Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Baylor
College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030,1 and
Department of Cell and Structural Biology, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 618012
Received 5 February 2001/Returned for modification 15 March
2001/Accepted 9 April 2001
Studies with live cells demonstrate that agonist and antagonist
rapidly (within minutes) modulate the subnuclear dynamics of estrogen
receptor
(ER) and steroid receptor coactivator 1 (SRC-1). A
functional cyan fluorescent protein (CFP)-tagged
lac repressor-ER chimera (CFP-LacER) was used in live
cells to discretely immobilize ER on stably integrated
lac operator arrays to study recruitment of yellow
fluorescent protein (YFP)-steroid receptor coactivators (YFP-SRC-1 and
YFP-CREB binding protein [CBP]). In the absence of ligand, YFP-SRC-1
is found dispersed throughout the nucleoplasm, with a surprisingly high
accumulation on the CFP-LacER arrays. Agonist addition results in the
rapid (within minutes) recruitment of nucleoplasmic YFP-SRC-1, while
antagonist additions diminish YFP-SRC-1-CFP-LacER associations. Less
ligand-independent colocalization is observed with CFP-LacER and
YFP-CBP, but agonist-induced recruitment occurs within minutes. The
agonist-induced recruitment of coactivators requires helix 12 and
critical residues in the ER-SRC-1 interaction surface, but not the F,
AF-1, or DNA binding domains. Fluorescence recovery after
photobleaching indicates that YFP-SRC-1, YFP-CBP, and CFP-LacER
complexes undergo rapid (within seconds) molecular exchange even in the
presence of an agonist. Taken together, these data suggest a dynamic
view of receptor-coregulator interactions that is now amenable to
real-time study in living cells.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Estrogen receptor
(ER) is a
member of the nuclear receptor (NR) superfamily and regulates
transcription of specific target genes in response to ligand binding
and phosphorylation (2, 19, 36). Functional domains
involved in ER transcription function have been mapped and include a
centrally located DNA binding domain (DBD); in addition, two activation
function domains (AFs) have also been identified, including an
N-terminal domain, AF-1, and a C-terminal domain, AF-2, containing the
ligand binding domain (LBD) (14, 15, 35).
ER functionally interacts with a large group of proteins referred to as
steroid receptor coregulators, including both coactivators and
corepressors (reviewed in reference 20). Coactivators such as steroid receptor coactivator 1 (SRC-1) and CREB-binding protein (CBP/p300) interact with ER in an agonist-dependent manner to increase
transcription function (5, 12, 13, 24), in part due to
intrinsic histone acetyltransferase activity (23, 30). SRC-1 and CBP act synergistically to enhance steroid receptor-based transcription (28), suggesting that they are in the same
molecular complex with steroid receptors. In the presence of agonist
only, SRC-1 redistributes to ER foci bound to insoluble nuclear
structures (33). The molecular mechanisms underlying
interactions between ER and coactivators involve structural
rearrangements in the LBD that occur upon hormone binding (4,
27). These structural changes involve the repositioning of helix
12 (amino acids [aa] 538 to 546) of the ER LBD, allowing for
coactivator interactions in the presence of agonist. In vitro
experiments have shown that helix 12 and key amino acids found in the
coactivator binding pocket are essential for transcriptional activity
and coactivator interactions (7, 10, 18).
Many assays used to analyze interactions between steroid receptors and
coregulators are performed in vitro or with yeast two-hybrid systems;
both of which fail to recapitulate the elegant organization of the
mammalian nucleus (22). Furthermore, experiments to
characterize transactivator function often involve the use of transient
transfection assays and exogenous templates that only partially reflect
the complex organization of steroid receptors in the context of nuclear architecture (29). Recently, a functional green
fluorescent protein-ER fusion protein (GFP-ER)
was shown to undergo ligand-dependent intranuclear
reorganization (11, 33). Furthermore, this reorganization correlates with nuclear matrix (NM) association (33),
suggesting that the NM plays a role in the subnuclear organization of
ER and agonist-dependent SRC-1 binding. In contrast to a report showing high mobility of several intranuclear proteins (25), our
recent photobleaching and biochemical data demonstrate that ligand and, surprisingly, proteasome activity regulate the intranuclear mobility-NM association between ER and SRC-1 (34). This work supports
the notion that a highly organized and dynamic subnuclear environment provides a framework for receptor function (1, 6, 31, 32).
Integrated DNA segments containing multiple binding sites for the
glucocorticoid receptor (GR) (21) have been utilized to show that fluorescent transcription factors can undergo rapid exchange
with their DNA binding sites in living cells. In a different system,
amplified chromosomal regions containing large numbers of
lac operator sites were used to analyze the effects of
transcription factor binding on chromatin structure (3,
26). Chimeric proteins consisting of GFP-Lac repressor bound to
VP16 activation function domain (37) or ER (A. C. Nye, R. R. Rajendran, D. L. Stenoien, M. A. Mancini,
B. S. Katzenellenbogen, and A.S. Belmont, submitted for
publication) result in an expansion of the chromosomal region containing the lac operators due to changes in chromatin structure.
