Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, February 2000, p. 1394-1406, Vol. 20, No. 4
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Active Repression of Methylated Genes by the
Chromosomal Protein MBD1
Huck-Hui
Ng,1
Peter
Jeppesen,2 and
Adrian
Bird1,*
Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology,
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JR,1 and
Medical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Western
General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU,2 United
Kingdom
Received 7 September 1999/Returned for modification 24 October
1999/Accepted 9 November 1999
 |
ABSTRACT |
MBD1 belongs to a family of mammalian proteins that share a
methyl-CpG binding domain. Previous work has shown that MBD1 binds to
methylated sites in vivo and in vitro and can repress transcription from methylated templates in transcription extracts and in cultured cells. In the present study we established by several experimental criteria that, contrary to a previous report, MBD1 is not a component of the MeCP1 repressor complex. We identified a powerful
transcriptional repression domain (TRD) at the C terminus of MBD1 that
can actively repress transcription at a distance. Methylation-dependent
repression in vivo depends on the presence of both the TRD and the
methyl-CpG binding domain. The mechanism is likely to involve
deacetylation, since the deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A can
overcome MBD1-mediated repression. Accordingly, we found that
endogenous MBD1 is particularly concentrated at sites of centromeric
heterochromatin, where acetylated histone H4 is deficient. Unlike MBD2
and MeCP2, MBD1 is not depleted by antibodies to the histone
deacetylase HDAC1. Thus, the deacetylase-dependent pathway by which
MBD1 actively silences methylated genes is likely to be different from
that utilized by the methylation-dependent repressors MeCP1 and MeCP2.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The mammalian genome is
characterized by methylation-free CpG islands interspersed within the
methylated bulk chromatin. The great majority of CpGs (about 85% of
those outside CpG islands) are in a methylated state in most somatic
cell types. The methylated sequences include exons of most genes, as
well as intergenic DNA made up of satellites, transposable elements,
and single-copy sequences. An established consequence of CpG
methylation is transcriptional silencing (reviewed in references
36 and 40). This is most apparent
at densely methylated CpG island promoters on the inactive X chromosome
(31), at the Xist promoter on the active X chromosome (2, 38) and at many imprinted genes (41, 43).
Whether the low-density methylation that affects the bulk of genomic
DNA also serves to repress transcription is uncertain (4, 6, 46).
One way of understanding the biological significance of DNA methylation
is to characterize fully the mechanisms by which CpG methylation leads
to transcriptional silencing. It is known already that the presence of
methylated CpG can interfere with binding of some transcription factors
to their cognate recognition sites (reviewed in reference
42). Also, DNA methylation can directly influence
the translational positioning of a nucleosome at specific DNA sequences
in vitro (13) and could lead to masking of essential regulatory elements by nucleosomes. In addition to these direct mechanisms of repression, there is now evidence for indirect repression mechanisms that are mediated by proteins that bind to methylated DNA.
Two methylated DNA binding activities have been detected in mammalian
cells and shown to repress transcription. MeCP1 (methyl-CpG binding
protein 1) exists as large complexes of 400 and 800 kDa and can bind to
12 or more symmetrically methylated CpGs in any sequence context
(29). The extent of repression on methylated reporters in
living cells correlates strongly with the density of methylation and
the in vitro affinity of MeCP1 for the methylated reporters (7,
8). Moreover, cells and extracts deficient in MeCP1 failed to
repress methylated reporters (7, 26), further implicating
MeCP1 as a methylation-dependent transcriptional repressor.
MeCP2 is distinct from MeCP1 but also has an affinity for methylated
DNA. MeCP2 is a chromosomal protein that localizes to methyl-CpG-rich
heterochromatin in mouse cells (27, 35). It differs from
MeCP1 in that it can bind to a single methylated CpG pair (27,
33) via an 85-amino-acid methyl-CpG binding domain
(33) which can bind specifically to a single methyl-CpG pair
in vitro. The methyl-CpG binding domain of MeCP2 is required for
methyl-CpG binding in vivo, since deletion within this region of an
MeCP2-LacZ fusion protein leads to inefficient targeting of the mutant
protein to densely methylated heterochromatic foci in mouse cells
(35). MeCP2 also interacts with methylated chromatin in
vitro (32) and can bind specific methyl-CpG pairs on
nucleosomal DNA in a defined system (10). Thus, MeCP2 is an
integral component of chromatin that has abundant binding sites in the
mammalian genome (32). The likely functional significance of
MeCP2 has been revealed by transient cotransfection studies. Fragments
of MeCP2 fused to the GAL4 DNA binding domain cause transcriptional silencing of a reporter gene with GAL4 binding sites upstream of the
promoter (32). Based on these experiments, a region central to MeCP2 has been defined as the transcriptional repression domain (TRD). This domain can interact with the mSin3A, HDAC1, and HDAC2 corepressor proteins in a glutathione S-transferase (GST)
pulldown assay (34). In addition, coimmunoprecipitation
assays and biochemical cofractionation assays indicate that MeCP2 is
associated with the mSin3 corepressor complex (25, 34). Most
importantly, the TRD of both mouse and Xenopus laevis MeCP2
can repress transcription in vivo, and the repression is sensitive to
the histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A (TSA). MeCP2 therefore
appears to repress transcription by recruiting a histone deacetylase
complex that modifies chromatin.
An expressed sequence tag database searching strategy was used to find
novel proteins with homology to the methyl-CpG binding domain of MeCP2
(12, 20). The rationale was that this domain is likely to be
structurally conserved for recognition of methyl-CpG pairs. A family of
novel mammalian proteins with homology to the methyl-CpG binding domain
(MBD1 to MBD4) has been identified using this approach. Using bandshift
assays, MBD1, MBD2, and MBD4 were shown to bind specifically to a
variety of DNA sequences that contained methyl-CpG. Ectopic expression
of MBD1, MBD2, and MBD4 in mouse cells resulted in the localization of
each protein to 4',6-diamidino-2-methylindole (DAPI) bright spots,
suggesting that they are able to specifically target to methylated DNA
in vivo (20). Ectopically expressed MBD2 and MBD4 failed to
localize correctly in mouse mutant cells with low levels of genomic
methylation, indicating that methylation is an essential determinant
for chromosome binding. By the same assay, MBD1 was correctly localized
in mutant cells, suggesting that protein factors may also be involved
in its localization in vivo. Although MBD2 and MBD3 are related, as
revealed by the high level of sequence conservation at the C-terminal
region (including the methyl-CpG binding domain), mammalian MBD3 does
not bind to methylated DNA specifically either in vitro or in vivo
(20, 50). Therefore, among the mammalian methylated DNA
binding activities and proteins so far identified, MeCP1, MeCP2, MBD1,
MBD2, and MBD4 show specificity for binding CpG only in its methylated
state. All but one of these proteins (the exception being MBD4) are now
implicated in methylation-directed gene repression (5).
This study concerns MBD1, the largest protein in the MBD family, with
an N-terminal methyl-CpG binding domain and two or three cysteine-rich
regions (termed the CxxC motifs) that are related to those in DNA
methyltransferase protein 1 (DNMT1) and the mammalian trithorax-like
protein HRX (see Fig. 1A). A region encompassing the CxxC motif in
DNMT1 binds zinc (3, 11). HRX, also known as
MLL (mixed-lineage leukemia) or ALL1 (acute
lymphoblastic leukemia), is frequently translocated in acute leukemias.
A previous study showed that MBD1 is able to repress transcription of a
methylated gene in vitro (12). This work indicated that MBD1
is a component of the MeCP1 complex in HeLa cells, since an antibody
raised against MBD1 was able to supershift MeCP1 activity
(12). Recently it has been shown that another methyl-CpG
binding protein, MBD2, is a component of HeLa MeCP1 (37). We
report here on functional studies of MBD1. We show that MBD1 can
actively repress methylated genes in vivo via a powerful repression
domain that depends on deacetylation. Our data rule out an association
between MBD1 and MeCP1 of HeLa cells. Like MeCP2, MBD1 appears to be an
integral chromosomal protein.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Protein expression, production of antibody, immunodepletion
assays and Western blotting.
