
(1-38, 82-96)]. This deletion mutant had the same weak transactivation ability as
1-38, which contains the QA, runt, and
PST domains, demonstrating that within the wild-type QA domain it is
the glutamine stretch that bears most, if not all, of the transactivation function. Again, all of the mutant proteins tested above were found to be expressed in similar amounts and were capable of
binding to the OSE2 element (Fig. 3C).
To determine whether AD1 and AD2 could act as autonomous activation
domains, we fused these two domains separately or together to the
heterologous DNA-binding domain of the yeast transcription factor GAL4
(GAL4DBD [amino acids 1 to 147]) (Fig.
4A) and tested the ability of the
constructs to transactivate a luciferase reporter gene driven by five
copies of the GAL4 upstream activation sequence (UASG) and
the simian virus 40 minimal promoter in pGAL4SVluc. In this assay, AD1
and AD2 alone or together had no transcriptional activity (Fig. 4A),
indicating that they need other domains of Osf2 to transactivate.
Activation domains that are functional only in the context of the
native protein are known to be present in other transcription factors,
such as USF2 (27).
|
Identification of activation and repression domains in the PST
region of Osf2.
Deletion of the entire PST domain of Osf2
(
258-528) also resulted in a four- to fivefold decrease in the
transactivation ability of the protein (Fig. 3B), indicating the
presence of an additional transactivation domain(s) within the PST
region. This is in agreement with the genetic analysis performed in
humans (29). To localize this third activation domain more
precisely and to determine if it could act independently of AD1 and
AD2, we fused the Osf2 PST domain to GAL4DBD (Fig. 4B) and tested the ability of this construct to transactivate pGAL4SVluc. These
experiments were performed in two different cell lines, COS7 and NIH
3T3. In this assay, the PST domain (C241-528) had no transcriptional activity. This was also the case for the GAL4 full-length Osf2 fusion
protein. Since the PST domain is important for the function of the
native protein in vivo (29) and in transient transfection assays (Fig. 3B [
258-528]), we hypothesized that the absence of
transactivation by the PST domain in this assay might reflect the
existence of multiple activation and repression subdomains and
generated more deletion mutants.
The VWRPY motif can act as a transcriptional repression domain. The analysis presented above suggested that the last 5 amino acids of Osf2 (VWRPY) might repress transcription (Fig. 4B). This motif is conserved in all known Runt-related proteins (16). To demonstrate the repression function of these 5 amino acids, we cloned in frame, between GAL4DBD and the VP16 activation domain, six copies of the VWRPY coding sequence (Fig. 5A) and tested their functions in a DNA cotransfection assay, also performed with the same two cell lines. This multimer of VWRPY led to a 280-fold decrease in the transactivation ability of VP16 in COS7 cells (Fig. 5B) and a 10-fold decrease in NIH 3T3 cells (Fig. 5C). In a control experiment, we cloned, at the same location, an oligonucleotide that would code for six copies of the 5-amino-acid motif (GASEL) located at the C-terminal end of AD3 (Fig. 5A). This construct resulted in a nearly twofold increase in the transactivation ability of VP16 in COS7 cells (Fig. 5B). This is consistent with the effect of the internal deletion of the GASEL motif presented in Fig. 3B. These results demonstrate that the VWRPY motif can act as a repressor of transcription. EMSA was performed with equal amounts of nuclear extracts from transfected COS7 cells to show that the fusion proteins were being produced (Fig. 5D).
|
C12 (which lacks the last 12 amino acids, including VWRPY) resulted in a weak but reproducible
decrease in the transactivation function of this Osf2 deletion mutant
(Fig. 6B). This observation supports the hypothesis that one mechanism
by which TLE2 may inhibit the transactivation function of Osf2 is
through an interaction with the VWRPY motif.
|
The QA domain prevents heterodimerization of full-length Osf2 with
Cbf
.
Cbfa2 and the Drosophila Runt protein can
heterodimerize with the widely expressed Cbf
protein in vertebrates
(44) and two homologs of Cbf
, Brother and Big Brother, in
Drosophila (13). Moreover, deletion of
Cbf
or Cbfa2 in mice results in an identical phenotype, underscoring the importance of the Cbfa2-Cbf
interaction in vivo (35, 39, 47, 48). Since Cbf
is also expressed in
osteoblasts, we tested whether Cbf
is also a partner for Osf2 by
using in vitro protein association assays with a purified recombinant GST-Cbf
fusion protein. 35S-labeled Cbfa2 was bound by
immobilized GST-Cbf
but not by GST alone (Fig.