To obtain additional insight into the mechanisms of intranuclear ER and
coactivator dynamics, we have utilized the integrated lac
operator arrays to localize fluorescent lac repressors
linked to wild-type and mutant ERs. Real-time in vivo recruitment
assays were performed to demonstrate that helix 12 and critical
residues in the ER-SRC-1 interaction surface of AF-2 are required for
rapid (within minutes), agonist-enhanced yellow fluorescent protein (YFP)-SRC-1 recruitment. AF-1, DNA binding, and C-terminal F domains are expendable for agonist-induced recruitment. Additionally, recruitment of YFP-CBP to CFP-LacER is agonist dependent and rapid (within minutes) and requires the same molecular domains. Finally, fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) was used to analyze
the dynamics of array-bound ER and SRC-1 or CBP in living cells.
Intriguingly, although agonist stabilizes these interactions, ER-SRC-1
and ER-CBP complexes remain highly dynamic in terms of exchange
half-life (within seconds).
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell culture and labeling.
A03_1 and RRE_B1 cells were
cultured as described previously (16). Twenty-four hours
prior to transfection, cells were plated onto
poly-D-lysine-coated coverslips in 35-mm-diameter wells at a concentration of 105 cells/well in phenol
red-free medium containing 10% charcoal-stripped serum. Transient
expression of CFP-LacER and SRC-1 vectors in A03_1 and RRE_B1 cells was
performed with FuGENE (Roche Diagnostics, Inc.) Twelve hours after
transfection, cells were shocked with 10% dimethyl sulfoxide and
allowed to recover for 6 h in stripped medium prior to addition of
hormone. Vehicle (ethanol), 10 nM 17
-estradiol (E2; Sigma), 10 nM
4-hydroxytamoxifen (4HT; a gift from D. Salin-Drouin, Laboratoires
Besins Iscovesco, Paris, France), or 10 nM ICI 182,780 (a gift from
Alan Wakeling, Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Macclesfield, United Kingdom)
was added for the times indicated.
Vectors.
CFP-ER and YFP-SRC-1 constructs were made as
described previously (33). ER deletion constructs were
generated by PCR to place a stop codon followed by a BamHI
site at the appropriate amino acid to be used in subcloning. PCR
products were ligated into the original CFP-ER vector, and the
resulting vectors were sequenced to verify that no mutations were
present. The V376D mutant was generated by site-directed mutagenesis to
recapitulate the previously described mutant (18). The
CFP-LacER vectors were made from GFP-LacER (Nye et al., submitted for
publication) by a swap involving placement of the lac
repressor (BamHI site) and a portion of the ER
(SacII site) into the CFP-ER vectors. YFP-SRC780-LXXAA was
made from a vector in which all of the LXXLL amino acids were mutated
to LXXAA (a kind gift from M. G. Parker) by swapping the
HindIII-BamHI fragment containing the three
LXXLL repeats located between aa 570 and 780.
Fluorescent and deconvolution microscopy.
Deconvolution
microscopy was performed with a Zeiss AxioVert S100 TV microscope and a
DeltaVision Restoration Microscopy System (Applied Precision, Inc.). A
Z-series of focal planes were digitally imaged and deconvolved with the
DeltaVision constrained iterative algorithm to generate high-resolution
images. All image files were digitally processed for presentation with
Adobe Photoshop and printed at 300 dpi with a Codonics NP 1600 dye
diffusion printer.
Live microscopy.
Following transfection, cells were
transferred to a live-cell, closed chamber (Bioptechs, Inc., Butler,
Pa.) and maintained in medium with 10% stripped fetal bovine serum
(FBS) at 37°C. This medium was recirculated with a peristaltic pump
to which ligand was added following the zero-time-point exposure. In
order to minimize photo damage, cells were imaged with neutral-density filters to allow only 30% of the total light and 1-s exposure times.
FRAP was performed on a Zeiss LSM 510 confocal microscope. A single
Z section was imaged before and at different time intervals following the 2-s bleach. The bleach was performed with the laser set
at 458 nm and at maximum power for 50 iterations of a box representing
a portion of each array. For dual-FRAP experiments, both CFP-LacER and
YFP-SRC780 or YFP-CBP were bleached with the same laser setting and
simultaneous images corresponding to the CFP and YFP fluorescence were
obtained by using the multitracking function of the microscope.
Fluorescent intensities of regions of interest were obtained with LSM
software, and data analysis was performed with Microsoft Excel. LSM
images were exported as TIF files, and final figures were generated
with Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator.
 |
RESULTS |
CFP-LacER chimeras bind to lac operator
repeats.
Stable cell lines containing integrated arrays comprised
of multiple copies of the lac operator have been used to
analyze the effects of transcription factors on chromatin structure
(3, 37). Recently, a chimera containing GFP-LacER was
shown to bind with high affinity to these arrays and to influence
chromatin structure (Nye et al., submitted). Here, we used this system
to evaluate real-time protein-protein interactions in the nuclei of
living cells. Toward this end, we generated CFP-Lac repressor fusions
with full-length ER (CFP-LacER) (Fig.
