Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 1999, p. 412-423, Vol. 19, No. 1
0270-7306/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Testing for DNA Tracking by MOT1, a SNF2/SWI2
Protein Family Member
David T.
Auble* and
Susanne M.
Steggerda
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular
Genetics, University of Virginia Health Science Center,
Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
Received 10 July 1998/Returned for modification 27 August
1998/Accepted 13 October 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Proteins in the SNF2/SWI2 family use ATP hydrolysis to catalyze
rearrangements in diverse protein-DNA complexes. How ATP hydrolysis is
coupled to these rearrangements is unknown, however. One attractive model is that these ATPases are ATP-dependent DNA-tracking enzymes. This idea was tested for the SNF2/SWI2 protein family member MOT1. MOT1
is an essential Saccharomyces cerevisiae transcription
factor that uses ATP to dissociate TATA binding protein (TBP) from DNA. By using a series of DNA templates with one or two TATA boxes in
combination with binding sites for heterologous DNA binding "roadblock" proteins, the ability of MOT1 to track along DNA was assayed. The results demonstrate that, following ATP-dependent TBP-DNA
dissociation, MOT1 dissociates rapidly from the DNA by a mechanism that
does not require a DNA end. Template commitment footprinting
experiments support the conclusion that ATP-dependent DNA tracking by
MOT1 does not occur. These results support a model in which MOT1 drives
TBP-DNA dissociation by a mechanism that involves a transient,
ATP-dependent interaction with TBP-DNA which does not involve
ATP-dependent DNA tracking.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The SNF2/SWI2 protein family is a
large group of evolutionarily conserved ATPases with diverse functions
in transcriptional control, DNA repair, and chromosome segregation
(10, 30). Genetic and biochemical approaches have revealed
that several of these proteins function by using ATP hydrolysis to
drive alterations in protein-DNA contacts. For example, SNF2/SWI2 and
related proteins in Drosophila melanogaster and humans are
components of large macromolecular complexes which can disrupt
nucleosome structure in vitro in an ATP-dependent reaction (4, 5,
7, 18, 20, 24, 29, 43, 44). Another member of this family, ISWI
(11), is a component of distinct complexes which can
function both in nucleosome remodeling and in the ATP-dependent
formation of closely spaced nucleosome arrays (19, 28, 42,
45). All SNF2/SWI2 protein family members which have been tested
contain an ATPase which is essential for in vitro and in vivo function (2, 21, 25). The intrinsic ATPase activity of these proteins is low or undetectable but can be activated by DNA, proteins, or
protein-DNA complexes with which these ATPases are known to interact
(3, 6, 15, 25, 31, 39).
Based on these data, one hypothesis is that all SNF2/SWI2 family
members participate in ATP-dependent reactions which result in
alterations of protein-DNA contacts. ATP-dependent alterations of
nucleosome structure can explain how SNF2/SWI2 and related complexes
render the chromatin template accessible to the transcription machinery
(43). Likewise, the essential transcriptional regulator MOT1
modulates transcription by catalyzing the ATP-dependent dissociation of
TATA binding protein (TBP) from DNA (2). By extension, the roles of SNF2/SWI2 family members in DNA repair may reflect
ATP-dependent dissociation or rearrangement of proteins on damaged DNA
as an obligate part of certain repair pathways. Despite the apparently widespread utilization of the conserved SNF2/SWI2 ATPase domain, there
is currently little mechanistic understanding of how ATP hydrolysis is
coupled to these protein-DNA rearrangements (30). Initial
sequence comparisons suggested that SNF2/SWI2 and related proteins fall
within a larger family of DNA helicases (14). It was
subsequently argued, however, that proteins within this group comprise
a distinct family of proteins, none of which have been demonstrated to
have helicase activity (16). If these ATPases do not appear
to be helicases, an alternative model is that these proteins are
ATP-dependent DNA-tracking enzymes (30). Such an enzyme
might be targeted to a specific protein-DNA complex and then use ATP
hydrolysis to translocate along DNA, disrupting protein-DNA contacts in
its path. Disruption of specific protein-DNA contacts could then be a
consequence of specific targeting of the ATPase (in an ATP-independent
event) and specific interactions between the ATPase and the target
protein-DNA complex which occur during ATP-dependent translocation
along DNA. Alternatively, a specifically targeted ATPase might acquire
the ability to translocate along DNA and disrupt protein-DNA contacts
relatively nonspecifically (like a snowplow). This model is attractive
because it can potentially explain how an ATPase might remodel the
structure of a nucleosome which contains an extensive protein-DNA
interface. Here we explicitly test the idea that the SNF2/SWI2 protein
family member MOT1 is an ATP-dependent DNA-tracking enzyme. These
experiments were possible because highly purified MOT1 catalyzes the
dissociation of TBP-DNA complexes in a well-defined in vitro reaction
(2, 3); as such, the MOT1 reaction lends itself to an
explicit test of the tracking hypothesis. Using a variety of DNA
templates with combinations of TATA boxes and heterologous
"roadblock" proteins, we demonstrate that MOT1 is not an
ATP-dependent DNA-tracking enzyme.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Plasmid constructions and DNA probes.
The gel shift probes
used (see Fig. 2) were made by phosphorylating oligonucleotides 2TATA-1
and 2TATA-3 (Table 1) by using T4
polynucleotide kinase and [
-32P]ATP. 2TATA-1 was then
annealed to 2TATA-2, and 2TATA-3 was annealed to 2TATA-4, by heating of
the combined DNAs in TE (10 mM Tris-Cl [pH 8], 0.1 mM EDTA) plus 0.1 M NaCl and slow cooling to room temperature over a period of 30 to 60 min. The annealed DNAs were electrophoresed on a 6% polyacrylamide
nondenaturing gel, excised, and eluted in TE plus 0.1 M NaCl. Following
ethanol precipitation, the DNAs were resuspended in TE. Plasmid
p2TATA5/6-1 was constructed by inserting the annealed 2TATA-5 and
2TATA-6 duplex into the SmaI site of pKSII+. The tandem TATA
footprinting probe used in the experiment represented by Fig. 4 was
obtained by digestion of p2TATA5/6-1 with ClaI and
SacI followed by Klenow fill-in with [
-32P]dCTP and 0.6 mM unlabeled dGTP to uniquely label
the top strand. This probe was purified on a nondenaturing gel as
described above. Plasmid p2-2lac contains the oligonucleotide duplex
2TATA-1-2TATA-2 inserted into the SmaI site and the
lac operator (selfcomplementary oligonucleotide lacO-Bam)
(35, 36) inserted into the BamHI site of pKSII+.
The TATA-containing insert is oriented such that the EcoRI
site in the pKSII+ polylinker is upstream and the inserted lac operator is downstream of the TATA box. For footprinting
and gel shift analysis to determine if MOT1 can dissociate from a template containing EcoRI-Gln 111 and/or
lac repressor bound to flanking sites (see Fig. 1), p2-2lac
DNA was digested with ClaI and SacI and labeled
by Klenow fill-in with [
-32P]dCTP and unlabeled dGTP
as described above. To determine the effect of
EcoRI-Gln 111 bound downstream of a TATA box on
MOT1 action (see Fig. 4E), we used a plasmid similar to p2-2lac,
p15/16lac, in which the TATA-containing insert (oligonucleotide duplex
2TATA-15-2TATA-16) was ligated to the SmaI site of pKSII+
in the opposite orientation, thereby placing the EcoRI site
in the pKSII+ polylinker downstream of the TATA box. A lac
operator (lacO-Pst duplex) was also inserted into the PstI
site of pKSII+ in p15/16lac in order to test the effect of
lac repressor placed at a different position downstream of
the TATA box (see Fig. 4D). p15/16lac without the lac
operator is referred to as p2TATA15/16 below. The p15/16lac
footprinting probe was generated by digestion with XbaI and
KpnI, followed by labeling of the top strand by Klenow
fill-in with [
-32P]dCTP and unlabeled dATP, dGTP, and
dTTP. To test tracking in the 5'-to-3' direction (with respect to the
DNA strand containing the TATA sequence TATAAAAG) with the
lac repressor reversible roadblock, plasmids p2TATAlac13 and
p2TATAlac14 were constructed. These plasmids were constructed by
inserting the lacO-TATA duplex with either the 9-bp spacer
(lac14-lac15) or the 12-bp spacer (lac18-lac19) into the
BamHI and PstI sites of p2TATA15/16 (described above) to generate p2TATAlac14 and p2TATAlac13, respectively. Footprinting probes were generated from these plasmids by digestion with XbaI and KpnI and labeling of the top strand
by Klenow fill-in, as described above for the p15/16lac probe. To test
for tracking by MOT1 in the 3'-to-5' direction (with respect to the DNA
strand containing the TATA sequence TATAAAAG), the
lac16-lac17 duplex was inserted into the HindIII and
ClaI sites and the lac18-lac19 duplex was inserted into the
BamHI and PstI sites of pKSII+ to create
p2TATAlac21. The 3'-to-5' tracking footprinting probe was generated by
digestion of p2TATAlac21 with XbaI and KpnI and
labeling, as described above for the p15/16lac probe. All plasmid
inserts were verified by sequencing.
