Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2000, p. 3633-3639, Vol. 20, No. 10
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Complex Transcriptional Regulatory Mechanisms
Control Expression of the E2F3 Locus
Monique R.
Adams,
Rosalie
Sears,
Faison
Nuckolls,
Gustavo
Leone,
and
Joseph R.
Nevins*
Department of Genetics, Howard Hughes Medical
Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
27710
Received 29 October 1999/Returned for modification 23 November
1999/Accepted 22 February 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
E2F transcription activity has been shown to play a critical role
in cell growth control, regulating the expression of a variety of genes
that encode proteins important for the initiation of DNA replication
and cell cycle regulation. We have shown that the E2F3 locus encodes
two protein products: the E2F3a product, which is tightly regulated by
cell growth, and the E2F3b product, which is constitutively expressed
throughout the cell cycle. To further explore the mechanism controlling
the expression of the two E2F3 gene products, we analyzed the genomic
sequences flanking the 5' region of E2F3a and E2F3b. We find that a
series of E2F binding sites confer negative control on the E2F3a
promoter in quiescent cells, similar to the control of the E2F1 and
E2F2 promoters. In addition, a group of E-box elements, which are Myc
binding sites, confer responsiveness to Myc and are necessary for full activation of the E2F3a promoter in response to growth stimulation. Based on these results and past experiments, it appears that the E2F1,
E2F2, and E2F3a genes are similarly regulated by growth stimulation,
involving a combination of E2F-dependent negative control and
Myc-mediated positive control. In contrast, the constitutive expression
of the E2F3b gene more closely reflects the control of expression of
the E2F4 and E2F5 genes.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Considerable effort has been devoted
to the elucidation of the regulatory pathways that govern the control
of gene activity in relation to cell growth. Such work has led to the
delineation of a pathway involving the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor
protein that appears to be critically important for the transition from quiescence and into S phase. The activity of the Rb protein is regulated by the action of G1 cyclin-dependent kinases
(cdk), primarily the D-type cyclins and associated cdk4 kinase. The
importance of the Rb pathway is emphasized by the fact that disruption
of various components that regulate the cell cycle, which regulate these kinases, can lead to the development of cancer (11).
The regulatory function of the Rb tumor suppressor protein appears to
largely depend on the ability of Rb to bind to and inhibit the family
of E2F transcription factors (8, 23, 24). In addition to
activating the transcription of a group of genes that encode proteins
necessary for DNA synthesis, it has been shown that E2F transcription
factors activate genes that encode proteins that are involved in
initiation of replication and maintenance of cell cycle regulation,
including Orc1, Cdc6, and Mcm and cyclin E, cyclin A, and cdc2,
respectively (5, 22).
The E2F family of proteins includes six distinct E2F members and at
least two heterodimer partners, DP1 and DP2 (5, 22). Whereas
the levels of DP protein are generally in abundance and do not appear
to be limiting for E2F activity, dramatic changes of E2F proteins have
been observed. Although the expression of E2F4 and E2F5 genes appear to
relatively constant throughout the cell cycle (6, 26), E2F1
and E2F2 gene expression has been found to dramatically increase in
late G1 (10, 12, 21, 27). The complexity of E2F
activity resulting from the formation of a variety of heterodimeric
protein complexes has led to the speculation that individual E2F family
members might have a distinct role in cellular growth. For example,
individual E2F family members might integrate distinct signaling
pathways within the cell to facilitate the orderly progression
throughout the cell cycle. Therefore, individual E2F genes or proteins
might respond to distinct extracellular growth factors or distinct
signal transduction pathways. Indeed, recent evidence indicates that
distinct roles can be ascribed to individual E2F family members. For
example, E2F1 has been shown to play a critical and unique role in the
induction of apoptosis (3, 13, 14, 25, 28, 30). E2F3 has
also been suggested to play a role in transcription activation but,
unlike E2F1, it appears to be important for the efficient induction of
the S phase in cycling cells (18). In contrast, E2F4 and
E2F5 proteins associate with the Rb-related p130 protein in quiescent
cells, where the complexes appear to function as transcription
repressors, preventing the expression of various genes encoding
proteins important for cell growth.
The E2F2 and E2F3 genes were originally identified by low-stringency
hybridization as E2F1-related genes, constituting an E2F subfamily that
shared sequence and function (16). We have now identified a
novel E2F3 product that specifically interacts with Rb in quiescent
cells (19). This novel product has been termed E2F3b and is
encoded by a unique mRNA transcribed from an intronic promoter within
the E2F3 locus. E2F3b RNA differs from the previously characterized
E2F3 RNA, which is now termed E2F3a, by the nature of the initial
coding exon (Fig. 1A). In contrast to the
E2F3a product, which is tightly regulated by cell growth, the expression of E2F3b remains constant throughout the cell
cycle. In addition, the E2F3b protein uniquely associates with Rb in
quiescent cells.