Recombinant proteins were expressed
in Escherichia coli as GST fusion or His-tagged proteins.
They were purified using glutathione (GSH)-Sepharose (Pharmacia) or
Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid superflow (Qiagen) as specified by the
manufacturer. Recombinant full-length MBD1 has a C-terminal His tag.
Antibodies against MBD1 (S751) were raised against affinity purified
GST-MBD1 fusions containing amino acids 351 to 556 of MBD1. For
affinity purification of antibody, GST-MBD1 fusion proteins were
coupled to Affi-Gel 15 activated matrix (Bio-Rad) as specified by the
manufacturer and antibody was purified as described previously
(18). The anti-MBD1 serum was passed through a
GST-GSH-Sepharose column before being loaded onto a GST-MBD1 column to
remove anti-GST antibodies. Immunodepletion experiments and Western
blotting were carried out as described previously (37).
Anti-MBD2 antibodies (S923 and R593) have been described previously
(37). Anti-MTA2, anti-SAP30 and anti-HDAC1 antibodies were a
gift from D. Reinberg (50, 51).
Plasmids.
DNA fragments encoding different regions of MBD1
were amplified by PCR with Pfu DNA polymerase (Stratagene).
All primers contain either a BglII or BamHI site.
After the PCR products were cleaved with appropriate restriction
enzymes, they were cloned into pCMV-GAL4 BamHI-digested
vector. The cDNA coding for the first 67 amino acids of MBD1 was cloned
into the EcoRI site of the pGEX-2TK (Pharmacia) vector.
Mutagenesis of the MBD and TRD was carried out by PCR-directed mutagenesis with primers that contained different codons. Full-length MBD1 and fragments thereof were cloned into pCS2+MT vector (which has a
cytomegalovirus [CMV] promoter driving MBD1 expression). The
resulting constructs expressed proteins with five Myc tags at their N
termini. The sequence of the third CxxC domain in MBD1 was isolated by
PCR of a HeLa cDNA library with primers that prime bp 486 to 498, encoding the amino acid sequence IAFN (see the published sequence of
human MBD1 [12]) and bp 600 to 612, encoding GLRR. The
CxxC domain of mouse DNMT1 was amplified with primers corresponding to
amino acids 639 and 705 (EKYD and DDDE, respectively [48]). All constructs were verified by DNA sequencing.
Gel filtration chromatography.
HeLa nuclear extract (2.5 mg)
prepared by the Dignam method was passed through Superose 6 gel
filtration column (HR 10/30; Pharmacia) under conditions described
previously (29). The column was calibrated with standard
molecular mass markers (blue dextran, 2,000 kDa; thyroglobulin, 669 kDa; apoferritin, 443 kDa;
-amylase, 200 kDa; bovine serum albumin,
66 kDa) under the same conditions for chromotography of nuclear extract
(0.15 ml/min). The buffer used was a 50 mM HEPES-KOH (pH 7.9)-250 mM
NaCl-1 mM EDTA-0.1% Triton X-100-10% glycerol-10 mM
-mercaptoethanol.
Transfection.
Mouse fibroblast L929 cells were transfected
using the DEAE-dextran method as described previously (32).
L cells were transfected with 2 µg of reporter plasmid and different
amounts of effector plasmids. The total amount of plasmid was
normalized to 6 µg by addition of pCMV vector as the carrier. The
cells were harvested 60 h after transfection, and
-galactosidase assays were performed as described previously
(32). In certain experiments, the transfected cells were
treated with 100 ng of TSA per ml for 24 h before harvest. pGL2
luciferase reporter (Promega) was either mock methylated (no enzyme
added) or M.HhaI (New England Biolabs) methylated. Complete methylation
was checked by restriction digestion with HhaI (New England Biolabs).
Bandshifts.
Bandshift assays were performed as described
previously (33) but without addition of unlabeled competitor
DNA. The DNA-protein complexes were resolved in a 5% polyacrylamide
gel in 0.5× TBE (Tris-borate-EDTA) buffer at 4°C. The CG11 and AB17
probes have been described previously (29, 33).
Immunofluorescence.
Except for minor modifications noted
below, double indirect immunolabelling of unfixed metaphase cell
preparations of HF19 primary human female fibroblasts was carried out
essentially as described previously (22, 24). To the
hypotonically swollen HF19 cell suspension, diluted to 0.5 × 105 cells per ml in 75 mM KCl, Tween 20 was added to a
final concentration of 0.1%, and then 0.5-ml portions were centrifuged
onto glass slides for 10 min at 2,000 rpm by using an Ames Cytotek
cytocentrifuge. Slides were incubated for 2 h at room temperature
simultaneously with both primary antibodies, sheep anti-MBD1 serum and
rabbit anti-acetyl(Lys-12)-histone H4 serum R5/12 (44),
diluted 1:200 and 1:100, respectively, in KCM (120 mM KCl, 20 mM NaCl,
10 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.8], 0.5 mM EDTA, 0.1% Triton X-100) containing 10% normal horse serum. Primary antibody binding was detected by a
secondary incubation for 30 min at room temperature with biotin-conjugated donkey anti-sheep immunoglobulin G (Sigma) and fluorescein-isothiocyanate-conjugated donkey anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (Scottish Antibody Production Unit), both diluted 1:50 in KCM containing 10% horse serum, followed by 30 min at room temperature with tetramethylrhodamine-S-isothiocyanate conjugated Extravidin (Sigma) diluted 1:50 in the same medium. Slides were rinsed after antibody incubations, fixed in formaldehyde, counterstained for DNA
with Hoechst 33258, and mounted for fluorescence microscopy by
previously described methods. Images were obtained with a Zeiss Axioskop fluorescence microscope fitted with Chroma 83000 triple-band-pass filter set, and a Photometrics CH250 charge-coupled
device camera, using Digital Scientific capture and analysis extensions
to IPLab Spectrum v3.1 software.
 |
RESULTS |
The N-terminal domain of MBD1 is sufficient for binding to
methylated DNA.
MBD1 was previously expressed in bacteria and
shown to bind to the methylated sequence
poly(GAm5C)-poly(GTm5C) but not to its
nonmethylated counterpart. Figure 1C
shows that full-length MBD1 (Fig. 1B) binds specifically to the 135-bp
CG11 duplex probe when methylated at 7 HpaII sites (CCGG) or
20 HhaI sites (GCGC) but not to the unmethylated probe.
Since these assays were carried out in the absence of any
nonradioactive competitor DNA, it is apparent that MBD1 has no
detectable affinity for nonmethylated DNA. The methyl-CpG binding
domain-like region in MBD1 (amino acids 7 to 61 [Fig. 1A]) has 43.6%
identity to the equivalent region of MeCP2 over a 55-amino-acid
sequence. We found that a polypeptide corresponding to the first 67 amino acids of MBD1 fused to GST bound specifically to the 17-mer
methylated probe (Fig. 1D) but not to the control nonmethylated probe
(probe AB17 [33]). Hemimethylated versions of probes
with the same sequence were not bound by the MBD (Fig. 1D). The region
of MBD1 that is required for specific interaction with the methyl-CpG
pair is therefore smaller than the 85-amino-acid minimal methyl-CpG
binding domain of MeCP2 (33). Proline at position 38 is
conserved between the MBD of MeCP2 and the MBD-like region of each of
the methylated DNA binding proteins (MBD1, MBD2, and MBD4)
(20). By using PCR-directed mutagenesis, the proline codon
was mutated to encode lysine. The purified GST-MBD1 (amino acids 1 to
67) with this amino acid substitution failed to bind to a methyl-CpG
pair as demonstrated in a bandshift assay (Fig. 1E). The result
confirms that the N-terminal 67-amino-acid region of MBD1 is
responsible for binding to methyl-CpG.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Binding to CpG methylated DNA by the methyl-CpG binding
domain of MBD1. (A) Two forms of MBD1 that can be expressed by the
human gene (19): MBD1 (accession no. Y10746) and MBD1*
(accession no. AAD50371). Both have an N-terminal methyl-CpG binding
domain (black box) and two or three CxxC domains (shaded boxes). (B)
Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis of
recombinant full-length MBD1 stained with Coomassie blue. (C) Bandshift
assays of full-length MBD1 in the presence of differentially methylated
CG11 probes. Probes were either nonmethylated (M ), or methylated at 7 HpaII sites (HpaII CG11) or 20 HhaI sites (HhaI
CG11) and labeled with 32P. (D) A 67-amino-acid region of
the methyl-CpG binding domain fused to GST (N67) binds to symmetrically
methylated CpGs but not to nonmethylated or hemimethylated CpGs. (E)
Amino acid substitution of the conserved proline 38 residue (P38K)
abolishes methyl-CpG binding. WT, wild type.
|
|
Characterization of an antibody against MBD1.