7A, lanes 4 to 6). In contrast,
35S-labeled Osf2 was not bound by immobilized GST-Cbf
(Fig. 7A, lanes 1 to 3). To further establish that full-length Osf2
could not interact directly with Cbf
, we performed EMSA. His-Osf2
alone formed a specific doublet with OSE2, and the addition of Cbf
resulted in intensification of the Osf2-DNA complex but not in the
appearance of a slower-migrating protein-DNA complex (Fig. 7B [compare
lanes 1 and 2]). In contrast, when using His-Cbfa2 as a positive
control, we always detected heterodimerization with Cbf
, resulting
in a protein-DNA complex of lower mobility (Fig. 7B [compare lanes 3 and 4]). These two results strongly suggest that under the conditions
of this assay, Osf2 and Cbf
are not able to heterodimerize whereas
Cbf
heterodimerizes with the positive control, Cbfa2.
|
(Fig. 7B [compare lanes 5 and 6]).
N19.1.1, another
deletion mutant of Osf2 that lacks AD1 (the first 19 amino acids)
alone, also could not heterodimerize with Cbf
(Fig. 7B, lane 8),
while a deletion mutant containing only the runt and PST domains of
Osf2 (
.runt.PST) could heterodimerize with Cbf
(Fig. 7B, lane
10). This indicated that it is the QA domain (AD2) that prevents
heterodimerization of the native protein with Cbf
.
The absence of heterodimerization of Osf2 with Cbf
prompted us to
analyze whether Osf2 could homodimerize. We first used His-tagged Osf2
and performed EMSA. The protein-DNA complex migrated as a doublet. This
doublet was observed whether we used low or high concentrations of
Osf2, but no additional complexes suggestive of homodimer formation
were observed with high concentrations of Osf2 (Fig. 7D, lanes 1 to 3).
Secondly, we did an EMSA with His-Osf2 and GST-Osf2, which forms a
lower-mobility complex than His-Osf2. Coincubation of these two
proteins with the probe did not generate a third complex of lower
mobility (not detectable even when we used more GST-Osf2 protein),
suggesting that under the conditions of this assay, Osf2 is unable to
homodimerize (Fig. 7C, lanes 4 and 5).
DISCUSSION
|
|
|---|
Osf2 is one mammalian member of the Runt-related family of transcription factors. Its critical function during skeletogenesis (10, 21, 24, 29, 36) and the presence of stretches of amino acids in this molecule that are distinct from those in most other Runt-related proteins (Fig. 1) suggest that it has functional domains which might specify its unique role in osteoblast differentiation. An extensive structure-function analysis of Osf2 revealed a novel functional organization for this family of proteins, demonstrating that the N-terminal end and the QA domain control to a large extent its transactivation and dimerization abilities. These findings are summarized in Fig. 8.
|
Definition of a short NLS in Osf2. Previous analyses of Cbfa1 had indicated that the NLS spans a broad region covering the runt and PST domains. This was based on a study of the subcellular localization of a series of deletion mutants of Cbfa1 (26). Here, we show that in the context of the wild-type protein, the NLS of Osf2 is much shorter. A 9-amino-acid sequence located at the junction of the runt and PST domains is necessary for nuclear localization of the protein. This sequence is rich in basic residues known to be important for nuclear localization of some proteins (32) and is present in other Runt-related proteins as well, implying that it might perform the same function in these proteins. Recently a short NLS, present at the same location as in Osf2, was identified in Cbfa2 (21a). More generally, it is conceivable that in other Runt-related proteins, this region, rather than the entire PST domain, may act as a sequence necessary for nuclear localization.
Existence of an efficient transactivation domain in the N-terminal end of Osf2. We generated N-terminal deletion mutants of Osf2, and, to our surprise, a deletion that left the runt and PST domains intact gave a very low level of activation in our transactivation assay. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of a transactivation function in the N-terminal end of any Runt-related protein. The sequence of the N-terminal end of Osf2 is substantially different from that of the homologous regions in Cbfa2 and Runt. It contains two subdomains that are unique to Osf2. One includes the first 19 amino acid residues, and the other comprises the QA domain; both of these domains have a transactivation function. The fact that AD1 and AD2 alone or together could not activate transcription in a GAL4 based assay suggests the existence of a critical interaction of these two domains with other regions of Osf2. Dependence of transactivation on the context of the native protein has also been shown for one activation domain in USF2 (27).