View larger version (1936K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
E2F3 genomic organization. (A) Schematic depiction of
the domain organization of the E2F3a and E2F3b products. (B) Schematic
depiction of the E2F3 genomic organization at the sites specifying
initiation of transcription. The exon structures defining the E2F3a and
E2F3b transcripts, which involve utilization of alternate transcription
start sites and thus distinct initial exon sequences, have been defined
(19). (C) DNA sequence in the 5'-flanking region of the
mouse E2F3 gene. The +1 transcription site for both E2F3a and E2F3b is
based on the longest clone sequenced from the RACE analysis as well as
on primer extension analysis. Boxed sequences represent putative E2F
and Myc binding sites as well as other consensus sites.
|
|
We have now explored the mechanisms controlling the expression of both
E2F3a and E2F3b during a cell proliferative event through the isolation
and analysis of the promoter elements for these two loci. Sequence
analysis of the E2F3a flanking sequence reveals a variety of known
transcription factor binding sites, including both E-box elements and
E2F binding sites. In contrast, the E2F3b flanking sequence contains no
such elements. We also find that the E2F3a promoter is subject to
E2F-dependent negative regulation in quiescent cells, as was previously
demonstrated for the E2F1 and E2F2 promoters, and that Myc also
contributes to the positive activation of the E2F3a promoter. In
contrast, the E2F3b promoter is constitutively active in quiescent and
growing cells, reflecting the fact that the E2F3b product is not
regulated as a function of cell growth.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell culture.
REF52 cells were grown in Dulbecco modified
Eagle medium (DMEM) containing 10% serum (5% fetal bovine serum and
5% calf serum). To bring cells to quiescence, cultures at 30%
confluence (24 h after plating) were incubated in DMEM containing
0.25% serum for 48 h. To stimulate cell growth, the cells were
fed with fresh medium containing 20% serum.
Construction of plasmids.
The E2F3a luciferase expression
vector was generated by subcloning the 2-kb promoter fragment of E2F3a
from SacI/HaeII-digested 3kbH3pBS into the
SacI/HindIII-digested pGL2Basic (Promega).
The primers GAGAGAGATCTTTCCGAAAGCAGCCTGG and
GAGAGAGATCTAATACCCTCCTCAGCG containing nested
BglII sites were used to generate a 1.0-kb E2F3b promoter
fragment via PCR. The PCR product was digested with BglII and subcloned into BglII-digested pGL2Basic. The E2F3a
(E2F
) plasmid was created using the GeneEditor (Promega) in vitro
site-directed mutagenesis kit as specified by the manufacturer. The
following point mutations were incorporated (the wild-type sequence is
followed by mutant sequence): E2F site 1, GCGGGAAA to
GCTTGAAA; E2F site 2, TTTCGCGGG to
TTTCAAGGG; and E2F site 3, GCGCGTAA to
GCTTGTAA. The E2F3a (Myc
) plasmid was created using the
Transformer (Clontech) site-directed mutagenesis kit as specified by
the manufacturer. Briefly, the unique SalI site in the
pGL2Basic vector backbone was altered using the selection
oligonucleotide 5'-CAAGGGCATCGGTCCACGGATCCAGACAT-3'. The
following mutations were made: Myc site 1, CACGCG to
ATCGAT; Myc site 2, CACATG to ATCAAT;
and Myc site 3, CACCTG to ATCCAT. The
primers GAGAGAGGTACCCCCCTCCCTTGCAAC containing a
KpnI site at the 5' end and GGCCCGGAGAGCAAGGCCCC
were used to generate the
733 E2F3b fragment via PCR. The PCR
product was digested with KpnI/SacII and
subcloned into KpnI/SacII-digested E2F3b
luciferase expression vector. The
350 E2F3b fragment was generated
via XhoI/SacII digestion of E2F3b followed by a
religation of the 6.0-kb fragment. Cytomegalovirus (CMV)-Myc was a gift
from S. Hann (Vanderbilt University) (7). The control vector
pRc-CMV was purchased from Invitrogen. All constructs were confirmed by sequencing.
Northern analysis.
Poly(A)+ RNA was isolated
from an equal amount of total RNA and processed for Northern analysis
as described previously (2).
Promoter transfection assays.
REF52 cells were transfected
with the various luciferase expression vectors, together with
CMV-
-galactosidase as an internal control, as previously described
(27). After transfection, cells were brought to quiescence
by serum starvation. For serum stimulation studies, cells were
stimulated to grow following the addition of 20% serum. Cells were
harvested at various times after stimulation, and luciferase and
-galactosidase assays were performed as described previously
(27).
Gel mobility shift assays.
Gel mobility shift assays to
detect E2F binding activity or Myc binding were performed as previously
described (18, 27). For E2F binding, an end-labeled plasmid
DNA fragment from the dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) promoter
containing two E2F recognition sites was used as a probe.
Oligonucleotides 5'-GGCGGAGATATGCAAATATGG-3' and
5'-AGGAAGCTGCTGCTGACAATG-3' were used as primers to generate two 110-bp PCR fragments spanning positions
113 to
123 of the E2F3a
wild-type and E2F3a E2F mutant promoters. The E2F wild-type and E2F
mutant PCR fragments were used as unlabeled competitors. Myc binding
assays used E-box containing annealed oligonucleotides 5'-GATCCTGACGACCACGTGGTCTTACG-3' and
5'-GATCCGTAAGACCACGTGGTCGTCAG-3' as a probe and E-box mutant
annealed oligonucleotides 5'-GATCCTGACGACATCGATGTCTTACG-3' and 5'-GATCCGTAAGACATCGATGTCGTCAG-3' as a control.
