Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 1999, p. 796-806, Vol. 19, No. 1
0270-7306/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Biology Department, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130
Received 4 May 1998/Returned for modification 5 June 1998/Accepted 23 September 1998
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Mounting evidence suggests that eukaryotic RNA polymerases preassociate with multiple transcription factors in the absence of DNA, forming RNA polymerase holoenzyme complexes. We have purified an apparent RNA polymerase I (Pol I) holoenzyme from Xenopus laevis cells by sequential chromatography on five columns: DEAE-Sepharose, Biorex 70, Sephacryl S300, Mono Q, and DNA-cellulose. Single fractions from every column programmed accurate promoter-dependent transcription. Upon gel filtration chromatography, the Pol I holoenzyme elutes at a position overlapping the peak of Blue Dextran, suggesting a molecular mass in the range of ~2 MDa. Consistent with its large mass, Coomassie blue-stained sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gels reveal approximately 55 proteins in fractions purified to near homogeneity. Western blotting shows that TATA-binding protein precisely copurifies with holoenzyme activity, whereas the abundant Pol I transactivator upstream binding factor does not. Also copurifying with the holoenzyme are casein kinase II and a histone acetyltransferase activity with a substrate preference for histone H3. These results extend to Pol I the suggestion that signal transduction and chromatin-modifying activities are associated with eukaryotic RNA polymerases.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In eukaryotes, the three multisubunit RNA polymerases utilize auxiliary transcription factors to recognize gene promoters and initiate transcription from defined start points (10, 21, 24, 36, 44, 48, 50, 59, 73). RNA polymerase II (Pol II) was the first eukaryotic RNA polymerase shown to be associated with general transcription factors in a holoenzyme complex (28, 29, 46). The Pol II holoenzyme was subsequently shown to include additional activities including the SWI/SNF chromatin-remodeling activity (71), the protein complex dubbed "mediator" which interacts with the C-terminal domain of the largest Pol II subunit (27, 38), multiple protein kinases (34), and enzymes involved in DNA repair (38). The list of proteins associated with the Pol II holoenzyme continues to grow as antibodies against suspected components are developed and tested.
Evidence for a Pol III holoenzyme was first reported a decade ago (72). Recently, a Pol III holoenzyme was characterized in greater detail by the Roeder laboratory and shown to contain the essential transcription factors TFIIIB and TFIIIC (70). The Pol III holoenzyme is self-sufficient for transcription of tRNAs and other class III genes which do not require TFIIIA. The latter gene-specific activator must be added to the holoenzyme for transcription of 5S rRNA genes. The Pol III holoenzyme was also shown to include at least one activity involved in the rapid down-regulation of Pol III transcription following treatment with cycloheximide or adenovirus infection (70). Therefore, it appears that the Pol III holoenzyme, like the Pol II holoenzyme, contains activities which are not strictly required for transcription but which probably link transcription with cellular signaling pathways.
Initial evidence for RNA Pol I holoenzymes has come from the extensive purification of a plant Pol I-containing complex self-sufficient for accurate, promoter-dependent transcription (53) and from functional studies of mouse complexes immunoprecipitated with antibodies against Pol I subunits (58). Plant Pol I transcription factors have not yet been characterized; thus, the identification of proteins in the putative Pol I holoenzyme of Brassica oleracea has been limited to several small subunits of the Pol I core enzyme for which antibodies are available (53). In the better-characterized Pol I transcription systems of vertebrates, namely, human, mouse, rat, and Xenopus systems, rRNA gene transcription is thought to require the transcription factor SL1 (also known as TIF-IB, Rib-1, TIF, and TFI-D), assisted by upstream binding factor (UBF) (3-5, 12, 22, 25, 39, 54, 61, 64, 66). SL1 is a complex of TATA-binding protein (TBP) and several associated factors (13, 52, 57). UBF is a homodimer that can bend and wrap DNA, presumably facilitating correct juxtaposition of SL1, polymerase, or other proteins essential for promoter and enhancer function (2, 49, 52). Though stimulatory, UBF is nonessential for basal-level in vitro transcription of rat and mouse rRNA gene templates (31, 60). Interestingly, immunoprecipitated mouse holoenzyme complexes contain both TBP and UBF but are not self-sufficient for promoter-dependent transcription. Instead, addition of another activity, TIF-IC, is needed (58). Thus far, a TIF-IC-like activity has been identified only in rodents.
In this paper, we show that Xenopus laevis cell extracts can be purified by DEAE (anion-exchange), Biorex (cation-exchange), Sephacryl (gel filtration), Mono Q (analytical anion-exchange), DNA-cellulose (affinity), and glycerol gradient sedimentation to yield single fractions that initiate accurate rRNA gene transcription in vitro. We show that TBP copurifies with the putative Pol I holoenzyme, whereas UBF does not. Protein kinase and histone acetyltransferase (HAT) activities also copurify with holoenzyme activity, extending the suggestion that all three nuclear polymerases associate with other protein complexes to integrate cellular signaling, chromatin modification, and transcription.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Preparation of X. laevis S100 extracts.
X.
laevis Xlk2 kidney cells were grown as monolayers in glass roller
bottles in 50% L-15 medium (Sigma or Gibco) supplemented with 5% Nu
serum (Collaborative Research), 5% fetal calf serum (Gibco), and 100 U
each of penicillin and streptomycin per ml. Cell transcription extracts
were made according to the method of McStay and Reeder (41).