What are the implications of these findings for the functional organization of other Runt-related proteins? The functional organizations of the N-terminal ends of other Runt-related proteins have not been fully analyzed. However, AD1 and AD2 sequences are unique to Osf2, suggesting that the presence of transactivation domains at the N-terminal end may be specific to Osf2.Analysis of the transactivation ability of the QA domain. Osf2 is the only Runt-related protein to have consecutive glutamine and alanine stretches. Our analyses show that the QA domain has an important transactivation function and that within the QA domain the stretch of 29 glutamine residues is responsible for most, if not all, of the transactivation function. This is in agreement with studies showing that glutamine stretches have a transactivation function in several other transcription factors (12). Our studies also indicate that although the alanine stretch has no detectable transactivation function per se (since it can be removed without affecting the transactivation ability of the protein), an expansion to 27 alanines results in a loss of function of Osf2. This study provides a molecular explanation for the phenotype of one CCD patient (29). In the case of another transcription factor, HOXD13, it has also been postulated that an expansion of the alanine stretch causes a loss of transactivation function resulting in synpolydactyly (30). This is in agreement with studies showing that long alanine-rich regions have a repression function in several transcription factors (14, 15).
To our knowledge there is no other vertebrate transcription factor with such a compact QA domain. In Drosophila, there are several transcription factors that have glutamine- and alanine-rich regions, and they may serve as examples to predict the function of the QA domain in Osf2. Bicoid is a Drosophila factor that has been intensively studied and shown to activate transcription through an interaction between its glutamine-alanine-rich region and TATA box-binding protein-associated factors (TAFs) TAF110 and TAF60 (40). Thus, it is possible that the QA domain of Osf2 may interact with the TAFs and/or other proteins of the general transcription machinery. Alternatively, the QA domain may also interact with cell-specific coactivators.A third activation domain is present in the PST domain. Deletion analysis showed that the PST domain contains a third transactivation domain, which we termed AD3. This is in agreement with what is already known of other Runt-related proteins, such as Cbfa2 (4). Our results identifying AD3 within the PST domain provide a molecular explanation for another CCD mutation, as a nonsense mutation in the PST domain that causes CCD in humans is located in AD3 (29). AD3 is highly homologous to the corresponding region of Cbfa2 (3) except for its C-terminal 27 amino acids (amino acids 348 to 374). Experiments conducted with human OSF2 have shown that this small region of the PST domain is also required for optimum transactivation (11). It will be important to determine in vivo the role of this small region in controlling osteoblast gene expression. The fact that deletion of each of the activation domains in Osf2 results in a similar decrease in the transactivation function of the protein indicates that these domains are functionally dependent on each other and that they may interact together with common coactivators.
Existence of a large repression subdomain in the PST domain. Another surprising result of this analysis of the Osf2 protein is that the PST domain as a whole had no transactivation function in a GAL4-based cotransfection assay. This is due, at least in part, to the presence of a relatively large repression domain (RD) that comprises the last 154 amino acids. Further studies will be required to understand the importance of the repression domain in Osf2. Given the sequence homology between Osf2 and Cbfa2 in this repression domain, it would be important to determine if the corresponding region in Cbfa2 also has a repression function. This repression domain includes the VWRPY motif, the last 5 amino acids of the molecule.
We have shown that six copies of the VWRPY motif were able to inhibit the transactivation function of VP16. In Drosophila, this motif of Runt interacts with Groucho and leads to transcriptional repression (1). TLE2, a mammalian homolog of Groucho (45), also inhibits transactivation by Osf2, and this inhibition requires the last 5 amino acids. Interestingly, TLE2 is expressed in osteoblasts and therefore may have the same function in vivo. TLE2 could cause a slight inhibition of transcription even in the absence of the VWRPY motif. This is consistent with the fact that the repression domain extends further towards the amino terminus of the PST domain and suggests that once recruited by Osf2, TLE2 might also modify chromatin structure and thereby modulate Osf2 function (37).Lack of heterodimerization of full-length Osf2 with Cbf
.