Unlabeled competitors were generated by PCR from the wild-type and Myc
mutant E2F3a promoters. Primers 5'-GCGTCAGCTGAACCTTCTACC-3'
and 5'-GTGTCAAAGGCAAGTTGGACC-3' generated a 174-bp PCR
fragment corresponding to positions
829 to
655 which contains Myc
sites 1 and 2. Primers 5'-GTCTCATTCTCCCAGTTCTGGG-3' and
5'-ATTGTGGGGCTGGAGAAATGG-3' generated a 130-bp PCR fragment corresponding to positions
1444 to
1314 containing Myc site 3.
 |
RESULTS |
Analysis of promoter sequences controlling expression of the E2F3
locus.
Our recent experiments have demonstrated a complexity in
the E2F3 locus whereby the use of alternate initial coding exons (termed exon 1a and exon 1b) gives rise to two distinct transcripts and
protein products (19) (Fig. 1). Given the organization of the E2F3 locus, together with the distinct regulation of the two E2F3
RNAs, we have now sought to identify the mechanisms responsible for the
control of the expression of these two RNAs through analysis of their
respective promoter sequences.
To analyze the functional capacity of the sequences flanking exons 1a
and 1b, the DNA fragments were placed in an expression vector utilizing
the luciferase gene as a reporter. REF52 cells were transfected with
the reporter along with a CMV-driven
-galactosidase plasmid as an
internal control; the cells were brought to quiescence by serum
starvation and then stimulated to re-enter the cell cycle by the
addition of fresh medium with serum. Cell samples were then harvested
at various times after serum addition, extracts were prepared, and
assays for luciferase and
-galactosidase were performed.
As seen in our initial experiments, the sequences flanking the 5'
region of the E2F3b transcription start site exhibited promoter activity which did not vary through the cell cycle (Fig.
2). Although we have not precisely
delineated the sequence elements that are essential for E2F3b promoter
activity, it is also clear from the analysis of several truncations of
the promoter sequence that although there is some reduction in promoter
activity upon deletion of 5' flanking sequence, substantial activity
can be found within the 5' 350 nucleotides (Fig. 2).

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Sequences required for E2F3b promoter activity. (A)
Schematic depiction of E2F3b promoter constructs. Luciferase reporter
constructs containing the indicated 5'-flanking sequence were used for
assays of promoter activity. (B) REF52 cells were transfected with 4 µg of the indicated E2F3b-luciferase plasmids together with 2 µg of
CMV- -galactosidase. Transfected cells were treated as described in
Materials and Methods and harvested at the indicated time points.
Luciferase activity was normalized to the -galactosidase activity.
Symbols: , E2F3b ( 1018); , E2F3b ( 733); , E2F3b ( 350).
|
|
E2F-dependent control of E2F3a promoter activity.
Based on
previous studies that have demonstrated a role for E2F elements in the
growth-regulated activation of a variety of promoters, we investigated
the role of these sites in E2F3a promoter activity using an expression
construct in which the E2F sites were eliminated by mutation. REF52
cells were transfected with either the wild-type E2F3a-luciferase
construct or the E2F3a (E2F
)-luciferase construct, each together with
a CMV-
-galactosidase internal control. Transfected cells were
growth arrested by the removal of serum and then stimulated to enter
the cell cycle by the addition of fresh medium with 20% serum. In
contrast to the constant activity of the E2F3b promoter,
the sequences flanking the E2F3a start site conferred
tight growth regulation (Fig. 3),
reflecting the pattern of accumulation of the E2F3a RNA. The absence of
promoter activity in the quiescent cells appears to reflect
E2F-dependent negative control since mutation of the E2F binding sites
in the E2F3a promoter resulted in a marked elevation of the activity of
the promoter in quiescent cells. The mutant promoter exhibited a
fivefold increase in activity in quiescent cells compared to the
activity of the wild-type promoter. After serum stimulation, the mutant
promoter only increased a further 1.9-fold compared to the 15-fold
increase in activity of the wild-type promoter. We thus conclude that
the activity of the E2F3a promoter is subject to E2F-mediated negative
regulation in quiescent cells, similar to the previous results for the
E2F1 and E2F2 promoters, likely due to the repression mediated by an
E2F-Rb family complex.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
E2F-dependent regulation of the E2F3a promoter.
(A) Schematic depiction of the E2F3a wild-type promoter and the
promoter containing alterations in the E2F binding elements. (B) E2F
binds to the E2F3a promoter. Gel mobility shift assays were performed
with a nuclear extract from G1/S-arrested mouse embryo fibroblasts and an end-labeled DNA fragment
derived from the DHFR promoter that contains two overlapping E2F
binding sites as the probe. Competition assays were performed as
described in Materials and Methods using the indicated amount (in
nanograms) of PCR products derived from either the wild-type E2F3a
promoter sequence spanning the E2F sites or the mutant promoter in
which the E2F sites were altered by point mutations. The positions of
either the E2F-p107 complex or free E2F complexes are indicated. (C)
REF52 cells were transfected with 4 µg of the wild-type
E2F3a-luciferase plasmid ( ) or 4 µg of the E2F3a
(E2F )-luciferase plasmid ( ), together with 2 µg of
CMV- -galactosidase. Transfected cells were processed as described
in Fig. 2. Luciferase activity was normalized to -galactosidase
activity.
|
|
A role for Myc in the control of E2F3a promoter activity.