Recombinant proteins.
The TBP used in these experiments
consisted of the C-terminal 180 amino acids of yeast TBP
(22), the minimal sequence required to provide full function
in vivo (32). This TBP core domain was used because it gave
more reproducible and complete occupancy of the TATA box than
full-length TBP under the conditions described below. Furthermore, MOT1
appears to bind to the yeast TBP core domain more stably than to
full-length TBP (1a), thus facilitating the template
commitment footprinting experiments. The TBP core domain was purified
from Escherichia coli as described previously (22) and was a gift from Jim Geiger. The "altered
specificity" TBP, TBPm3 (37), was obtained by subcloning
the TBPm3 open reading frame into an E. coli overexpression
plasmid. TBPm3 was purified from E. coli as previously
described for wild-type TBP (32). MOT1 was obtained from a
yeast overexpression strain and purified as previously described
(3). EcoRI-Gln 111 (23) was
generously provided by Paul Modrich, and lac repressor was
generously provided by Kathleen Matthews.
Gel mobility shift and DNase footprinting reactions.
Binding
reactions were performed essentially as described previously (1a) in
20-µl reaction mixtures containing 5 ng of TBP, radiolabeled DNA
(approximately 1,000 cpm for the gel shift reactions and 20,000 cpm for
the footprinting reactions), and approximately 5 units of MOT1, 10 ng
of lac repressor, and/or 2.5 nM
EcoRI-Gln 111. In general, TBP was incubated with
the DNA probe for 20 to 30 min, and EcoRI-Gln 111 and/or lac repressor was added for 5 min prior to addition
of MOT1 and 10 µM ATP. All incubations were performed at room
temperature. Incubation of TBP with the radiolabeled templates led to a
5- to 19-fold decrease in DNase cleavage in the TATA box; the magnitude
of the decrease in band intensity depended on the particular band which
was quantified and the particular TATA sequence. Binding of MOT1 to
TBP-DNA was complete within 1 min, and ATP-dependent TBP-DNA
dissociation was complete in under 1 min following addition of ATP, so
the template commitment experiments were performed by incubating MOT1
with or without ATP with the preformed protein-DNA complexes for
15 s to 1 min (as indicated) prior to termination. Rapid
dissociation of lac repressor was induced where indicated by
the addition of 60 ng of unlabeled duplex lacO-Pst oligonucleotide and
350 µM IPTG (isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactopyranoside). Gel
shift analyses were performed by loading the reaction mixtures onto 6%
nondenaturing polyacrylamide gels, as previously described (1a). For template commitment experiments, reactions with
unlabeled DNA (cold competitor reactions [see Results]) were set up
in parallel with the reactions with radiolabeled probe. Cold competitor
reaction mixtures contained 200 ng of annealed 2TATA-1-2TATA-2 and 100 ng of TBP in 5 µl containing the same salt and buffer conditions as
in the standard reaction mixtures containing radiolabeled DNA. Following a preincubation of 20 to 40 min, the 5-µl cold competitor reaction mixtures were added to the reaction mixtures containing radiolabeled DNA, as indicated. DNase footprinting was performed by
addition of 1 µl of 5 U of DNase I (Worthington) per ml for 1 min.
Reactions were terminated by addition of an equal volume of 5 M
ammonium acetate and 3 volumes of ethanol. Following ethanol precipitation, the DNase I-digested DNAs were analyzed by
electrophoresis on 8% polyacrylamide sequencing gels.
 |
RESULTS |
Experimental strategy.
In previous work, MOT1-TBP-DNA
complexes were detected in the absence of ATP by either a gel mobility
shift assay or a DNase I footprinting assay (1a). In the
presence of ATP, rapid dissociation of both TBP and MOT1 from the
template was detected (1a, 2). Since all of these
experiments were performed on radiolabeled linear templates, however,
it was impossible to determine if TBP-DNA dissociation was catalyzed by
a DNA-tracking mechanism or by a transient local interaction between
MOT1 and TBP-DNA exclusively at the TATA box. To test for tracking, two
kinds of experiments were performed. First, heterologous DNA binding
proteins were used to trap a putatively tracking MOT1 molecule on DNA.
This approach has been used previously to demonstrate DNA tracking by
replication and transcription factors (40, 41). If MOT1 disrupts TBP-DNA complexes by using ATP hydrolysis to processively track along DNA, we reasoned that it might be possible to detect these
putative ATP-dependent MOT1-DNA-tracking complexes with heterologous
DNA binding proteins which might prevent MOT1 from translocating off
the end of a linear DNA molecule. Alternatively, a hypothetical
tracking complex might be able to disrupt heterologous DNA binding
protein complexes as it moves along DNA. Both of these possibilities
were tested. A second approach to test for DNA tracking by MOT1
involved performing template commitment DNase footprinting experiments
on DNAs containing two TATA boxes. Using strategies to target MOT1 to
just one of the two TBP-DNA complexes formed on these templates, we
tested whether or not a template-committed MOT1 molecule can
translocate along DNA from one TBP-DNA complex to another without first dissociating.
Rapid dissociation of TBP and MOT1 from DNA does not require a DNA
end.
The first test of DNA tracking by MOT1 utilized templates
with a lac operator and/or EcoRI site placed on
either side of a TATA box (Fig. 1). The
lac operator forms a stable complex with lac repressor (35), and the EcoRI site
is tightly bound by a catalytically inactive form of EcoRI
endonuclease, EcoRI-Gln 111 (23). TBP
was incubated with the radiolabeled templates in the presence or
absence of lac repressor and/or
EcoRI-Gln 111; then, MOT1 was added,
followed by ATP, and the reactions were analyzed by nondenaturing
polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis or DNase footprinting (Fig.
1A). The DNA probe used in the experiments shown in Fig. 1B and C
contained a lac operator 21 bp downstream of the TATA box
and an EcoRI binding site 45 bp upstream of the TATA box. By
gel mobility shift analysis, complexes with discrete and
distinguishable mobilities could be identified when the probe was
incubated with all combinations of the proteins used. The complex
containing TBP, MOT1, EcoRI-Gln 111, and
lac repressor migrated with the lowest mobility, as expected
(Fig. 1B, lane 10), and the association of MOT1 with the template
required the binding of TBP (lane 12). Following the addition of ATP,
the supershifted complex containing all of the proteins collapsed to
the position of the probe incubated with just
EcoRI-Gln 111 and lac repressor
(compare lanes 8 and 11 in Fig. 1B), indicating that MOT1-catalyzed
TBP-DNA dissociation leads to the dissociation of both TBP and MOT1.
This reaction was complete following incubation with ATP for 15 s
and immediate loading onto the gel. The results in Fig. 1B are also
consistent with the results shown in Fig. 1C, in which the fate of
these proteins was monitored by DNase footprinting. Incubation of MOT1 with TBP and DNA led to an extension of the DNase footprint upstream of
the TATA box (compare lanes 2 and 3 in Fig. 1C), and the addition of
ATP led to virtually complete disruption of the footprint after 1 min
(compare lanes 3 and 4 to lane 1 in Fig. 1C). Note that in contrast to
bidirectional binding of TBP to DNA, which has previously been reported
(8), based on the asymmetry of MOT1 binding to these TBP-DNA
complexes, we conclude that binding of wild-type TBP to the DNA probes
used in these experiments occurs unidirectionally, with a defined
orientation. Incubation of the DNA with either
EcoRI-Gln 111 (Fig. 1C, lanes 6 to 9) or
EcoRI-Gln 111 and lac repressor (lanes
10 to 13) led to clear protection of the lac operator and
EcoRI sites, and the occupancy of these sites did not
detectably affect MOT-catalyzed disruption of TBP-DNA (compare lanes 8, 9, 12, and 13 to lanes 4 and 5 [Fig. 1C]). Furthermore, the DNase
digestion patterns between the TATA box and the roadblocks are
indistinguishable in reaction mixtures containing no MOT1 or MOT1 plus
ATP, supporting the conclusion that MOT1 rapidly dissociates from DNA
following ATP-dependent TBP-DNA dissociation.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
MOT1 and TBP dissociate rapidly from DNA in an
ATP-dependent reaction that does not require an unobstructed DNA end.