1A). CFP-LacER retains the ability to
activate transcription in an agonist-dependent manner, although it is
less active (~50%) than untagged ER (Fig. 1B). We next transfected
this plasmid into two stable cell lines containing integrated
lac operator arrays. The A03_1 cell line (16)
contains heterochromatic arrays arranged in a globular structure useful
for studying changes in chromatin, while the RRE_B1 cell line contains
euchromatic arrays, which are more extended and linear (J. Zhao
and A. S. Belmont, unpublished data). When either of these cell
lines is transfected with CFP-LacER, most of the fluorescent protein is
associated with the compact A03_1 arrays or more linear RRE_B1 arrays
(Fig. 1C). Other CFP-lac fusions with ER mutations also
target to the array (see below), since binding occurs via the
lac repressor domain.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
CFP-LacER binds to lac operators. (A)
Schematic diagram of the CFP-LacER chimera shows the N-terminal CFP
followed by the lac repressor with ER at its C terminus.
(B) The activity of the CFP-LacER was tested on an estrogen response
element-containing promoter driving luciferase expression in the
presence and absence of 10 nM E2. Clear agonist-induced activity
(~50% of wild type) with CFP-LacER, but not CFP-Lac alone, is
evident. Shown is the luciferase activity divided by -galactosidase
activity, which served as an internal control (n = 3). (C) A03_1 (left) or RRE_B1 (right) cells were transfected with
CFP-LacER. After fixation, nuclei were stained with
4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) (blue), and then
deconvolution-based fluorescence microscopy was performed. CFP-LacER
binds to globular arrays in A03_1 cells and extended arrays in RRE_B1
cells. Bar = 10 µm.
|
|
Targeting of SRC-1 to LacER on lac operators.
We have previously reported a clear agonist-dependent interaction
between bulk wild-type ER and SRC-1 in distinct intranuclear foci
(33). However, analysis of interactions between ER
deletion constructs and SRC-1 is complicated in cases in which both
proteins have diffuse intranuclear distributions. To overcome this
problem, we utilized the integrated lac operators to
localize lac repressor-ER fusion proteins, thus allowing us
to evaluate protein-protein interactions in living cells. ER-SRC-1
interactions were first analyzed in A03_1 cells cotransfected with
CFP-LacER and YFP-SRC-1. When YFP-SRC-1 is transfected alone, it has
a similar intranuclear distribution, as observed previously in HeLa
cells, with no detectable accumulation on the arrays in the presence or
absence of added hormone (data not shown). In cells cotransfected with
CFP-LacER and YFP-SRC-1, addition of agonist results in the rapid
recruitment to the array of the nucleoplasmic YFP-SRC-1 within 5 min
(Fig. 2A). In some cases, most of the
YFP-SRC-1 pool was recruited to the array in as little as 2 min after
hormone addition, indicating that SRC-1 recruitment is a rapid process.
In most cells, an accumulation of YFP-SRC-1 can be observed in the
absence of hormone, which may be due to the very high concentration of
CFP-LacER in these globular arrays and weak hormone-independent
interactions between ER and SRC-1 (17; B. M. Jaber and C. L. Smith, personal communication). When RRE_B1 cells containing
the more extended, euchromatic arrays (and therefore less concentrated
CFP-LacER) are analyzed, fewer hormone-independent interactions between
CFP-LacER and YFP-SRC-1 are visible, which is likely due in part to
the lower signal at the arrays versus the significant levels of
YFP-SRC-1 throughout the nucleus (Fig. 2B).

View larger version (60K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
CFP-LacER recruits YFP-SRC-1. (A) A03_1 cells were
cotransfected with CFP-LacER (top row) and YFP-SRC-1 (bottom row) and
subjected to live microscopy during hormone addition. Before hormone
addition (left column), CFP-LacER is found associated with the array,
but much of the YFP-SRC-1 remains nucleoplasmic. Addition of E2 (10 nM, 5 min) results in the rapid recruitment of YFP-SRC-1 to CFP-LacER
(bottom). (B) When the same experiment is performed with RRE_B1 cells,
much less YFP-SRC-1 (bottom left) is evident on an extended,
euchromatic array containing CFP-LacER (top left) in the absence of
hormone. Addition of E2 (10 nM, 5 min) results in the rapid recruitment
of YFP-SRC-1 (bottom right) to the CFP-LacER (top right). Images are
deconvolved and represent a single Z-section. Bar = 10 µm.
|
|
We have previously shown that a small segment of SRC-1 spanning aa 570 to 780 (YFP-SRC570-780) containing three LXXLL motifs required for NR
binding (8) is sufficient for colocalization with bulk
nucleoplasmic ER (33). E2 addition results in
YFP-SRC570-780 recruitment to CFP-LacER on the A03_1 arrays as well
(data not shown). A disadvantage of using YFP-SRC570-780 is that it is
distributed throughout the cell, since it lacks the amino-terminal
nuclear localization signal of SRC-1 and must rely upon diffusion
through nuclear pores to enter the nucleus. A longer construct spanning the amino-terminal region of SRC-1 (YFP-SRC780) is localized in the
nucleus and is recruited to the arrays (Fig.