Cbfa2 heterodimerizes with Cbf
(4), and the
Drosophila Runt protein interacts with Cbf
homologs
called Brother and Big Brother (13). Moreover, deletion of
the Cbf
gene in mice leads to a phenotype identical to that caused
by inactivation of Cbfa2 (35, 39, 47, 48),
indicating that the interaction between Cbf
and Cbfa2 is
functionally important in vivo. Therefore, we were surprised when we
failed to detect any interaction between Osf2 and Cbf
in DNA-binding
assays, while in a control experiment Cbf
heterodimerized with
Cbfa2.
.
Second, Cbf
colocalizes to the nucleus only with a deletion mutant
of the Cbfa1 protein lacking its N-terminal end (26). This
finding is in agreement with the absence of skeletal abnormalities in
mice heterozygous for the Cbf
deletion (39, 48) and with
the observation that the N-terminal part of Cbfa1 prevents its
heterodimerization with Cbf
(26). Lastly, deletion and
domain-swapping experiments strongly suggest that the QA domain is
responsible for preventing heterodimerization with Cbf
. Our deletion
removed AD1 (
N19.1.1), leaving in place the amino-terminal part of
Osf2, which is highly homologous to the corresponding region of Cbfa2,
and the QA domain (AD2). Full-length Cbfa2 heterodimerizes readily with
Cbf
; therefore, it is likely that it is the QA domain that prevents
heterodimerization of Osf2 with Cbf
. This is possibly due to
conformational changes imposed on the molecule by the QA domain.
Alternatively, Osf2 might heterodimerize with as yet unknown and
possibly cell-specific proteins.
In summary, the results of our structure-function analysis of Osf2
reveal the existence of domains and functions that are unique to this
Runt-related protein. Indeed, they indicate that the first 19 amino
acids (AD1) and the QA domain (AD2) have critical functions as
activators of transcription and that the QA domain functions
additionally as an inhibitor of heterodimerization. The latter function
may be best understood when the three-dimensional structure of the
protein becomes available. This unique functional organization among
Runt-related proteins might reflect the particular function of Osf2
during skeletogenesis.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|
|---|
K.T. thanks Patricia Ducy for pointing out the NLS, for providing
various reagents, and for suggestions throughout the course of the
study. We thank Yoshiaki Ito (Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan) for
providing the Cbf
cDNA clone, Marilyn Szentirmay for the pSG424 and
GAL4VP16 expression vectors, and Jennifer Philhower for the pGAL4SVluc
reporter construct. Thanks are due to Brendan Lee and Thorsten Schinke
for critical reading of the manuscript and to members of the Karsenty
lab for helpful suggestions.
S.S. is a scholar of the Fonds de la Recherche en Sante du Quebec and a Killam Scholar of the Montreal Neurological Institute. This work was supported by a grant from the Medical Research Council of Canada, PG11473, to S.S. and by grants from the National Institutes of Health, DE11290 and HD97006, and a Basic Science Award of the March of Dimes Foundation to G.K.
FOOTNOTES
* Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Human and Molecular Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030. Phone: (713) 798-5489. Fax: (713) 798-1465. E-mail: karsenty{at}bcm.tmc.edu.
Present address: Department of Human and Molecular Genetics, Baylor
College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030.
Present address: Department of Medicine, New York University
Medical Center, New York, NY 10016.
REFERENCES
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Aronson, B. D., A. L. Fisher, K. Blechman, M. Caudy, and J. P. Gergen. 1997. Groucho-dependent and -independent repression activities of Runt domain proteins. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:5581-5587[Abstract]. |
| 2. | Ausubel, F. M., R. Brent, R. E. Kingston, D. D. Moore, J. G. Seidman, J. A. Smith, and K. Struhl (ed.). 1994. In Current protocols in molecular biology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y. |
| 3. |
Bae, S. C.,
Y. Yamaguchi-Iwai,
E. Ogawa,
M. Maruyama,
M. Inuzuka,
H. Kagoshima,
K. Shigesada,
M. Satake, and Y. Ito.
1993.
Isolation of PEBP2 B cDNA representing the mouse homolog of human acute myeloid leukemia gene, AML1.