For functional
studies of MBD1, an antibody was raised in sheep against a fusion
between amino acids 351 to 556 of MBD1 and GST. The C-terminal domain
of MBD1 (amino acids 351 to 556) was chosen for the antigen to minimize
cross-reactivity, since it does not have significant homology to other
MBDs or known proteins. When a Western blot of HeLa nuclear extracts
was probed with this antibody (S751), two major bands at 83 and 75 kDa
were detected (Fig. 2A). The 75-kDa band
has the same mobility as recombinant MBD1 protein, which migrates on
sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with an
apparent size that is larger than its calculated size. Two lines of
evidence indicate that the 83- and 75-kDa bands are specific for MBD1.
First, the preimmune serum did not detect these proteins (data not
shown). Second, the specific antibodies in the immune antiserum can be
depleted by preincubation with GST-MBD1 coupled to GSH-Sepharose beads
(Fig. 2A). GST alone attached to GSH-Sepharose beads did not deplete
the MBD1-specific signal. The two proteins recognized by the antibody
are probably splice variants of MBD1 that contain two or three CxxC
motifs, since cDNAs encoding two or three CxxC motifs have been found in the mouse (20) and can also be detected in HeLa cells by reverse transcription-PCR (data not shown). The additional CxxC motif
of about 68 amino acids is expected to cause an increase of 5 kDa. The
S751 immune antiserum is specific for MBD1 and does not cross-react
with MBD2b or MBD4 (Fig. 2B). To test for its ability to recognize
native MBD1, S751 anti-MBD1 antiserum, together with control preimmune
serum, was used to immunoprecipitate nuclear proteins from HeLa nuclear
extracts. The presence of MBD1 in the anti-MBD1 immunoprecipitate (Fig.
3A)
indicates that the antibody can
recognize native MBD1.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Characterization of an antibody raised against the C
terminus of MBD1. (A) Anti-MBD1 antibody detects two major forms of
MBD1 in HeLa nuclear extract (thick arrows; right panel). Adsorption of
the antibody with the cognate antigen (GST-MBD1) drastically reduces
the reaction of the serum with recombinant MBD1 and prevents the
detection of MBD1 in a HeLa nuclear extract (left panel). Mock
adsorption with GST does not affect the reactivity of the serum toward
MBD1. The asterisk denotes a nonspecific band due to secondary
antibody. HeLa NE denotes 30 µg of HeLa nuclear extract. (B)
Anti-MBD1 antibody recognizes MBD1 but not MBD2b, MBD4, or bovine serum
albumin.
|
|

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
MBD1 is not a component of HeLa MeCP1 activity. (A)
Extracts subjected to adsorption by anti-MBD1 antibodies (immune)
contained reduced levels of MBD1, whereas preimmune antibodies did not
deplete MBD1. Only immunoprecipitates by anti-MBD1 antibodies contained
MBD1. We used 1, 5, and 10 µl of sera for the experiments. (B)
Both MBD1-immunodepleted extracts (I) and mock-depleted extracts (PI)
retained MeCP1 activity, as assayed by the formation of a complex with
methylated probe DNA. MeCG11 is the methylated version of CG11. (C)
Antibody against MBD1 did not supershift MeCP1 activity. Serum was not
added in lanes 2 and 8. Lanes 3, 5, 9, and 11 contain 1 µl of
preimmune or immune serum. Half the amount of serum was used in lanes
4, 6, 10, and 12. The complexes formed with the nonmethylated probe are
nonspecific complexes not due to MeCP1 (7). (D) MBD1 and
MBD2 are not associated in the same complex. Anti-MBD1 antibodies did
not immunoprecipitate MBD2, and anti-MBD2 antibodies did not
immunoprecipitate MBD1. (E) MBD1 is not associated with the MBD2-HDAC1
MeCP1 complex. Anti-HDAC1 antibodies immunodeplete MBD2 but not MBD1.
Anti-MTA2 and anti-SAP30 antibodies were used as controls, since
neither MBD1 nor MBD2 associates with these proteins. (F) Apparent
molecular masses of MBD1 and MBD2. HeLa nuclear extract was applied to
a Superose 6 gel filtration column. Eluted fractions were analyzed by
Western blotting to detect MBD1 and MBD2.
|
|
MBD1 is not a component of HeLa MeCP1.
The discovery of three
novel methyl-CpG binding proteins (MBD1, MBD2, and MBD4) has raised the
possibility that these proteins contribute to the MeCP1 activity. A
previous antibody raised against full-length MBD1 was apparently able
to supershift the MeCP1 activity in a HeLa nuclear extract, suggesting
that MBD1 may be a component of MeCP1 (12). However, several
lines of evidence based on antibody S751 now preclude MBD1 involvement
in MeCP1.
HeLa nuclear extracts were preincubated with both anti-MBD1 and
preimmune antibodies coupled on protein G-Sepharose. Anti-MBD1 antibody specifically immunoprecipitated MBD1 and immunodepleted MBD1
from the extracts (Fig. 3A). Bandshift assays using a methylated version of the CG11 probe showed that MeCP1 activity was not affected by this treatment (Fig. 3B). The nonspecific complex on the
nonmethylated probe CG11 was not affected by similar treatment
(7) (Fig. 3B). Thus, drastic depletion of MBD1 from the
extract did not reduce MeCP1 activity. We attempted to "supershift"
the MeCP1 complex with methylated DNA by adding anti-MBD1 antibody.
Addition of preimmune or immune sera (1 µl) to the extracts slightly
altered the mobility of the MeCP1 complex (Fig. 3C, lane 3 and 5)
compared to that in extracts with no added serum (lane 2). When half
the amount of serum (0.5 µl) was added to the extract, no alteration in mobility was observed. In neither case was there any difference between the effects of preimmune or immune sera on the bandshift complex (Fig. 3C, compare lanes 2, 4, and 6). We conclude that anti-MBD1 was unable to supershift MeCP1 complex, although the same
amount of serum could recognize native MBD1 in the extract. Affinity-purified anti-MBD1 antibody also failed to affect the mobility
of MeCP1 (data not shown). We suspect that cross-reactivity of the
original antibody with unknown components of MeCP1 was responsible for
the earlier data (12).
Another methyl-CpG binding protein, MBD2, has recently been
conclusively shown to be a component of MeCP1 (37). Antibody against MBD2 was able to both immunodeplete and supershift MeCP1 activity. We investigated whether MBD1 and MBD2 are in the same complex
by performing immunoprecipitation assays. We found that MBD1
immunoprecipitates do not contain MBD2 and that MBD2 immunoprecipitates do not contain MBD1 (Fig. 3D). An antibody against HDAC1 depletes both
MBD2 and MeCP1 activity from HeLa extracts (37). MBD1
protein, however, was not depleted by anti-HDAC1 antibodies under
conditions where MBD2 was specifically depleted by the same antibody
(Fig. 3E). Therefore, MBD1 is not associated with the MBD2-HDAC1
complex that is part of MeCP1.