Briefly, cells were harvested at late log phase with phosphate-buffered
saline supplemented with 1 mM EDTA (pH 8.0) and collected by low-speed
centrifugation. After being washed in EDTA-free phosphate-buffered
saline, cells were swollen in hypotonic buffer and ruptured with a
Dounce homogenizer. After addition of KCl to a final concentration of
140 mM, extracts were subjected to centrifugation at 100,000 × g for 2 h at 4°C. The supernatant (S100) was dialyzed
against column buffer (20% glycerol, 25 mM HEPES [pH 7.9], 1 mM
dithiothreitol [DTT], and 0.1 mM EDTA) containing 100 mM KCl (CB100),
frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at
80°C.
Glycerol gradient sedimentation.
For glycerol gradient
sedimentation, 0.5 ml of transcriptionally active DE350 fraction was
layered onto 11.5-ml, 20 to 40% glycerol gradients containing 100 mM
KCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM EDTA, 0.2 mM EGTA, and 1 mM DTT.
Gradients were subjected to centrifugation at 40,000 rpm in a Beckman
SW41 rotor for 18 h at 4°C. Thirty ~0.4-ml fractions were
collected from the bottom of the tube. Aliquots were mixed with an
equal volume of glycerol-free buffer and tested for both total Pol I
activity (nicked calf thymus DNA template; 150 µg of
-amanitin per
ml) and promoter-dependent transcription.
Assay for nonspecific RNA Pol I activity.
Promoter-independent (nonspecific) total RNA Pol I activity was
measured as described in the work of Schwartz and Roeder
(56). Fractions dialyzed against CB100 were added to
reaction mixtures containing sheared calf thymus DNA (final
concentration, 25 µg/ml),
-amanitin (150 to 50 µg/ml),
nucleoside triphosphates (0.5 mM [each] ATP, GTP, and CTP and 0.04 mM
UTP), [
-32P]UTP (0.05 µCi/µl; specific activity,
3,000 Ci/mmol), MnCl2 (2 mM), and bovine serum albumin (1 mg/ml). After 15 min at 30°C, reaction mixtures were spotted on DE81
filters and washed repeatedly with 0.5 M sodium phosphate to remove
unincorporated UTP, followed by washing in 95% ethanol to speed
drying. Incorporated [
-32P]UTP bound to filters was
quantified by scintillation counting.
Assay for promoter-dependent RNA Pol I activity.
Promoter-dependent (specific) RNA Pol I transcription was performed in
30- to 40-µl reaction mixtures containing 10% glycerol, 25 mM HEPES
(pH 7.9), 90 mM KCl, 6 mM MgCl2, 1 mM DTT, 100 µg of
-amanitin per ml, 0.5 mM (each) nucleoside triphosphates, and 200 to
400 ng of template DNA. Reaction mixtures were incubated for 2 to
3 h at 25°C. Transcription reactions were analyzed by S1
protection with end-labeled, single-stranded 65-nucleotide probes
complementary to the RNA and spanning
15 to +50 or
21 to +44
relative to the transcription start site, +1. The labeled oligonucleotide and RNA were hybridized overnight at 65°C in 0.3 M
NaCl-10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5)-1 mM EDTA. S1 digestion was carried out
at 37°C for 1 h in 5% glycerol-50 mM NaCl-30 mM sodium
acetate (pH 4.5)-1 mM zinc sulfate-100 to 150 U of S1 nuclease per
ml. Products were resolved on 8% polyacrylamide-8 M urea gels. Gels were vacuum dried onto filter paper and exposed to X-ray film.
Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
(SDS-PAGE) and Western blotting.
Peak fractions were analyzed on
SDS-4.5 to 18% gradient polyacrylamide gels and stained with
Coomassie brilliant blue R-250. For Western blotting, SDS-7.5 or 10%
polyacrylamide gels were used. Proteins were transferred to
nitrocellulose or polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Amersham) with a
semidry blotting apparatus (Sartorius) at 100 mA for 3 to 4 h.
Membranes were incubated with several rabbit antisera: anti-TBP was a
generous gift of Paul Labhart, anti-Drosophila casein kinase
II (CKII) cross-reacting with the Xenopus
subunit was a
generous gift of Neil Osheroff, and anti-human CKII
and
' were
purchased from Upstate Biotechnology. Anti-Xenopus UBF was
raised in rabbits against the 328 N-terminal amino acids of UBF
expressed in Escherichia coli. Secondary antibodies for
Western blotting, coupled to horseradish peroxidase, were detected by
enhanced chemiluminescence according to the directions of the
manufacturer (Amersham). Alternatively, antibodies coupled to alkaline
phosphatase were detected by the conventional colorimetric assay
(Bio-Rad).
Protein kinase activity assay.
Mono Q peak fractions in
CB100 (4 µl) were incubated for 30 min at 25°C in 10-µl reaction
mixtures containing 3.5 µM ATP, 1 to 2 µCi of
[
-32P]ATP (6,000 Ci/mmol), and 7 mM MgCl2.
Reaction mixtures were then loaded onto an SDS-polyacrylamide gel.
Following electrophoresis, gels were fixed in methanol-acetic acid,
dried, and exposed to X-ray film.
HAT assays.
