Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 2001, p. 534-547, Vol. 21, No. 2
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.2.534-547.2001
Remodeling of Yeast CUP1 Chromatin Involves
Activator-Dependent Repositioning of Nucleosomes over the Entire Gene
and Flanking Sequences
Chang-Hui
Shen,
Benoit P.
Leblanc,
Jennifer A.
Alfieri,
and
David J.
Clark*
Laboratory of Cellular and Developmental
Biology (NIDDK), National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
20892-2715
Received 3 October 2000/Returned for modification 26 October
2000/Accepted 1 November 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The yeast CUP1 gene is activated by the
copper-dependent binding of the transcriptional activator, Ace1p. An
episome containing transcriptionally active or inactive
CUP1 was purified in its native chromatin structure from
yeast cells. The amount of RNA polymerase II on CUP1 in the
purified episomes correlated with its transcriptional activity in vivo.
Chromatin structures were examined by using the monomer extension
technique to map translational positions of nucleosomes. The chromatin
structure of an episome containing inactive CUP1 isolated
from ace1
cells is organized into clusters of
overlapping nucleosome positions separated by linkers. Novel nucleosome
positions that include the linkers are occupied in the presence of
Ace1p. Repositioning was observed over the entire CUP1 gene
and its flanking regions, possibly over the entire episome. Mutation of
the TATA boxes to prevent transcription did not prevent repositioning,
implicating a chromatin remodeling activity recruited by Ace1p. These
observations provide direct evidence in vivo for the nucleosome sliding
mechanism proposed for remodeling complexes in vitro and indicate that
remodeling is not restricted to the promoter but occurs over a
chromatin domain including CUP1 and its flanking sequences.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Regulation of gene expression is
best understood in living cells, where access to promoters and other
regulatory elements is generally restricted by chromatin structure.
Mechanisms have evolved to render these accessible at the appropriate
moment (17, 60), including (i) regulated posttranslational
modifications of the core histones, particularly acetylation, which
alter nucleosome structure; (ii) remodeling of specific regions of
chromatin by multisubunit complexes which use ATP to disrupt, displace,
or slide nucleosomes; (iii) regulated nucleosome positioning
(48); and (iv) contributions of other chromatin proteins.
An ideal approach to studying these interactions would be to examine
native chromatin structures in vitro by using the sophisticated techniques available for analysis of reconstituted chromatin and relate
these to events in vivo. The main concerns are purity and the amounts
of material available. The use of small episomes with high copy number
facilitates the separation of large chromosomal fragments from the gene
of interest, e.g., simian virus 40 minichromosomes (14).
Budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) offers a source of
minichromosomes in the form of plasmids, with the advantage that a
model gene can be chosen and studied in the context of its molecular
genetics (13, 20, 45).
CUP1 encodes a copper metallothionein responsible for
protecting yeast cells from the toxic effects of copper (7,
23). It was chosen as a model gene because its regulation is
well understood and relatively simple, increasing the likelihood that
its activity can be reconstituted in vitro. In the absence of toxic
concentrations of copper, CUP1 is not required for growth
(18). It is strongly induced when copper ions enter the
cell and bind to the N-terminal domain of the transcriptional activator
Ace1p (also called Cup2p), which folds and binds specifically to
upstream activating sequences (UASs) in the CUP1 promoter
(6, 16). Transcription of CUP1 is activated via
the C-terminal acidic activation domain (16). Thus, the
signal transduction pathway is known in some detail. The only other
transcription factor that influences CUP1 expression directly is heat shock factor (33). Current models for
transcriptional activation are highly complex, invoking requirements
for many proteins (51). However, CUP1 can be
induced in vivo in the absence of many of the basal transcription
factors: TATA-binding protein (TBP) has been detected at the
CUP1 promoter in vivo (25, 31), but induction
is independent of TFIIA (32, 42), TFIIE (46), the Kin28 CTD kinase of TFIIH, and some components of the mediator, but
not others (28, 29, 36). Furthermore, Ace1p activates transcription independently of most of the TAFs (37).
Thus, CUP1 appears to be an example of simplified regulation
(27).
We are interested in the process by which a gene in its natural
chromatin context is activated for transcription. Here we describe the
native chromatin structures of the transcriptionally active and
inactive forms of CUP1 in a small episome purified from
yeast cells. Activation of CUP1 is accompanied by a
gene-wide repositioning of nucleosomes, which requires the
presence of Ace1p but is independent of transcription, providing
evidence for an activator-dependent remodeling activity that moves
nucleosomes on CUP1 and its flanking sequences.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Construction of yeast strains and plasmids.
The
CUP1 locus was deleted from BJ5459 (MATa
cir+ ura3-52 trp1 lys2-801 leu2
1 his3
200
pep4::HIS3 prb1
1.6R can1 GAL) (21) (Yeast Genetic Stock Center, Berkeley, Calif.) by
transformation with the 4.3-kb Bst1107I-SwaI
fragment from p
Cup3, with LEU2 flanked by CUP1
locus flanking sequences. p
Cup3: The 828-bp HindIII fragment from cosmid ATCC 71209 containing sequence flanking the CUP1 locus was inserted at the HindIII site
of pNEB193 (New England Biolabs) to obtain p
Cup1A. The 1.8-kb
DraI fragment from cosmid ATCC 70887 containing sequence on
the other side of CUP1 was inserted at the SmaI
site in p
Cup1A to obtain p
Cup2A. LEU2 as a 2.0-kb BstYI-SalI fragment from pOF4 (30)
(gift of J. Thorner) was inserted into p
Cup2A
BamHI/SalI to give p
Cup3. This strain was cured of the 2µm circle plasmid to obtain YDCcup1
2 as described previously (3). TRP1 ARS1 as a 1,453-bp
HindIII fragment from pTB-B9 (54) (gift of
A. Dean) was inserted at the HindIII site of pGEM13zf(+)
(Promega), oriented such that ARS1 is closest to the
NotI site in the vector, to give pGEM-TRP1ARS1.
CUP1 was obtained either as a 1,998-bp KpnI
fragment containing the entire CUP1 repeat or as a 925-bp
KpnI-NsiI fragment containing just
CUP1 from YEp(CUP1)2A (ATCC 53233) and inserted into pUC19
cut with KpnI only or KpnI and PstI to
give pCP1A (with CUP1 closest to the XbaI site in
the vector) and pCP2, respectively. A 1,060-bp SphI-PvuII CUP1 fragment from pCP2 was
inserted into pSP72 (Promega) SphI/PvuII to give
pSP72-CUP1. A 1,015-bp EcoRI CUP1 fragment from
pSP72-CUP1 was inserted at the EcoRI site in pGEM-TRP1 ARS1 to obtain pGEM-TAC(+), such that CUP1 is transcribed in the
opposite direction to TRP1. pGEM-TAC(
) was obtained by
cutting pGEM-TAC(+) with HindIII and religating to
obtain the opposite orientation. TAC DNA as a 2,468-bp linear
HindIII fragment from pGEM-TAC was circularized with
ligase and used to transform YDCcup1
2. pGEM-TAC with both TATA boxes
mutated was constructed by PCR-based mutagenesis: the proximal TATA
box, TTATAA, was converted to CCCGGG; the distal TATA box, TATAAA, was converted to GGGCCC. An
ace1
strain with TAC was constructed as follows. A
1,492-bp SmaI-HindIII ACE1
fragment from pRI-3 (gift of S. Hu and D. Hamer) (16) was
inserted into pUC19 SmaI/HindIII to give
pUC-ACE1. A BstZ17I-MscI fragment containing the
ACE1 open reading frame (ORF) was replaced with
URA3 to give pUC-ACE1
URA3. YDCcup1
2::TAC was
transformed with the XbaI-HindIII fragment
from pUC-ACE1
URA3. The replacement of ACE1 with
URA3 was confirmed by Southern blotting. The copy number of
TAC was determined by phosphorimager quantitation of the ratio of
linearized TAC to chromosomal BglII fragment containing
TRP1 in Southern blots of BglII digests of
genomic DNA, using the 238-bp HindIII-BglII fragment from TAC as a probe.
Purification of minichromosomes.
The protocol is based on
our previous method (3) with alterations resulting in
increased yield, reflecting a systematic analysis of losses of TAC at
each stage by quantitative Southern blot. Cells were grown at 30°C in
synthetic complete medium lacking tryptophan to late log phase in
flasks or in a fermenter and stored at
80°C. Cells (2.6 g) were
thawed in 50 ml of spheroplasting medium (SM) (6.7 g of yeast nitrogen
base with ammonium sulfate and without copper sulfate (Bio101) per
liter, 2% D-glucose, 0.74 g of CSM-trp (Bio101) per
liter, 1 M D-sorbitol, 50 mM Tris-HCl [pH 8.0]) with 20 mM 2-mercaptoethanol (2-ME) and warmed to 30°C for 15 min, with
swirling. Lytic enzyme (120 mg) (Sigma L-4025; 1,000 U/mg) was
dissolved in 3 ml of SM and added to the cells. Spheroplasting was
followed by diluting aliquots of cells into 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) and measuring A600. When the
A600 reached 5% of the starting value, in about
20 min, spheroplasts were collected (7,500 rpm, 5 min, Sorvall SS34
rotor, 4°C), washed twice with 25 ml of SM (no 2-ME) and resuspended
in 50 ml of prewarmed SM with or without 5 mM CuSO4.