The apparent molecular weights of the MBD1 and MBD2 complexes also
differ as shown by gel filtration. A HeLa nuclear extract was passed
over a Superose 6 gel filtration column to determine the native size of
MBD1. Western blot analysis of the fractions eluted from the column
revealed that MBD1 migrates at a molecular mass of 200 to 400 kDa (Fig.
3F). The calculated molecular mass for MBD1 is 66 kDa, and it is
therefore possible that MBD1 interacts with itself or other nuclear
proteins to form a higher-molecular-mass complex. Alternatively,
monomers of MBD1 may adopt a nonglobular conformation with an increased
apparent molecular mass in this assay. In contrast, MBD2 (Fig. 3F)
comigrates at about 800 kDa under the same conditions. Thus, MBD1 and
MeCP1 do not comigrate in a gel filtration assay. This series of
experiments argues strongly against involvement of MBD1 in the MBD2
complex of HeLa cells. We cannot exclude the possibility that MBD1
contributes to the MeCP1 activity found in extracts derived from
somatic tissues.
MBD1 contains an active repression domain.
It has previously
been shown that MBD1 can repress the expression of methylated genes in
transcription extracts (12) and cultured cell lines
(16). Is preferential repression of methylated templates by
recombinant MBD1 and transiently transfected MBD1 due to steric
exclusion of essential regulatory elements (passive repression)? Or
does MBD1 repress actively, for example by interference with the
initiation complex or recruitment of a corepressor? To answer this
question, we fused fragments of the MBD1 coding sequence to DNA
encoding a GAL4 DNA binding domain and tested the effect of the
expressed fusion proteins on a reporter bearing GAL4 DNA binding sites
approximately 80 bp upstream of the human
-actin promoter (Fig.
4A). Individual effector constructs were
separately cotransfected into mouse L929 fibroblasts together with a
-galactosidase reporter either with or without five GAL4 binding
sites (constructs p
geoN/B and p
G5BglII [Fig. 4A]). To avoid
the mistargeting of the GAL4 fusion proteins to methylated sites in the
genome, the first 43 amino acids of MBD1, corresponding to half of the MBD, were omitted from all constructs. Approximately 60 h after transfection, the cells were harvested and extracts were assayed for
-galactosidase activity. For each construct, titration of at least
three concentrations of effector was performed. Western blot analyses
of the lysates of transfected cells with anti-GAL4 antibody were also
carried out to confirm that effectors of the correct size were
expressed (data not shown). The results showed that two regions in MBD1
can repress transcription from reporter constructs: the CxxC domain
between amino acids 273 to 340 and the C-terminal region spanning amino
acids 506 to 538 (Fig. 4B and C). Neither the related N-terminal CxxC
domain (amino acids 161 to 228 [Fig. 4B]) nor a third CxxC domain
(amino acids 161 to 221), which occurs in the MBD1* splice variant
(Fig. 1A), could repress the reporters (data not shown). The CxxC
domains of HRX (amino acids 1147 to 1197) and DNA cytosine
5-methyltransferase DNMT1 (amino acids 639 to 705 of mouse DNMT1;
accession no. X14805) also show different repression activities, since
the HRX domain can specifically repress a reporter with GAL4 binding
sites (39, 49) whereas the DNMT1 domain fused to a GAL4 DNA
binding domain does not repress (data not shown). The two regions of
MBD1 that gave repression differed in that effectors containing the
CxxC domain (amino acids 273 to 340) also significantly inhibited the control reporter which lacked GAL4 binding sites, whereas the C-terminal domain (amino acids 506 to 538) showed specificity for
repression of the reporter with GAL4 binding sites (Fig. 4B and C). We
conclude that inhibition by the CxxC domain can occur without binding
to the reporter gene and may be nonspecific. The C-terminal domain,
however, has the properties of an active repression domain and is
referred to below as the TRD of MBD1.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Effect of regions of MBD1 on transcription when tethered
to the DNA by a GAL4 DNA binding domain. (A) Map of reporters with five
GAL4 binding sites (G5) and no GAL4 binding sites (G0) and of the
effectors which express a fusion between the GAL4 binding site and
regions of MBD1 downstream. Effector proteins were expressed from a CMV
promoter. (B) Examples of the relative transcription levels of G5
(squares) and G0 (circles) reporters in the presence of increasing
amounts of different GAL4-MBD1 effectors. The MBD1(273-340) profile
was obtained with effector constructs that contained the second CxxC
domain, whereas the MBD1(506-538) profile was obtained with effectors
containing the C terminus of MBD1. The shaded box next to each panel
provides a key to the repression profile obtained with the effector
constructs listed in panel C. (C) Summary maps showing regions in MBD1
that can affect the transcription of reporters in the above assay.
Repression characteristic of the CxxC domain [see MBD1(273-340)
above] was seen with grey constructs, whereas repression
characteristic of the C terminus [see MBD1(506-538) above] was seen
with diagonally shaded constructs. aa, amino acids.
|
|
Characterization of the C-terminal TRD.
The TRD of MBD1
contains 33% hydrophobic amino acids (alanine, isoleucine, leucine,
phenylalanine, and valine) and 15.1% glycine. Comparison between human
and mouse MBD1 revealed that the TRD is conserved, with 66.7% identity
over a 33-amino-acid region (Fig. 5A). To
test the importance of the conserved amino acids, three TRD mutations
with single-amino-acid substitutions were generated. Conversion of
hydrophobic residues isoleucine-527 and leucine-530 to the basic
residue arginine abolished the repression activity of TRD (Fig. 5A).
Replacement of polar residue threonine-525 by lysine led to partial
loss of repression activity. Western blot analysis using anti-GAL4
antibodies indicated that the expression of these GAL4-TRD mutants was
comparable to that of the wild-type TRD fusion protein (Fig. 5A,
inset).

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Repression by the C-terminal TRD acts at a distance but
is sensitive to TRD mutations and the presence of TSA. (A) Amino acid
sequence conservation of the TRD between human and mouse MBD1s.
Mutations of hydrophobic residue isoleucine-527 (I527R) and leucine-530
(L530R) destroys the repression activity of the TRD, but mutation of
threonine-525 (T525K) leads to partial loss of repression activity.
Inset: wild-type (WT) and mutant GAL4-TRD fusion proteins are expressed
at equal levels. (B) GAL4-TRD can repress transcription from a
distance. Repression was effective when GAL4 binding sites were placed
at 400, 1,300, and 2,100 bp from the transcription start site in the
reporter construct. (C) TSA (100 ng/ml) can partially relieve
repression by GAL4-TRD. The results shown are based on three
independent transfections.
|
|
We next asked whether the TRD can repress transcription at a distance.
Two reporters (p
-887-G5 and p
-1774-G5) with the five GAL4 binding
sites located 1.3 and 2.1 kb away from the transcription start site
(32) were used to address this question (Fig. 5B). GAL4-TRD
repressed the activity of the p
G5BglII reporter in which the GAL4
binding sites were 400 bp upstream of the transcription start site to
about 10% of the control level. At the same effector concentration
(250 ng), the activity of p
geoN/B reporter, which lacked GAL4
binding sites, was not affected. GAL4-TRD also efficiently repressed
when the GAL4 binding sites were 887 bp (p
-887-G5) and 1,774 bp
(p
-1774-G5) further upstream than in p
G5BglII (Fig. 5B). The
result indicates that the TRD can efficiently mediate repression even
when it is more than 2,000 bp distant from the transcription start
site. This finding contrasts with the significant reduction with
distance in the efficiencies of activation by GAL4-VP16 and of
repression by the GAL4-TRD of MeCP2 in the same system (32).
The association between methylated DNA, transcriptional repression, and
hypoacetylated histones raised the possibility that MBD1 also represses
transcription via deacetylation (14, 25, 34, 36, 37).