Based on the observation that the E2F3a is cell cycle regulated,
together with the fact that sequence analysis revealed the presence of
several E-box elements that can serve as binding sites for the Myc
protein (Fig. 4A and B), we have
investigated the role of Myc in the regulation of E2F3a promoter
activity. As an initial approach, we determined the effect of
overexpression of Myc protein on the activity of the E2F3a promoter.
REF52 cells were transfected with the E2F3a expression vector together
with increasing amounts of a Myc expression vector. Cells were
harvested and then extracts were assayed for luciferase activity. As
shown in Fig. 4C, coexpression of Myc protein led to a stimulation of E2F3a promoter activity. In contrast, Myc had no effect on the activity
of the E2F3b promoter, a finding consistent with the absence of E-box
elements within the E2F3b promoter sequence.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Myc activates the E2F3a promoter but not the E2F3b
promoter. (A) Schematic depiction of the E2F3a wild-type promoter and
the promoter containing alterations in the Myc binding elements. (B)
Myc binds to the E2F3a promoter. Gel mobility shift assays for Myc
binding were performed as described in Materials and Methods using
baculovirus-produced Myc and Max proteins and an end-labeled
double-stranded oligonucleotide that contains an E-box sequence
(27). Specificity of binding was demonstrated by competition
with cold wild-type DNA probe (WT) or a mutant version of the probe in
which the E-box element was disrupted by mutation (Mut). Competition
assays to demonstrate binding to the sites in the E2F3a promoter were
performed using PCR products containing the wild-type sequence of the
proximal two sites (Site1,2) or the distal site (Site3) or mutant
versions of each (Mut1,2 and Mut3). (C) The E2F3a promoter, but not the
E2F3b promoter, is activated by Myc. REF52 cells were transfected with
8 µg of either the E2F3a-luciferase plasmid or the E2F3b-luciferase
plasmid, together with the indicated amount (in micrograms) of a
CMV-driven Myc expression vector along with 2 µg of
CMV- -galactosidase. When less than 3 µg of CMV-Myc was used, the
control vector pRc-CMV was included to bring the total amount of CMV
vector added to 3 µg. Transfected cells were incubated in low-serum
medium for 48 h, at which time cells were harvested, extracts were
prepared, and luciferase and -galactosidase activities were
measured. (D) Activation of wild-type E2F3a by Myc is dependent on
intact E-box elements. REF52 cells were transfected with 8 µg of
either wild-type E2F3a-luciferase or the E-box-site mutant E2F3a
(E-box )-luciferase plasmid in which the E-box sequences were altered
by mutation as described in Materials and Methods. Each plasmid was
cotransfected with either 10 µg of CMV-Myc or 10 µg of the control
pRc-CMV, together with 2 µg of -galactosidase.
|
|
To determine if the Myc-mediated activation of E2F3a promoter activity
does indeed depend on the ability of Myc to bind to the promoter, we
generated point mutations in the Myc recognition sequences located at
688 to
693,
779 to
784, and
1412 to
1417. As shown in Fig.
4D, the E2F3a promoter lacking the Myc sites exhibits a marked
reduction of in promoter activity compared to the wild-type promoter,
displaying only a twofold induction compared to the CMV control.
Baseline activities of the wild-type E2F3a promoter and the E-box
mutant E2F3a promoter were similar.
Given the ability of Myc to activate the E2F3a gene, as well as the
evidence for a role of the Myc binding sites in mediating activation of
the E2F3a promoter, we have investigated the potential role of these
elements in the normal growth-activated induction of E2F3a promoter
activity. REF52 cells were transfected with either the wild-type
E2F3a-luciferase construct or the E2F3a (E-box
)-luciferase construct
and then brought to quiescence by serum starvation. The quiescent cells
were then stimulated to grow by the addition of fresh medium with 20%
serum, and samples were then taken at various times and assayed for
luciferase activity. As shown in Fig. 5,
the wild-type promoter again reflected the pattern of accumulation of
the endogenous E2F3a transcript. In contrast, the mutation of the Myc
binding sites resulted in a three- to fourfold reduction of promoter
activity during the time of peak activation. In light of the ability of
Myc to stimulate E2F3a promoter activity, as well as the ability of Myc
to induce the endogenous E2F3a transcript, together with the
observation that mutation of the Myc binding sites impairs the
growth-regulated activity of the E2F3a promoter, we conclude that the
full activation of the E2F3a promoter following growth stimulation
reflects a contribution from Myc.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
E-box elements are required for full activity of the
E2F3a promoter in response to stimulation of cell proliferation.