Spheroplasts were incubated at 30°C for 30 min at 225 rpm, collected
as described above, and washed with 25 ml of cold 1 M
D-sorbitol, 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0). Spheroplasts were
lysed by vigorous resuspension with a pipette in 40 ml 18% (wt/vol)
Ficoll 400, 40 mM potassium phosphate, 1 mM MgCl2 (pH 6.5 [adjusted with phosphoric acid]), with 5 mM 2-ME, 0.1 mM AEBSF
[4-(2-aminoethyl)benzenesulfonyl fluoride], 5 µg of leupeptin per
ml, and 15 µg of pepstatin A per ml. Two step gradients were used: 20 ml of lysate layered over 15 ml of 7% (wt/vol) Ficoll-20% (vol/vol)
glycerol-40 mM potassium phosphate-1 mM MgCl2 (pH 6.5),
with additions as described above, and spun (14,000 rpm, 30 min,
SS34 rotor, 4°C). Each nuclear pellet was resuspended in 3 ml of 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0)-5 mM Na-EDTA with additions as described above.
Forty microliters of RNase (Qiagen; DNase free; 100 mg/ml) was added to
each resuspension, left for 30 min on ice, and spun (10,000 rpm, 5 min; SS34; 4°C). The cloudy supernatants, containing the
minichromosomes, were applied to a 700 µl of 30% sucrose cushion in
TAE (pH 7.9) (40 mM Tris, 2 mM Na-EDTA; adjusted to pH 7.9 with acetic
acid) containing 10 µg of bovine serum albumin (BSA) (Calbiochem;
nuclease and protease free) per ml and additions as described above, in
SW60 tubes, and spun (60,000 rpm, 2.5 h, SW60 Ti rotor,
4°C). The 30% cushions were pooled, syringe filtered to remove
particles (0.45 µm pore diameter, low protein binding), divided
between two prewashed Centricon 500 filtration units (Amicon),
concentrated (6,000 rpm, SS34 rotor, 4°C) until the volume was
100 µl, and washed twice with wash buffer (WB), which was made up of
TAE (pH 7.9) containing BSA and the additions described above. A sample
was removed for analysis. (SDS was added to 1% and KOAc was added to 1 M, DNA was extracted with phenol-chloroform [1:1] and then chloroform and precipitated with ethanol in the presence of 20 µg of glycogen.) Minichromosomes were frozen on dry ice and stored at
20°C. For electroelution from agarose gels, a 60-ml 0.7% agarose gel (6 cm wide,
10 cm long; SeaKem GTG agarose for nucleic acids >1 kb; FMC) in TAE
(pH 7.9) with a central 4.4-cm well (1.5 mm wide) flanked by marker
wells was cooled to 4°C in a Bio-Rad Mini-Sub Cell with TAE (pH 7.9)
as a running buffer. Marker wells were loaded with sample buffer
containing xylene cyanol and bromophenol blue. Minichromosomes were
adjusted to 10% sucrose (without dyes) and electrophoresed at 40 V for
1.3 h at 4°C with buffer recirculation. A gel slice defined by
the midpoints of the two dye bands in the marker lanes was excised and
placed in SpectraPor 7 dialysis tubing (flat width of 24 mm, molecular
weight cutoff of 8,000), which had been soaked in TAE (pH 7.9), 0.01%
NP-40, 10 µg of BSA per ml at 4°C. The same buffer (2.5 ml) was
added, and the tubing was secured with dialysis clips. Electroelution
was at 40 V, 1.5 h, 4°C with buffer recirculation. The current
direction was reversed for 30 s. The eluate was syringe filtered
as described above to remove pieces of agarose, protease inhibitors and
2-ME were added, and the eluate was concentrated to about 100 µl in a
prewashed Centricon 30 for 40 min as described above. The preparation
was washed twice with 1 ml of WB for 30 min, to a final volume of about
100 µl.
Preparation of RNA and Northern blot analysis.
After
induction, spheroplasts from 40 ml of culture were collected and
resuspended in 400 µl of 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5)-10 mM EDTA-0.5%
SDS, mixed with 400 µl of phenol and incubated at 65°C for 30 min
with occasional, brief vortexing. The aqueous phase was extracted again
with phenol and then chloroform. RNA was precipitated with ethanol
after adding 0.3 M NaOAc (pH 5.3), resuspended in 400 µl of 50 mM
Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 2 mM EDTA, 1% 2-ME, 1% SDS, 10% glycerol, and
stored at
80°C. Equal amounts (0.25 µg) of RNA were mixed with 27 mM MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid), 6.9 mM NaOAc, 1.4 mM EDTA,
25% formaldehyde, 69% formamide, and 0.01% bromophenol blue to 16.7 µl and incubated for 15 min at 65°C. NH4OAc (3.3 µl,
0.5 M) was added. Samples were electrophoresed at 5 V/cm for 12 h
in a 1% agarose gel containing 17% formaldehyde, 20 mM MOPS, 5 mM
NaOAc, and 1 mM EDTA. The gel was blotted and hybridized overnight at
68°C with the 600-bp BsaBI-PacI CUP1
fragment from pGEM-TAC as a probe.
Topoisomer analysis.
Purified TAC-DNA was loaded in a 1.2%
(wt/vol) agarose gel (15 by 10 cm) in the presence or absence of
chloroquine diphosphate and electrophoresed at 45 V for 4.6 h with
buffer recirculation (9). Gels were blotted and probed
with a HindIII digest of pGEM-TAC labeled by random
priming. Linking number standards were prepared as described previously
(9) using pSP72. For analysis of TAC directly from cells,
DNA was isolated by rapid extraction of induced and uninduced
spheroplasts with 1% SDS and purified as described above.
Monomer extension.
To prepare core particles, 25 to 40 ng of
TAC minichromosomes were incubated in 40 µl of 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH
8.0)-35 mM NaCl-3 mM CaCl2, with 2 to 4 U of micrococcal
nuclease (MNase) (Worthington) for 2 min at 30°C, and EDTA was added
to 5 mM. Core particle DNA was extracted, purified from 3% agarose
gels, and end labeled with T4 kinase. Core DNA was denatured with
alkali, annealed with excess template, and extended with Klenow enzyme,
in the presence or absence of a restriction enzyme (61).
With pGEM-TAC(+) as template, BamHI, SapI,
XcmI, Bsu36I, and DraIII were used.
With pGEM-TAC(
), SapI, BamHI, XcmI,
BglII, and BstBI were used. Products were
analyzed in 6% denaturing polyacrylamide gels.
Primer extension.
Analysis was performed as described
previously (56). Nuclei were prepared from 500 ml of cells
as described above and resuspended in 4 ml of 10 mM HEPES-Na (pH 7.5),
0.5 mM MgCl2, and 0.05 mM CaCl2 with protease
inhibitors and 2-ME as described above. MNase (Worthington) was added
to 650-µl aliquots of nuclei to 0 to 80 U/ml and incubated for 10 min
at 37°C. EDTA was added to 10 mM, SDS was added to 1%, and DNA was
purified as described above and dissolved in 80 µl of Tris-EDTA (TE)
buffer containing RNase. For a free DNA control, pCP1A was digested
with MNase to various degrees. MNase-digested DNA (5 µl) was mixed
with primer (end labeled with T4 kinase and [
-32P]ATP)
at 10 nM with 1.6 U of Vent polymerase in buffer supplied by the
manufacturer (NEB). The primers used were CUP1A
(5'-CTTCACCACCCTTTATTTCAGGCTG-3') and CUP1B
(5'-CGAAATCTGGGGATTCTATACAGAG-3'). Multiple rounds of extension were performed as follows. DNA was denatured for 5 min at
95°C; followed by 20 cycles of 95°C for 1 min, 56°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 1.5 min; followed by 72°C for 5 min. DNA was purified and analyzed in 6% sequencing gels.
Restriction enzyme accessibility.
TAC minichromosomes (4 ng)
were mixed with an appropriate plasmid (4 ng) as an internal control
(either pGEM-TAC, pBR322, or pGEM-TRP1ARS1) and a BstEII
digest of
DNA at 1 ng/µl in a mixture of 100 µl of 10 mM
Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 50 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mg of BSA
per ml, 5 mM 2-ME, and 0.1 mM AEBSF and incubated at 30°C. A
zero-time sample (18 µl) was removed, and then 2 to 20 U of
restriction enzyme was added. Aliquots were removed at various times
and quenched with an equal volume of 2% SDS-20 mM Na-EDTA. DNA was
purified as described above. If the restriction site was not unique in
TAC, the DNA was digested with HindIII. DNA was resolved
in 0.8% agarose gels, and Southern blots were probed either with
pGEM-TAC or, if a second digestion had been performed, with the 238-bp
HindIII-BglII fragment from pGEM-TAC. Rates
of digestion were determined with a phosphorimager.
Transcription run-on analysis.