3A and B), similar to full-length
YFP-SRC-1. This construct is much easier to express than full-length
SRC-1, which has a tendency to form large cytoplasmic aggregates once a
very low threshold of expression is reached. For this reason, the
following experiments were performed with YFP-SRC780.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
YFP-SRC780 recruitment to CFP-LacER in A03_1 cells. (A)
In the absence of hormone, YFP-SRC780 (right column) is present in the
nucleoplasm and also accumulates on the CFP-lacER (left column) bound
to the lac operator arrays. (B) Following E2 addition
(10 nM, 30 min), most of the YFP-SRC780 is found associated with
CFP-LacER. (C) Pretreatment with 4HT (10 nM, 30 min) leads to less
YFP-SRC780 on the array. (D) Pretreatment with ICI 182,780 (10 nM, 30 min) also diminishes the amount of YFP-SRC780 on the array. (E)
Mutation of the LXXLL motifs to LXXAA results in no SRC-1 accumulation
on the array even in the presence of agonist. Bar = 10 µm.
|
|
The observed accumulation of YFP-SRC-1 on the lac operator
arrays in A03_1 cells suggests that ER-SRC-1 interactions occur in the
absence of hormone. To test whether antagonists prevent YFP-SRC-1
binding to CFP-LacER, cells were pretreated with vehicle (Fig. 3A), 10 nM E2 (Fig. 3B), 10 nM 4HT (Fig. 3C), or 10 nM ICI 182,780 (Fig. 3D)
for 30 min prior to microscopic analysis. Treatment with either 4HT or
ICI 182,780 resulted in a uniform distribution of YFP-SRC-1 throughout
the nucleoplasm, with much less pronounced accumulations on the array
compared to no ligand and E2. Recruitment of SRC-1 is dependent upon
the LXXLL motifs, because mutation of the three LXXLL motifs present in
YFP-SRC780 to LXXAA results in no colocalization following E2 addition
(Fig. 3E).
To determine if this experimental paradigm could be applied to other
types of coactivator molecules, functional YFP-CBP and CFP-LacER were
cotransfected in A03_1 cells. In the absence of hormone, we observe
negligible accumulation of YFP-CBP on the array (Fig.
4A) in most cells, in contrast to the
substantial amount of YFP-SRC-1 found on the array in the absence of
hormone. Addition of 10 nM E2 results in the recruitment of YFP-CBP to CFP-LacER (Fig. 4B); however, this recruitment is qualitatively less
complete than that observed for YFP-SRC-1. YFP-CBP recruitment also
occurs within minutes of adding E2. In the presence of 10 nM 4HT (Fig.
4C) or 10 nM ICI 182,780 (Fig. 4D), YFP-CBP does not accumulate on the
array.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
YFP-CBP recruitment to CFP-LacER in A03 1 cells. (A) In
the absence of hormone, YFP-CBP (right column) is present in the
nucleoplasm with little accumulation on the CFP-LacER (right column)
bound to the lac operator arrays. (B) Following E2
addition (10 nM, 30 min), most of the YFP-CBP is found associated with
CFP-LacER. (C) Pretreatment with 4HT (10 nM, 30 min) leads to no
YFP-CBP on the array. (D) Pretreatment with ICI 182,780 (10 nM, 30 min)
also prevents YFP-CBP from going to the array. Bar = 10 µm.
|
|
FRAP was next used to analyze the stability of ER-SRC-1 interactions
in A03_1 cells. Following a short bleaching with a high-intensity laser, little recovery of CFP-LacER fluorescence is observed for 30 s (Fig. 5A and B; lower panels)
or for over 20 min (data not shown), indicating that this chimeric
receptor is essentially immobilized on the array due to its
high-affinity binding (26). In contrast, the YFP-SRC780
present on the array in the absence of hormone (Fig. 5A) recovers very
rapidly, reaching its steady-state distribution within seconds, with a
recovery half-life (t1/2) of 2.1 ± 0.8 s (n = 10 cells). Following treatment with
E2 for 20 min or less, photobleaching results in a clearly defined
YFP-SRC780 bleach zone that shows complete recovery within a
t1/2 of 8.0 ± 2.5 s
(n = 10). Treatment with E2 for longer periods of time (>1 h) (Fig. 5C) results in slower recovery of the YFP-SRC-1
(t1/2 = 30.2 ± 15.1 s),
suggesting that ER-SRC-1 complexes may become more stable over time.
There is much more heterogeneity in these cells, with half-lives
ranging between ~15 and 45 s, which accounts for the large
deviation. We next tested the stability of the CFP-LacER-YFP-CBP complexes by using this FRAP procedure. Following treatment with 10 nM
E2, YFP-CBP recovered rapidly, with a
t1/2 of 4.2 ± 1.1 s (Fig.
5D). In the case of YFP-CBP, no stabilization of the complex was
observed following longer hormone treatments (data not shown).

View larger version (67K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Dual FRAP of CFP-LacER and coregulators. Simultaneous
FRAP was performed on A03_1 cotransfected with both CFP-LacER and
YFP-SRC780 or YFP-CBP to analyze the molecular dynamics of
ER-coregulator complexes. In the absence of ligand, bleaching of
CFP-LacER (A, top row) results in a dark zone that exhibits little
recovery during 20 s or for up to 20 min (data not shown). In
contrast, YFP-SRC780 reequilibrates to its steady-state distribution
within seconds (A, bottom row; t1/2 = 2.1 ± 0.8 s, n = 10 cells). With brief
exposure to agonist (20 min, [B, bottom row]), SRC780 becomes more
stably bound to the CFP-LacER; however, complete recovery is observed
within 20 to 40 s (t1/2 = 7.5 ± 1.2 s, n = 10 cells). With longer agonist
exposure (2 h [C, bottom row]), YFP-SRC780 recovers more slowly
(t1/2 = 30.2 ± 15.1 [bottom
row]), indicating that ER-SRC complexes stabilize over time. FRAP was
also performed on cells cotransfected with CFP-LacER and YFP-CBP (D).