Repression by GAL4-TRD of MBD1 is sensitive to TSA, suggesting that
deacetylation may play a role (Fig. 5C). The relatively nonspecific
repression by the CxxC domain was, however, not sensitive to TSA (data
not shown). It is unlikely that MBD1 is associated with known histone
deacetylase 1 complexes, since MBD1 proteins were not depleted by
HDAC1, SAP30, or MTA2 antibodies (Fig. 3E). Furthermore, the apparent
molecular weight of MBD1 in extracts was much lower than that of known
corepressor complexes (Fig. 3F).
MBD1 repression in vivo depends on the TRD, the methyl-CpG binding
domain, and deacetylation.
Results with GAL4 fusions to MBD1
fragments indicate that MBD1 contains a TRD whose action may depend on
deacetylation. To assess the requirements of methylation-dependent
repression in vivo, we expressed MBD1 (or regions thereof [Fig.
6C]) in mouse L929 cells that were
cotransfected with a methylated or nonmethylated reporter construct.
The reporter consisted of a luciferase coding region plus a simian
virus 40 (SV40) promoter and enhancer (Fig. 6B). Methylation of all 25 HhaI sites in the ~6,000-bp construct had a minimal effect
on expression (presumably due to the low density of methylation), but
in the presence of intact MBD1, expression was significantly inhibited
(Fig. 6A). Repression was abolished by removing the C-terminal TRD
(amino acids 479 to 556). Deletion of the methyl-CpG binding domain
also abolished repression (Fig. 6A). Comparable expression of the MBD1
proteins was demonstrated by probing Western blots with anti-Myc
monoclonal antibody 9e10 (Santa Cruz) to detect the N-terminal Myc
epitope tag (Fig. 6D). Nuclear localization of all three MBD1 proteins
was verified by immunostaining with anti-Myc antibodies (data not
shown). We next asked whether methylation-dependent repression by MBD1
could be reversed by TSA. As shown in Fig. 6E, TSA treatment restored
the transcription of the methylated reporter in the presence of MBD1 to
over 75% of control levels. These findings confirm that methylated DNA
binding and the TRD are required for repression and that deacetylation is an important component of the repression mechanism.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Repression of a methylated reporter gene by MBD1 depends
on the TRD and methyl-CpG binding domains and is sensitive to TSA. (A)
Mouse L929 cells were transfected with an SV40-luciferase reporter (2 µg) that was nonmethylated (M ) or methylated at 25 HhaI
(GCGC) sites (M+). Levels of M+ and M reporter expression (luciferase
activity) were normalised to the expression level of cotransfected CMV
-galactosidase control reporter (1 µg). Transcription levels were
expressed as the ratio of M+ to M normalised expression levels. The
low density of methylation in the pGL2 control reporter had a
negligible effect on transcription in the absence of cotransfected MBD1
but caused repression relative to the nonmethylated reporter in the
presence of 0.5 µg of intact MBD1 fused to a Myc epitope tag
(5MT-MBD1). N-terminal or C-terminal deletions prevented repression.
(B) Diagram of the pGL2 SV40-luciferase reporter, showing the locations
of methylated HhaI sites. (C) Diagram of the 5MT-MBD1
proteins used to obtain data shown in panel A. (D) Western blots of
proteins extracted from cells transfected by each of the 5MT-MBD1
constructs showing equivalent expression. The blots were probed with
anti-Myc monoclonal antibody 9e10. (E) TSA (100 ng/ml) overcomes
repression by MBD1 of a methylated reporter gene. The results shown are
based on three independent transfections.
|
|
MBD1 is a chromosomal protein that is enriched in hypoacetylated
constitutive heterochromatin.
Localization of MBD1 has been
studied by transient transfection of constructs expressing fusions
between MBD1 and green fluorescent protein (16, 20). To
avoid possible artifacts associated with overexpression of modified
proteins in the presence of endogenous bound protein, we used the
anti-MBD1 antibody to study the localization of endogenous MBD1 on
metaphase chromosomes of human diploid cells. Unfixed metaphase cell
preparations from the primary female fibroblast line HF19
(24) were subjected to immunofluorescent labelling with
sheep anti-MBD1 serum S751 (Fig. 7). The
major sites of labelling corresponded to centromeric heterochromatin on
chromosomes 1, 9, 15, and 16. There was also a concentration in the
acrocentric short arms of chromosomes 13, 14, and 15, where rRNA genes
are interspersed with highly methylated spacer DNA (9).
Nonuniform labelling of euchromatic chromosome arms was also seen (Fig.
7A and B). Affinity-purified MBD1 antibodies gave the same staining pattern as the immune serum, and preimmune serum gave only background staining (data not shown).

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Localization of MBD1 on human metaphase chromosomes in
relation to the distribution of histone H4 acetylation. (A) Unfixed
cytospin HF19 primary female fibroblast metaphase cell, simultaneously
immunolabelled with sheep S751 anti-serum (detected in red) and rabbit
anti-acetyl(Lys-12)-H4 (detected in green), counterstained for DNA with
Hoechst 33258 (blue). Numbered chromosomes were identified from their
Hoechst fluorescence and H4-acetylation immunofluorescence patterns. Xa
and Xi refer to the active and inactive X chromosomes, respectively.
(B) Separated red image showing the MBD1 concentration at centromeres
(particularly noticeable in constitutive pericentromeric
heterochromatin of chromosomes 1, 9, 15 and 16 [see also panel A])
and weaker, nonuniform labelling of euchromatic chromosome arms.
Specific euchromatin localization is evident, since both chromatids
exhibit a similar pattern of immunofluorescent bands (this is more
apparent in some chromosomes than others). (C) Separated green image
showing the histone H4 acetylation profile and identifying
hypoacetylated constitutive heterochromatin and the inactive X
chromosome (Xi). (D) The intensities of MBD1 and acetylated H4
immunofluorescence (red and green, respectively) and Hoechst 33258 DNA
fluorescence (blue) are plotted along the axis of the nonoverlapped
chromosome 1 from panel A. (The position along the chromosome axis is
given in arbitrary units, starting at the tip of the short arm;
fluorescence intensity is likewise given in arbitrary units.) The
concentration of MBD1 at the centromere is clearly indicated by the
peak in the red trace, in contrast to the very low level of histone H4
acetylation in the same region (green trace). MBD1 fluorescence along
the chromosome arms shows much weaker maxima.
|
|
The distribution of MBD1 along human metaphase chromosomes was compared
with the known distribution of histone H4 acetylation (21, 23,
24) by simultaneous immunofluorescent labelling of fibroblast
chromosomes with S751 serum and rabbit anti-acetylated H4 serum R5/12,
which recognizes H4 acetylated at lysine-12 and preferentially reacts
with multiply acetylated isoforms (24, 44). The results for
a typical cell are illustrated in Fig. 7. In contrast to acetylated H4
(Fig. 7A and C, green), which is not detected at centric constitutive
heterochromatin (23), MBD1 labelling (Fig. 7A and B, red) is
highly concentrated in centromeric domains, particularly on chromosomes
1, 9, 15, and 16. The concentration of MBD1 at the centromere is
clearly indicated by the peak of stain intensity in the red trace along
chromosome 1, which contrasts with the very low level of histone H4
acetylation (green trace) in the same region (Fig. 7D). The association
between regions rich in MBD1 and hypoacetylated chromatin did not apply to the facultative heterochromatin, since the distribution of MBD1 on
the inactive X chromosome was not significantly different from that
seen on the active X chromosome or the autosomes (Fig. 7A and B).
Anti-MBD1 antiserum also labelled euchromatin at a level significantly
above the background labelling observed using preimmune sheep serum
(data not shown) although less strongly than it labelled constitutive
heterochromatin (Fig. 7A and B). MBD1 fluorescence along the chromosome
arms showed much weaker maxima. Although some peaks were common to both
the MBD1 distribution and the H4 acetylation profile, in general they
showed distinct patterns, which were also different from the G-band
like Hoechst 33258 pattern (Fig. 7D). These data suggest that MBD1 is
enriched in domains that may not correspond to G- or R-chromosome
banding patterns.
 |
DISCUSSION |
MBD1 was originally identified by searching the EST database for
proteins with homology to the methyl-CpG binding domain of MeCP2. We
show here that the N-terminal 67 amino acids of MBD1 are sufficient for
binding to a single mCpG pair. This domain is significantly smaller
than the minimal methyl-CpG binding domain of MeCP2 (85 amino acids).