(A) Experimental scheme for the reactions analyzed in panels B and C. (B) Analysis of MOT1-catalyzed TBP-DNA dissociation on a "blocked"
template by gel mobility shift. The template used is diagrammed above
the autoradiogram. The total length of the probe was 154 bp, with 18 bp
extending upstream of the EcoRI site and 36 bp downstream of
the lac operator. The bands corresponding to various
protein-DNA complexes are indicated by arrows. Note that addition of
ATP to DNA preincubated with TBP, MOT1, lac repressor, and
EcoRI-Gln 111 (lane 11) leads to rapid formation
of a protein-DNA complex which comigrates with the lac
repressor-EcoRI-Gln 111-DNA complex (lane 9).
(C) Analysis of the fate of MOT1 and TBP on the same template as in
panel B by DNase I footprinting. The footprints of proteins bound to
EcoRI, TATA, and lac operator sites are indicated
by rectangles. The bracket on the right denotes the DNA upstream of the
TATA box protected from DNase I digestion by MOT1 when added to a
reaction mixture containing TBP in the absence of ATP (lanes 3, 7, and
11). Note that addition of ATP for 1 min caused loss of the TBP and
MOT1 footprints (lane 4), and this result is unaffected by
EcoRI-Gln 111 bound upstream of the TATA box
(lane 8) as well as by the binding of both
EcoRI-Gln 111 and lac repressor to sites on either side of the TATA box (lane 12).
(D) DNase I footprinting analysis of MOT1 activity on a DNA template
containing a lac operator 36 bp downstream of a TATA box.
The experiment was performed as described for panel C except that
unlabeled lac operator DNA ("cold DNA") was added as
indicated to verify that lac repressor does not dissociate
from the lac operator on the footprinting probe over the
time course of the MOT1-catalyzed reaction. (E) DNase I footprinting
analysis was performed as described for panel C by using a radiolabeled
probe containing an EcoRI site 42 bp downstream from a TATA
box. To verify that EcoRI-Gln 111 remains stably
bound to the EcoRI site over the course of the
MOT1-catalyzed reaction, a molar excess of unlabeled
EcoRI-containing DNA ("cold DNA") was added as
indicated. (F) DNase footprinting experiments were performed as
described for panels D and E by using the same footprinting probe as
for panel C; unlabeled EcoRI-containing DNA was added as
indicated to verify that EcoRI-Gln 111 is not
dissociated from its site upstream of the TATA box over the course of
the MOT1-catalyzed reaction.
|
|
The behavior of MOT1 in this assay was further analyzed by using
additional templates in which either the
lac operator was
placed a different distance downstream of the TATA box (Fig.
1D)
or the
EcoRI binding site was placed downstream of the TATA box
instead of the
lac operator (Fig.
1E). Results of
experiments
with these templates performed similarly to the experiment
shown
in Fig.
1C support the conclusion that MOT1 is not blocked on
the
template by the presence of heterologous DNA binding proteins,
and this
conclusion does not depend on any particular placement
or combination
of
EcoRI or
lac operator
sites.
If MOT1 tracks along DNA, one possibility was that an "engaged"
tracking enzyme might acquire the ability to dissociate heterologous
DNA binding proteins. In the experiments represented by Fig.
1D
to F,
this possibility was tested by adding unlabeled
lac operator
or
EcoRI binding site DNA along with ATP during the
disruption
reaction. While these unlabeled DNAs can completely prevent
the
association of
lac repressor or
EcoRI-
Gln 111 with DNA (Fig.
1D,
lanes 6 and 7;
Fig.
1E, lanes 8 and 9), the
lac repressor and
EcoRI-
Gln 111 footprints are unaffected by MOT1
and ATP, indicating
that MOT1 does not disrupt their binding (Fig.
1D,
lane 11; Fig.
1E, lane 13; Fig.
1F, lane 12). These results demonstrate
that
TBP-DNA disruption by MOT1 leads to rapid dissociation of TBP
and
MOT1 from the template in a reaction that does not require
an
unobstructed DNA
end.
Use of a template containing tandem TATA boxes to test for tracking
by MOT1.
The results in Fig. 1 rule out models for MOT1 action in
which the ATP-dependent reaction leads to a very tight and long-lived association of MOT1 with DNA following loading at a TBP-DNA complex. On
the other hand, some DNA tracking proteins can diffuse along DNA over
relatively long distances, and yet they are released from DNA in just a
few seconds following loading (12, 40). To determine if MOT1
might function in this way, a series of template commitment DNase
footprinting experiments was performed. The aim of these experiments
was to determine if MOT1 loaded onto one TBP-DNA complex could
translocate to a second TBP-DNA complex on the same template without
prior dissociation from the DNA. The first strategy that was employed
is shown in Fig. 2. It was previously
shown that MOT1 requires DNA sequences upstream of the TATA box (with
respect to the start site of transcription) in order to form
MOT1-TBP-DNA ternary complexes and also to catalyze TBP-DNA
dissociation in the presence of ATP (1a). Additional data
demonstrate that 17 bp of DNA upstream of the TATA box is required,
whereas DNA sequences downstream of the TATA box are not
(46). The specific sequence of the DNA upstream of the TATA box also appears to be relatively unimportant (46). These
results suggested that two TBP complexes placed in close apposition
might create a situation in which MOT1 can recognize the TBP-DNA
complex bound to the upstream TATA box but not TBP bound to the
downstream TATA box, because the upstream TBP molecule would provide a
steric block for recognition by MOT1 (Fig. 2B). One important
prediction of this model is that two closely spaced TATA boxes located
at the end of a template with a short upstream end should not be recognized by MOT1 (Fig. 2C).

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Strategy for testing of models of MOT1 action by using a
DNA template with tandem TATA boxes. (A) MOT1 interacts with TBP-DNA
via interactions with both TBP and DNA upstream of the TBP-DNA complex.
Under template commitment conditions, dissociation of the TBP molecule
directly interacting with MOT1 but not the adjacent TBP molecule might
occur by a mechanism involving a transient, ATP-driven power stroke.
Alternatively, in the presence of ATP, interaction of MOT1 with TBP-DNA
might be followed by engagement with the DNA template and dissociation
of both TBP molecules by an ATP-dependent DNA-tracking mechanism. (B)
One requirement of the tandem TATA experiment is that MOT1 is
specifically targeted to only one of the two TBP-DNA complexes on the
tandem TATA template. (C) One prediction is that MOT1 can disrupt
TBP-DNA on this template only via interactions with DNA upstream of the
5' TBP-DNA complex. Hence, upstream truncation of the DNA should permit
TBP binding to both TATA boxes, but these complexes should be
refractory to MOT1 action.
|
|
Two suitable "tandem TATA" probes were examined by gel mobility
shift analysis (Fig.
3). The DNAs contain
one wild-type and
one mutant TATA box separated by 7 bp. The tandem
TATAs were placed
either within a probe of sufficient length to support
MOT1 action
(long probe) or near the upstream end of a short probe.
Different
TATA sequences were used to differentially target different
TBPs
to different sites on each of the two probes. Wild-type TBP binds
only to the wild-type TATA sequence TATAAAAG, whereas the
altered-specificity
TBP, TBPm3 (
37), binds to both the
wild-type site and TGTAAAAG.
TBPm3 was chosen because it is
recognized by MOT1 indistinguishably
from wild-type TBP
(
1; also see below).

View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Gel mobility shift analysis of protein-DNA complexes
formed on tandem TATA templates. The sequences of the two DNA probes
used are shown at the top; the TBP binding sites are boxed. The
upstream site, TGTAAAAG, is recognized by the
altered-specificity TBP, TBPm3, but not by wild-type TBP. TBPm3 and
wild-type TBP bind to the downstream TATA box. The free DNA as well as
protein-DNA complexes formed on these probes are indicated by arrows.