Following treatment with E2, YFP-CBP recovers within 20 s with a
t1/2 of 4.2 ± 1.1 (n = 10). Stabilization of ER-CBP complexes was not
observed with longer E2 treatments (data not shown).
|
|
To test ER domains responsible for SRC-1 interactions in vivo,
CFP-LacER deletion and mutation constructs were generated. When
CFP-LacER554 (lacking the F domain; data not shown) or
CFP-LacER250-554 (lacking F, AF-1, and the DBD) (Fig.
6A) was cotransfected with YFP-SRC780,
agonist addition resulted in the rapid recruitment of the coactivator
to the array as observed for full-length CFP-LacER (Fig. 2). We next
tested the effects of deletion of helix 12 on YFP-SRC780 recruitment.
Shown in Fig. 6B are A03_1 cells cotransfected with CFP-LacER534 and
YFP-SRC780. In these cells, no recruitment of YFP-SRC780 is observed
in the presence of hormone, suggesting that helix 12 is required. Also,
negligible ligand-independent accumulation of YFP-SRC780 is observed.
Finally, we tested an inactive point mutant, CFP-LacERV376D, for
coactivator interactions in vivo. This mutation results in an inactive
ER that does not show appreciable binding to SRC-1 in glutathione
S-transferase (GST) pull-down experiments (18).
Interestingly, this mutation does not appear to affect
ligand-independent interactions, but prevents the recruitment of the
nucleoplasmic YFP-SRC780 following agonist addition (Fig. 6C). The
array itself becomes noticeably brighter, primarily due to the
condensation and concentration of the agonist-recruited fluorescent
molecules, with little or no loss of the nucleoplasmic YFP-SRC780
fluorescence.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Critical regions required for YFP-SRC-1 recruitment.
A03_1 cells were cotransfected with YFP-SRC780 (bottom row) and either
CFP-LacER250-554 (A, top row), CFP-LacER534 (B, top row), or
CFP-LacERV376D (C, top row). Cells were imaged before (left column) and
after 20 min of 10 nM E2 (right column). CFP-LacER250-554 retains all
of the critical residues required for agonist-induced YFP-SRC780
recruitment (A). Deletion of helix 12 (CFP-LacER534 [B]) prevents
ligand-enhanced recruitment and eliminates most of the
ligand-independent interactions. Mutation of the ER-SRC-1 interface
(CFP-LacERV376D [C]) inhibits agonist-induced SRC-1 recruitment, but
does not eliminate the ligand-independent interactions. The brighter
signal is primarily due to contraction of the chromosomal region (Nye
et al., submitted).
|
|
ER domains necessary for YFP-CBP recruitment were next tested in the
A03_1 cells. As with full-length CFP-LacER (Fig. 2B), an F domain
deletion, CFP-LacER554, rapidly recruits YFP-CBP to the arrays (data
not shown). Moreover, deletion of the AF-1, DBD, and F domains (e.g.,
CFP-LacER250-554) results in a protein that retains the ability to
recruit YFP-CBP (Fig. 7A). Again, we see no recruitment following deletion of helix 12 (CFP-LacER534; Fig. 7B).
Finally, the CFP-LacERV376D point mutant was analyzed and showed little
agonist-dependent recruitment of YFP-CBP to the arrays (Fig. 7C). These
results indicate that the LBD is sufficient for agonist-induced
recruitment of YFP-CBP as well and that helix 12 and residues
comprising the ER-SRC-1 interaction interface are required for
recruitment of both YFP-SRC and YFP-CBP.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Critical regions required for YFP-CBP recruitment. A03_1
cells were cotransfected with YFP-CBP (bottom rows) and either
CFP-LacER250-554 (A, top row), CFP-LacER534 (B, top row), or
CFP-LacERV376D (C, top row). Cells were imaged before (left column) and
after 20 min of 10 nM E2 (right column). CFP-LacER250-554 retains all
of the critical residues for agonist-induced YFP-CBP recruitment (A).
Deletion of helix 12 (CFP-LacER534 [B]) prevents ligand-enhanced
recruitment of YFP-CBP. Mutation of the ER-SRC-1 interface
(CFP-LacERV376D [C]) inhibits agonist-dependent CBP recruitment.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Targeting of ER to discrete subnuclear regions via interactions
between the lac repressor and large chromatin domains
containing lac operons allowed us to analyze interactions
between ER and coactivators in a live-cell setting. YFP-SRC-1, but not
YFP-CBP, accumulates with CFP-LacER even in the absence of hormone.