HAT assays were performed as described by
Brownell and Allis (8), with minor modifications. Ten
micrograms of HeLa core histones (kindly provided by J. Workman) or 25 µg of total calf thymus histones (Worthington; fraction HLY) was
incubated with 5 µl of S100 extract or dialyzed column fractions for
45 min at 37°C in 30- to 50-µl reaction mixtures. Buffer conditions
were 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.9), 1 mM DTT, 0.1 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, 10 mM butyric acid, 0.25 µM acetyl coenzyme A (CoA), and 100 nCi of
[3H] acetyl-CoA (26 Ci/mmol; Sigma). Reactions were
stopped with 5 volumes of cold (
20°C) acetone. Precipitated
proteins were washed with acetone, dissolved in SDS sample buffer, and
subjected to electrophoresis on an SDS-15% polyacrylamide gel. Gels
were treated with En3Hance cocktail (Kodak), and
3H-labeled proteins were detected by fluorography with
Kodak XAR film.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Initial evidence for a Pol I holoenzyme. Cell extracts of cultured X. laevis cells support accurate RNA Pol I transcription initiation from recombinant X. laevis rRNA minigenes (41). In this procedure, mechanically disrupted cells are adjusted to 140 mM KCl and subjected to centrifugation at 100,000 × g, and the high-speed supernatant (S100) is saved. The S100 fraction supports transcription from the rRNA gene promoter but contains only ~15% of the nonspecific RNA Pol I activity (promoter-independent transcription on nicked DNA) that can be assayed. The remaining 85% of the Pol I activity that can be detected is what can be extracted from the cell pellet at high salt concentrations (0.4 to 0.8 M KCl); these fractions do not support promoter-dependent transcription (1). It is likely that additional Pol I remains in crude nuclear-chromatin pellets after high salt extraction and that histones and other chromatin proteins extracted at high salt inhibit the in vitro Pol I assay (56). Therefore, we suspect that the actual amount of Pol I extracted with 140 mM KCl is substantially less than 15% of the total Pol I and is probably enriched in free polymerase not yet engaged in transcription elongation.
S100 fractions were dialyzed against 100 mM KCl buffer and applied to a DEAE column. The column was then washed with 100 mM KCl column buffer (CB100) and sequentially eluted with column buffer containing 175 mM KCl (CB175), CB350, and CB1000 to yield fractions designated DE175, DE350, and DE1000, respectively. Following dialysis, the flowthrough and step-eluted fractions were tested alone and in all combinations for their ability to support
-amanitin-resistant transcription.
Approximately 30% of the assayable Pol I activity flowed through the
DEAE column, ~10% was present in the DE175 fraction, and the
remaining ~60% was in the DE350 fraction. Only the DE350 fraction
programmed accurate transcription initiation, as expected from prior
studies (39). Though consistently less active than the
starting S100 (compare lanes 1 and 2 in Fig.
1B), the promoter-dependent
transcriptional activity of the DE350 fraction was not further
stimulated by addition of any combination of the flowthrough, DE175, or
DE1000 fractions (data not shown).
|
|
|
Purification of the putative Pol I holoenzyme to near homogeneity. Based on the initial results in Fig. 1 to 3, we developed a scheme for purification of the putative Pol I holoenzyme that integrated DEAE-Sepharose, Biorex 70, and Mono Q ion-exchange chromatography; DNA-affinity chromatography (DNA-cellulose); and purification according to mass by gel filtration (Sephacryl S300) or glycerol gradient sedimentation. The protocol empirically found to provide the highest degree of purification while maintaining the greatest yield of promoter-dependent transcription activity was one that minimized dilution and dialysis (Fig. 4A). According to this purification scheme, crude S100 extract was initially fractionated on DEAE. Proteins eluted in CB350 were diluted slightly to 250 mM KCl and then loaded onto a Biorex column equilibrated in CB250. The Biorex column was eluted in a single step with CB800. Though a 600 mM elution from Biorex is sufficient to recover polymerase, as shown in Fig. 3, the 800 mM elution was found not to disrupt the complex and was expected to dissociate any contaminating nucleic acid or nonspecifically associated proteins prior to gel filtration. The Biorex eluate in 800 mM KCl buffer was next loaded onto a 195-ml Sephacryl S300 gel filtration column equilibrated and developed in CB100. The Sephacryl column served two purposes, facilitating the purification of the holoenzyme according to its mass and at the same time desalting the holoenzyme fractions. The holoenzyme peak eluting from the Sephacryl column was fractionated on Mono Q, by using a relatively shallow gradient from 250 to 600 mM KCl to optimize separation from other proteins. Finally, Mono Q peak fractions were subjected to chromatography on DNA-cellulose and eluted with steps of increasing salt concentration.
|
15 was also prevalent in
transcription reactions with Mono Q (Fig. 5A, lane 4) or DC350 (lane 5)
fractions, whereas this signal was much weaker (but detectable) with
S100 extract (lane 3). Neither +1 nor
15 signals were obtained in
control reactions (lanes 1 and 2), as expected. McStay and Reeder
showed that an activity required for Pol I termination flows through
DEAE, whereas the Pol I transcription initiation factors bind to the
column and elute in the DE350 fraction (40). This activity
should be missing from our purified fractions. This suggested that the
15 signal might result from internal S1 cleavage of readthrough
transcripts initiated at +1 and going around the entire circular
plasmid construct and traversing the promoter region complementary to
the probe. Alternatively, transcription initiation sites elsewhere on
the plasmid could be a source of readthrough transcripts. A third possibility is that the
15 signal represents an alternative
transcription initiation site. The possibility that the
15 or +1
signals could be S1 artifacts resulting from internal digestion of
readthrough transcripts seemed unlikely given that neither site is
particularly AT rich. Nonetheless, a simple control experiment was
performed to directly test this possibility. For this experiment, rRNA
minigene sequences from
245 to +350 were transcribed into RNA with
the T7 promoter in the pBluescript plasmid located adjacent to the upstream border of the cloned minigene sequences (
245). These transcripts would be identical to any putative readthrough transcripts traversing the minigene. Increasing amounts of these T7 transcripts were hybridized to a 65-mer probe spanning
21 to +44. RNA-probe hybrids were then subjected to S1 nuclease digestion in reactions performed side by side with those using transcripts generated with the
S100, Mono Q, or DC350 fractions (lanes 3 to 5). Importantly, T7
transcripts were only digested to a size corresponding to the full-length probe (Fig. 5A, lanes 6 to 9). No fragments whose 5' ends
mapped to
15 or +1 were generated, indicating that the latter are not
S1 artifacts of readthrough transcripts. This suggests that the
15
signal probably represents an alternative initiation site upstream of
+1. A possibility is that the increased use of this site by proteins in
Mono Q peak and DC350 fractions compared to starting S100 extracts may
reflect the modification or loss of an activity that helps restrict
transcription initiation to +1. Interestingly, we have noted that in
fractions that have been stored for many months, the ability to
transcribe from +1 is labile and progressively lost over time. In such
"dead" fractions, transcription signals mapping to
15 can still
be detected, also suggesting a time-dependent decay in a specificity
factor (data not shown).