Electroeluted minichromosomes
(15 to 50 ng) were incubated in a mixture of 90 µl of 10 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 8.0), 0.1 M NH4OAc; 0.6 mM (each) ATP, GTP, and CTP; 5 mM MgCl2; 2.5 mM MnCl2; 1 U of RNase Prime
Inhibitor (Eppendorf) per µl; and 45 µCi of
[
-32P]UTP at 3,000 Ci/mmol in the presence or absence
of 20 µg of
-amanitin per ml for 20 min at 30°C. Na-EDTA was
added to 10 mM. Free label was removed with a Sephadex G-50 spin
column, and purified RNA was denatured for use as a probe of a Southern blot.
 |
RESULTS |
Purification of the TRP1 ARS1 CUP1 (TAC)
minichromosome.
CUP1 is present in multiple copies per
haploid genome, and strains with higher copy numbers are more resistant
to copper (23). The genes are tandemly reiterated with a
2-kb repeat unit containing CUP1 and another gene of unknown
function (URF). The haploid strain BJ5459 was chosen for these studies
because it carries protease mutations, which should reduce proteolysis
of chromatin during isolation. It is resistant to 1 mM copper and
contains about eight copies of CUP1 at a single locus (not
shown). These were deleted to obtain a cup1
strain, which
was then cured of the 2µm circle plasmid (an endogenous yeast plasmid
present at high copy number in most laboratory strains) as described
previously (3). This strain was transformed with
TRP1 ARS1 CUP1 (TAC), a 2,468-bp yeast plasmid based on
TRP1 ARS1 (62) (Fig.
1A). To demonstrate that CUP1
in TAC is fully functional, growth was measured in the presence of 1 mM
copper (Fig. 1B). The parental strain (BJ5459) grew well in the
presence of copper, with a doubling time about 20% longer. The
cup1
strain grew at the same rate as BJ5459 in the
absence of copper, but was inviable in the presence of copper. The
introduction of TAC restored growth in 1 mM copper, indicating that
CUP1 in TAC is fully functional. The copy number of TAC was
measured by Southern blot analysis at an average of 10 per cell (it is
likely that asymmetric segregation of ARS plasmids at cell
division (45) will result in cells with significantly more
or less than 10 copies of TAC). The correlation between the copy number
of CUP1 and the degree of resistance to copper
(23) suggests that most of the TAC episomes are likely to
be active in the presence of 1 mM copper.

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
The TRP1 ARS1 CUP1 (TAC) episome protects
yeast cells from the toxic effects of excess copper ions. (A) Map of
the TAC episome. TAC is based on TRP1 ARS1, a yeast genomic
EcoRI fragment (1,453 bp) capable of autonomous replication.
TRP1 encodes an enzyme required for the biosynthesis of
tryptophan and is used as a selection marker. ARS1 is the
origin of replication. There is a UASGAL from
GAL3 within TRP1 ARS1. CUP1 was inserted at the
EcoRI site in TRP1 ARS1. The CUP1
promoter contains two UASs: proximal ( 106 to 142
[UASp]) and distal ( 146 to 220 [UASd]),
both of which contain binding sites for Ace1 and HSF. There are two
good consensus TATA boxes, at 77 (TATAd) and 33
(TATAp) relative to the transcription start site. The
insert also includes the 3' untranslated region belonging to the URF
neighboring CUP1. (B) TAC protects cells from copper
toxicity. The growth of yeast cells was monitored by
A600. Cells from overnight cultures grown in the
absence of copper were inoculated into medium with or without 1 mM
copper(II) sulfate to an initial optical density of about 0.2. The
parental strain, BJ5459 (doubling times were 160 min without copper and
185 min with copper), and the cup1 strain, YDCcup1 2
(170 min without copper), were grown in synthetic complete medium.
YDCcup1 2::TAC was grown in synthetic complete medium
lacking tryptophan (185 min without copper and 225 min with copper).
(C) Induction of CUP1 in spheroplasts. CUP1 mRNA
(about 600 nucleotides) was detected by Northern blot hybridization
with a CUP1 probe. Spheroplasts were incubated in SM with
copper(II) sulfate added as indicated. RNA was prepared from
spheroplasts after 30 min at 30°C with shaking at 225 rpm in an
incubator.
|
|
A method for the purification of the TAC minichromosome as chromatin
was developed. In the first step, cells were resuspended
in medium with
sorbitol as an osmotic stabilizer and digested
with lytic enzyme to
obtain spheroplasts, which were then treated
with 5 mM copper(II)
sulfate to maximize induction of
CUP1. The
induction of
CUP1 under these conditions was followed by Northern
blot
analysis (Fig.
1C).
CUP1 was strongly induced in both the
TAC-containing strain (about sixfold in 2 mM copper) and the parental
strain with chromosomal
CUP1 (about ninefold). However, this
level
of induction was significantly less than we were able to measure
in intact cells (about 30-fold; not shown), and there was significant
expression of
CUP1 even in the absence of copper. Why
CUP1 is
partially induced in spheroplasts is unclear, but it
is possible
that it is part of a stress response to spheroplasting
(
1).
To obtain a strain containing TAC with inactive
CUP1, the gene
for its transcriptional activator, Ace1p, was
deleted. This strain
expressed
CUP1 at very low levels (not
shown).
Native TAC chromatin was isolated from copper-induced, uninduced, and
ace1
cells. Low-ionic-strength buffers were used to
prevent nucleosome sliding and to retain proteins. Purity was
assessed
by analysis of extracted nucleic acids (Fig.
2A): TAC
chromatin preparations also
contained small amounts of mitochondrial
nucleoids, genomic chromatin,
and digested ribosomes. TAC DNA
was mostly supercoiled, with only a
little nicked circle, indicating
that TAC chromatin was not damaged by
nucleases. This represents
a high degree of purity (yields were 40 to
60%, corresponding
to about 1 µg of plasmid DNA per liter of cells).
This preparation
was used for analysis of chromatin structure (see
below), but
for transcription experiments, TAC was further purified by
electroelution
from agarose gels (Fig.
2A). Minichromosomes were
analyzed in
an agarose gel, with or without treatment with SDS to
remove the
proteins (Fig.
2B). In the absence of SDS, TAC DNA migrated
more
slowly, as chromatin, with no free TAC DNA present, confirming
that the minichromosomes remained substantially intact after
purification.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Purification of the TRP1 ARS1 CUP1 (TAC)
episome. (A) Nucleic acids extracted from a typical preparation of TAC
minichromosomes, before and after electroelution, analyzed in a 0.8%
agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide. Supercoiled pSP72 (a plasmid
of similar size to TAC; 2,472 bp) was used as a marker. Marker, a
mixture of DNA BstEII and pBR322 MspI
digests. (B) Analysis of TAC chromatin in an agarose gel. Electroeluted
uninduced (U) and induced (I) TAC minichromosomes were incubated
briefly with or without 1% SDS before loading in a 0.8% agarose gel.
The gel was blotted and probed with radiolabeled pGEM-TAC.
|
|
Topological analysis of TAC minichromosomes in vitro and in
vivo.
Topological analysis can be used to count nucleosomes on
closed circular DNA, using the fact that a nucleosome protects one negative supercoil from relaxation by topoisomerase (49).
DNA was extracted from TAC minichromosomes, and topoisomers were
resolved in a chloroquine gel (Fig. 3).
By comparison with a set of standards of defined linking number, the
centers of the linking number distributions were determined
(12). The topologies of purified TAC minichromosomal DNA
from uninduced and copper-induced cells were very similar, with
12.0 ± 0.2 (n = 2) and 11.8 ± 0.8 (n = 3) negative supercoils, respectively. TAC purified
from ace1
cells (not shown) contained 11.0 ± 0.9 (n = 3) negative supercoils, about one less than TAC from induced and uninduced cells. However, whether this difference is
significant is unclear, because the standard errors overlap. The
topologies of TAC purified from uninduced, induced, and
ace1
cells were compared with those of TAC in vivo by
rapid extraction of DNA from spheroplasts: the values were 12.0 ± 0.7 (n = 2), 12.5 ± 0.4 (n = 9),
and 12.2 ± 0.6 (n = 3) supercoils, respectively. The values for induced TAC and TAC from ace1
cells are
slightly higher than those for the purified minichromosomes (although
the standard errors overlap). It was also noted that the topoisomer distributions of purified TAC were broader than those of TAC in vivo.
An important point here is that the linker DNA in purified TAC
chromatin is completely relaxed (it copurifies with topoisomerase activity) (data not shown), but in vivo, TAC minichromosomes might not
be completely relaxed, depending on the balance between supercoiling and relaxing activities. In conclusion, topological analysis is consistent with the presence of 10 to 13 nucleosomes in TAC
minichromosomes, both in vitro and in vivo. This estimate is sensitive
to the possible contributions of RNA polymerase II (Pol II), remodeling
complexes, and other factors to DNA supercoiling.

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Topological analysis of copper-induced and uninduced TAC
minichromosomes in vitro and in vivo. (A) Determination of the linking
numbers of uninduced and copper-induced TAC minichromosomes in vitro.
DNA extracted from preparations of induced (I) and uninduced (U) TAC
was electrophoresed in an agarose gel containing 10 µg of chloroquine
per ml. Linking number standards with an average of 0 (relaxed), 5, 10, and 15 negative supercoils were prepared by using pSP72. Southern blots
probed with pGEM-TAC are shown. (B) Determination of the linking
numbers of uninduced and copper-induced TAC minichromosomes in vivo.