In this depiction, the open circles represent TBP or TBPm3, the black
oval is MOT1, the DNA probe is represented by the black horizontal
line, and the TATA boxes are shown as rectangles. The amounts of
purified MOT1 added to the reaction mixtures are in microliters; this
preparation of MOT1 had an activity of about 1 unit/µl
(1a).
|
|
As shown in Fig.
3, incubation of the long probe with TBPm3 (lanes 1 to
5) results in the detection of TBPm3 bound to either
one or both TATA
boxes in the absence of MOT1 (lane 1). Supershifted
species are formed
when MOT1 is added (lanes 2 and 4) and, at
steady state, the TBPm3-DNA
complexes are largely disrupted when
ATP is added (lanes 3 and 5). Note
that the probe is not quantitatively
shifted to the positions of full
occupancy because TBP-DNA complexes
formed with full-length TBP are
unstable in the gel (
17). As
was seen with the doubly
occupied TATA boxes formed on the long
probe, binding of wild-type TBP
to TATA box 2 on the long probe
generates a complex which is also
recognized and disrupted by
MOT1 (Fig.
3, lanes 6 to 10). (The
MOT1-TBP-DNA ternary complex
is less obvious in lanes 7 and 9 in this
particular experiment
because less of the probe is shifted by wild-type
TBP than in
the adjacent lanes containing TBPm3.) In contrast, binding
of
TBPm3 to both TATA boxes formed on the short probe (Fig.
3, lanes
11 to 15) generates a protein-DNA complex which is only weakly
bound by
MOT1 in the absence of ATP (lanes 12 and 14). In the
presence of ATP,
MOT1 dissociates from TBPm3-DNA, but these TBP-DNA
complexes are
largely refractory to MOT1 action (compare lanes
13 and 15 to lanes 3 and 5). The small effect of MOT1 that we
do observe could be due to a
small fraction of TBPm3 which binds
to TATA box 2 in the opposite
orientation (
8). These results
indicate that tandem TBP-DNA
complexes can be disrupted by MOT1,
but this activity requires
interaction with DNA upstream of TATA
box 1. Furthermore, the results
with the short probe show that
TBP bound to TATA box 1 effectively
blocks access by MOT1 to TBP
bound to TATA box 2 as required to test
the models shown in Fig.
2.
Based on the results shown in Fig.
3, template commitment footprinting
experiments using the long tandem TATA probe were performed
next. TBP
was incubated with either the radiolabeled tandem TATA
probe or, in a
parallel reaction, with a 10-fold molar excess
of unlabeled DNA (Fig.
4A). Following a 20-min preincubation,
MOT1 was added to the reaction mixture containing the labeled
DNA for 1 min. The binding of TBP to DNA is stable, and this 1-min
incubation
with MOT1 is sufficient to commit MOT1 to TBP-DNA but
is sufficiently
short that TBP does not appreciably dissociate
from the template during
this time. The reaction mixtures containing
labeled and unlabeled DNA
were then combined with ATP for 1 min
and then DNase treated and
terminated as described in Materials
and Methods.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Template-committed MOT1 disrupts both TBPs bound to the
tandem TATA template. (A) Experimental scheme. The radiolabeled DNA,
shown on top (asterisk), was incubated with TBP (open saddle shapes) in
one reaction, and a 10-fold molar excess of identical, unlabeled DNAs
was incubated with TBP in a parallel reaction. Since the unlabeled
reaction mixture contains a molar excess of DNA over TBP, this reaction
mixture presumably contains unbound, singly bound, and doubly bound DNA
molecules which, for simplicity, are not all shown. After 20 min, MOT1
(black oval) was added to the reaction mixture containing radiolabeled
DNA, and then the two reaction mixtures were combined with ATP for 1 min. DNase was added for 1 min, and then the reactions were terminated
and the reaction products were resolved on 8% sequencing gels (see
Materials and Methods). (B) The indicated proteins were added as
outlined for panel A with the exception that the competitor TBP-DNA was
added at different points in the scheme, as indicated. No competitor
was added to the reaction mixtures in lanes 1 to 4. (C) The template
commitment footprinting experiment was performed as described for panel
B except that the reactions were performed in duplicate and
footprinting was performed with two different amounts of DNase I. Competitor TBP-DNA was not added to the reaction mixtures in lanes 1 and 2.
|
|
The addition of TBP to the tandem TATA probe results in full protection
of both TATA boxes from DNase digestion (Fig.
4B and
C, lanes 2).
Addition of MOT1 causes an extension of the footprint
upstream of the
TATA boxes, as expected (Fig.
4B, lane 3), and
the footprints are
disrupted in the presence of MOT1 and ATP (Fig.
4B, lane 4). Competitor
TBP-DNA prevents the interaction between
TBP and the labeled probe
(Fig.
4B, lane 5; Fig.
4C, lanes 3 and
4), but over the time course of
the reaction the competitor has
no effect on TBP-DNA complexes
preformed on the radiolabeled probe
(Fig.
4B, lane 6; Fig.
4C, lanes 5 and 6). Addition of the competitor
TBP-DNA reaction mixture prior to
the addition of MOT1 and ATP
prevents MOT1 activity towards TBP-DNA
complexes formed on the
radiolabeled probe (Fig.
4B and C, lanes 7).
Combining the preformed
complexes under template commitment conditions,
as shown in Fig.
4A, results in uniform disruption of both TBP-DNA
complexes (Fig.
4B, lane 7 versus lane 8; Fig.
4C, lane 7 versus lane
9). Under
these conditions, phosphorimager quantitation of the band
intensities
demonstrates that 30 to 60% of the radiolabeled templates
retain
a committed molecule of MOT1 when challenged with competitor
TBP-DNA
and ATP. (In the experiment represented by Fig.
4B, 30% of the
TBP-DNA complexes were disrupted by MOT1.) This efficiency of
template
commitment reflects the fact that in the absence of ATP,
MOT1
dissociates rapidly from TBP-DNA complexes under these conditions
(
1), and so even rapid mixing of these reaction mixtures
gives
rise to some dissociation of MOT1 from the template prior to
ATP-dependent
TBP-DNA disruption. This degree of template commitment
may also
be related to the efficiency with which MOT1 successfully
dissociates
a TBP-DNA complex in the presence of ATP prior to
dissociation
from the
template.
The uniform disruption of TBPs bound to both TATA boxes by
template-committed MOT1 is consistent with a model in which MOT1
functions by an ATP-dependent DNA-tracking mechanism. Due to the
close
proximity of the tandem TATA boxes, however, there are other
explanations for these results (see Discussion). To permit a more
direct test of tracking by MOT1, a system was required to determine
the
effect of template-committed MOT1 on a TBP-DNA complex located
more
remotely from the site at which it is
loaded.
Targeting of MOT1 to one of two TBP-DNA complexes on the same
template by using a reversible steric block.
The strategy that was
employed utilized DNA templates with two TATA boxes placed between 80 and 90 bp apart (Fig. 5A). The results
shown in Fig. 4 demonstrate that access to a TBP-DNA complex can be
blocked by the binding of a second TBP molecule just upstream. To test
for DNA tracking from one TBP-DNA complex to another on the same
template, a reversible steric block that prevented interaction between
MOT1 and one of the TBP-DNA complexes was required. lac repressor is a suitable reversible steric block because it binds with
high affinity and stability to its binding site, and the binding of
lac repressor can be rapidly reversed by the addition of the
inducer IPTG (26, 33, 34, 40, 47). In the presence of IPTG
and a molar excess of unlabeled lac operator DNA, the quantitative dissociation of lac repressor from DNA was
found to occur in just a few seconds (1). The template
commitment experiment using templates with the reversible
lac repressor block were performed similarly to the tandem
TATA box template commitment experiments, with the exception that the
unlabeled competitor TBP-DNA complex was combined with IPTG and
unlabeled lac operator to induce the dissociation of
lac repressor from the labeled template (Fig. 5A).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Strategy for testing for DNA tracking by MOT1 with
lac repressor as a reversible steric block. (A) DNA
containing two TATA boxes (open rectangles) separated by 80 to 100 bp
is incubated with TBP (open saddle shapes) and lac repressor
(gray circle), which binds to a lac operator (gray
rectangle) precisely positioned upstream of one TATA box to interfere
with MOT1 (black circle) binding to its proximally positioned TBP. The
other TBP-DNA complex remains available for MOT1 interaction. One
configuration of these sites is shown, but an analogous DNA containing
a lac operator positioned just upstream of the 5' TATA box
was also tested (see text). Template commitment footprinting
experiments were then performed in a fashion analogous to those in Fig.