|
40 (lanes 1 and 2). Transcription was reduced
significantly with LS-50/-41 (lanes 3 and 4) and was further reduced
with LS-111/-102 (lanes 5 and 6), in agreement with prior studies
(51).
The protein compositions of peak fractions throughout the purification
scheme were compared following gradient SDS-PAGE and Coomassie blue
staining (Fig. 6). The protein
compositions of the peak fractions from the final two columns, Mono Q
and DNA-cellulose, are qualitatively similar. This suggests that
purification of the complex is approaching apparent homogeneity,
defined as the point at which no further reduction in complexity is
achieved by additional steps. Approximately 55 distinct bands are
visible in the DC350 fraction, and with the exception of prominent
bands at ~50 and ~33 kDa, most have similar staining intensities.
|
TBP, but not UBF, copurifies with the Pol I holoenzyme. Mono Q and DNA-cellulose peak fractions were tested for activities suspected to be associated with the Pol I complex and for which antibodies or biochemical assays were available. With a polyclonal antiserum raised against recombinant Xenopus TBP (generously provided by Paul Labhart), TBP was readily detected in Mono Q fractions 16 to 20, precisely cofractionating with the fractions competent for promoter-dependent transcription (Fig. 7A). TBP was also detected in the DNA-cellulose peak fraction (Fig. 7B, last lane). Interestingly, comparison of peak fractions throughout the purification scheme reveals the progressive enrichment of a TBP isoform with decreased SDS-PAGE gel mobility relative to the starting S100 (Fig. 7B), most likely due to phosphorylation or some other posttranslational modification. Preimmune serum did not cross-react with any Xenopus proteins of the expected size for TBP (data not shown).
|
Protein kinase activity copurifies with the Pol I holoenzyme.
We tested for protein kinase(s) by incubating Mono Q fractions flanking
and including the holoenzyme peak with [
-32P]ATP in a
magnesium-containing buffer, followed by SDS-PAGE and autoradiography.
As shown in Fig. 8, one or more protein
kinases were able to phosphorylate many of the proteins in Mono Q
fractions 14 to 22, with labeling activity highest in fractions 17 to
20, closely corresponding to the peak holoenzyme fractions. A test of
the nucleotide specificities of the kinase(s) revealed that labeling
with ATP could be competed with excess unlabeled GTP but not CTP (Fig.
8B, compare lanes 2 to 5 to lane 1), consistent with the known
properties of CKII. Labeling of some, though not all, protein bands in
peak holoenzyme fractions was inhibited by heparin, a known inhibitor
of CKII (20) (Fig. 8B, compare lanes 7 and 8 to lane 6).
Furthermore, a peptide containing a consensus CKII phosphorylation site
(15) was a competitor for the labeling of most proteins
phosphorylated by the endogenous kinase within the peak Mono Q fraction
(Fig. 8B, lane 11). This same peptide could be phosphorylated when
mixed with the peak holoenzyme fraction and supplied with either
[
-32P]ATP or [
-32P]GTP as the
phosphate donor (Fig. 8C). Confirmation that CKII is present in Mono Q
peak holoenzyme fractions was obtained by Western blotting with a
polyclonal antiserum raised against Drosophila CKII
(generously provided by Neil Osheroff) and a commercial antiserum raised against human
and
' CKII subunits, both of which
cross-react with the appropriate subunits of Xenopus CKII.
With these antibodies, CKII was detected in Mono Q fractions 17 to 20, corresponding closely with the Pol I holoenzyme peak (Fig.
9A). CKII was also present in the peak
DNA-cellulose fraction (Fig. 9B).
|
|
Holoenzyme fractions contain HAT activity. Our studies of uniparental rRNA gene silencing in interspecies hybrids (nucleolar dominance) have suggested that rRNA gene activity can be controlled via histone acetylation and associated chromatin modifications (11). We tested for HAT activity by assaying the ability of Pol I holoenzyme fractions to catalyze the labeling of purified histones with [3H]acetyl-CoA (Fig. 10). In starting S100 whole-cell extracts, HAT activity was readily detected, with histone H4 being the predominant substrate (lane 1). Different HAT activities were fractionated at the Biorex purification step; the flowthrough was enriched in H4 HAT activity (lane 2), whereas the 0.8 M KCl step was enriched for an activity with a substrate preference for histones H3 and H2A (lane 3). The latter HAT activity copurified with the holoenzyme peak on Sephacryl S300 (lane 4), Mono Q (lane 5), and DNA-cellulose (lane 8). These data indicate that HAT activity is closely associated with, or intrinsic to, the Pol I holoenzyme. Future studies using chromatin-assembled minigenes will be needed to test whether the associated HAT activity assists in the transcription of these templates.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Prior studies have shown that the Xenopus Pol I transcription system can be split by heparin chromatography into multiple transcription factors that must be added back together to reconstitute transcription (39). However, in our scheme, which purposely omits the heparin column, all activities essential for accurate, promoter-dependent transcription initiation copurify with Pol I on at least five columns. The order of the columns does not appear to be critical. For instance, the Biorex column can precede or follow the Mono Q column. Likewise, the purification scheme can be modified such that the Sephacryl gel filtration column can be omitted, instead being replaced by glycerol gradient sedimentation following DEAE, Biorex, and Mono Q chromatography (14a).