FRAP studies demonstrate that these ligand-independent interactions between YFP-SRC-1 and CFP-LacER are transient. Addition of agonist results in the rapid recruitment of both YFP-SRC-1 and YFP-CBP (within
minutes) and stabilization of the receptor-coactivator complexes as
measured by FRAP. Interestingly, these complexes are highly dynamic,
with exchange of subunits occurring within seconds. Domain-mapping
experiments reveal that a region (aa 535 to 554) that contains helix 12 (aa 538 to 546) in the crystal structure of the ER LBD (4,
27) is required for SRC-1 and CBP recruitment, while N-terminal
regions that include AF-1 and DBDs are dispensable.
Ligand binding is known to induce conformational changes that reveal
interaction surfaces required for the SRC-1 binding presented here.
Structural studies provide insight into the importance of helix 12 for
coactivator interactions. The E2-bound ER LBD exists in a different
conformation from the raloxifene-bound LBD due to a repositioning of
helix 12 (4). In the E2-bound LBD complex, helix 12 forms
a surface that is important for AF-2 activity. In contrast, helix 12 in
the raloxifene-bound LBD is buried in a hydrophobic groove that limits
access to critical residues required for AF-2 function. Recently, the
structure of the ER LBD bound to agonist and an NR box peptide
(containing the LXXLL motif) from the SRC-1-related GRIP1 protein was
determined. Interestingly, the coactivator NR box lies in the groove
formed by the agonist-induced repositioning of helix 12 (27). The structure of the ER LBD bound to tamoxifen was
also determined and showed that helix 12 was in a position to occlude
coactivator binding by mimicking interactions formed by the NR box with
the LBD. These studies provide a structural mechanism for the
differential effects of agonists and antagonists observed here and
point out that rearrangements involving helix 12 are very important for
ER activity and interactions with coactivators. Point mutagenesis of
conserved residues in this region of the mouse ER and GR significantly
reduces ligand-dependent transcriptional activation without affecting
either ligand or DNA binding (7). Also, deletion
experiments demonstrate that helix 12 is critical for ER's
intranuclear reorganization, also pointing to the importance of this
region for ER function (D. L. Stenoien and M. A. Mancini,
unpublished data).
Our live-cell data, particularly with the A03_1 cell line, indicate
that SRC-1 can interact with the ligand-free receptor. Several other
pieces of data support our observations. First, coactivation assays
show that SRC-1 increases basal activity levels of ER in the absence of
hormone (34). Furthermore, recent fluorescence energy
transfer (FRET) data obtained with fluorescently tagged ER LBD and
SRC-1 peptides indicate that some ligand-independent interactions do
occur (17). Ligand-independent interactions in a mammalian
two-hybrid assay show basal interactions between ER and SRC-1 in HeLa
cells (Jaber and Smith, personal communication). Taken together with
our photobleaching studies, which indicate rapid
(t1/2 = 2 s) complex exchange,
these interactions are likely to be more transient than those induced
by an agonist that result in most of the SRC-1 being bound to the
receptor. While agonist reduces the exchange rate, the E2-induced
ER-SRC-1 complexes remain highly dynamic
(t1/2 ~8 s) immediately following
hormone treatment. There appears to be a stabilization of the ER-SRC-1
complexes over time, because the recovery half-life increases to
approximately 30 s after 1 h of hormone exposure.
Collectively, these data address an increasingly appreciated component
of nuclear receptor function, i.e., dynamics (21).
The lac operator system used here has unique advantages in
that it allows ER-coactivator interactions to be analyzed in a living
mammalian nucleus as opposed to more conventional assays, such as in
vitro binding or yeast two-hybrid experiments. There are several
problems inherent in each of these systems. In vitro experiments are
often performed with bacterially expressed proteins, which may lack
proper posttranslational modifications and proper folding. Furthermore,
these experiments do not take into account that steroid receptors are
components of larger complexes containing either heat shock proteins or
coregulator molecules, depending on the ligand-bound state of the
receptor. Many of the same problems also exist in yeast two-hybrid
assays, which may lack necessary mammalian components. The use of our
lac operator binding system provides a complementary way to
analyze protein-protein interactions in vivo. Furthermore, live-cell
FRAP analysis of these interactions in real time provides new insight
into complex formation and the surprisingly high degree of molecular exchange.
The differences in the exchange rates between SRC-1 and CBP suggest
that SRC-1 is more tightly bound to ER than CBP. These results confirm
those of a FRET-based assay that showed SRC-1 has a higher affinity for
ER (38). Interestingly, in this previous study, no
increase in FRET was observed between ER and CBP following ligand
addition. Our live recruiting assays clearly show agonist-dependent colocalization of ER and CBP. A possible explanation for the
discrepancy between the two results is that the molecular distance
between the fluorescent probes on CBP and ER is greater than the
minimal distance required for FRET (20 to 100 Å) (9).
This could occur if the orientation of the fluorescent molecules
prevented energy transfer or if the association between ER and CBP is
via a third protein that is part of this complex.
Taken together, these studies approach multiple attributes of ER
function within a nuclear context. These direct, live studies provide a
novel system for studying the dynamic behavior of ER and coregulators.