4, with the exception that IPTG and unlabeled lac operator
DNA were added along with unlabeled competitor TBP-DNA and ATP to
induce the rapid dissociation of lac repressor from the
operator on the footprinting probe. Following DNase treatment, the
reactions were analyzed as described for Fig. 4 to determine if MOT1
bound to one TBP-DNA complex can influence the rate of dissociation of
a second TBP-DNA complex on the same template without prior
dissociation. (B) lac repressor bound to a lac
operator positioned 12 bp (lanes 1 to 10) or 9 bp (lanes 11 to 18)
upstream of a TATA box can block MOT1 action. TBP and lac
repressor were incubated with radiolabeled DNA as indicated, and then
MOT1 in the presence or absence of ATP and/or IPTG plus unlabeled
lac operator was added for 1 min followed by addition of
DNase I and analysis of the reaction products, as described for Fig. 4.
The regions of DNA protected by TBP and lac repressor are
indicated (rectangles), and the upstream extension of the TBP footprint
induced by MOT1 in the absence of ATP is indicated by a bracket.
|
|
Several versions of the
lac operator-TATA template were
constructed. First, the
lac operator was placed either 9 or
12 bp
upstream of a TATA box. A second TATA box was then placed either
upstream or downstream in order to test for tracking in both
directions.
A test of the efficiency of the
lac repressor
block to MOT1 function
is shown in Fig.
5B. Lanes 1 to 4 demonstrate
that TBP binds to
this TATA box and that MOT1 recognizes the TBP-DNA
complex and
disrupts it in the presence of ATP. In contrast, occupancy
of
the
lac operator by
lac repressor in DNAs with
either the 12-bp
spacing (lanes 5 to 10) or 9-bp spacing (lanes 11 to
18) resulted
in virtually complete inhibition of MOT1 activity (compare
DNase
sensitivity in the TATA box in lanes 3 and 4 with lanes 7, 8,
14, and 15). Addition of IPTG and unlabeled
lac operator
resulted
in the appearance, again, of the upstream protection
characteristic
of the MOT1-TBP-DNA ternary complex (lanes 9 and 16),
and the
footprint was disrupted in the presence of ATP (lanes 10 and
17).
Comparison of lanes 6 to 8 and 13 to 15 reveals that two positions
in the 9- and 12-bp spacers (just above arrow) are weakly protected
by
MOT1, suggesting that MOT1 can bind weakly to TBP-DNA even
when access
to DNA upstream of the TATA box is blocked by the
binding of
lac repressor. Nonetheless, tracking by MOT1 to this
TBP-DNA
complex could still be assessed by directly comparing
the activity of
MOT1 on templates with one TATA box versus two
TATA boxes (see
below).
The results in Fig.
5 demonstrate that
lac repressor can be
used to reversibly block ATP-dependent removal of TBP from DNA
by MOT1.
This made it possible to test for translocation of MOT1
from one
TBP-DNA complex to another, as shown in Fig.
5A. As an
additional
feature, the DNA templates used for these experiments
contained an
EcoRI site placed between the two TATA boxes at a
position
which does not sterically interfere with MOT1 action
(see below and
Fig.
6 and
7). If the effect of template-committed
MOT1 bound to one
TBP-DNA complex on TBP bound to a second site
could be blocked by
EcoRI-
Gln 111 bound to the
EcoRI site,
then
this would suggest that intramolecular transfer of MOT1 involves
tracking or DNA
looping.
Figure
6 shows the results of experiments
to test if MOT1 can translocate along DNA in the 5'-to-3' direction
(with respect
to the DNA strand encoding the TATA sequence
TATAAAAG). The radiolabeled
template contains an upstream
TATA box which is accessible to
MOT1 and then 39 bp of downstream
flanking DNA followed by an
EcoRI site, 15 additional base
pairs of 3' flanking DNA, and then
a
lac operator separated
from the 3' TATA box by either 12 bp
(Fig.
6A) or 9 bp (Fig.
6B, lanes
1 to 14). For comparison, the
effects of MOT1 on TBP bound to a
template with an appropriately
positioned
lac operator and
only one TATA box were also determined
(Fig.
6B, lanes 15 to 18).
Addition of the competitor TBP-DNA
reaction mixtures prior to MOT1
completely blocked MOT1 action
on the radiolabeled template (Fig.
6A
and B, lanes 2 versus lanes
3) whereas addition of the competitor
reaction mixture following
incubation of MOT1 with TBP-DNA complexes
formed on the radiolabeled
probe led to disruption of 30 to 50% of the
TBP-DNA complexes
(Fig.
6A and B, lanes 3 versus lanes 4), as was seen
in the tandem
TATA experiments described above.
lac
repressor protected the
lac operator on both templates, as
expected (Fig.
6A and B, lanes
5). On the template containing the 12-bp
spacing between the downstream
TATA and the
lac operator
(Fig.
6A), addition of MOT1 to TBP-
lac repressor-DNA
complexes followed by addition of IPTG and the competitor
reaction
mixture led to the loss of the
lac repressor footprint
and
partial protection of DNA upstream of the 5' TATA box (Fig.
6A, lane
6). Since template commitment by MOT1 was not complete,
the degree of
protection by MOT1 at the available TBP-DNA complex
was difficult to
detect in some experiments. No protection of
the DNA upstream of the 3'
TATA box was observed, consistent with
the expectation that
lac repressor prevents association of MOT1
with this TBP-DNA
complex and that MOT1 cannot translocate from
the upstream TATA box to
the downstream TATA box on this template.
Performance of the template
commitment experiment in the presence
of ATP (Fig.
6A, lane 7)
demonstrates that MOT1 catalyzes disruption
of TBP-DNA complexes at the
upstream TATA box equivalently to
that seen in the absence of
lac repressor (Fig.
6A; compare lanes
4 and 7). In contrast,
there is very little effect of MOT1 on
TBP-DNA disruption at the
downstream TATA box (Fig.
6A, lanes
4 and 7). Phosphorimager analysis
was used to quantitate the changes
in band intensities in the
footprinted regions. These results
demonstrate that the small effects
(less than twofold) of MOT1
on TBP-DNA complexes formed at the
downstream TATA box are the
same whether or not the upstream TATA box
is present on the same
DNA template. The low level of MOT1-catalyzed
disruption of TBP-DNA
at the downstream TATA box therefore reflects the
slight "leakiness"
of the
lac repressor block and is not
due to tracking by MOT1
in the 5'-to-3' direction. In agreement with
this conclusion,
the results obtained with this probe are the same when
EcoRI-
Gln 111 is bound to its site between the
two TATA boxes (Fig.
6A,
lanes 9 to 12), demonstrating that tracking by
MOT1 is not detectable.

View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Testing for ATP-dependent DNA tracking by MOT1 in the
5'-to-3' direction by DNase footprinting. (A) The footprinted regions
centered over the indicated sites are shown as open rectangles, and the
distances between the sites are shown in base pairs. The indicated
proteins were added to the probe as schematized in Fig. 5A, with the
exception that the unlabeled competitor TBP-DNA was added in the order
indicated at the top of the figure. For the reactions in lanes 1, 2, 8, 9, and 12, the competitor reaction mixture was added after
preincubation with the indicated proteins and immediately prior to the
addition of DNase. The unmarked arrow indicates a position upstream of
the 5' TATA box which is protected by MOT1 in the absence of ATP (lanes
6 and 11). (B) Comparison of the effects of MOT1 on TBP-DNA complexes
subject to the reversible lac repressor steric block on
templates with (lanes 1 to 14) or without (lanes 15 to 18) the second
5' TATA box. Experiments were performed as described for panel A; the
unlabeled TBP-DNA competitor was added to the reaction mixtures in
lanes 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 15, and 16 after preincubation with the
indicated proteins and immediately prior to addition of DNase.
|
|
By using the probe with the 9-bp spacing between the 3' TATA box and
the
lac operator, similar results were obtained (Fig.
6B).
In this configuration, the
lac repressor-blocked TATA box
is
slightly more leaky, and release of
lac repressor by IPTG
gives
rise to a low level of MOT1-catalyzed TBP-DNA disruption on the
template containing one TATA box (Fig.