The degree to which we have purified the holoenzyme is frustratingly difficult to estimate based on conventional biochemical criteria. As we have discussed in detail previously (53), the major problem is the extreme lability of Pol I activity. Only a portion of the total Pol I activity loaded on each column can be recovered and accounted for among the subsequent fractions, and mixing fractions does not reconstitute lost activity. Therefore, specific activity is not a useful measure of purity because the continual loss of activity leads to large and compounded errors. On a protein mass basis, final DNA-cellulose peak fractions contain approximately 4,000-fold less protein than the starting amount of S100 protein.
The possibility that the Pol I transcription machinery copurifies by virtue of being bound to DNA seems unlikely. First, purification of the functional holoenzyme was unaffected by treatment of starting S100 extracts with DNase. Second, though the crude extract and DE350 fractions contain considerable amounts of nucleic acid (both RNA and DNA), virtually all contaminating nucleic acid flows through the Biorex column based on ethidium bromide staining and fluorometry (following Hoechst dye binding) and none can be detected following Mono Q chromatography. The fact that the holoenzyme binds to DNA-cellulose and elutes at moderate salt suggests that DNA-binding sites within the complex are unoccupied. One could argue that the interaction with DNA-cellulose is simply an ionic interaction rather than a DNA affinity interaction. However, we have evidence that the Pol I holoenzyme binds promoter DNA in vitro in a gel mobility shift assay and thus must be free of associated DNA or must be able to readily exchange onto a promoter probe, apparently as an intact complex (unpublished data). Probably the strongest argument is that the 800 mM KCl elution from the Biorex column is loaded without dialysis onto the Sephacryl gel filtration column; ionic interactions between the holoenzyme complex and DNA should be disrupted at such high salt concentrations and are unlikely to occur again during chromatography.
In yeast, in vitro transcription studies have suggested that neither TBP nor upstream activation factor is essential for basal-level Pol I transcription from the core promoter. However, TBP is required for full promoter activity in vitro, apparently by facilitating an interaction between upstream activation factor and core factor (62). TBP is also required for yeast Pol I transcription in vivo (14, 55). In vertebrates and Acanthamoeba, all studies to date have suggested that TBP is essential for Pol I transcription (44, 48); thus, one would predict that a Pol I holoenzyme capable of promoter-dependent transcription should include TBP. Indeed, TBP precisely cofractionates with Xenopus holoenzyme fractions that support transcription from the rRNA gene promoter, supporting this prediction. It is interesting that TBP should be so stably associated with the holoenzyme, even at salt concentrations as high as 0.8 M KCl, whereas it can apparently dissociate readily from the Xenopus Rib-1-SL1 complex unless stabilized by UBF (7). We speculate that protein-protein interactions within the putative holoenzyme complex prevent dissociation of TBP (and presumably all of Rib-1), perhaps in a manner analogous to the way in which UBF can stabilize TBP within the Rib1 complex (7).
The role of UBF in Pol I transcription is controversial. Due to its abundance and ability to bend and wrap naked DNA, we and others have proposed that UBF is likely to serve a structural role, helping to organize rRNA genes into a transcriptionally competent format (2, 49, 52). UBF's ability to counteract transcriptional repression caused by histone H1 or Ku protein on naked DNA templates (31, 32) and its ability to displace linker histone from fully assembled nucleosomes (26) are consistent with a defining role in chromatin structure. However, there is disagreement concerning the need for UBF in the activation of Pol I transcription. In mouse and rat cells, UBF has been shown to be stimulatory but not essential for basal-level transcription. In contrast, available evidence has suggested that UBF is required for transcription from the Xenopus and human promoters (3, 4, 7, 13, 39). One possibility is that the requirement for UBF depends on the purity of the system, with crude fractions requiring UBF as an antirepressor. Experiments by Kuhn and Grummt support the latter interpretation (31).
Based on the current study, we suggest that UBF is nonessential for basal-level transcription in vitro from the Xenopus promoter, in agreement with the conclusions reached by using rodent systems. In apparent contradiction to our demonstration that UBF and the Xenopus holoenzyme do not precisely copurify, immunoprecipitation studies have suggested a UBF-Pol I holoenzyme association in mouse cell extracts (57). A possibility is that UBF-holoenzyme interactions occur but are transient, such that a small fraction of total UBF can be immunoprecipitated with the holoenzyme in crude fractions. Given the vast excess of UBF over holoenzyme in the cell, transient UBF-holoenzyme interactions would seem to be necessary to prevent the holoenzyme from being sequestered at nonpromoter sites bound by UBF. Importantly, our finding that UBF does not copurify with the holoenzyme suggests that UBF is not integral to the complex but does not rule out its ability to interact with the holoenzyme.