Oncogene
8:809-814[Medline].
|
| 4. |
Bae, S.-C.,
E. Ogawa,
M. Maruyama,
H. Oka,
M. Satake,
K. Shigesada,
N. A. Jenkins,
D. J. Gilbert,
N. G. Copeland, and Y. Ito.
1994.
PEBP2 B/Mouse AML1 consists of multiple isoforms that possess differential transactivation potentials.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:3242-3252 |
| 5. |
Bae, S. C.,
E. Takahasi,
Y. W. Zhang,
E. Ogawa,
K. Shigesada,
Y. Namba,
M. Satake, and Y. Ito.
1995.
Cloning, mapping and expression of PEBP2 C, a third gene encoding the mammalian Runt domain.
Gene
159:245-248[Medline].
|
| 6. | Coffman, J. A., C. V. Kirchhamer, M. G. Harrington, and E. H. Davidson. 1996. SpRunt-1, a new member of the runt domain family of transcription factors, is a positive regulator of the aboral ectoderm-specific CyIIIA gene in sea urchin embryos. Dev. Biol. 174:43-54[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Daga, A.,
C. A. Karlovich,
K. Dumstrei, and U. Banerjee.
1996.
Patterning of cells in the Drosophila eye by Lozenge, which shares homologous domains with AML1.
Genes Dev.
10:1194-1205 |
| 8. |
Dingwall, C., and R. A. Laskey.
1991.
Nuclear targeting sequences a consensus.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
16:478-481[Medline].
|
| 9. | Ducy, P., and G. Karsenty. 1995. Two distinct osteoblast-specific cis-acting elements control expression of the mouse osteocalcin gene. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:1858-1869[Abstract]. |
| 10. | Ducy, P., R. Zhang, V. Geoffroy, A. L. Ridall, and G. Karsenty. 1997. Osf2/Cbfa1: a transcriptional activator of osteoblast differentiation. Cell 89:747-754[Medline]. |
| 11. | Geoffroy, V., D. A. Corral, L. Zhou, B. Lee, and G. Karsenty. 1998. Genomic organization, expression of the human CBFA1 gene, and evidence for an alternative splicing event affecting protein function. Mamm. Genome 9:54-57[Medline]. |
| 12. |
Gerber, H.-P.,
K. Seipel,
O. Georgiev,
M. Hofferer,
M. Hug,
S. Rusconi, and W. Schaffner.
1994.
Transcriptional activation modulated by homopolymeric glutamine and proline stretches.
Science
263:808-811 |
| 13. |
Golling, G.,
L.-H. Li,
M. Pepling,
M. Stebbins, and J. P. Gergen.
1996.
Drosophila homologs of the proto-oncogene product PEBP2/CBF regulate the DNA-binding properties of Runt.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:932-942[Abstract].
|
| 14. |
Han, K., and J. L. Manley.
1993.
Transcriptional repression by the Drosophila even-skipped protein: definition of a minimal repression domain.
Genes Dev.
7:491-503 |
| 15. | Han, K., and J. L. Manley. 1993. Functional domains of the Drosophila Engrailed protein. EMBO J. 12:2723-2733[Medline]. |
| 16. | Ito, Y., and S. C. Bae. 1997. The runt domain transcription factor, PEBP2/CBF, and its involvement in human leukemia, p. 108-132. In M. Yaniv, and J. Ghysdael (ed.), Cell cycle regulators and chromosomal translocation. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland. |
| 17. | Jones, K. L. 1997. In Smith's recognizable patterns of human malformation. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, Pa. |
| 18. | Kagoshima, H., M. Satake, H. Miyoshi, M. Ohki, M. Pepling, J. P. Gergen, K. Shigesada, and Y. Ito. 1993. The runt domain identifies a new family of heteromeric transcriptional regulators. Trends Genet. 9:338-341[Medline]. |
| 19. |
Kagoshima, H.,
Y. Akamatsu,
Y. Ito, and K. Shigesada.
1996.
Functional dissection of the and subunits of transcription factor PEBP2 and the redox susceptibility of its DNA-binding activity.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:33074-33082 |
| 20. |
Kania, M. A.,
A. S. Bonner,
J. B. Duffy, and J. P. Gergen.
1990.
The Drosophila segmentation gene runt encodes a novel regulatory protein that is also expressed in the developing nervous system.
Genes Dev.