Amino acid substitution at proline 38, which is conserved among members
of the MBD family, abolished the affinity of the MBD1 domain toward the
mCpG pair. In a recent nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy
structure of the methyl-CpG binding domain of MeCP2 (45),
proline 38 was found at a sharp turn between two strands of beta sheet.
The amino acids around this proline in the MBD of MeCP2 did not undergo
a chemical shift upon DNA binding, suggesting that this residue is not
in contact with the DNA. Replacement of the proline by lysine is likely
to perturb the local structure of the MBD by removing the unique chain-bending property of proline.
Using an antibody specific for MBD1, we investigated the relationship
between MBD1 and MeCP1. The antibody binds to native human MBD1 in
extracts, but extracts with greatly reduced levels of MBD1 show no loss
of MeCP1 activity. In addition, the antibody fails to supershift the
MeCP1 complex. Recent studies have demonstrated that another methyl-CpG
binding protein, MBD2, is responsible for MeCP1 activity
(37). Correspondingly, anti-MBD2 antibodies supershift the
MeCP1 complex and can immunodeplete MeCP1 activity from extracts. The
distinction between MeCP1 and MBD1 is emphasized by gel filtration
chromatography, since MBD2 is part of an approximately 800-kDa complex
in HeLa cells whereas native MBD1 migrates at 200 to 400 kDa. Finally,
anti-MBD1 antibodies do not immunoprecipitate MBD2, and vice versa.
Based on the summation of this work and the MBD2 study (37),
we conclude that MeCP1 of HeLa cells does not contain MBD1 protein.
It was shown earlier that recombinant MBD1 can repress transcription in
vitro in a methylation-dependent manner (12). While this
manuscript was in preparation, Fujita et al. confirmed the in vitro
data with additional promoters and showed that human MBD1, when
expressed in Drosophila cells, can repress methylated reporter genes specifically (16). Because reporter genes are methylated at many sites within, upstream, and downstream of the transcribed region, it is important to know whether repression is due
to passive steric interference with transcription by bound MBD within
the gene or within a transcription factor binding site or whether it is
due to active interference with the transcription process. Active
repression should be apparent even when the repressor is tethered well
upstream of the gene region. We used a GAL4 fusion repression assay to
identify a TRD within MBD1 that can affect the transcriptional activity
of a reporter gene from binding sites at least 2,000 bp pairs upstream
of its promoter. We conclude that the TRD represents an active
repression domain. A second repression domain, which coincided with one
of the CxxC domains, repressed reporters with and without GAL4 binding
sites and may therefore represent a nonspecific (or toxic)
transcriptional inhibitor.
The specific TRD at the C terminus of MBD1 repressed strongly in the
transient-transfection assay. This region was the primary cause of
methylation-dependent repression by intact MBD1, since a protein
lacking it but having intact CxxC domains did not significantly repress
a methylated reporter. Repression by the C-terminal TRD depended on
tethering to DNA by either the GAL4 DNA binding domain or the
methyl-CpG binding domain. The amino acid sequence of the TRD is
conserved between the human and mouse MBD1s. It is enriched in
hydrophobic residues, unlike the highly basic TRD of MeCP2 (32). Mutations at conserved residues within the domain
abolish repression. TSA treatment relieves the repression by GAL4-TRD and intact MBD1, strongly suggesting that deacetylation is involved in
silencing. HDAC1 is unlikely to be responsible, however, since it fails
to coimmunoprecipitate with MBD1. MBD1 does not appear to be associated
with two other well-studied corepressor complexes, Mi-2/NuRD or
Sin3/SAP30, since it does not co-immunoprecipitate with components of
these complexes and is considerably smaller than either by gel
filtration (Fig. 3). Other members of the mammalian histone deacetylase
family have been reported (15, 17, 47) and may conceivably
play a role in repression by MBD1.
Previous work showed that overexpressed tagged versions of MBD1
localize preferentially to heterochromatic foci in mouse cells (20) and centromeric foci and chromosome arms in HeLa cells (16). We show here that endogenous MBD1 in diploid human
cells localizes to prominent heterochromatic foci close to the
centromeres of chromosomes 1, 9, 15, and 16 and more weakly to
euchromatic chromosome arms. Regions of pericentromeric heterochromatin
that are particularly deficient in acetylated histone H4 tails are enriched in MBD1, although the protein is also found at lower concentrations in euchromatic regions of the genome. The distribution of MBD1 is similar to that of 5-methylcytosine in constitutive heterochromatin, as established using antibodies against the modified base (1, 30). Thus, MBD1 resembles MeCP2 by being stably associated with chromosomes, even during mitosis, when many
transcription factors are displaced (28). Although both
MeCP2 and MBD1 are chromosome associated, MeCP2 is usually present at
low levels in cultured cells. Whether the two proteins normally compete
for the same sites or have additional specificities that segregate them
(e.g., differing protein-protein interactions) is a topic for future
work. More broadly, it will be necessary to dissect the roles of MeCP2,
MeCP1 (MBD2), and MBD1 to determine their specific contributions to
methylated gene silencing (see reference 5 for a
review). Do they back up one another to repress any one promoter? Or
are particular genes targeted by one of the three repressors? Answers
to these and other pressing questions await the discovery of genes that
are specifically targeted for repression in the living organism.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Yi Zhang, Danny Reinberg, and Bryan Turner for
antibodies; Xinsheng Nan for plasmids; Harris Morrison for assistance in karyotyping; and Vicky Clark, Joan Davidson, and Aileen Greig for
technical assistance.
This work was supported by a Program Grant to A.B. from the Wellcome
Trust and by the Medical Research Council (London). H-H.N. is a Darwin
Trust Scholar.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute of
Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Edinburgh EH9 3JR, United Kingdom. Phone: (0131) 650-5670. Fax: (0131)
650-5379. E-mail: A.Bird{at}ed.ac.uk.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Barbin, A.,
C. Montpellier,
N. Kokalj-Vokac,
A. Gibaud,
A. Niveleau,
B. Malfoy,
B. Dutrillaux, and C. A. Bourgeois.
1994.
New sites of methylcytosine-rich DNA detected on metaphase chromosomes.
Hum. Genet.
94:684-692[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Beard, C.,
E. Li, and R. Jaenisch.
1995.
Loss of methylation activates Xist in somatic but not in embryonic cells.
Genes Dev.
9:2325-2334[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Bestor, T. H.
1992.
Activation of mammalian DNA methyltransferase by cleavage of a Zn binding regulatory domain.
EMBO J.
11:2611-2617[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Bestor, T. H.,
C. P. Walsh, and J. A. Yoder.
1997.
Does DNA methylation control transposition of selfish elements in the germline.
Trends Genet.
13:470-472[CrossRef].
|
| 5.
|
Bird, A., and A. P. Wolffe.
1999.
Methylation-induced repression belts, braces and chromatin.
Cell
99:451-454[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Bird, A. P.
1995.
Gene number, noise reduction and biological complexity.
Trends Genet.
11:94-100[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Boyes, J., and A. Bird.
1991.
DNA methylation inhibits transcription indirectly via a methyl-CpG binding protein.
Cell
64:1123-1134[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Boyes, J., and A. Bird.
1992.
Repression of genes by DNA methylation depends on CpG density and promoter strength: evidence for involvement of a methyl-CpG binding protein.
EMBO J.
11:327-333[Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Brock, J. R., and A. Bird.
1997.
Mosaic methylation of the repeat unit of the human ribosomal RNA genes.
Hum. Mol. Genet.
6:451-456[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Chandler, S. P.,
D. Guschin,
N. Landsberger, and A. P. Wolffe.
1999.