Another difference between the Xenopus and mouse holoenzymes is that the Xenopus complex is self-sufficient for promoter-dependent transcription, whereas the mouse holoenzyme requires supplemental TIF-IC (57). In agreement with the results reported here, highly purified Pol I holoenzyme fractions from the plant B. oleracea are also self-sufficient for transcription (53). One possibility is that TIF-IC is easily displaced from the mouse polymerase but is tightly associated with polymerase in other species. It is noteworthy that similar controversies exist concerning the composition of RNA Pol II holoenzymes in vertebrates and yeast (18). For instance, some groups have purified the Pol II holoenzyme in a form containing all essential transcription factors and self-sufficient for promoter-dependent transcription (46, 47) or in a form associated with the chromatin-remodeling complex SWI/SNF (71). Other groups have isolated the Pol II holoenzyme as a complex missing essential transcription factors or SWI/SNF (18, 28, 33).
CKII is a ubiquitous kinase known to be important for cell cycle control and signaling pathways regulating cell proliferation (1a, 35, 42). CKII has been implicated in the control of rRNA gene expression for some time (21), with good evidence that it is involved in the phosphorylation of the UBF acidic tail, the C terminus rich in serine and acidic amino acids (45, 67, 68). Our finding that CKII is associated with the Pol I holoenzyme suggests that UBF-holoenzyme interactions might result in UBF phosphorylation. The DNA-binding activity of UBF does not appear to be affected by its growth-dependent phosphorylation state (68), suggesting that phosphorylation affects another, currently undefined, step. We suspect that a role for CKII may become apparent under UBF-dependent transcription conditions. CKII was recently shown to be associated with immunoprecipitated rat RNA Pol I (19); therefore, it seems likely that CKII is associated with mammalian Pol I holoenzymes as it is in Xenopus. The significance of this association remains to be demonstrated.
Several well-known Pol II coactivator and transcription factor complexes have HAT activity, including the GCN5-containing SAGA complex (16, 69) and TFIID (43). In addition, ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling activities such as SWI/SNF have been found in association with Pol II holoenzymes (71). These results suggest that assembly of transcription preinitiation complexes involves activators, general transcription factors, and holoenzymes that not only bind to DNA and one another but also reposition nucleosomes and hyperacetylate their histones in the vicinity of gene promoters (17, 23, 63). Thus, gene activation increasingly appears to be dependent on chromatin modifications that facilitate gene derepression. Association of HAT activity with the Pol I holoenzyme is consistent with a genome-wide role for chromatin modifications in gene regulation and is consistent with our observation that histone hyperacetylation is correlated with rRNA gene activation in the epigenetic phenomenon of nucleolar dominance (11).
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Liang Annie Shen for excellent technical assistance, Jerry Workman (Pennsylvania State University) for the gift of purified HeLa histones, Neil Osheroff (Vanderbilt University) for the gift of antibodies against Drosophila CKII, and Paul Labhart (Scripps Research Institute) and Brian McStay (University of Dundee) for gifts of antibodies against Xenopus TBP. We are grateful to Larry Rothblum (Geisinger Clinic) for helpful discussions and for sharing unpublished results and materials.
This work was supported by NIH grant 5-RO1-GM50910 to C.S.P. Annie-Claude Albert was supported, in part, by a W. M. Keck Fellowship awarded through the Washington University School of Medicine.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Biology Department, Washington University, Campus Box 1137, One Brookings Dr., St. Louis, MO 63130. Phone: (314) 935-7569. Fax: (314) 935-4432. E-mail: pikaard{at}biodec.wustl.edu.
Present address: Department of Biochemistry, Kansas State
University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Albert, A.-C. Unpublished data. |
| 1a. |
Allende, J. E., and C. C. Allende.
1995.
Protein kinases. 4. Protein kinase CK2: an enzyme with multiple substrates and a puzzling regulation.
FASEB J.
9:313-323 |
| 2. |
Bazett-Jones, D.,
B. Leblanc,
M. Herfort, and T. Moss.
1994.
Short-range DNA looping by the Xenopus HMG-box transcription factor, xUBF.
Science
264:1134-1137 |
| 3. |
Bell, S. P.,
H. M. Jantzen, and R. Tjian.
1990.
Assembly of alternative multiprotein complexes directs rRNA promoter selectivity.
Genes Dev.
4:943-954 |
| 4. |
Bell, S. P.,
R. M. Learned,
H. M. Jantzen, and R. Tjian.
1988.
Functional cooperativity between transcription factors UBF1 and SL1 mediates human ribosomal RNA synthesis.
Science
241:1192-1197 |
| 5. | Bell, S. P., C. S. Pikaard, R. H. Reeder, and R. Tjian. 1989. Molecular mechanisms governing species-specific transcription of ribosomal RNA. Cell 59:489-497[Medline]. |
| 6. | Berk, A. J., and P. A. Sharp. 1977. Sizing and mapping of early adenovirus mRNAs by gel electrophoresis of S1 endonuclease-digested hybrids. Cell 12:721-732[Medline]. |
| 7. | Bodeker, M., C. Cairns, and B. McStay. 1996. Upstream binding factor stabilizes Rib 1, the TATA-binding-protein-containing Xenopus laevis RNA polymerase I transcription factor, by multiple protein interactions in a DNA-independent manner. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16:5572-5578[Abstract]. |
| 8. |
Brownell, J. E., and C. D. Allis.
1995.