Effects of mutation of Myc binding sites on growth stimulated the
expression of the E2F3a promoter. REF52 cells were transfected with 4 µg of the wild-type E2F3a-luciferase plasmid ( ) or the mutant
E2F3a (E-box )-luciferase plasmid ( ), together with 2 µg of
CMV- -galactosidase. Transfected cells were treated as described in
Fig. 2, and the luciferase and -galactosidase activities were
measured. The luciferase activity was normalized to the
-galactosidase activity.
|
|
Myc activates the endogenous E2F3a gene.
Given the ability of
Myc to activate the E2F3a promoter, which is dependent on the Myc
binding sites, and given the indication of specificity in this
induction as seen by the lack of response of the E2F3b promoter, we
investigated the ability of Myc to specifically activate the endogenous
E2F3a gene. REF52 cells were starved for 48 h and then were either
serum stimulated or infected with either Ad-Myc or the control virus
Ad-CMV that lacks an insert. The cells were harvested either 20 h
after serum stimulation or 26 h after virus infection,
poly(A)+ RNA was isolated, and the RNA was analyzed by
Northern blotting. As shown in Fig. 6,
infection of REF52 cells with Ad-Myc resulted in the induction of the
slower-migrating E2F3a RNA, which is equivalent to the induction that
resulted from serum stimulation of the quiescent cells. In contrast,
the level of the faster-migrating E2F3b RNA remained constant and was
not affected by the expression of Myc protein. We thus conclude that
Myc does have the capacity to induce the E2F3 gene and does so
specifically through the activation of the E2F3a promoter.

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Myc activates the endogenous E2F3a gene but not the
E2F3b gene. REF52 cells were brought to quiescence and then infected
with an adenovirus recombinant containing the c-myc gene
(Ad-Myc) (right lane) or a control virus lacking an insert (Ad-CMV)
(middle lane). An additional aliquot of cells was stimulated by serum
addition (left lane). Poly(A)+ RNA was isolated and
subjected to Northern analysis. E2F3a and E2F3b RNAs were detected
using an E2F3 cDNA probe.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Based on a large body of previous work, the E2F family could be
seen as two distinct subfamilies: the E2F1, E2F2, and E2F3 group versus
the E2F4 and E2F5 group (5, 22). The E2F1 to -3 subfamily
shares sequence and structural similarities as well as the ability to
preferentially interact with Rb but not with p130 or p107
(16). The E2F1 to -3 genes also share a regulatory pattern
that restricts their expression to proliferating cells (10, 12,
18, 21, 27). In contrast, the E2F4 and E2F5 proteins are more
closely related with respect to sequence and structure, they uniquely
bind to p130 and p107, and they are constitutively expressed without
regard to the state of cell proliferation (1, 6, 9, 24). Our
recent analysis of genetic complexity in the E2F3 locus
(19), detailing the utilization of distinct exons to
generate two related but distinct protein products, now adds to the
overall complexity of the E2F family.
The characteristics of the novel E2F3b product places it at the
juncture of the two E2F subfamilies. E2F3b shares sequence with the
E2F1 to -3a group and, like E2F1 to -3a, the E2F3b protein uniquely
associates with Rb. However, unlike E2F1 to -3 but similar to E2F4 and
E2F5, the E2F3b protein lacks the N-terminal sequences of this group
that confers posttranscriptional control of accumulation, and the E2F3b
gene is not regulated with respect to the cell proliferation cycle but
rather is constitutively expressed. The data we describe here now add
to this comparison since it is clear that the expression pattern is
dictated by the promoter elements that regulate the expression of the
two E2F3 transcripts, and these promoters reflect the organization of
the E2F subfamilies. Like E2F1 and -2, the E2F3a promoter is regulated
by E2F-mediated negative control in quiescent cells. Moreover, like
E2F1 and E2F2, E2F3a is subject to regulation by the Myc protein,
dependent on E-box elements within the E2F3a promoter. In contrast, the
E2F3b promoter is not controlled by cell growth and does not respond to
Myc, and these properties coincide with an absence of E2F and Myc
binding sites in the promoter.
Potential roles for the E2F3 activities in cell cycle control.
Although the two E2F3 products are largely identical, they do differ by
the presence of an N-terminal domain that is found in E2F3a but is
absent from E2F3b. A number of recent experiments, directed at an
analysis of the function of N-terminal sequences of E2F1, suggest a
role for these sequences in the regulated accumulation of E2F1
activity. This N-terminal region contains sequence that targets cyclin
A-cdk2 to the protein, resulting in the phosphorylation of the DP1
heterodimeric partner which then leads to an inhibition of DNA binding
activity (4, 15, 31). A distinct N-terminal domain of E2F1
is responsible for targeting the Skp2-containing SCF complex to the
protein, resulting in ubiquitin-mediated degradation of E2F1
(20). Both events thus contribute to the regulated
accumulation of E2F1 protein and activity during the cell cycle.
Although equivalent experiments have not been performed for E2F2 or
E2F3a, the similar patterns of accumulation of the proteins and the
sequence similarity with E2F1 suggests that both E2F2 and E2F3a will be
similarly regulated. In contrast, E2F3b has no such sequence, which is
consistent with the constant presence of the E2F3b protein in quiescent
and proliferating cells.