The methyl-CpG binding transcriptional repressor MeCP2 stably associates with nucleosomal DNA.
Biochemistry
38:7008-7018[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Chuang, L. S.-H.,
H.-H. Ng,
J.-N. Chia, and B. F. L. Li.
1996.
Characterisation of independent DNA and multiple Zn-binding domains at the N terminus of human DNA-(cytosine-5) methyltransferase: modulating the property of a DNA-binding domain by contiguous Zn-binding motifs.
J. Mol. Biol.
257:935-948[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Cross, S. H.,
R. R. Meehan,
X. Nan, and A. Bird.
1997.
A component of the transcriptional repressor MeCP1 is related to mammalian DNA methyltransferase and trithorax-like protein.
Nat. Genet.
16:256-259[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Davey, C.,
S. Pennings, and J. Allan.
1997.
CpG methylation remodels chromatin structure in vitro.
J. Mol. Biol.
267:276-288[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Eden, S.,
T. Hashimshony,
I. Keshet, and H. Cedar.
1998.
DNA methylation models histone acetylation.
Nature
394:842[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Emiliani, S.,
W. Fischle,
C. Van Lint,
Y. Al-Abed, and E. Verdin.
1998.
Characterization of a human RPD3 ortholog, HDAC3.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:2795-2800[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Fujita, N.,
S. Takebayashi,
K. Okumura,
S. Kudo,
T. Chiba,
H. Saya, and M. Nakao.
1999.
Methylation-mediated transcriptional silencing in euchromatin by methyl-CpG binding protein MBD1 isoforms.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:6415-6426[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Grozinger, C. M.,
C. A. Hassig, and S. L. Schreiber.
1999.
Three proteins define a class of human histone deacetylases related to yeast Hda1p.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96:4868-4873[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Harlow, E., and D. Lane.
1988.
Antibodies: a laboratory manual.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 19.
|
Hendrich, B.,
C. Abbott,
H. McQueen,
D. Chambers,
S. Cross, and A. Bird.
1999.
Genomic structure and chromosomal mapping of the murine and human Mbd1, Mbd2, Mbd3, and Mbd4 genes.
Mamm. Genome
10:906-912[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Hendrich, B., and A. Bird.
1998.
Identification and characterization of a family of mammalian methyl-CpG binding proteins.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:6538-6547[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Jeppesen, P.
1997.
Histone acetylation: a possible mechanism for the inheritance of cell memory at mitosis.
Bioessays
19:67-74[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Jeppesen, P.
1994.
Immunofluorescence techniques applied to mitotic chromosome preparations.
Methods Mol. Biol.
29:253-285[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Jeppesen, P.,
A. Mitchell,
B. Turner, and P. Perry.
1992.
Antibodies to defined histone epitopes variations in chromatin conformation and underacetylation of centric heterochromatin in human metaphase chromosomes.
Chromosoma
101:322-332[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Jeppesen, P., and B. M. Turner.
1993.
The inactive X chromosome in female mammals is distinguished by a lack of histone H4 acetylation, a cytogenetic marker for gene expression.
Cell
74:281-289[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Jones, P. L.,
G. J. C. Veenstra,
P. A. Wade,
D. Vermaak,
S. U. Kass,
N. Landsberger,
J. Strouboulis, and A. P. Wolffe.
1998.
Methylated DNA and MeCP2 recruit histone deacetylase to repress transcription.
Nat. Genet.
19:187-191[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Levine, A.,
G. L. Cantoni, and A. Razin.
1991.
Inhibition of promoter activity by methylation: possible involvement of protein mediators.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:6515-6518[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Lewis, J. D.,
R. R. Meehan,
W. J. Henzel,
I. Maurer-Fogy,
P. Jeppesen,
F. Klein, and A. Bird.
1992.
Purification, sequence and cellular localisation of a novel chromosomal protein that binds to methylated DNA.
Cell
69:905-914[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Martinez-Balbas, M.,
A. Dey,
S. K. Rabindran,
K. Ozato, and C. Wu.
1995.
Displacement of sequence-specific transcription factors from mitotic chromatin.
Cell
83:29-38[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Meehan, R. R.,
J. D. Lewis,
S. McKay,
E. L. Kleiner, and A. P. Bird.
1989.
Identification of a mammalian protein that binds specifically to DNA containing methylated CpGs.
Cell
58:499-507[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Miller, O. L.,
W. Schnoedl,
J. Allen, and B. F. Erlanger.
1974.
Immunofluorescent localization of 5MC.
Nature
251:636-637[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Mohandas, T.,
R. S. Sparkes, and L. J. Shapiro.
1981.
Reactivation of an inactive human X-chromosome: evidence for X-inactivation by DNA methylation.
Science
211:393-396[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Nan, X.,
J. Campoy, and A. Bird.
1997.
MeCP2 is a transcriptional repressor with abundant binding sites in genomic chromatin.
Cell
88:471-481[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Nan, X.,
R. R. Meehan, and A. Bird.
1993.
Dissection of the methyl-CpG binding domain from the chromosomal protein MeCP2.
Nucleic Acids Res.
21:4886-4892[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Nan, X.,
H.-H. Ng,
C. A. Johnson,
C. D. Laherty,
B. M. Turner,
R. N. Eisenman, and A. Bird.
1998.
Transcriptional repression by the methyl-CpG-binding protein MeCP2 involves a histone deacetylase complex.
Nature
393:386-389[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Nan, X.,
P. Tate,
E. Li, and A. P. Bird.
1996.
DNA methylation specifies chromosomal localization of MeCP2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:414-421[Abstract].
|
| 36.
|
Ng, H.-H., and A. Bird.
1999.
DNA methylation and chromatin modification.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
9:158-163[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Ng, H.-H.,
Y. Zhang,
B. Hendrich,
C. A. Johnson,
B. M. Burner,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst,
D. Reinberg, and A. Bird.
1999.
MBD2 is a transcriptional repressor belonging to the MeCP1 histone deacetylase complex.
Nat. Genet.
23:58-61[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Panning, B., and R. Jaenisch.
1996.
DNA hypomethylation can activate Xist expression and silence X-linked genes.
Genes Dev.
10:1991-2002[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Prasad, R.,
T. Yano,
C. Sorio,
T. Nakamura,
R. Rallapalli,
Y. Gu,
D. Leshkowitz,
C. M. Croce, and E. Canaani.
1995.
Domains with transcriptional regulatory activity within the ALL1 and AF4 proteins involved in acute leukemia.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:12160-12164[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 40.
|
Razin, A.
1998.
CpG methylation, chromatin structure and gene silencing a three-way connection.
EMBO J.
17:4905-4908[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 41.
|
Stöger, R.,
P. Kubicka,
C.-G. Liu,
T. Kafri,
A. Razin,
H. Cedar, and D. P. Barlow.
1993.
Maternal specific methylation of the imprinted mouse Ifg2r locus identifies the expressed locus as carrying the imprinting signal.
Cell
73:61-70[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Tate, P. H., and A. Bird.
1993.
Effects of DNA methylation on DNA-binding proteins and gene expression.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
3:226-231[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 43.
|
Tremblay, K. D.,
K. L. Duran, and M. S. Bartolomei.
1997.
A 5' 2-kilobase-pair region of the imprinted mouse H19 gene exhibits exclusive paternal methylation throughout development.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:4322-4329[Abstract].
|
| 44.
|
Turner, B. M., and G. Fellows.
1989.
Specific antibodies reveal ordered and cell cycle-related use of histone H4 acetylation sites in mammalian cells.
Eur. J. Biochem.
79:131-139.
|
| 45.
|
Wakefield, R. I. D.,
B. P. Smith,
X. Nan,
A. Free,
A. Soterious,
D. Uhrin,
A. Bird, and P. N. Barlow.
1999.
The solution structure of the domain from MeCP2 that binds to methylated DNA.
J. Mol. Biol.
291:1055-1065[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 46.
|
Walsh, C. P., and T. H. Bestor.
1999.
Cytosine methylation and mammalian development.