An activity gel assay detects a single, catalytically active histone acetyltransferase subunit in Tetrahymena macronuclei.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:6364-6368 |
| 9. | Bunick, D., R. Zandomeni, S. Ackerman, and R. Weinmann. 1982. Mechanism of RNA polymerase II-specific initiation of transcription in vitro: ATP requirement and uncapped runoff transcripts. Cell 29:877-886[Medline]. |
| 10. | Buratowski, S. 1994. The basics of basal transcription by RNA polymerase II. Cell 77:1-3[Medline]. |
| 11. |
Chen, Z. J., and C. S. Pikaard.
1997.
Epigenetic silencing of RNA polymerase I transcription: a role for DNA methylation and histone modification in nucleolar dominance.
Genes Dev.
11:2124-2136 |
| 12. |
Clos, J.,
D. Buttgereit, and I. Grummt.
1986.
A purified transcription factor (TIF-IB) binds to essential sequences of the mouse rDNA promoter.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
83:604-608 |
| 13. |
Comai, L.,
J. C. B. M. Zomerdijk,
H. Beckmann,
S. Zhou,
A. Admon, and R. Tjian.
1994.
Reconstitution of transcription factor SL1: exclusive binding of TBP by SL1 or TFIID subunits.
Science
266:1966-1972 |
| 14. | Cormack, B. P., and K. Struhl. 1992. The TATA-binding protein is required for transcription by all three nuclear RNA polymerases in yeast cells. Cell 69:685-696[Medline]. |
| 14a. | Denton, M., and C. S. Pikaard. Unpublished data. |
| 15. | Gatica, M., A. Jedlicki, C. C. Allende, and J. E. Allende. 1994. Activity of the E75E76 mutant of the alpha subunit of casein kinase II from Xenopus laevis. FEBS Lett. 339:93-96[Medline]. |
| 16. |
Grant, P. A.,
L. Duggan,
J. Cote,
S. M. Roberts,
J. E. Brownell,
R. Candau,
R. Ohba,
T. Owen-Hughes,
C. D. Allis,
F. Winston,
S. L. Berger, and J. L. Workman.
1997.
Yeast Gcn5 functions in two multisubunit complexes to acetylate nucleosomal histones: characterization of an Ada complex and the SAGA (Spt/Ada) complex.
Genes Dev.
11:1640-1650 |
| 17. | Grunstein, M. 1997. Histone acetylation in chromatin structure and transcription. Nature 389:349-352[Medline]. |
| 18. | Halle, J.-P., and M. Meisterernst. 1996. Gene expression: increasing evidence for a transcriptosome. Trends Genet. 12:161-163[Medline]. |
| 19. |
Hannan, R. D.,
W. M. Hempel,
A. Cavanaugh,
T. Arino,
S. I. Dimitrov,
T. Moss, and L. I. Rothblum.
1998.
Affinity purification of mammalian RNA polymerase I.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:1257-1267 |
| 20. |
Hathaway, G. M.,
T. H. Lubben, and J. A. Traugh.
1980.
Inhibition of casein kinase II by heparin.
J. Biol. Chem.
255:8038-8041 |
| 21. | Jacob, S. T. 1995. Regulation of ribosomal gene transcription. Biochem. J. 306:617-626. |
| 22. |
Jantzen, H.-M.,
A. M. Chow,
D. S. King, and R. Tjian.
1992.
Multiple domains of the RNA polymerase I activator hUBF interact with the TATA-binding protein complex hSL1 to mediate transcription.
Genes Dev.
6:1950-1963 |
| 23. | Kadonaga, J. T. 1998. Eukaryotic transcription: an interlaced network of transcription factors and chromatin-modifying machines. Cell 92:307-313[Medline]. |
| 24. | Kassavetis, G. A., C. Bardeleben, B. Bartholomew, B. R. Braun, C. A. P. Joazeiro, M. Pisano, and E. P. Geiduschek. 1994. Transcription by RNA polymerase III, p. 107-126. In R. C. Conaway, and J. W. Conaway (ed.), Transcription mechanisms and regulation. Raven Press, New York, N.Y. |
| 25. |
Kato, H.,
M. Nagamine,
R. Kominami, and M. Muramatsu.
1986.
Formation of the transcription initiation complex on mammalian rDNA.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
6:3418-3427 |
| 26. | Kermekchiev, M., J. L. Workman, and C. S. Pikaard. 1997. Nucleosome binding by the polymerase I transactivator upstream binding factor displaces linker histone H1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:5833-5842[Abstract]. |
| 27. | Kim, Y. J., S. Björklund, Y. Li, M. H. Sayre, and R. D. Kornberg. 1994. A multiprotein mediator of transcriptional activation and its interaction with the C-terminal repeat domain of RNA polymerase II. Cell 77:599-608[Medline]. |
| 28. | Koleske, A. J., and R. A. Young. 1995. The RNA polymerase II holoenzyme and its implications for gene regulation. Trends Biochem. Sci. 20:113-116[Medline]. |
| 29. | Koleske, A. J., and R. A. Young. 1994. An RNA polymerase II holoenzyme responsive to activators. Nature 368:466-469[Medline]. |
| 30. |
Kuhn, A.,
T. M. Gottlieb,
S. P. Jackson, and I. Grummt.
1995.
DNA-dependent protein kinase: a potent inhibitor of transcription by RNA polymerase I.
Genes Dev.
9:193-203 |
| 31. |
Kuhn, A., and I. Grummt.
1992.
Dual role of the nucleolar transcription factor UBF: trans-activator and antirepressor.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
89:7340-7344 |
| 32. |
Kuhn, A.,
V. Stefanovsky, and I. Grummt.
1993.