6B, lane 17 versus lane
18).
This degree of disruption is equivalent to that seen on the
template
containing two TATA boxes (Fig.
6B, lanes 6 and 7; also
phosphorimager
analysis not shown). Also in support of the observation
that MOT1
loaded at the upstream TBP-DNA complex does not effect
disruption at
the downstream TBP-DNA complex is the observation
that
EcoRI-
Gln 111 binding between the two TATA boxes
has no detectable
effect on the results (Fig.
6B, lanes 9 and 10).
These results
indicate that tracking by MOT1 protein in the 5'-to-3'
direction
is not
detectable.
An analogous experiment to determine if tracking by MOT1 in the
3'-to-5' direction (with respect to the DNA strand containing
the TATA
sequence TATAAAAG) could be detected is represented by
Fig.
7. This experiment utilized a
radiolabeled DNA fragment containing
a downstream TATA box for
formation of an accessible TBP-DNA complex.
A second TATA box is
located 81 bp upstream. The upstream TATA
box is appropriately
positioned to a
lac operator on its upstream
side for
reversible blocking by
lac repressor. An
EcoRI
binding
site is located between the two TATA boxes, as was described
for
the 5'-to-3' tracking probes used for the experiments depicted
in
Fig.
6. The autoradiograms shown in Fig.
7A represent two different
exposures of the same gel. As was observed for the other tracking
probes, incubation with TBP resulted in protection of both TATA
boxes
(Fig.
7A, lane 2). Addition of the unlabeled competitor
reaction
mixture and ATP prior to the addition of MOT1 resulted
in no detectable
change in the TBP footprints (Fig.
7A, lane 3),
whereas addition of
MOT1 to preformed TBP-DNA complexes prior
to the addition of the
competitor reaction led to partial disruption
of both TBP-DNA complexes
(Fig.
7A, lane 4), as required for the
template commitment experiment.
lac repressor protected the
lac operator (Fig.
7A, lane 5 or 17), and addition of MOT1 in the
absence of ATP led to an
upstream extension of the TBP footprint
at the downstream TATA box.
Surprisingly, dissociation of
lac repressor by IPTG in the
absence of ATP led to the appearance
of the characteristic MOT1
footprint at the upstream TATA box
as well (Fig.
7A, lane 6 or 18).
MOT1 bound to the upstream TBP-DNA
complex was not loaded onto this
site directly, since a single
TATA box separated from a
lac
operator by 12 bp does not display
this behavior (not shown), nor was
this behavior seen with the
analogous tracking probe shown in Fig.
6.
The appearance of MOT1
at the upstream TBP-DNA complex appears to
depend on an unobstructed
path between the two TBP-DNA complexes, since
binding of
EcoRI-
Gln 111 to the site between them
prevents the appearance of the MOT1
footprint at the upstream but not
the downstream TBP-DNA complex
(Fig.
7A, lane 9 versus 10 or lane 21 versus 22). Since
EcoRI-
Gln 111 binding per se
does not affect MOT1 activity at the upstream
TBP-DNA complex (Fig.
7B,
lanes 3 and 4 versus lanes 6 and 7),
we suggest that MOT1 loaded at the
downstream TBP-DNA complex
might slide to the upstream TBP-DNA complex
in the absence of
ATP. Alternatively, MOT1 might be transferred to the
upstream
TBP-DNA complex by another mechanism, such as DNA looping.
Additional
experiments will be required to determine the mechanism of
this
ATP-independent behavior of MOT1. In the presence of ATP,
disruption
of TBP-DNA complexes formed at both TATA boxes was observed
(Fig.
7A, lanes 7 and 19), as expected, since MOT1 is associated with
TBP molecules bound to both TATAs. These results support a model
in
which MOT1 can be transferred from one TBP-DNA complex to another
on
the same DNA molecule, but this reaction is not ATP dependent
and
therefore does not represent the mechanism by which MOT1 catalyzes
TBP-DNA dissociation.

View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Testing for ATP-dependent DNA tracking by MOT1 in the
3'-to-5' direction by DNase footprinting. (A) The binding sites and
footprinted regions on DNA are indicated as in Fig. 6. The brackets
indicate the region on DNA protected by MOT1 in the MOT1-TBP-DNA
ternary complex formed in the absence of ATP. The experiment was
performed as described for Fig. 5A and 6. Unlabeled TBP-DNA competitor
was added to the reaction mixtures in lanes 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, and 12 after
preincubation with the indicated proteins and immediately prior to the
addition of DNase. The results shown in lanes 13 to 24 are from the
same experiment as for lanes 1 to 12, but the film was exposed longer
in order to better visualize the partial DNase protection upstream of
the 5' TATA box (brackets) afforded by MOT1, which has translocated
along DNA from its loading site at the downstream TATA box (see text).
(B) Control DNase footprinting experiment for panel A which
demonstrates that EcoRI-Gln 111 binding to the
EcoRI site (lanes 5 to 7) does not interfere with MOT1
action at either of the TBP-DNA complexes formed at the two TATA boxes
in the absence of lac repressor. The template used in this
experiment was the same as that used for panel A.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Rapid TBP-DNA dissociation by MOT1.
To test for ATP-dependent
DNA tracking by MOT1, we first monitored the fate of MOT1 bound to a
TBP-DNA complex assembled between two stable heterologous DNA binding
proteins. By both gel mobility shift and DNase footprinting analyses,
it was found that the ATP-dependent disruption of TBP-DNA complexes is
fast and leads to release of both TBP and MOT1 from DNA in a reaction
that does not require a DNA end. The results are identical regardless
of the orientation or spacing of lac repressor or
EcoRI-Gln 111 with respect to MOT1-TBP-DNA ternary complexes, indicating that these observations do not depend on
the particular arrangement of proteins along the DNA. Since heterologous roadblock proteins are not disrupted by MOT1 and they do
not detectably provide a barrier which traps MOT1 on DNA, we conclude
that MOT1 activity leads to dissociation from internal sites on the DNA
template in just a few seconds. These results rule out extreme versions
of the ATP-dependent DNA-tracking model in which MOT1 binds very
tightly to the DNA template and is stably associated with it for more
than approximately 30 s. Some highly processive enzymes can be
arrested by a heterologous roadblock protein. For instance,
lac repressor can arrest elongating RNA polymerase II
(9) and RNA polymerase III (38). There are examples of DNA-tracking proteins, however, which nonetheless can
dissociate from DNA very rapidly. For instance, phage T4 gp45 protein
is a well-established DNA-tracking protein that has been observed to
quantitatively dissociate from DNA in just a few seconds; its movement
along DNA can be readily detected, however, under conditions in which
its continuous loading offsets rapid unloading from the template
(12, 40). The
subunit of E. coli DNA
polymerase III holoenzyme is an example of a DNA-tracking protein with
intermediate stability on DNA.
can associate with DNA for several
minutes prior to dissociation (12). Since known DNA-tracking
proteins possess a wide range of half times for dissociation from DNA
(13, 27), the rapid dissociation of MOT1 from the template
with roadblocks at either end does not directly address the question of
whether or not MOT1 tracks.
MOT1-catalyzed disruption of tandem TBP-DNA complexes.
Juxtaposition of two TATA boxes resulted in the differential targeting
of MOT1 to only the upstream TBP-DNA complex. In the presence of ATP,
this template-committed MOT1 then disrupted both TBP-DNA complexes
equivalently. This result is consistent with a model in which MOT1
causes TBP-DNA dissociation by an ATP-dependent DNA-tracking mechanism.
This result is also consistent, however, with a number of other
possibilities. First, since MOT1 is much larger than TBP, the
ATP-dependent reaction at the upstream TBP-DNA complex might result in
a conformational change in MOT1 which leads to an incidental collision
between MOT1 and the downstream TBP which triggers the release of both
TBP molecules. In some experiments, we observed a DNase
I-hypersensitive site between the tandem TBP-DNA complexes in the
presence of MOT1 (Fig. 4B, lane 3), which might reflect an alteration
of the DNA structure between the two TATA boxes, perhaps due to MOT1
bound to the upstream TBP-DNA complex incidentally bumping into the TBP
molecule bound to the downstream TATA box. Alternatively, MOT1 might
trigger TBP-DNA dissociation by propagating a structural change in DNA through the TATA box and into the downstream DNA. In this case, the
disruption of both TBP-DNA complexes would result from the singular
action of MOT1 bound to the upstream TBP-DNA complex. Another
possibility is that the ejection of TBP from the upstream TATA box
might precede dissociation of MOT1, and template-associated MOT1 might
then preferentially disrupt the downstream TBP-DNA complex in a
subsequent step simply because it is located proximally to this
complex. Finally, MOT1 might use ATP to disrupt TBP-DNA complexes by a
power stroke which involves a short translocation along DNA through the
TATA box. In this case, template-committed MOT1 would behave as a
DNA-tracking enzyme on the tandem TATA template but no tracking would
be observed when the TBP-DNA complexes were placed further apart. It
should be possible to discriminate among these possibilities by
spectroscopic methods which can detect the very rapid changes in MOT1,
TBP, and DNA which accompany this reaction.