4:1701-1713 |
| 21. | Komori, T., H. Yagi, S. Nomura, A. Yamaguchi, K. Sasaki, K. Deguchi, Y. Shimizu, R. T. Bronson, Y.-H. Gao, M. Inada, M. Sato, R. Okamoto, Y. Kitamura, S. Yoshiki, and T. Kishimoto. 1997. Targeted disruption of Cbfa1 results in a complete lack of bone formation owing to maturational arrest of osteoblasts. Cell 89:755-764[Medline]. |
| 21a. |
Kanno, T.,
Y. Kanno,
L.-F. Chen,
E. Ogawa,
W.-Y. Kim, and Y. Ito.
1998.
Intrinsic transcriptional activation-inhibition domains of the polymavirus enhancer binding protein 2/core binding factor subunit revealed in the presence of the subunit.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:2444-2454 |
| 22. |
Kozak, M.
1987.
An analysis of 5'-noncoding sequences of 699 vertebrate messenger RNAs.
Nucleic Acids Res.
15:8125-8148 |
| 23. |
Kurokawa, M.,
T. Tanaka,
K. Tanaka,
N. Hirano,
S. Ogawa,
K. Mitani,
Y. Yazaki, and H. Hirai.
1996.
A conserved cysteine residue in the runt homology domain of AML1 is required for the DNA-binding ability and the transforming activity on fibroblasts.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:16870-16876 |
| 24. | Lee, B., K. Thirunavukkarasu, L. Zhou, L. Pastore, A. Baldini, J. Hecht, V. Geoffroy, P. Ducy, and G. Karsenty. 1997. Missense mutations abolishing DNA-binding of the osteoblast-specific transcription factor OSF2/CBFA1 in cleidocranial dysplasia. Nat. Genet. 16:307-310[Medline]. |
| 25. | Lenny, N., S. Meyers, and S. W. Hiebert. 1995. Functional domains of the t(8;21) fusion protein, AML-1/ETO. Oncogene 11:1761-1769[Medline]. |
| 26. |
Lu, J.,
M. Maruyama,
M. Satake,
S.-C. Bae,
E. Ogawa,
H. Kagoshima,
K. Shigesada, and Y. Ito.
1995.
Subcellular localization of the and subunits of the acute myeloid leukemia-linked transcription factor PEBP2/CBF.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:1651-1661[Abstract].
|
| 27. | Luo, X., and M. Sawadogo. 1996. Functional domains of the transcription factor USF2: atypical nuclear localization signals and context-dependent transcriptional activation domains. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:1367-1375[Abstract]. |
| 28. |
Meyers, S.,
J. R. Downing, and S. W. Hiebert.
1993.
Identification of AML-1 and the (8;21) translocation protein (AML-1/ETO) as sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins: the runt homology domain is required for DNA binding and protein-protein interactions.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:6336-6345 |
| 29. | Mundlos, S., F. Otto, C. Mundlos, J. B. Mulliken, A. S. Aylsworth, S. Albright, D. Lindhout, W. G. Cole, W. Henn, J. H. M. Knoll, M. J. Owen, R. Mertelsmann, B. U. Zabel, and B. R. Olsen. 1997. Mutations involving the transcription factor CBFA1 cause cleidocranial dysplasia. Cell 89:773-779[Medline]. |
| 30. | Muragaki, Y., S. Mundlos, J. Upton, and B. R. Olsen. 1996. Altered growth and branching patterns in synpolydactyly caused by mutations in HOXD13. Science 272:548-551[Abstract]. |
| 31. | Nakayama, H., Y. Liu, S. Stifani, and J. C. Cross. 1997. Developmental restriction of Mash-2 expression in trophoblasts correlates with potential activation of the Notch-2 pathway. Dev. Genet. 21:21-30[Medline]. |
| 32. | Nigg, E. A. 1997. Nucleocytoplasmic transport: signals, mechanisms and regulation. Nature 386:779-787[Medline]. |
| 33. |
Ogawa, E.,
M. Maruyama,
H. Kagoshima,
M. Inuzuka,
J. Lu,
M. Satake,
K. Shigesada, and Y. Ito.
1993.
PEBP2/PEA2 represents a new family of transcription factors homologous to the products of the Drosophila runt and the human AML1 gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
90:6859-6863 |
| 34. |
Ogawa, E.,
M. Inuzuka,
M. Maruyama,
M. Satake,
M. Naito-Fujimoto,
Y. Ito, and K. Shigesada.
1993.