DNA extracted directly from induced and uninduced spheroplasts was
analyzed as in panel A, except that the gel contained 7.5 µg of
chloroquine per ml.
|
|
RNA Pol II is present on highly purified TAC minichromosomes.
Transcriptionally active chromatin should contain RNA Pol II. Pol II
forms stable elongation complexes which stall when nucleotides are
removed. Nucleotides (including labeled UTP) were added to electroeluted minichromosomes to allow RNA polymerases to elongate nascent transcripts. To locate the sequences transcribed by Pol II, the
labeled RNA was used as probe of a Southern blot of a gel with various
restriction digests of pGEM-TAC (Fig.
4A). The digests divided TAC into
separate CUP1, TRP1, and ARS1
fragments (lane 2). In lane 3, the CUP1 fragment was cut to
give promoter and transcribed (ORF) fragments. The labeled RNA gave a
strong signal with the TAC band and did not hybridize at all with the pGEM vector band, indicating that hybridization was specific (Fig. 4B).
RNA from copper-induced minichromosomes gave a strong signal with the
CUP1 fragment, which was sensitive to
-amanitin (a
specific inhibitor of Pol II, at low concentrations), indicating that
Pol II is still present on CUP1 after purification.
Transcription was not completely inhibited by
-amanitin, probably
because this drug inhibits the translocation step in RNA synthesis
(58) and would allow the addition of a single nucleotide
to the nascent transcript before blocking synthesis; if this nucleotide
is UTP, the transcript would be end labeled. The ARS1
fragment contains the 3' end of TRP1, perhaps accounting for
the signal on this fragment, but there might be some readthrough
transcription into ARS1 from CUP1. All
transcripts hybridizing to CUP1 were derived from the ORF,
because the promoter fragment did not hybridize at all. This also shows
that Pol II must have terminated transcription before reaching the
CUP1 promoter region. TRP1 is transcriptionally active in all TAC preparations and was used to normalize the
CUP1 signals: induced TAC synthesized twice as much
CUP1 RNA as uninduced TAC and 5 times more than TAC from
ace1
cells. These differences were less than expected
given that CUP1 is induced sixfold in spheroplasts (Fig.
1C), but could be accounted for if there were substantial readthrough
from CUP1 into TRP1 in vitro.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Presence of RNA Pol II on CUP1 in purified
TAC minichromosomes. Electroeluted TAC minichromosomes were incubated
with nucleoside triphosphates (including radiolabeled UTP) for
synthesis of run-on transcripts in the presence or absence of
-amanitin. (A) Typical gel used for Southern blots (stained with
ethidium). pGEM-TAC was digested with HindIII only (lane
1); HindIII and EcoRI (lane 2); or
HindIII, EcoRI, and PacI (lane 3).
(B) Hybridization with RNA synthesized in the presence or absence of
-amanitin by electroeluted TAC minichromosomes isolated from
induced, uninduced, or ace1 cells.
|
|
In conclusion, TAC minichromosomes can be isolated substantially intact
from yeast cells, and retain amounts of RNA Pol II
that correlate with
the transcriptional activity of
CUP1 in
vivo.
The induced CUP1 promoter is more accessible to
restriction enzymes.
Restriction enzymes were used to probe the
accessibility of CUP1 promoter DNA in copper-induced
and uninduced TAC minichromosomes. Restriction enzymes
cleave nucleosomal DNA at a very slow rate relative to naked DNA. In
these experiments, minichromosomes were mixed with a plasmid as
internal control and the kinetics of digestion of TAC chromatin and
plasmid DNA were compared. This approach gives a quantitative estimate
of the degree of protection of a particular restriction site (Fig.
5). This protection is likely to be
predominantly due to nucleosomes, but other bound complexes might also
contribute.

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Accessibility of restriction sites in the
CUP1 promoter in uninduced and induced TAC minichromosomes.
(A) Map of relevant restriction sites in TAC. (B) Accessibility of the
MunI site in the CUP1 promoter. TAC chromatin
(not electroeluted) was mixed with plasmid DNA as an internal control
and digested with MunI for the times indicated. DNA was
purified and digested with HindIII to linearize both TAC
and the control plasmid (pGEM-TAC). A Southern blot was probed with the
HindIII-BglII fragment from TAC (the
BglII site is at 238). Data were quantitated by
phosphorimager analysis and plotted for the uninduced control ( ),
uninduced TAC ( ), induced control ( ), and induced TAC ( ). The
dashed lines show the plots for the other MunI site, in
TRP1. (C) Accessibility of the HaeII and
MspA1I sites. Plots of data from phosphorimager analysis.
These sites are both unique in TAC. Symbols are as in panel B.
|
|
There is a
MunI site between the putative TATA boxes in the
CUP1 promoter.
MunI cleaved about 15% of
uninduced TAC, reaching
a plateau, indicating that 85% of the
promoters are inaccessible
(Fig.
5B). In contrast, about 35% of
induced TAC was accessible.
The other
MunI site in TAC is
located just inside the transcribed
region of
TRP1 and is
strongly and equally protected in uninduced
and induced TAC (about 10%
cleavage). Similarly, the
MspA1I site
in the proximal UAS
was accessible in 25% of uninduced TAC, whereas
about 50% of induced
TAC was accessible (Fig.
5C). In contrast,
the
HaeII site in
the 3' URF region was 20% accessible in both
induced and uninduced
TAC, indicating that induction had no effect
on its accessibility. In
summary, induced TAC episomes contained
more accessible
CUP1
promoters than uninduced TAC, indicating
that activation of
CUP1 coincides with increased exposure of the
promoter,
presumably to facilitate formation of the transcription
complex.
Chromatin structure of the TAC minichromosome.
The chromatin
structures of TAC from induced and uninduced cells were examined
initially by the indirect end-labeling method (54) to
determine whether CUP1 is present in a highly ordered chromatin structure. However, a cleavage pattern consistent with a more
complex chromatin structure was observed (not shown), and nucleosome
positions could not be determined. Therefore, the monomer extension
method (61) for identifying nucleosome positions was used,
which was developed to resolve arrays of overlapping positions in
complex reconstituted chromatin structures, without ambiguity (10, 11). This method requires purified chromatin; it is
unlikely to be effective with nuclei because of the large excess of
nucleosomes from the rest of the genome.
Isolated minichromosomes were completely digested to nucleosome core
particles by using MNase. DNA was extracted, and core
particle DNA (140 to 160 bp) was purified from a gel and end labeled
with T4
polynucleotide kinase. Labeled core DNA was then used
as primer for
extension by Klenow fragment with single-stranded
pGEM-TAC DNA as
template. The replicated DNA was digested with
different restriction
enzymes to resolve different regions of
the TAC minichromosome. The
lengths of the resulting DNA fragments
were determined accurately in
sequencing gels: each band defines
the distance from the border of a
nucleosome to the chosen restriction
site. A control for
sequence-dependent termination by Klenow enzyme
involves omission of
the restriction enzyme. The borders of each
nucleosome were located
precisely, with one using the positive
strand as template and the other
using the negative strand. The
data from one template strand define all
of the "upstream" nucleosome
borders unambiguously and are
sufficient to define the chromatin
structure. The other strand should
give the same nucleosome positions,
this time defined by the
"downstream" borders. The degree to which
the two sets of
positioning data are consistent can be assessed
by calculating the
average distance between the nucleosome borders,
which should be close
to 147 bp, the size of the core
particle.
Because the monomer extension technique is not yet widely used, it is
worthwhile discussing some technical points. A slight
underdigestion of
chromatin by MNase results in core particles
that are not completely
trimmed to 147 bp. Consequently, bands
within about 20 bp of one
another are likely to represent different
degrees of trimming of the
same positioned nucleosome. In the
analysis, clusters of bands within
20 bp were counted as the same
nucleosome. If core particles are
overdigested by MNase, nicks
begin to appear. Labeled core DNA was
routinely checked in denaturing
gels: the size range was typically 140 to 160 bp, with very little
nicking. In any case, nicking would not
affect the result, because
kinase does not label nicks, and end-labeled
nicked DNA strands
liberated on denaturation of core DNA would give the
correct result
on extension. Proteins other than nucleosomes which
might be bound
to the minichromosome will not interfere with nucleosome
mapping
unless they protect 140 to 160 bp of DNA against extensive
digestion
by MNase (because the DNA is subsequently gel purified). The
contributions
of such proteins would appear as nucleosome-free gaps in
the map
(see below), but this might not be obvious unless there is
close
to 100% occupancy of their
sites.
Initially, TAC episomes from copper-induced and uninduced cells were
compared. A complex but highly reproducible band pattern
was obtained
with no qualitative differences between the induced
and uninduced
minichromosomes. Some data for induced TAC are shown
in Fig.
6A (ind. lanes), and a
summary of many data sets using
different restriction enzymes to map
different parts of TAC is
shown in Fig.
6B. The pattern defined 48 different nucleosome
positions on TAC (Table
1). The intensities of the bands indicate
that some nucleosomes occur more frequently than others. Many
of these
positions are overlapping and therefore mutually exclusive.