ATP-independent transfer of MOT1 from one TBP-DNA complex to
another.
Targeting of MOT1 to one of two TBP-DNA complexes
separated by 80 to 100 bp demonstrated that MOT1 does not use ATP to
track along DNA in the 5'-to-3' direction. Surprisingly, MOT1 bound to
a downstream TBP-DNA complex can be transferred to an upstream TBP-DNA
complex in the absence of ATP. ATP-independent tracking by MOT1 is
suggested by the observation that the appearance of MOT1 at the
upstream TBP-DNA complex depends on loading at the downstream TBP-DNA
complex. Translocation of MOT1 from one TBP-DNA complex to another also
depends on an unobstructed DNA path between the two complexes, since
EcoRI-Gln 111 can block the translocation without
interfering directly with MOT1 action at either TBP-DNA complex. An
alternative explanation is that ATP-independent transfer of MOT1 occurs
by DNA looping. A rigorous test of MOT1's ability to track along DNA
in the absence of ATP will require additional experimental approaches
including protein-DNA cross-linking and the use of longer DNA templates.
Implications for other SNF2/SWI2 protein family members?
ATPase activity of SNF2/SWI2 protein family members is generally very
low, but the activity of several of these factors can be activated by
DNA (see the introduction). In contrast, the MOT1 ATPase is activated
by TBP but not by DNA (3). Likewise, a human homolog of
MOT1, TAF-172, has an ATPase which is activated by TBP plus
DNA but only weakly by DNA alone (6). The high degree of
sequence conservation among the ATPases of all SNF2/SWI2 protein family
members suggests that they undergo similar ATP-dependent conformational
changes but that they simply respond to different allosteric effectors.
How ATP hydrolysis by other SNF2/SWI2-related proteins drives
rearrangements of other protein-DNA complexes is unknown; as more
detailed mechanistic analyses proceed, it will be interesting to
compare the ways in which this evolutionarily conserved ATPase is
exploited to catalyze this diverse array of reactions.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We are grateful to Kevin Struhl for the TBPm3 gene, Jim Geiger
for yeast TBP core domain, Kathleen Matthews for lac
repressor, and Paul Modrich for EcoRI-Gln 111. We
appreciate the thoughtful comments, criticisms, and encouragement of
David Levens, E. Peter Geiduschek, George Kassavetis, Blaine
Bartholomew, Bob Kadner, and Jerry Workman. We are also grateful to
Rong Li, Tamara Muldrow, Tom Thompson, Mitch Smith, and Mike Christman
for suggestions and for critically reading the manuscript.
This work was supported by NIH grant GM55763 to D.T.A.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Virginia Health
Science Center, Box 440, Charlottesville, VA 22908. Phone: (804)
243-2629. Fax: (804) 924-5069. E-mail: dta4n{at}virginia.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
| Auble, D. T. Unpublished observations.
|
| 1a.
|
Auble, D. T., and S. Hahn.
1993.
An ATP-dependent inhibitor of TBP binding to DNA.
Genes Dev.
7:844-856[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Auble, D. T.,
K. E. Hansen,
C. G. F. Mueller,
W. S. Lane,
J. Thorner, and S. Hahn.
1994.
Mot1, a global repressor of RNA polymerase II transcription, inhibits TBP binding to DNA by an ATP-dependent mechanism.
Genes Dev.
8:1920-1934[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Auble, D. T.,
D. Wang,
K. W. Post, and S. Hahn.
1997.
Molecular analysis of the SNF2/SWI2 protein family member MOT1, an ATP-driven enzyme that dissociates TATA-binding protein from DNA.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:4842-4851[Abstract].
|
| 4.
|
Brown, S. A., and R. E. Kingston.
1997.
Disruption of downstream chromatin by a transcriptional activator.
Genes Dev.
11:3116-3121[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Cairns, B. R.,
Y. Lorch,
Y. Li,
M. Zhang,
L. Lacomis,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst,
J. Du,
B. Laurent, and R. D. Kornberg.
1996.
RSC, an essential, abundant chromatin-remodeling complex.
Cell
87:1249-1260[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Chicca, J. J. I.,
D. T. Auble, and B. F. Pugh.
1998.
Cloning and biochemical characterization of TAF-172, a human homolog of yeast MOT1.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:1701-1710[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Cote, J.,
J. Quinn,
J. L. Workman, and C. L. Peterson.
1994.
Stimulation of GAL4 derivative binding to nucleosomal DNA by the yeast SWI/SNF complex.
Science
265:53-60[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Cox, J. M.,
M. M. Hayward,
J. F. Sanchez,
L. D. Gegnas,
S. van der Zee,
J. H. Dennis,
P. B. Sigler, and A. Schepartz.
1997.
Bidirectional binding of the TATA box binding protein to the TATA box.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:13475-13480[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Deuschle, U.,
R. A. Hipskind, and H. Bujard.
1990.
RNA polymerase II transcription blocked by Escherichia coli lac repressor.
Science
248:480-483[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Eisen, J. A.,
K. S. Sweder, and P. C. Hanawalt.
1995.
Evolution of the SNF2 family of proteins: subfamilies with distinct sequences and functions.
Nucleic Acids Res.
23:2715-2723[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Elfring, L. K.,
R. Deuring,
C. M. McCallum,
C. L. Peterson, and J. W. Tamkun.
1994.
Identification and characterization of Drosophila relatives of yeast transcriptional activator SNF2/SWI2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:2225-2234[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Fu, T.-J.,
G. M. Sanders,
M. O'Donnell, and E. P. Geiduschek.
1996.
Dynamics of DNA-tracking by two sliding-clamp proteins.
EMBO J.
15:4414-4422[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Gelles, J., and R. Landick.
1998.
RNA polymerase as a molecular motor.
Cell
93:13-16[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Gorbalenya, E. G.,
E. V. Koonin,
A. P. Donchenko, and V. M. Blinov.
1989.
Two related superfamilies of putative helicases involved in replication, recombination, repair and expression of DNA and RNA genomes.
Nucleic Acids Res.
17:4713-4730[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Guzder, S. N.,
P. Sung,
L. Prakash, and S. Prakash.
1997.
Yeast Rad7-Rad16 complex, specific for the nucleotide excision repair of the nontranscribed DNA strand, is an ATP-dependent DNA damage sensor.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:21665-21668[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Henikoff, S.
1993.
Transcriptional activator components and poxvirus DNA-dependent ATPases comprise a single family.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
18:291-292[Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Hoopes, B. C.,
J. F. LeBlanc, and D. K. Hawley.
1992.
Kinetic analysis of yeast TFIID-TATA box complex formation suggests a multi-step pathway.
J. Biol. Chem.
267:11539-11547[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Imbalzano, A. N.,
H. Kwon,
M. R. Green, and R. E. Kingston.
1994.
Facilitated binding of TATA-binding protein to nucleosomal DNA.
Nature
370:481-485[Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Ito, T.,
M. Bulger,
M. J. Pazin,
R. Kobayashi, and J. T. Kadonaga.
1997.
ACF, an ISWI-containing and ATP-utilizing chromatin assembly and remodeling factor.
Cell
90:145-155[Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Kadonaga, J. T.
1998.
Eukaryotic transcription: an interlaced network of transcription factors and chromatin-modifying machines.
Cell
92:307-313[Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Khavari, P. A.,
C. L. Peterson,
J. W. Tamkun,
D. B. Mendel, and G. R. Crabtree.
1993.
BRG1 contains a conserved domain of the SWI2/SNF2 family necessary for normal mitotic growth and transcription.
Nature
366:170-174[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Kim, Y.,
J. H. Geiger,
S. Hahn, and P. B. Sigler.
1993.