Genes Dev.
13:26-34[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 47.
|
Yang, W. M.,
Y. L. Yao,
J. M. Sun,
J. R. Davie, and E. Seto.
1997.
Isolation and characterization of cDNAs corresponding to an additional member of the human histone deacetylase gene family.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:28001-28007[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 48.
|
Yoder, J. A.,
R.-W. Chui Yen,
P. M. Vertino,
T. H. Bestor, and S. B. Baylin.
1996.
New 5' regions of the murine and human genes for DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:31092-31097[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 49.
|
Zeleznik-Le, N. J.,
A. M. Harden, and J. D. Rowley.
1994.
11q23 translocations split the "AT-hook" cruciform DNA-binding region and the transcriptional repression domain from the activation domain of the mixed-lineage leukemia (MLL) gene.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:10610-10614[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 50.
|
Zhang, Y.,
H.-H. Ng,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst,
A. Bird, and D. Reinberg.
1999.
Analysis of the NURD subunits reveal a histone deacetylase core complex and a connection with DNA methylation.
Genes Dev.
13:1924-1935[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 51.
|
Zhang, Y.,
Z.-W. Sun,
R. Iratni,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst,
M. Hampsey, and D. Reinberg.
1998.
SAP30, a novel protein conserved between human and yeast, is a component of a histone deacetylase complex.
Mol. Cell
1:1021-1031[CrossRef][Medline].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, February 2000, p. 1394-1406, Vol. 20, No. 4
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Fejer, G., Koroknai, A., Banati, F., Gyory, I., Salamon, D., Wolf, H., Niller, H. H., Minarovits, J.
(2008). Latency type-specific distribution of epigenetic marks at the alternative promoters Cp and Qp of Epstein-Barr virus. J. Gen. Virol.
89: 1364-1370
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sakamoto, Y., Watanabe, S., Ichimura, T., Kawasuji, M., Koseki, H., Baba, H., Nakao, M.
(2007). Overlapping Roles of the Methylated DNA-binding Protein MBD1 and Polycomb Group Proteins in Transcriptional Repression of HOXA Genes and Heterochromatin Foci Formation. J. Biol. Chem.
282: 16391-16400
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kang, B. G., Shin, J. H., Yi, J. K., Kang, H. C., Lee, J. J., Heo, H. S., Chae, J. H., Shin, I., Kim, C. G.
(2007). Corepressor MMTR/DMAP1 Is Involved in both Histone Deacetylase 1- and TFIIH-Mediated Transcriptional Repression. Mol. Cell. Biol.
27: 3578-3588
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wong, J J L, Hawkins, N J, Ward, R L
(2007). Colorectal cancer: a model for epigenetic tumorigenesis. Gut
56: 140-148
[Full Text]
-
To, K. K. W., Zhan, Z., Bates, S. E.
(2006). Aberrant Promoter Methylation of the ABCG2 Gene in Renal Carcinoma. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 8572-8585
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jorgensen, H. F., Adie, K., Chaubert, P., Bird, A. P.
(2006). Engineering a high-affinity methyl-CpG-binding protein. Nucleic Acids Res
34: e96-e96
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Villa, R., Morey, L., Raker, V. A., Buschbeck, M., Gutierrez, A., De Santis, F., Corsaro, M., Varas, F., Bossi, D., Minucci, S., Pelicci, P. G., Di Croce, L.
(2006). The methyl-CpG binding protein MBD1 is required for PML-RAR{alpha} function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
103: 1400-1405
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Swales, A K E, Spears, N
(2005). Genomic imprinting and reproduction. Reproduction
130: 389-399
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Auriol, E., Billard, L.-M., Magdinier, F., Dante, R.
(2005). Specific binding of the methyl binding domain protein 2 at the BRCA1-NBR2 locus. Nucleic Acids Res
33: 4243-4254
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sharma, D., Blum, J., Yang, X., Beaulieu, N., Macleod, A. R., Davidson, N. E.
(2005). Release of Methyl CpG Binding Proteins and Histone Deacetylase 1 from the Estrogen Receptor {alpha} (ER) Promoter upon Reactivation in ER-Negative Human Breast Cancer Cells. Mol. Endocrinol.
19: 1740-1751
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Springer, N. M., Kaeppler, S. M.
(2005). Evolutionary Divergence of Monocot and Dicot Methyl-CpG-Binding Domain Proteins. Plant Physiol.
138: 92-104
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ichimura, T., Watanabe, S., Sakamoto, Y., Aoto, T., Fujita, N., Nakao, M.
(2005). Transcriptional Repression and Heterochromatin Formation by MBD1 and MCAF/AM Family Proteins. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 13928-13935
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jin, S.-G., Jiang, C.-L., Rauch, T., Li, H., Pfeifer, G. P.
(2005). MBD3L2 Interacts with MBD3 and Components of the NuRD Complex and Can Oppose MBD2-MeCP1-mediated Methylation Silencing. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 12700-12709
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Tong, Y., Aune, T., Boothby, M.
(2005). T-bet antagonizes mSin3a recruitment and transactivates a fully methylated IFN-{gamma} promoter via a conserved T-box half-site. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
102: 2034-2039
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ruzov, A., Dunican, D. S., Prokhortchouk, A., Pennings, S., Stancheva, I., Prokhortchouk, E., Meehan, R. R.
(2004). Kaiso is a genome-wide repressor of transcription that is essential for amphibian development. Development
131: 6185-6194
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jiang, C.-L., Jin, S.-G., Pfeifer, G. P.
(2004). MBD3L1 Is a Transcriptional Repressor That Interacts with Methyl-CpG-binding Protein 2 (MBD2) and Components of the NuRD Complex. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 52456-52464
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Klose, R. J., Bird, A. P.
(2004). MeCP2 Behaves as an Elongated Monomer That Does Not Stably Associate with the Sin3a Chromatin Remodeling Complex. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 46490-46496
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Valinluck, V., Tsai, H.-H., Rogstad, D. K., Burdzy, A., Bird, A., Sowers, L. C.
(2004). Oxidative damage to methyl-CpG sequences inhibits the binding of the methyl-CpG binding domain (MBD) of methyl-CpG binding protein 2 (MeCP2). Nucleic Acids Res
32: 4100-4108
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Stirzaker, C., Song, J. Z., Davidson, B., Clark, S. J.
(2004). Transcriptional Gene Silencing Promotes DNA Hypermethylation through a Sequential Change in Chromatin Modifications in Cancer Cells. Cancer Res.
64: 3871-3877
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hattori, N., Nishino, K., Ko, Y.-g., Hattori, N., Ohgane, J., Tanaka, S., Shiota, K.
(2004). Epigenetic Control of Mouse Oct-4 Gene Expression in Embryonic Stem Cells and Trophoblast Stem Cells. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 17063-17069
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jorgensen, H. F., Ben-Porath, I., Bird, A. P.
(2004). Mbd1 Is Recruited to both Methylated and Nonmethylated CpGs via Distinct DNA Binding Domains. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 3387-3395
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Rothem, L., Stark, M., Kaufman, Y., Mayo, L., Assaraf, Y. G.
(2004). Reduced Folate Carrier Gene Silencing in Multiple Antifolate-resistant Tumor Cell Lines Is Due to a Simultaneous Loss of Function of Multiple Transcription Factors but Not Promoter Methylation. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 374-384
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Craig, J. M., Earle, E., Canham, P., Wong, L. H., Anderson, M., Choo, K.H. A.
(2003). Analysis of mammalian proteins involved in chromatin modification reveals new metaphase centromeric proteins and distinct chromosomal distribution patterns. Hum Mol Genet
12: 3109-3121
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Watanabe, S., Ichimura, T., Fujita, N., Tsuruzoe, S., Ohki, I., Shirakawa, M., Kawasuji, M., Nakao, M.
(2003). Methylated DNA-binding domain 1 and methylpurine-DNA glycosylase link transcriptional repression and DNA repair in chromatin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
100: 12859-12864