The ability to monitor two proteins simultaneously provides an
unambiguous assessment of the early events that occur after hormone
addition. Coactivator recruitment is rapid, occurring within minutes of
hormone addition. Helix 12 and the agonist-induced conformational
changes that expose regions necessary for intranuclear ER function are
critical for coactivator interactions, yet the AF-1 and DBD are
dispensable in our system. Surprisingly, once formed, the steroid
receptor-coactivator complexes remain highly dynamic. These results
suggest not only do transcription complexes undergo rapid exchange with
DNA target sites in vivo (21), but the individual
components of these complexes also undergo rapid exchange. Exciting
avenues for future investigation will be to apply these tools to
analyze interactions between other receptors and coregulators and to
test novel, clinically relevant compounds for their effects on these interactions.
This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of
Health to M. A. Mancini (R01-DK55622), A. Belmont (R01-GM58460 and
R01-GM42516), and C. L. Smith (RO1 DK53002); a National American Heart Association Scientist Development Award and funds from the Department of Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine to M. A. Mancini; an NIH postdoctoral fellowship (1F32DK09787) to D. L. Stenoien; and an NIH Cell and Molecular Biology traineeship
(T32-GM07283) and Howard Hughes Medical Institute predoctoral
fellowship to A. Nye.
| 1.
|
Barrack, E. R.
1987.
Steroid hormone receptor localization in the nuclear matrix: interaction with acceptor sites.
J. Steroid Biochem.
27:115-121[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Beato, M.,
S. Chavez, and M. Truss.
1996.
Transcriptional regulation by steroid hormones.
Steroids
61:240-251[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Belmont, A. S.,
G. Li,
G. Sudlow, and C. Robinett.
1999.
Visualization of large-scale chromatin structure and dynamics using the lac operator/lac repressor reporter.
Methods Cell Biol.
58:203-222[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Brzozowski, A. M.,
A. C. Pike,
Z. Dauter,
R. E. Hubbard,
T. Bon,
O. Engstrom,
L. Ohman,
G. L. Greene,
J. A. Gustafsson, and M. Carlquist.
1997.
Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the oestrogen receptor.
Nature
389:753-758[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Chakravarti, D.,
V. J. LaMorte,
M. C. Nelson,
T. Nakajima,
I. G. Schulman,
H. Juguilon,
M. Montminy, and R.M. Evans.
1996.
Role of CBP/P300 in nuclear receptor signaling.
Nature
383:99-103[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Cook, P. R.
1999.
The organization of replication and transcription.
Science
284:1790-1795[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Danielian, P. S.,
R. White,
J. A. Lees, and M. G. Parker.
1992.
Identification of a conserved region required for hormone dependent transcriptional activation by steroid hormone receptors.
EMBO J.
11:1025-1033[Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Heery, D. M.,
E. Kalkhoven,
S. Hoare, and M. G. Parker.
1997.
A signature motif in transcriptional co-activators mediates binding to nuclear receptors.
Nature
387:733-736[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Heim, R., and R. Y. Tsien.
1996.
Engineering green fluorescent protein for improved brightness, longer wavelengths and fluorescence resonance energy transfer.
Curr. Biol.
6:178-182[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Henttu, P. M. A.,
E. Kalkhoven, and M. G. Parker.
1997.
AF-2 activity and recruitment of steroid receptor coactivator 1 to the estrogen receptor depend on a lysine residue conserved in nuclear receptors.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:1832-1839[Abstract].
|
| 11.
|
Htun, H.,
L. T. Holth,
D. Walker,
J. R. Davie, and G. L. Hager.
1999.
Direct visualization of the human estrogen receptor alpha reveals a role for ligand in the nuclear distribution of the receptor.
Mol. Biol. Cell
10:471-486[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Jenster, G.,
T. E. Spencer,
M. M. Burcin,
S. Y. Tsai,
M. J. Tsai, and B. W. O'Malley.
1997.
Steroid receptor induction of gene transcription: a two-step model.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:7879-7884[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Kamei, Y.,
L. Xu,
T. Heinzel,
J. Torchia,
R. Kurokawa,
B. Gloss,
S. C. Lin,
R. A. Heyman,
D. W. Rose,
C. K. Glass, and M. G. Rosenfeld.
1996.
A CBP integrator complex mediates transcriptional activation and AP-1 inhibition by nuclear receptors.
Cell
85:403-414[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Kumar, V.,
S. Green,
G. Stack,
M. Berry,
J. R. Jin, and P. Chambon.
1987.
Functional domains of the human estrogen receptor.
Cell
51:941-951[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Lees, J. A.,
S. E. Fawell, and M. G. Parker.
1989.
Identification of two transactivation domains in the mouse oestrogen receptor.
Nucleic Acids Res.
17:5477-5488[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
Li, G.,
G. Sudlow, and A. S. Belmont.
1998.
Interphase cell cycle dynamics of a late-replicating, heterochromatic homogeneously staining region: precise choreography of condensation/decondensation and nuclear positioning.
J. Cell Biol.
140:975-989[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Llopis, J.,
S. Westin,
M. Ricote,
J. Wang,
C. Y. Cho,
R. Kurokawa,
T. M. Mullen,
D. W. Rose,
M. G. Rosenfeld,
R. Y. Tsien, and C. K. Glass.
2000.
