Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, May 2000, p. 3633-3639, Vol. 20, No. 10
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
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.
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.
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

and
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References


View larger version (1936K):
[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).
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
| |
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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 30. |
Wu, X., and A. J. Levine.
1994.
p53 and E2F-1 cooperate to mediate apoptosis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:3602-3606 |
| 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 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»