The first
impression is that nucleosomes are positioned randomly
in TAC, but this
is not the case. A truly random distribution
would yield 2,468 different positions and bands of equal intensity
corresponding to every
nucleotide position in the sequencing gel.
Instead, 48 relatively
strong positions were observed. It is emphasized
that this complex
pattern of nucleosome positions was highly reproducible;
data were
obtained from many independent preparations (Table
1).
The standard
errors were relatively small and reflect a combination
of some
measurements from the less accurate region at the top
of each gel and
small differences in the degree of trimming of
core DNA by MNase. The
average distance between nucleosome borders
was 151 ± 8 bp, very
close to the 147 bp expected, indicating
that the data from the
positive and negative strands are in agreement:
they both describe the
same chromatin structure.

View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Chromatin structure of purified TAC minichromosomes by
monomer extension analysis. (A) Typical monomer extension analysis of
positioned nucleosomes in TAC from copper-induced (ind.) and
ace1 cells purified to the stage prior to electroelution.
In the examples shown, translational positions were mapped from the
BamHI site (at 1833) on the positive strand of pGEM-TAC and
the NheI site (at 423) on the negative strand. Controls had
extension but no digestion with restriction enzyme. Nucleosome
positions are indicated by numbered dots or bars (the latter indicating
bands which were included within that nucleosome position, as discussed
in the text). They are numbered from 1 to 48 (Table 1), beginning at
the HindIII site in TRP1 (Fig. 1A). The
markers are HinfI and DdeI digests of DNA
labeled with T4 kinase; the sizes of some of the bands are indicated to
the left. (B) Summary of nucleosome positions in TAC minichromosomes.
Nucleosome positions are numbered in the order of their coordinates in
TAC relative to the HindIII site in TRP1
(=1). The EcoRI sites mark the boundaries of the
CUP1 insert. Positions observed in TAC from
ace1 cells are shown above the map of TAC, and
nonoverlapping position clusters I to VI are indicated. Cluster I
includes positions 41 to 48 and 1 to 7. In TAC from uninduced and
induced cells, all of the nucleosome positions shown were observed; the
novel positions occupying linkers between the clusters are shown below
the map of TAC. (C) Distribution of nucleosome positions in TAC. Gray
ovals indicate positioned nucleosomes drawn to scale (numbered
according to Table 1).
|
|
Thus, induced and uninduced TAC minichromosomes have qualitatively very
similar complex chromatin structures, perhaps representing
all possible
combinations of the 48 positions observed. They might
differ
quantitatively in their nucleosome distributions, but it
is difficult
to compare different monomer extension samples quantitatively,
because
a control band for normalization is not available. However,
the
increased accessibility of the restriction sites for
MunI
and
MspA1I in the
CUP1 promoter observed on
induction (Fig.
5)
suggests that nucleosome positions over the promoter
are less
likely to be occupied after induction. There are multiple ways
of arranging the nucleosomes in TAC with respect to one another.
Most
arrangements give a maximum of 12 or 13 nucleosomes in TAC,
consistent
with topological measurements in vivo and in vitro
(Fig.
3). Thus, TAC
chromatin is highly heterogeneous; each minichromosome
is likely to
have a slightly different chromatin structure from
the
next.
Ace1p-dependent nucleosome repositioning on CUP1 and
flanking regions.
To determine the contribution of Ace1p to
chromatin structure, TAC isolated from ace1
cells was
analyzed (Fig. 6A). A simpler chromatin structure was observed in which
only 32 of the 48 positions in induced TAC were prominent, i.e., a
subset of the same positions (Table 1); the other 16 positions were
rarely occupied. The nucleosomes observed can be divided into six
clusters of overlapping positions (I to VI in Fig. 4B) separated by
linkers of various lengths, some of which contain factor binding sites
that could act as nucleosome phasing signals: the 18-bp linker between
clusters IV and V contains the distal TATA box in the CUP1
promoter; the very long (151 bp) linker between clusters II and III
contains the UASGAL, and the 80-bp linker between clusters
V and VI includes the region just upstream of the putative TATA box for
TRP1, which might contain an activator binding site. The
41-bp linker between clusters I and II might contain a binding site for
an unknown factor, since the function of the DNA between
ARS1 and GAL3 remains to be elucidated. However,
the 48-bp linker between clusters III and IV and the 22-bp linker
between clusters VI and I are within the CUP1 and TRP1 ORFs, respectively, and so are unlikely to represent
phasing signals. Nucleosome arrangements indicate a maximum of 11 nucleosomes in TAC from ace1
cells (1 or 2 less than TAC
from Ace1p-containing cells).
As discussed above, in the presence of Ace1p, more nucleosome positions
were observed (Fig.
6; compare
ace1
and induced lanes),
including positions 25, 26, and 27 over the
CUP1 promoter
and
20 and 21 in the
CUP1 ORF. Nucleosome repositioning also
occurred
over the sequences flanking
CUP1, with positions 8, 9, 12, 13,
and 14 downstream of the
CUP1 insert and
positions 33 to 36 and
39 to 40 in the region upstream of
CUP1 appearing. These results
are summarized in Fig.
6C, in
which the nucleosome position clusters
observed in
ace1
cells are shown together with all of the 48
possible positions observed
in Ace1p-containing cells. From these
observations, it may be concluded
that the binding of Ace1p coincides
with the repositioning of
nucleosomes on
CUP1 and its flanking
regions from the
clusters to the
linkers.
TAC also has a complex chromatin structure in nuclei.
A
concern in all determinations of nucleosome positions is the
possibility of nucleosome sliding. This seems unlikely to be occurring
here; sliding requires elevated salt concentrations and temperature
(>0.15 M at 37°C in the absence of histone H1) (50),
which were avoided throughout purification. Furthermore, sliding would
have had to occur to the same precise positions in all preparations.
Although sliding seemed unlikely, we addressed the possibility that a
single array of precisely positioned nucleosomes was present on
CUP1 in nuclei which was disrupted during the subsequent purification step, by analyzing the chromatin structure of TAC minichromosomes in nuclei. The monomer extension method is unlikely to
be effective in nuclei, because there would be a very high background
from contaminating core particles. Therefore, to examine the chromatin
structure of TAC in nuclei, we used primer extension to map MNase-cut
sites (56) with primers corresponding to both ends of the
CUP1 insert. Nuclei were prepared from uninduced and induced
cells containing TAC and digested with increasing amounts of MNase. A
typical nucleosomal ladder with a repeat length of about 160 bp was
observed (Fig. 7A), as expected for yeast
(55). Primer extension analysis of these samples (Fig. 7B)
revealed a series of bands unique to chromatin, reflecting cleavage in the linkers, but they are not spaced by 147 bp. The pattern of protected regions of much less than 147 bp was consistent with the
complex pattern of overlapping nucleosome positions revealed by monomer
extension, and there was no evidence for a single array of positioned
nucleosomes. There is almost no difference between induced and
uninduced CUP1, although there are some subtle changes in
the band pattern and degree of protection in the promoter region. We
obtained similar maps for chromosomal CUP1 in nuclei from
BJ5459 cells (not shown). Thus, the primer extension map is consistent with the presence of multiple, overlapping positioned nucleosomes in
TAC chromatin in nuclei. Furthermore, the fact that TAC minichromosomes from ace1
cells isolated in parallel gave a different
chromatin structure also suggests that the isolation protocol preserves chromatin structure.

View larger version (80K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Chromatin structure of CUP1 in TAC
minichromosomes in nuclei by primer extension analysis. (A) Analysis of
DNA from nuclei from copper-induced and uninduced
YDCcup1 2::TAC digested with MNase in a 1% agarose gel
stained with ethidium bromide. Markers were a mixture of DNA
digested with BstEII and pBR322 digested with
MspI (some bands are labeled). (TAC is faintly visible in
the undigested control lanes and is mostly nicked under the conditions
used for incubation of the nuclei.) The band at the bottom in all lanes
is residual RNA. (B) Primer extension mapping of copper-induced and
uninduced CUP1 in TAC minichromosomes in nuclei. Samples
shown in panel A, lanes 1, 4, and 6, were used. DNA, pCP1A digested
with MNase. Major bands are indicated with dots and coordinates in TAC.
Markers (DdeI and HinfI) are as in Fig. 6A. (C)
Comparison of primer extension data for TAC in nuclei with the
nucleosome map obtained for purified TAC by monomer extension (Fig. 6).
The arrows indicate the major MNase-cut sites mapped by primer
extension; these sites can be fit to linkers between positioned
nucleosomes mapped by monomer extension.
|
|
Nucleosome repositioning on CUP1 is independent of
transcription.
Ace1p-dependent nucleosome repositioning might be
due to transcription by RNA Pol II or to a chromatin remodeling complex recruited by Ace1p. The former seemed unlikely, because nucleosomes were repositioned in untranscribed regions as well as transcribed regions. To distinguish between the two, a yeast strain containing TAC
with both TATA boxes in the CUP1 promoter mutated to prevent transcript initiation was used (confirmed by mung bean nuclease mapping
of transcripts) (data not shown). Nucleosome positions in these TAC
minichromosomes were identical to those in the induced state,
indicating that nucleosomes were repositioned in the presence of Ace1p,
but in the absence of transcription (Fig.