The nucleolar transcription activator UBF relieves Ku antigen-mediated repression of mouse ribosomal gene transcription.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:2057-2063 |
| 33. | Li, Y., S. Bjorklund, Y. J. Kim, and R. D. Kornberg. 1996. Yeast RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. Methods Enzymol. 273:172-175[Medline]. |
| 34. | Liao, S. M., J. Zhang, D. A. Jeffery, A. J. Koleske, C. M. Thompson, D. M. Chao, M. Viljoen, H. J. vanVuuren, and R. A. Young. 1995. A kinase-cyclin pair in the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme. Nature 374:193-196[Medline]. |
| 35. | Litchfield, D. W., and B. Luscher. 1993. Casein kinase II in signal transduction and cell cycle regulation. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 127/128:187-199. |
| 36. | Lobo, S. M., and N. T. Hernandez. 1994. Transcription of snRNA genes by RNA polymerases II and III, p. 127-160. In R. C. Conaway, and J. W. Conaway (ed.), Transcription mechanisms and regulation. Raven Press, New York, N.Y. |
| 37. |
Lofquist, A. K.,
H. Li,
M. A. Imboden, and M. R. Paule.
1993.
Promoter opening (melting) and transcription initiation by RNA polymerase I requires neither nucleotide beta,gamma hydrolysis nor protein phosphorylation.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:3233-3238 |
| 38. | Maldonado, E., R. Shiekhattar, M. Sheldon, H. Cho, R. Drapkin, P. Rickert, E. Lees, C. W. Anderson, S. Linn, and D. Reinberg. 1996. A human RNA polymerase II complex associated with SRB and DNA-repair proteins. Nature 381:86-89[Medline]. |
| 39. | McStay, B., C. H. Hu, C. S. Pikaard, and R. H. Reeder. 1991. xUBF and Rib 1 are both required for formation of a stable polymerase I promoter complex in X. laevis. EMBO J. 10:2297-2303[Medline]. |
| 40. |
McStay, B., and R. H. Reeder.
1990.
A DNA-binding protein is required for termination of transcription by RNA polymerase I in Xenopus laevis.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:2793-2800 |
| 41. | McStay, B., and R. H. Reeder. 1986. A termination site for Xenopus RNA polymerase I also acts as an element of an adjacent promoter. Cell 47:913-920[Medline]. |
| 42. | Meisner, H., and M. P. Czech. 1991. Phosphorylation of transcriptional factors and cell-cycle-dependent proteins by casein kinase II. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 3:474-483[Medline]. |
| 43. | Mizzen, C. A., X. J. Yang, T. Kokubo, J. E. Brownell, A. J. Bannister, T. Owen-Hughes, J. Workman, L. Wang, S. L. Berger, T. Kouzarides, Y. Nakatani, and C. D. Allis. 1996. The TAF(II)250 subunit of TFIID has histone acetyltransferase activity. Cell 87:1261-1270[Medline]. |
| 44. | Moss, T., and V. Y. Stefanovsky. 1995. Promotion and regulation of ribosomal transcription in eukaryotes by RNA polymerase I. Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol. 50:25-66[Medline]. |
| 45. |
O'Mahony, D. J.,
S. D. Smith,
W. Xie, and L. I. Rothblum.
1992.
Analysis of the phosphorylation, DNA-binding and dimerization properties of the RNA polymerase I transcription factors UBF1 and UBF2.
Nucleic Acids Res.
20:1301-1308 |
| 46. | Ossipow, V., J. P. Tassan, E. A. Nigg, and U. Schibler. 1995. A mammalian RNA polymerase II holoenzyme containing all components required for promoter-specific transcription initiation. Cell 83:137-146[Medline]. |
| 47. |
Pan, G.,
T. Aso, and J. Greenblatt.
1997.
Interaction of elongation factors TFIIS and elongin A with a human RNA polymerase II holoenzyme capable of promoter-specific initiation and responsive to transcriptional activators.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:24563-24571 |
| 48. | Paule, M. R. 1994. Transcription of ribosomal RNA by eukaryotic RNA polymerase I, p. 83-106. In R. C. Conaway, and J. W. Conaway (ed.), Transcription mechanisms and regulation. Raven Press, New York, N.Y. |
| 49. |
Putnam, C. D.,
G. P. Copenhaver,
M. L. Denton, and C. S. Pikaard.
1994.
The RNA polymerase I transactivator upstream binding factor requires its dimerization domain and high-mobility group (HMG) box 1 to bend, wrap, and positively supercoil enhancer DNA.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:6476-6488 |
| 50. | Reeder, R. H. (ed.). 1992. Regulation of transcription by RNA polymerase I, vol. 1. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y. |
| 51. |
Reeder, R. H.,
D. Pennock,
B. McStay,
J. Roan,
E. Tolentino, and P. Walker.
1987.
Linker scanner mutagenesis of the Xenopus laevis ribosomal gene promoter.
Nucleic Acids Res.
15:7429-7441 |
| 52. | Reeder, R. H., C. S. Pikaard, and B. McStay. 1995. UBF, an architectural element for RNA polymerase I promoters. Nucleic Acids Mol. Biol. 9:251-263. |
| 53. |
Saez-Vasquez, J., and C. S. Pikaard.
1997.
Extensive purification of a putative RNA polymerase I holoenzyme from plants that accurately initiates rRNA gene transcription in vitro.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:11869-11874 |
| 54. |
Schnapp, A., and I. Grummt.
1991.
Transcription complex formation at the mouse rDNA promoter involves the stepwise association of four transcription factors and RNA polymerase I.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:24588-24595 |
| 55. | Schultz, M. C., R. H. Reeder, and S. Hahn. |