Despite these differences, E2F3b does share a nuclear localization
sequence with E2F3a that allows the protein to accumulate in the
nucleus. This property, together with the additional property of
binding to Rb, creates a unique E2F-Rb complex in quiescent and growing
cells with the potential to repress transcription of target genes.
Given the fact that the remainder of the two E2F3 proteins are
identical, one might speculate that whatever determines promoter
specificity in the E2F family might be shared between these two E2F3
proteins. As such, it seems possible that the genes that are
specifically regulated by E2F3a during the cell cycle might be
specifically negatively regulated by E2F3b in quiescent cells.
E2F genes as Myc targets.
Our previous studies have
demonstrated an ability of Myc to activate the E2F1 and E2F2 genes
(17, 27). The findings presented here now show that the
E2F3a transcript is also induced by Myc, thus demonstrating that the
transcription of each of the growth-regulated E2F genes is stimulated
by Myc. The fact that Myc-mediated activation of E2F3a is dependent on
the presence of the E-box elements within the E2F3a promoter suggests a
direct role for Myc in the regulation of the E2F3a gene. Moreover, our
recent experiments have demonstrated a role for both E2F1 and E2F2 in
enabling Myc function since mouse embryo fibroblasts that carry either
an E2F1 or an E2F2 null allele are impaired in their ability to respond
to Myc-induced cell proliferation or Myc-induced apoptosis (G. Leone,
R. Sears, S. J. Field, M. A. Thompson, H. Yang, Y. Fujiwara,
M. E. Greenberg, S. Orkin, J. DeGregori, and J. R. Nevins,
submitted for publication). Based on the observations presented here,
as well as past experiments that have documented a role for E2F3
activity in cell cycle progression (18), we suspect that the
same will be true for E2F3: that the ability of Myc to function in cell
proliferation will be dependent on its ability to activate the E2F3a gene.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Genetics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Duke University Medical
Center, Durham, NC 27710. Phone: (919) 684-2746. Fax: (919) 681-8973. E-mail: J.Nevins{at}duke.edu.
Present address: Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL 60064.
Present address: Division of Human Cancer Genetics, Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH 43210.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Beijersbergen, R. L.,
R. M. Kerkhoven,
L. Zhu,
L. Carlee,
P. M. Voorhoeve, and R. Bernards.
1994.
E2F-4, a new member of the E2F gene family, has oncogenic activity and associates with p107 in vivo.
Genes Dev.
8:2680-2690[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
DeGregori, J.,
T. Kowalik, and J. R. Nevins.
1995.
Cellular targets for activation by the E2F1 transcription factor include DNA synthesis and G1/S regulatory genes.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:4215-4224[Abstract].
|
| 3.
|
DeGregori, J.,
G. Leone,
A. Miron,
L. Jakoi, and J. R. Nevins.
1997.
Distinct roles for E2F proteins in cell growth control and apoptosis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:7245-7250[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Dynlacht, B. D.,
K. Moberg,
J. A. Lees,
E. Harlow, and L. Zhu.
1997.
Specific regulation of E2F family members by cyclin-dependent kinases.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:3867-3875[Abstract].
|
| 5.
|
Dyson, N.
1998.
The regulation of E2f by pRB-family proteins.
Genes Dev.
12:2245-2262[Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Ginsberg, D.,
G. Vairo,
T. Chittenden,
Z.-X. Xiao,
G. Xu,
K. L. Wydner,
J. A. DeCaprio,
J. B. Lawrence, and D. M. Livingston.
1994.
E2F-4, a new member of the E2F transcription factor family, interacts with p107.
Genes Dev.
8:2665-2679[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Hann, S.,
M. Dixit,
R. Sears, and L. Sealy.
1994.
The alternatively initiated c-Myc proteins differentially regulated transcription through a noncanonical DNA binding site.
Genes Dev.
8:2441-2452[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Hiebert, S. W.
1993.
Regions of the retinoblastoma gene product required for its interaction with the E2F transcription factor are necessary for E2 promoter repression and pRb-mediated growth suppression.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:3384-3391[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Hijmans, E. M.,
P. M. Voorhoeve,
R. L. Beijersbergen,
L. J. van'T Veer, and R. Bernards.
1995.
E2F-5, a new E2F family member that interacts with p130 in vivo.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:3082-3089[Abstract].
|
| 10.
|
Hsiao, K.-M.,
S. L. McMahon, and P. J. Farnham.
1994.
Multiple DNA elements are required for the growth regulation of the mouse E2F1 promoter.
Genes Dev.
8:1526-1537[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Hunter, T., and J. Pines.
1994.
Cyclins and cancer II: cyclin D and CDK inhibitors come of age.
Cell
79:573-582[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Johnson, D. G.,
K. Ohtani, and J. R. Nevins.
1994.
Autoregulatory control of E2F1 expression in response to positive and negative regulators of cell cycle progression.
Genes Dev.
8:1514-1525[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Kowalik, T. F.,
J. DeGregori,
G. Leone, and J. R. Nevins.
1998.