8). Taken together, our observations
constitute strong evidence for the recruitment by Ace1p of a nucleosome
repositioning activity which acts over the entire CUP1 gene
and some flanking sequences.

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Chromatin structure of TAC minichromosomes containing
TATA box mutations in the CUP1 promoter. Monomer extension
analysis to compare nucleosome positions in copper-induced and
TATA-mutant TAC minichromosomes. Two independently prepared TATA
mutant samples are shown. Labeling is as in the legend to
Fig. 6.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
CUP1 was chosen as a model for understanding gene
activation in the context of chromatin structure, because its
regulation is relatively simple and it has a strongly inducible
promoter. An effective method for the purification of episomes was
developed, and evidence that their chromatin structures remained
substantially intact has been presented, including the retention of RNA
Pol II in amounts correlating with transcriptional activity in vivo. The chromatin structures of purified TAC minichromosomes in various states of transcriptional activity were determined by the monomer extension method. A relatively ordered chromatin structure is observed
in the absence of the transcriptional activator, Ace1p. In its
presence, the clusters of nucleosome positions were disrupted, because
nucleosomes were repositioned over linkers. Nucleosome repositioning
requires Ace1p, but is independent of transcription, because it
occurred even when the TATA boxes in the CUP1 promoter were mutated.
Translationally positioned nucleosomes in TAC.
TAC
minichromosomes isolated from cells containing Ace1p are
heterogeneous in chromatin structure: 48 differently positioned nucleosomes were identified. Overlapping nucleosome positions were
observed over the entire plasmid. These can be occupied in many
different combinations to give totals of 11 to 13 nucleosomes, in
agreement with the topological analysis. The complexity of the
chromatin structure of induced TAC minichromosomes is about what
would be expected from in vitro reconstitution experiments. For
example, on two 358-bp fragments containing a 5S RNA gene, 6 or 12 positions were observed (41) indicating "position
densities" of about 1 per 30 or 60 bp, respectively, and for a 359-bp
fragment containing the Drosophila hsp70 promoter, 5 positions were observed (1 per 72 bp) (19). For TAC (2,468 bp), the value is 1 per 51 bp. In fact, the translational positions
mapped in native induced TAC chromatin are the same as those formed by
reconstitution of nucleosomes from purified components (C.-H. Shen and
D. J. Clark, unpublished data). Therefore, DNA sequence
determines the possible positions in TAC, but events on the plasmid
determine which positions are occupied and when.
Chromatin structure of the TAC minichromosome.
In the absence
of Ace1p, the chromatin structure of CUP1 and its flanking
sequences is relatively ordered, with clusters of alternative
overlapping nucleosome positions separated by linkers that are rarely
occupied by nucleosomes. This may represent a relatively undisturbed
chromatin structure laid down during nucleosome assembly coupled to DNA
replication, which might be determined in part by factors acting as
nucleosome phasing signals (15) bound at the
TRP1 and CUP1 promoters, at ARS1 (the
origin recognition complex), at the UASGAL and perhaps at
other sites in TAC. All of these sites except ARS1 are at
least partly in the linker in ace1
cells. In the case of
ARS1, a MNase-hypersensitive site was observed by indirect
end labeling (not shown), previously reported by others
(54), indicating that ARS1 is accessible in a
significant fraction of TAC minichromosomes (presumably those with
arrays including nucleosomes 1 and 4 or 6 or 7, placing ARS1 in the linker). In TAC from cells containing Ace1p, the presence of
nucleosomes on a fraction of each of these binding sites implies that
remodeling might lead to some displacement of these factors.
TRP1 was used as a selection marker for TAC and was
therefore in its transcriptionally active state under all conditions
examined.
The activity of
TRP1 was insufficient to disturb
the chromatin
structure of
CUP1 in
ace1
cells,
although it might have had minor
effects. The
TRP1 promoter
in
TRP1 ARS1 is truncated and might
be missing important
regulatory elements which reduce its ability
to recruit remodeling
complexes as well as its transcriptional
activity. Remodeling of
CUP1 does have effects on
TRP1: in the
presence
of Ace1p, nucleosomes occupy positions 39 and 40 at the
5' end of
TRP1 and positions 8, 9, and 12 to 14 near
ARS1.
The
chromatin structure of the
TRP1 ARS1 minichromosome has
been studied
in detail by using indirect end labeling
(
54): three strongly
positioned nucleosomes were
identified next to
ARS1. However,
insertion of DNA at the
EcoRI site disrupted the positioning of
these nucleosomes
(
44). This is also where
CUP1 was inserted
and
probably accounts for the less ordered structure of the
ARS1 region in TAC. Another relevant factor is the much higher copy
number
of
TRP1 ARS1 (100 to 200 per cell) (
62)
relative to TAC
and other
TRP1 ARS1 plasmids with inserts
(
20,
53): most
TRP1 genes in
TRP1
ARS1-containing cells might be inactive and unremodeled,
with more
ordered
structures.
How does Ace1p target the remodeling complex to CUP1?
In
the absence of Ace1p, the chromatin structure of the CUP1
promoter is such that the distal TATA box is placed in the linker between two clusters of overlapping positions, but the UASs
(coordinates 1510 to 1612) may be completely open (positions 30 to 32),
partly covered (position 29), or completely contained within a
nucleosome (position 28). For induction, Ace1p must bind to its site in
order to target the remodeling complex. It is not known whether
Ace1p, like the thyroid hormone receptor (59), can
recognize its binding site in a nucleosome, or whether, like many
transcriptional activators (2), it has greatly reduced
affinity for its site when in a nucleosome. If the latter is the case,
the presence of multiple binding sites for Ace1p (two in each UAS)
offers a potential solution: for positions 29 to 32, at least one site
is present in the linker and available for Ace1p to bind. In the case
of position 28, in which all the sites are covered, the weakened
binding of several Ace1p molecules might be sufficient to disrupt the
nucleosome (2). In this model, Ace1p should be able to
access at least one binding site independently of which nucleosome
positions 28 to 32 happen to be occupied. An alternative,
"concerted probing," model postulates the formation of a
complex between copper-activated Ace1p and the remodeler, which
then "probes" each nucleosome in turn until Ace1p recognizes
its binding site.
It is instructive to compare
CUP1 with
PHO5, for
which the relationship between chromatin structure and gene expression
in
yeast has been most thoroughly studied (reviewed in reference
52). Induction of
PHO5 correlates with the
disruption of an
ordered array of four positioned nucleosomes on the
PHO5 promoter
and requires the presence of a binding site
for the Pho4p activator
in the linker between the central pair of
nucleosomes.
CUP1 has
a much less ordered chromatin
structure at the promoter, but there
are four binding sites for Ace1p,
which, as discussed above, could
facilitate binding of Ace1p. The large
increase in accessibility
to nucleases at the
PHO5 promoter
indicates that nucleosome disruption
is likely to involve dramatic
conformational changes or displacement
of the four nucleosomes rather
than just repositioning. For
CUP1,
relatively modest
increases in accessibility to restriction enzymes
were observed on
induction (not shown). As for
CUP1, chromatin
remodeling at
PHO5 is dependent on the presence of activator,
but
transcription is not required. Whether remodeling of
PHO5 chromatin is confined to the promoter or whether, like
CUP1,
it
involves the rest of the gene and flanking sequences is
unclear.
Mechanism of remodeling of CUP1 and its flanking
sequences.
It is not known which of the chromatin remodeling
activities identified in yeast is involved in CUP1
regulation. Nucleosome repositioning could be the direct result of
recruitment by Ace1p of the SWI-SNF complex, RSC (8), or
one of the I-SWI-like complexes. Alternatively, it might be the
indirect consequence of a targeted histone modification, such as
acetylation. Experiments addressing these possibilities are in
progress. Current models for the mechanism of chromatin remodeling have
been reviewed recently (22, 24, 38, 43). In the
"activator model" (43), gene-specific activators recruit a remodeling complex directly to the promoter, which then alters local chromatin structure to facilitate transcription (39, 40). In vitro, remodeling complexes catalyze nucleosome sliding (19, 26, 57) and/or nucleosome transfer (35).
Remodeled nucleosomes also have an altered conformation and can form
dimer-like particles (4, 34, 47).
Much of the evidence for the mechanism of remodeling is based on
biochemical data in vitro. We have provided direct support
for the
activator model in vivo by isolating and examining the
structures of
native chromatin: we have shown that remodeling
of
CUP1 is
dependent on its transcriptional activator, Ace1p,
that remodeling
involves the repositioning of nucleosomes, and
that, perhaps
surprisingly, remodeling is not confined to the
CUP1
promoter, but includes the entire gene and unrelated flanking
regions
also. While there is much evidence that gene activation
is correlated
with disruption of a relatively ordered chromatin
structure, the
structural nature of this disruption has not been
elucidated. Our
observations suggest that a major part of this
structural transition is
the dynamic redistribution of nucleosomes.
Repositioned nucleosomes
protected 147 bp of DNA from digestion
by MNase, and so, by this
criterion, are not conformationally
altered. However, remodeled
nucleosomes might be relatively short-lived
intermediates in vivo.