Ligand-dependent interactions of coactivators steroid receptor coactivator-1 and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor binding protein with nuclear hormone receptors can be imaged in live cells and are required for transcription.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97:4363-4368[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Mak, H. Y.,
S. Hoare,
P. M. Henttu, and M. G. Parker.
1999.
Molecular determinants of the estrogen receptor-coactivator interface.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:3895-3903[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Mangelsdorf, D. J.,
C. Thummel,
M. Beato,
P. Herrlich,
G. Schutz,
K. Umesono,
B. Blumberg,
P. Kastner,
M. Mark, and P. Chambon.
1995.
The nuclear receptor superfamily: the second decade.
Cell
83:835-839[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
McKenna, N. J.,
R. B. Lanz, and B. W. O'Malley.
1999.
Nuclear receptor coregulators: cellular and molecular biology.
Endocr. Rev.
20:321-344[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
McNally, J. G.,
W. G. Muller,
D. Walker,
R. Wolford, and G. L. Hager.
2000.
The glucocorticoid receptor: rapid exchange with regulatory sites in living cells.
Science
287:1262-1265[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Nickerson, J. A.,
B. J. Blencowe, and S. Penman.
1995.
The architectural organization of nuclear metabolism.
Int. Rev. Cytol.
162A:67-123.
|
| 23.
|
Ogryzko, V. V.,
R. L. Schiltz,
V. Russanova,
B. H. Howard, and Y. Nakatani.
1996.
The transcriptional coactivators p300 and CBP are histone acetyltransferases.
Cell
87:953-959[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Onate, S. A.,
S. Y. Tsai,
M. J. Tsai, and B. W. O'Malley.
1995.
Sequence and characterization of a coactivator for the steroid hormone receptor superfamily.
Science
270:1354-1357[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Phair, R. D., and T. Mistelli.
2000.
High mobility of proteins in the mammalian cell nucleus.
Nature
404:604-609[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Robinett, C. C.,
A. Straight,
G. Li,
C. Willhelm,
G. Sudlow,
A. Murray, and A. S. Belmont.
1996.
In vivo localization of DNA sequences and visualization of large-scale chromatin organization using lac operator/repressor recognition.
J. Cell Biol.
135:1685-1700[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Shiau, A. K.,
D. Barstad,
P. M. Loria,
L. Cheng,
P. J. Kushner,
D. A. Agard, and G. L. Greene.
1998.
The structural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen.
Cell
95:927-937[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Smith, C. L.,
S. A. Onate,
M. J. Tsai, and B. W. O'Malley.
1996.
CREB binding protein acts synergistically with steroid receptor coactivator-1 to enhance steroid receptor-dependent transcription.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:8884-8888[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Smith, C. L., and G. L. Hager.
1997.
Transcriptional regulation of mammalian genes in vivo. A tale of two templates.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:27493-27496[Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Spencer, T. E.,
G. Jenster,
M. M. Burcin,
C. D. Allis,
J. Zhou,
C. A. Mizzen,
N. J. McKenna,
S. A. Onate,
S. Y. Tsai,
M. J. Tsai, and B. W. O'Malley.
1997.
Steroid receptor coactivator-1 is a histone acetyltransferase.
Nature
389:194-198[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Stein, G. S.,
A. J. van Wijnen,
J. L. Stein,
J. B. Lian,
S. Pockwinse, and S. McNeil.
1998.
Interrelationships of nuclear structure and transcriptional control: functional consequences of being in the right place at the right time.
J. Cell. Biochem.
70:200-212[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Stenoien, D.,
Z. D. Sharp,
C. L. Smith, and M. A. Mancini.
1998.
Functional subnuclear partitioning of transcription factors.
J. Cell. Biochem.
70:213-221[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Stenoien, D. L.,
M. G. Mancini,
K. Patel,
E. Allegretto,
C. L. Smith, and M. A. Mancini.
2000.
Subnuclear trafficking of estrogen receptor- and steroid receptor coactivator-1.
Mol. Endocrinol.
14:518-534[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Stenoien, D. L.,
K. Patel,
M. G. Mancini,
M. Dutertre,
C. L. Smith,
B. W. O'Malley, and M. A. Mancini.
2001.
FRAP reveals estrogen receptor- mobility is ligand- and proteasome-dependent.
Nat. Cell Biol.
3:15-23[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Tora, L.,
J. White,
C. Brou,
D. Tasset,
N. Webster,
E. Scheer, and P. Chambon.
1989.
The human estrogen receptor has two independent nonacidic transcriptional activation functions.
Cell
59:477-487[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Tsai, M. J., and B. W. O'Malley.
1994.
Molecular mechanisms of action of steroid/thyroid receptor superfamily members.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
63:451-486[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Tumbar, T.,
G. Sudlow, and A. S. Belmont.
1999.
Large-scale chromatin unfolding and remodeling induced by VP16 acidic activation domain.
J. Cell Biol.
145:1341-1354[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Zhou, G.,
R. Cummings,
Y. Li,
S. Mitra,
H. A. Wilkinson,
A. Elbrecht,
J. D. Hermes,
J. M. Schaeffer,
R. G. Smith, and D. E. Moller.
1998.
Nuclear receptors have distinct affinities for coactivators: characterization by fluorescence resonance energy transfer.
Mol. Endocrinol.
12:1594-1604[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|