E2F1-specific induction of apoptosis and p53 accumulation is modulated by mdm2.
Cell Growth Differ.
9:113-118[Abstract].
|
| 14.
|
Kowalik, T. F.,
J. DeGregori,
J. K. Schwarz, and J. R. Nevins.
1995.
E2F1 overexpression in quiescent fibroblasts leads to induction of cellular DNA synthesis and apoptosis.
J. Virol.
69:2491-2500[Abstract].
|
| 15.
|
Krek, W.,
M. E. Ewen,
S. Shirodkar,
Z. Arany,
W. G. Kaelin, and D. M. Livingston.
1994.
Negative regulation of the growth-promoting transcription factor E2F-1 by a stably bound cyclin A-dependent protein kinase.
Cell
78:161-172[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Lees, J. A.,
M. Saito,
M. Valentine,
T. Look,
E. Harlow,
N. Dyson, and K. Helin.
1993.
The retinoblastoma protein binds to a family of E2F transcription factors.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:7813-7825[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Leone, G.,
J. DeGregori,
R. Sears,
L. Jakoi, and J. R. Nevins.
1997.
Myc and Ras collaborate in inducing accumulation of active cyclin E/Cdk2 and E2F.
Nature
387:422-426[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Leone, G.,
J. DeGregori,
Z. Yan,
L. Jakoi,
S. Ishida,
R. S. Williams, and J. R. Nevins.
1998.
E2F3 activity is regulated during the cell cycle and is required for the induction of S phase.
Genes Dev.
12:2120-2130[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Leone, G.,
F. Nuckolls,
S. Ishida,
M. Adams,
R. Sears,
L. Jakoi,
A. Miron, and J. R. Nevins.
2000.
Identification of a novel E2F3 product suggests a mechanism for determining specificity of repression by Rb proteins.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20:3626-3632[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
| Marti, A., C. Wirbelauer, M. Scheffner, and W. Krek. Interaction between SCFSKP2 ubiquitin protein ligase and
E2F-1 underlies regulation of E2F-1 degradation. Nat. Cell Biol., in
press.
|
| 21.
|
Neuman, E.,
E. K. Flemington,
W. R. Sellers, and W. G. Kaelin, Jr.
1994.
Transcription of the E2F-1 gene is rendered cell cycle dependent by E2F DNA-binding sites within its promoter.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:6607-6615[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Nevins, J. R.
1998.
Toward an understanding of the functional complexity of the E2F and retinoblastoma families.
Cell Growth Differ.
9:585-593[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Qian, Y.,
C. Luckey,
L. Horton,
M. Esser, and D. J. Templeton.
1992.
Biological function of the retinoblastoma protein requires distinct domains for hyperphosphorylation and transcription factor binding.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12:5363-5372[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Qin, X.-Q.,
D. M. Livingston,
M. Ewen,
W. R. Sellers,
Z. Arany, and W. G. Kaelin, Jr.
1995.
The transcription factor E2F-1 is a downstream target of RB action.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:742-755[Abstract].
|
| 25.
|
Qin, X.-Q.,
D. M. Livingston,
W. G. Kaelin, and P. D. Adams.
1994.
Deregulated transcription factor E2F-1 expression leads to S-phase entry and p53-mediated apoptosis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:10918-10922[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Sardet, C.,
M. Vidal,
D. Cobrinik,
Y. Geng,
C. Onufryk,
A. Chen, and R. A. Weinberg.
1995.
E2F-4 and E2F-5, two members of the E2F family, are expressed in the early phases of the cell cycle.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:2403-2407[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Sears, R.,
K. Ohtani, and J. R. Nevins.
1997.
Identification of positively and negatively acting elements regulating expression of the E2F2 gene in response to cell growth signals.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:5227-5235[Abstract].
|
| 28.
|
Shan, B., and W.-H. Lee.
1994.
Deregulated expression of E2F-1 induces S-phase entry and leads to apoptosis.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:8166-8173[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Vairo, G.,
D. M. Livingston, and D. Ginsberg.
1995.
Functional interaction between E2F-4 and p130: evidence for distinct mechanisms underlying growth suppression by different retinoblastoma protein family members.
Genes Dev.
9:869-881[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Wu, X., and A. J. Levine.
1994.
p53 and E2F-1 cooperate to mediate apoptosis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:3602-3606[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Xu, M.,
K.-A. Sheppard,
C.-Y. Peng,
A. S. Yee, and H. Piwnica-Worms.
1994.
Cyclin A/CDK2 binds directly to E2F-1 and inhibits the DNA-binding activity of E2F-1/DP-1 by phosphorylation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:8420-8431[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2000, p. 3633-3639, Vol. 20, No. 10
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Eiring, A. M., Neviani, P., Santhanam, R., Oaks, J. J., Chang, J. S., Notari, M., Willis, W., Gambacorti-Passerini, C., Volinia, S., Marcucci, G., Caligiuri, M. A., Leone, G. W., Perrotti, D.
(2008). Identification of novel posttranscriptional targets of the BCR/ABL oncoprotein by ribonomics: requirement of E2F3 for BCR/ABL leukemogenesis. Blood
111: 816-828
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Parisi, T., Yuan, T. L., Faust, A. M., Caron, A. M., Bronson, R., Lees, J. A.