Furthermore, remodeled nucleosomes might
not protect 147 bp of DNA from
MNase digestion (they might be
relatively unstable or, if a dimer-like
particle is formed, they
might protect a larger piece of DNA which
would not be present
in core DNA
preparations).
The remodeling activity recruited to
CUP1 by Ace1p is
apparently capable of reorganizing a domain of chromatin structure
defined
by the limits of nucleosome repositioning observed. This
extends
from positions 8 and 9 near
ARS1 to positions 39 and
40 at the
5' end of
TRP1. These are outside the
CUP1 insert and indicate
that the remodeling activity
influences nucleosome positions over
nearly 2 kb of DNA and perhaps
over the entire TAC plasmid. The
fact that remodeling is not confined
to the promoter suggests
that the remodeling complex recruited by Ace1p
somehow reorganizes
a domain of chromatin structure rather than working
only on promoter
nucleosomes. How it might achieve this is a matter for
speculation,
but the looping and tracking models suggested for enhancer
action
(
5) are obvious candidates. Remodeling activity
might create
a "fluid" chromatin structure (
24). Thus,
the heterogeneity
observed in TAC minichromosomes is likely to reflect
a highly
dynamic chromatin structure, in which facile nucleosome
movement
between observed translational positions is catalyzed by the
remodeling
complex recruited by Ace1p (Fig.
9). The fact that these positions
overlap
might be important in the mechanism of nucleosome transfer.
Facile
nucleosome movement should facilitate events such as the
formation of a
transcription complex at the
CUP1 promoter and
the passage
of RNA Pol II.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 9.
A fluid chromatin model for the remodeling of the
CUP1 gene in TAC. A chromatin structure representative of
TAC minichromosomes containing inactive CUP1
(ace1 ) is shown. TRP1 is transcriptionally
active and is shown as undergoing remodeling (double-headed arrows
indicate nucleosome repositioning). The first step in activation of
CUP1 for transcription is the binding of copper-activated
Ace1p to one of its binding sites in the UASs. How Cu-Ace1p might gain
access to its sites is discussed in the text. Cu-Ace1p recruits a
remodeling complex (RMC) to the CUP1 promoter, which
catalyzes nucleosome repositioning on CUP1 and its flanking
sequences. The continual free movement of nucleosomes between positions
results in a fluid chromatin structure, rendering the underlying DNA
transparent and facilitating the formation of a transcription complex
at the CUP1 promoter and the passage of RNA Pol II (see text
for a discussion of possible mechanisms).
|
|
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Ramin Akhavan for the ace1
strain; Carolyn
Neal for the mutant strain; Yossi Shiloach and Loc Trinh for
fermenter-grown cells; and A. Dean, D. Hu, J. Thorner, and the
American Type Culture Collection for plasmids. We thank Chris
Szent-Györgyi for useful discussions; Ann Dean, Jurrien Dean,
Rohinton Kamakaka, Alan Kimmel, and Alan Wolffe for comments on the
manuscript; and Anne Dranginis for communicating unpublished results.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Laboratory of
Cellular and Developmental Biology (NIDDK), National Institutes of
Health, Building 6, Room B1-12, Bethesda, MD 20892-2715. Phone: (301) 496-6966. Fax: (301) 496-5239. E-mail:
djclark{at}helix.nih.gov.
Present address: Department of Cell Biology and Human Anatomy,
University of California
Davis, Davis, CA 95616.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Adams, C. C., and D. S. Gross.
1991.
The yeast heat shock response is induced by conversion of cells to spheroplasts and by potent transcriptional inhibitors.
J. Bacteriol.
173:7429-7435[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Adams, C. C., and J. L. Workman.
1993.
Nucleosome displacement in transcription.
Cell
72:305-308[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Alfieri, J. A., and D. J. Clark.
1999.
Isolation of minichromosomes from yeast cells.
Methods Enzymol.
304:35-49[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Bazett-Jones, D. P.,
J. Côté,
C. C. Landel,
C. L. Peterson, and J. L. Workman.
1999.
The SWI/SNF complex creates loop domains in DNA and polynucleosome arrays and can disrupt DNA-histone contacts within these domains.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:1470-1478[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Blackwood, E. M., and J. T. Kadonaga.
1998.
Going the distance: a current view of enhancer action.
Science
281:60-63[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Buchman, C.,
P. Skroch,
J. Welch,
S. Fogel, and M. Karin.
1989.
The CUP2 gene product, regulator of yeast metallothionein expression, is a copper-activated DNA-binding protein.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9:4091-4095[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Butt, T. R.,
E. J. Sternberg,
J. A. Gorman,
P. Clark,
D. Hamer,
M. Rosenberg, and S. T. Crooke.
1984.
Copper metallothionein of yeast, structure of the gene, and regulation of expression.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:3332-3336[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Cairns, B. R.,
Y. Lorch,
Y. Li,
M. Zhang,
L. Lacomis,
H. Erdjument-Bromage,
P. Tempst,
J. Du,
B. Laurent, and R. D. Kornberg.
1996.
RSC, an essential, abundant chromatin-remodeling complex.
Cell
87:1249-1260[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Clark, D. J.
1998.
Counting nucleosome cores on circular DNA using topoisomerase I, p. 139-152.
In
H. Gould (ed.), Chromatin: a practical approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
|
| 10.
|
Davey, C.,
S. Pennings, and J. Allan.
1997.
CpG methylation remodels chromatin structure in vitro.
J. Mol. Biol.
267:276-288[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Davey, C.,
S. Pennings,
G. Meerseman,
T. J. Wess, and J. Allan.
1995.
Periodicity of strong nucleosome positioning sites around the chicken adult -globin gene may encode regularly spaced chromatin.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:11210-11214[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Depew, R. E., and J. C. Wang.
1975.
Conformational fluctuations of DNA helix.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
72:4275-4279[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Ducker, C. E., and R. T. Simpson.
2000.
The organized chromatin domain of the repressed yeast a cell-specific gene STE6 contains two molecules of the corepressor Tup1p per nucleosome.
EMBO J.
19:400-409[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Eadara, J. K., and L. C. Lutter.
1993.
RNA polymerase locations in the simian virus 40 transcription complex.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:22020-22027[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Fedor, M. J.,
N. F. Lue, and R. D. Kornberg.
1988.
Statistical positioning of nucleosomes by specific protein-binding to an upstream activating sequence in yeast.
J. Mol. Biol.
204:109-127[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Fürst, P.,
S. Hu,
R. Hackett, and D. Hamer.
1988.
Copper activates metallothionein gene transcription by altering the conformation of a specific DNA binding protein.
Cell
55:705-717[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Grunstein, M.
1997.
Histone acetylation in chromatin structure and transcription.
Nature
389:349-352[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Hamer, D. H.,
D. J. Thiele, and J. E. Lemontt.
1985.
Function and autoregulation of yeast copperthionein.
Science
228:685-690[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Hamiche, A.,
R. Sandaltzopoulos,
D. A. Gdula, and C. Wu.
1999.
ATP-dependent histone octamer sliding mediated by the chromatin remodeling complex NURF.
Cell
97:833-842[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Haswell, E. S., and E. K. O'Shea.
1999.
An in vitro system recapitulates chromatin remodeling at the PHO5 promoter.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:2817-2827[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Jones, E. J.
1991.
Tackling the protease problem in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Methods Enzymol.
194:428-453[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Kadonaga, J. T.
1998.
Eukaryotic transcription: an interlaced network of transcription factors and chromatin-modifying machines.
Cell
92:307-313[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Karin, M.,
R. Najarian,
A. Haslinger,
A. P. Valenzuela,
J. Welch, and S. Fogel.
1984.
Primary structure and transcription of an amplified genetic locus: the CUP1 locus of yeast.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:337-341[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Kingston, R. E., and G. J. Narlikar.
1999.
ATP-dependent remodeling and acetylation as regulators of chromatin fluidity.
Genes Dev.
13:2339-2352[Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Kuras, L., and K. Struhl.
1999.
Binding of TBP to promoters in vivo is stimulated by activators and requires Pol II holoenzyme.
Nature
399:609-613[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Längst, G.,
E. J. Bonte,
D. F. V. Corona, and P. B. Becker.
1999.
Nucleosome movement by CHRAC and ISWI without disruption or trans-displacement of the histone octamer.
Cell
97:843-852[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Leblanc, B. P.,
C. J. Benham, and D. J. Clark.
2000.
An initiation element in the yeast CUP1 promoter is recognized by RNA polymerase II in the absence of TATA-box binding protein if the DNA is negatively supercoiled.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97:10745-10750[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Lee, D., and J. T. Lis.
1998.
Transcriptional activation independent of TFIIH kinase and the RNA polymerase II mediator in vivo.
Nature
393:389-392[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Lee, D.,
S. Kim, and J. T. Lis.
1999.
Different upstream transcriptional activators have distinct coactivator requirements.
Genes Dev.
13:2934-2939[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Levin, D. E.,
O. F. Fields,
R. Kunisawa,
J. M. Bishop, and J. Thorner.
1990.
A candidate protein kinase C gene, PKC1, is required for the S. cerevisiae cell cycle.
Cell
62:213-224[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Li, X.-Y.,
A. Virbasius,
X. Zhu, and M. R. Green.
1999.
Enhancement of TBP binding by activators and general transcription factors.