Crystal structure of a yeast TBP/TATA-box complex.
Nature
365:512-520[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
King, K.,
S. J. Benkovic, and P. Modrich.
1989.
Glu-111 is required for activation of the DNA cleavage center of EcoRI endonuclease.
J. Biol. Chem.
264:11807-11815[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Kwon, H.,
A. N. Imbalzano,
P. A. Khavari,
R. E. Kingston, and M. R. Green.
1994.
Nucleosome disruption and enhancement of activator binding by a human SWI/SNF complex.
Nature
370:477-481[Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Laurent, B. C.,
I. Treich, and M. Carlson.
1993.
The yeast SNF2/SWI2 protein has DNA-stimulated ATPase activity required for transcriptional activation.
Genes Dev.
7:583-591[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Lewis, M.,
G. Chang,
N. C. Horton,
M. A. Kercher,
H. C. Pace,
M. A. Schumacher,
R. G. Brennan, and P. Lu.
1996.
Crystal structure of the lactose operon repressor and its complexes with DNA and inducer.
Science
271:1247-1254[Abstract].
|
| 27.
|
Lohman, T. M.,
K. Thorn, and R. D. Vale.
1998.
Staying on track: common features of DNA helicases and microtubule motors.
Cell
93:9-12[Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Mizuguchi, G.,
T. Tsukiyama,
J. Wisniewski, and C. Wu.
1997.
Role of nucleosome remodeling factor NURF in transcriptional activation of chromatin.
Mol. Cell
1:141-150[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Owen-Hughes, T.,
R. T. Utley,
C. L. Peterson, and J. L. Workman.
1996.
Persistent site-specific remodeling of a nucleosome array by transient action of the SWI/SNF complex.
Science
273:513-516[Abstract].
|
| 30.
|
Pazin, M. J., and J. T. Kadonaga.
1997.
SWI2/SNF2 and related proteins: ATP-driven motors that disrupt protein-DNA interactions?
Cell
88:737-740[Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Petukhova, G.,
S. Stratton, and P. Sung.
1998.
Catalysis of homologous DNA pairing by yeast Rad51 and Rad54 proteins.
Nature
393:91-94[Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Reddy, P., and S. Hahn.
1991.
Dominant negative mutations in yeast TFIID define a bipartite DNA-binding region.
Cell
65:349-357[Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Riggs, A. D.,
S. Bourgeois, and M. Cohn.
1970.
lac repressor-operator interaction. III. Kinetic studies.
J. Mol. Biol.
53:401-417[Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Riggs, A. D.,
H. Suzuki, and S. Bourgeois.
1970.
lac repressor-operator interaction. I. Equilibrium studies.
J. Mol. Biol.
48:67-83[Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Sadler, J. R.,
H. Sasmor, and J. L. Betz.
1983.
A perfectly symmetric lac operator binds the lac repressor very tightly.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
80:6785-6789[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Simons, A.,
D. Tils,
B. von Wilcken-Bergmann, and B. Muller-Hill.
1984.
Possible ideal lac operator: Escherichia coli lac operator-like sequences from eukaryotic genomes lack the central G-C pair.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:1624-1628[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Strubin, M., and K. Struhl.
1992.
Yeast and human TFIID with altered DNA-binding specificity for TATA elements.
Cell
68:721-730[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Syroid, D. E., and J. P. Capone.
1994.
RNA chain elongation and termination by mammalian RNA polymerase III. Analysis of tRNA gene transcription by imposing a reversible factor-mediated block to elongation using a sequence-specific DNA binding protein.
J. Mol. Biol.
244:482-493[Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Tantin, D.,
A. Kansal, and M. Carey.
1997.
Recruitment of the putative transcription-repair coupling factor CSB/ERCC6 to RNA polymerase II elongation complexes.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:6803-6814[Abstract].
|
| 40.
|
Tinker, R. L.,
G. A. Kassavetis, and E. P. Geiduschek.
1994.
Detecting the ability of viral, bacterial and eukaryotic replication proteins to track along DNA.
EMBO J.
13:5330-5337[Medline].
|
| 41.
|
Tinker-Kulberg, R. L.,
T.-J. Fu,
E. P. Geiduschek, and G. A. Kassavetis.
1996.
A direct interaction between a DNA-tracking protein and a promoter recognition protein: implications for searching DNA sequence.
EMBO J.
15:5032-5039[Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Tsukiyama, T.,
C. Daniel,
J. Tamkun, and C. Wu.
1995.
ISWI, a member of the SWI2/SNF2 ATPase family, encodes the 140 kDa subunit of the nucleosome remodeling factor.
Cell
83:1021-1026[Medline].
|
| 43.
|
Tsukiyama, T., and C. Wu.
1997.
Chromatin remodeling and transcription.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
7:182-191[Medline].
|
| 44.
|
Utley, R. T.,
J. Cote,
T. Owen-Hughes, and J. Workman.
1997.
SWI/SNF stimulates the formation of disparate activator-nucleosome complexes but is partially redundant with cooperative binding.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:12642-12649[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Varga-Weisz, P. D.,
M. Wilm,
E. Bonte,
K. Dumas,
M. Mann, and P. B. Becker.
1997.
Chromatin-remodeling factor CHRAC contains the ATPases ISWI and topoisomerase II.
Nature
388:598-602[Medline].
|
| 46.
| Wang, D., and D. T. Auble. Unpublished
observations.
|
| 47.
|
Winter, R. B.,
O. G. Berg, and P. H. von Hippel.
1981.
Diffusion-driven mechanisms of protein translocation on nucleic acids. 3. The Escherichia coli lac repressor-operator interaction: kinetic measurements and conclusions.
Biochemistry
20:6961-6977[Medline].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 1999, p. 412-423, Vol. 19, No. 1
0270-7306/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Durr, H., Flaus, A., Owen-Hughes, T., Hopfner, K.-P.
(2006). Snf2 family ATPases and DExx box helicases: differences and unifying concepts from high-resolution crystal structures. Nucleic Acids Res
34: 4160-4167
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Klejman, M. P., Zhao, X., van Schaik, F. M. A., Herr, W., Timmers, H. Th. M.
(2005). Mutational analysis of BTAF1-TBP interaction: BTAF1 can rescue DNA-binding defective TBP mutants. Nucleic Acids Res
33: 5426-5436
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Pereira, L. A., Klejman, M. P., Ruhlmann, C., Kavelaars, F., Oulad-Abdelghani, M., Timmers, H. Th. M., Schultz, P.
(2004). Molecular Architecture of the Basal Transcription Factor B-TFIID. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 21802-21807
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Darst, R. P., Dasgupta, A., Zhu, C., Hsu, J.-Y., Vroom, A., Muldrow, T., Auble, D. T.
(2003). Mot1 Regulates the DNA Binding Activity of Free TATA-binding Protein in an ATP-dependent Manner. J. Biol. Chem.
278: 13216-13226
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Geisberg, J. V., Moqtaderi, Z., Kuras, L., Struhl, K.
(2002). Mot1 Associates with Transcriptionally Active Promoters and Inhibits Association of NC2 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Cell. Biol.
22: 8122-8134
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Pereira, L. A., van der Knaap, J. A., van den Boom, V., van den Heuvel, F. A. J., Timmers, H. T. M.
(2001). TAFII170 Interacts with the Concave Surface of TATA-Binding Protein To Inhibit Its DNA Binding Activity. Mol. Cell. Biol.
21: 7523-7534
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lee, D. W., Zhang, K., Ning, Z.-Q., Raabe, E. H., Tintner, S., Wieland, R., Wilkins, B. J., Kim, J. M., Blough, R. I., Arceci, R. J.
(2000). Proliferation-associated SNF2-like Gene (PASG): A SNF2 Family Member Altered in Leukemia1. Cancer Res.
60: 3612-3622
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Boyer, L. A., Shao, X., Ebright, R. H., Peterson, C. L.
(2000). Roles of the Histone H2A-H2B Dimers and the (H3-H4)2 Tetramer in Nucleosome Remodeling by the SWI-SNF Complex. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 11545-11552
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Adamkewicz, J. I., Mueller, C. G. F., Hansen, K. E., Prud'homme, W. A., Thorner, J.
(2000). Purification and Enzymic Properties of Mot1 ATPase, a Regulator of Basal Transcription in the Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 21158-21168
[Abstract]
[Full Text]