Molecular cloning and characterization of PEBP2 , the heterodimeric partner of a novel Drosophila Runt-related DNA-binding protein, PEBP2 .
Virology
194:314-331[Medline].
|
| 35. | Okuda, T., J. van Deursen, S. W. Hiebert, G. Grosveld, and J. R. Downing. 1996. AML1, the target of multiple chromosomal translocations in human leukemia, is essential for normal fetal liver hematopoiesis. Cell 84:321-330[Medline]. |
| 36. | Otto, F., A. P. Thornell, T. Crompton, A. Denzel, K. C. Gilmour, I. R. Rosewell, W. H. Stamp, R. S. P. Beddington, S. Mundlos, B. R. Olsen, P. B. Selby, and M. J. Owen. 1997. Cbfa1, a candidate gene for the cleidocranial dysplasia syndrome, is essential for osteoblast differentiation and bone development. Cell 89:773-779. |
| 37. |
Palaparti, A.,
A. Baratz, and S. Stifani.
1997.
The Groucho/transducin-like Enhancer of Split transcriptional repressors interact with the genetically defined amino-terminal silencing domain of histone H3.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:26604-26610 |
| 38. |
Sadowski, I., and M. Ptashne.
1989.
A vector for expressing GAL4 (1-147) fusion in mammalian cells.
Nucleic Acids Res.
17:7539 |
| 39. |
Sasaki, K.,
H. Yagi,
R. T. Bronson,
K. Tominaga,
T. Matsunashi,
K. Deguchi,
Y. Tani,
T. Kishimoto, and T. Komori.
1996.
Absence of fetal liver hematopoiesis in mice deficient in transcriptional coactivator core binding factor .
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:12359-12363 |
| 40. |
Sauer, F.,
S. K. Hansen, and R. Tjian.
1995.
Multiple TAFIIs directing synergistic activation of transcription.
Science
270:1783-1788 |
| 41. |
Schreiber, E.,
P. Matthias,
M. Muller, and W. Schaffner.
1989.
Rapid detection of octamer binding proteins with "mini-extracts" prepared from small number of cells.
Nucleic Acids Res.
17:6419 |
| 42. | Selby, P. B., and P. R. Selby. 1978. Gamma-ray-induced dominant mutations that cause skeletal abnormalities in mice. II. Description of proved mutations. Mutat. Res. 51:199-236[Medline]. |
| 43. | Sillence, D. O., H. E. Ritchie, and P. B. Selby. 1987. Animal model: skeletal anomalies in mice with cleidocranial dysplasia. Am. J. Med. Genet. 27:75-85[Medline]. |
| 44. | Speck, N. A., and T. Stacy. 1995. A new transcription factor family associated with human leukemias. Crit. Rev. Eukaryot. Gene Expr. 5:337-364[Medline]. |
| 45. | Stifani, S., C. M. Blaumueller, N. J. Redhead, R. E. Hill, and S. Artavanis-Tsakonas. 1992. Human homologs of a Drosophila Enhancer of Split gene product define a novel family of nuclear proteins. Nat. Genet. 2:119-126[Medline]. |
| 46. | Van Dyke, M. W., M. Sirito, and M. Sawadogo. 1992. Single-step purification of bacterially expressed polypeptides containing an oligo-histidine domain. Gene 111:99-104[Medline]. |
| 47. |
Wang, Q.,
T. Stacy,
M. Binder,
M. Marin-Padilla,
A. H. Sharpe, and N. A. Speck.
1996.
Disruption of the cbfa2 gene causes necrosis and hemorrhaging in the central nervous system and blocks definitive hematopoiesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:3444-3449 |
| 48. |
Wang, Q.,
T. Stacy,
J. D. Miller,
A. F. Lewis,
T.-L. Gu,
X. Huang,
J. H. Bushweller,
J.-C. Bories,
F. W. Alt,
G. Ryan,
P. P. Liu,
A. Wynshaw-Boris,
M. Binder,
M. Marin-Padilla,
A. H. Sharpe, and N. A. Speck.
1996.
The CBF subunit is essential for CBF 2 (AML1) function in vivo.
Cell
87:697-708[Medline].
|