Nature
399:605-609[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Liu, Q.,
S. E. Gabriel,
K. L. Roinick,
R. D. Ward, and K. M. Arndt.
1999.
Analysis of TFIIA function in vivo: evidence for a role in TATA-binding protein recruitment and gene-specific activation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:8673-8685[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Liu, X., and D. J. Thiele.
1996.
Oxidative stress induces heat shock factor phosphorylation and HSF-dependent activation of yeast metallothionein gene transcription.
Genes Dev.
10:592-603[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Lorch, Y.,
B. R. Cairns,
M. Zhang, and R. D. Kornberg.
1998.
Activated RSC-nucleosome complex and persistently altered form of the nucleosome.
Cell
94:29-34[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Lorch, Y.,
M. Zhang, and R. D. Kornberg.
1999.
Histone octamer transfer by a chromatin remodeling complex.
Cell
96:389-392[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 36.
|
McNeil, J. B.,
H. Agah, and D. Bentley.
1998.
Activated transcription independent of the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme in budding yeast.
Genes Dev.
12:2510-2521[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Moqtaderi, Z.,
M. Keaveney, and K. Struhl.
1998.
The histone H3-like TAF is broadly required for transcription in yeast.
Mol. Cell
2:675-682[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Muchardt, C., and M. Yaniv.
1999.
ATP-dependent chromatin remodelling: SWI/SNF and Co. are on the job.
J. Mol. Biol.
293:187-198[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Natarajan, K.,
B. M. Jackson,
H. Zhou,
F. Winston, and A. G. Hinnebusch.
1999.
Transcriptional activation by Gcn4p involves independent interactions with the SWI/SNF complex and the SRB/mediator.
Mol. Cell
4:657-664[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Neely, K. E.,
A. H. Hassan,
A. E. Wallberg,
D. J. Steger,
B. R. Cairns,
A. P. H. Wright, and J. L. Workman.
1999.
Activation domain-mediated targeting of the SWI/SNF complex to promoters stimulates transcription from nucleosome arrays.
Mol. Cell
4:649-655[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 41.
|
O'Donohue, M. F.,
I. Duband-Goulet,
A. Hamiche, and A. Prunell.
1994.
Octamer displacement and redistribution in transcription of single nucleosomes.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:937-945[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Ozer, J.,
L. E. Lezina,
J. Ewing,
S. Audi, and P. E. Lieberman.
1998.
Association of transcription factor IIA with TATA binding protein is required for transcriptional activation of a subset of promoters and cell cycle progression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18:2559-2570[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Peterson, C. L., and J. L. Workman.
2000.
Promoter targeting and chromatin remodeling by the SWI/SNF complex.
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
10:187-192[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 44.
|
Roth, S. Y.,
A. Dean, and R. T. Simpson.
1990.
Yeast 2 repressor positions nucleosomes in TRP1/ARS1 chromatin.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10:2247-2260[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Roth, S. Y., and R. T. Simpson.
1991.
Yeast minichromosomes.
Methods Cell Biol.
35:289-314[Medline].
|
| 46.
|
Sakurai, H., and T. Fukasawa.
1999.
Activator-specific requirement for the general transcription factor IIE in yeast.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
261:734-739[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 47.
|
Schnitzler, G.,
S. Sif, and R. E. Kingston.
1998.
Human SWI/SNF interconverts a nucleosome between its base state and a stable remodeled state.
Cell
94:17-27[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 48.
|
Simpson, R. T.
1991.
Nucleosome positioning: occurrence, mechanisms and functional consequences.
Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol.
40:143-184[Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Simpson, R. T.,
F. Thoma, and J. M. Brubaker.
1985.
Chromatin reconstituted from tandemly repeated cloned DNA fragments and core histones: a model system for study of higher order structure.
Cell
42:799-808[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 50.
|
Spadafora, C.,
P. Oudet, and P. Chambon.
1979.
Rearrangement of chromatin structure induced by increasing ionic strength and temperature.
Eur. J. Biochem.
100:225-235[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 51.
|
Struhl, K.
1996.
Chromatin structure and RNA polymerase II connection: implications for transcription.
Cell
84:179-182[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 52.
|
Svaren, J., and W. Hörz.
1997.
Transcription factors vs nucleosomes: regulation of the PHO5 promoter in yeast.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
22:93-97[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 53.
|
Tanaka, S.,
D. Halter,
M. Livingstone-Zatchej,
B. Reszel, and F. Thoma.
1994.
Transcription through the yeast origin of replication ARS1 ends at the ABFI binding site and affects extrachromosomal maintenance of minichromosomes.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:3904-3910[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Thoma, F.,
L. W. Bergman, and R. T. Simpson.
1984.
Nuclease digestion of circular TRP1ARS1 chromatin reveals positioned nucleosomes separated by nuclease-sensitive regions.
J. Mol. Biol.
177:715-733[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 55.
|
Thomas, J. O., and V. Furber.
1976.
Yeast chromatin structure.
FEBS Lett.
66:274-280[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 56.
|
Weiss, K., and R. T. Simpson.
1997.
Cell type-specific chromatin organization of the region that governs directionality of yeast mating type switching.
EMBO J.
16:4352-4360[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 57.
|
Whitehouse, I.,
A. Flaus,
B. R. Cairns,
M. F. White,
J. L. Workman, and T. Owen-Hughes.
1999.
Nucleosome mobilization catalysed by the yeast SWI/SNF complex.
Nature
400:784-787[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 58.
|
Wieland, T., and H. Faulstich.
1991.
Fifty years of amanitin.
Experientia
47:1186-1193[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 59.
|
Wolffe, A. P.
1997.
Sinful repression.
Nature
387:16-17[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 60.
|
Wolffe, A. P.
1999.
Chromatin, 3rd. ed.
Academic Press, London, United Kingdom.
|
| 61.
|
Yenidunya, A.,
C. Davey,
D. J. Clark,
G. Felsenfeld, and J. Allan.
1994.
Nucleosome positioning on chicken and human globin gene promoters in vitro. Novel mapping techniques.
J. Mol. Biol.
237:401-414[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 62.
|
Zakian, V. A., and J. F. Scott.
1982.
Construction, replication, and chromatin structure of TRP1 RI circle, a multiple-copy synthetic plasmid derived from Saccharomyces cerevisiae chromosomal DNA.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
2:221-232[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 2001, p. 534-547, Vol. 21, No. 2
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.2.534-547.2001
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Jimeno-Gonzalez, S., Gomez-Herreros, F., Alepuz, P. M., Chavez, S.
(2006). A Gene-Specific Requirement for FACT during Transcription Is Related to the Chromatin Organization of the Transcribed Region. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 8710-8721
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kim, Y., McLaughlin, N., Lindstrom, K., Tsukiyama, T., Clark, D. J.
(2006). Activation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae HIS3 Results in Gcn4p-Dependent, SWI/SNF-Dependent Mobilization of Nucleosomes over the Entire Gene. Mol. Cell. Biol.
26: 8607-8622
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wang, J.-P. Z., Widom, J.
(2005). Improved alignment of nucleosome DNA sequences using a mixture model. Nucleic Acids Res
33: 6743-6755
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Eriksson, P. R., Mendiratta, G., McLaughlin, N. B., Wolfsberg, T. G., Marino-Ramirez, L., Pompa, T. A., Jainerin, M., Landsman, D., Shen, C.-H., Clark, D. J.
(2005). Global Regulation by the Yeast Spt10 Protein Is Mediated through Chromatin Structure and the Histone Upstream Activating Sequence Elements. Mol. Cell. Biol.
25: 9127-9137
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ercan, S., Reese, J. C., Workman, J. L., Simpson, R. T.
(2005). Yeast Recombination Enhancer Is Stimulated by Transcription Activation. Mol. Cell. Biol.
25: 7976-7987
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kuo, H.-C., Moore, J. D., Krebs, J. E.
(2005). Histone H2A and Spt10 Cooperate to Regulate Induction and Autoregulation of the CUP1 Metallothionein. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 104-111
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Garcia, I., Gonzalez, R., Gomez, D., Scazzocchio, C.
(2004). Chromatin Rearrangements in the prnD-prnB Bidirectional Promoter: Dependence on Transcription Factors. Eukaryot Cell
3: 144-156
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kim, Y., Clark, D. J.
(2002). SWI/SNF-dependent long-range remodeling of yeast HIS3 chromatin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
99: 15381-15386
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shen, C.-H., Leblanc, B. P., Neal, C., Akhavan, R., Clark, D. J.
(2002). Targeted Histone Acetylation at the Yeast CUP1 Promoter Requires the Transcriptional Activator, the TATA Boxes, and the Putative Histone Acetylase Encoded by SPT10. Mol. Cell. Biol.
22: 6406-6416
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Badi, L., Barberis, A.
(2002). The CUP1 upstream repeated element renders CUP1 promoter activation insensitive to mutations in the RNA polymerase II transcription complex. Nucleic Acids Res
30: 1306-1315
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Shen, C.-H., Clark, D. J.
(2001). DNA Sequence Plays a Major Role in Determining Nucleosome Positions in Yeast CUP1 Chromatin. J. Biol. Chem.
276: 35209-35216
[Abstract]
[Full Text]