(2007). Selective Requirements for E2f3 in the Development and Tumorigenicity of Rb-Deficient Chimeric Tissues. Mol. Cell. Biol.
27: 2283-2293
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sylvestre, Y., De Guire, V., Querido, E., Mukhopadhyay, U. K., Bourdeau, V., Major, F., Ferbeyre, G., Chartrand, P.
(2007). An E2F/miR-20a Autoregulatory Feedback Loop. J. Biol. Chem.
282: 2135-2143
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Agromayor, M., Wloga, E., Naglieri, B., Abrashkin, J., Verma, K., Yamasaki, L.
(2006). Visualizing Dynamic E2F-Mediated Repression In Vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 4448-4461
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Chen, S., Qiong, Y., Gardner, D. G.
(2006). A Role for p38 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase and c-Myc in Endothelin-Dependent Rat Aortic Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation. Hypertension
47: 252-258
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Black, E. P., Hallstrom, T., Dressman, H. K., West, M., Nevins, J. R.
(2005). Distinctions in the specificity of E2F function revealed by gene expression signatures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
102: 15948-15953
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ishida, H., Masuhiro, Y., Fukushima, A., Argueta, J. G. M., Yamaguchi, N., Shiota, S., Hanazawa, S.
(2005). Identification and Characterization of Novel Isoforms of Human DP-1: DP-1{alpha} REGULATES THE TRANSCRIPTIONAL ACTIVITY OF E2F1 AS WELL AS CELL CYCLE PROGRESSION IN A DOMINANT-NEGATIVE MANNER. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 24642-24648
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Schaley, J. E., Polonskaia, M., Hearing, P.
(2005). The Adenovirus E4-6/7 Protein Directs Nuclear Localization of E2F-4 via an Arginine-Rich Motif. J. Virol.
79: 2301-2308
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
IAQUINTA, P.J., ASLANIAN, A., LEES, J.A.
(2005). Regulation of the Arf/p53 Tumor Surveillance Network by E2F. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol
70: 309-316
[Abstract]
-
Giangrande, P. H., Zhu, W., Schlisio, S., Sun, X., Mori, S., Gaubatz, S., Nevins, J. R.
(2004). A role for E2F6 in distinguishing G1/S- and G2/M-specific transcription. Genes Dev.
18: 2941-2951
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Savell, J., Ma, Y., Morrow, K. S., Jove, R., Olashaw, N., Moseley, P. L., Cress, W. D., Wharton, W.
(2004). AG490 inhibits G1-S traverse in BALB/c-3T3 cells following either mitogenic stimulation or exogenous expression of E2F-1. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
3: 205-213
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ma, Y., Yuan, J., Huang, M., Jove, R., Cress, W. D.
(2003). Regulation of the Cyclin D3 Promoter by E2F1. J. Biol. Chem.
278: 16770-16776
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Landsberg, R. L., Sero, J. E., Danielian, P. S., Yuan, T. L., Lee, E. Y., Lees, J. A.
(2003). The role of E2F4 in adipogenesis is independent of its cell cycle regulatory activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
100: 2456-2461
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kirmizis, A., Bartley, S. M., Farnham, P. J.
(2003). Identification of the Polycomb Group Protein SU(Z)12 as a Potential Molecular Target for Human Cancer Therapy. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
2: 113-121
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
He, Y., Cress, W. D.
(2002). E2F-3B Is a Physiological Target of Cyclin A. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 23493-23499
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Rounbehler, R. J., Rogers, P. M., Conti, C. J., Johnson, D. G.
(2002). Inactivation of E2f1 Enhances Tumorigenesis in a Myc Transgenic Model. Cancer Res.
62: 3276-3281
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Cloud, J. E., Rogers, C., Reza, T. L., Ziebold, U., Stone, J. R., Picard, M. H., Caron, A. M., Bronson, R. T., Lees, J. A.
(2002). Mutant Mouse Models Reveal the Relative Roles of E2F1 and E2F3 In Vivo. Mol. Cell. Biol.
22: 2663-2672
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sears, R. C., Nevins, J. R.
(2002). Signaling Networks That Link Cell Proliferation and Cell Fate. J. Biol. Chem.
277: 11617-11620
[Full Text]
-
Frolov, M. V., Huen, D. S., Stevaux, O., Dimova, D., Balczarek-Strang, K., Elsdon, M., Dyson, N. J.
(2001). Functional antagonism between E2F family members. Genes Dev.
15: 2146-2160
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Nevins, J. R.
(2001). The Rb/E2F pathway and cancer. Hum Mol Genet
10: 699-703
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zaika, A., Irwin, M., Sansome, C., Moll, U. M.
(2001). Oncogenes Induce and Activate Endogenous p73 Protein. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 11310-11316
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
D'Souza, S. J. A., Pajak, A., Balazsi, K., Dagnino, L.
(2001). Ca2+ and BMP-6 Signaling Regulate E2F during Epidermal Keratinocyte Differentiation. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 23531-23538
[Abstract]
[Full Text]