![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, April 2004, p. 3552-3561, Vol. 24, No. 8
0270-7306/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.24.8.3552-3561.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology and Department of Radiation Oncology,1 Department of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 277102
Received 23 May 2003/ Returned for modification 23 July 2003/ Accepted 21 January 2004
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the protein Cdc13p binds the telomere G-strand overhang, where it helps form a protective cap with other proteins (22, 23, 35) as well as recruit telomerase to telomeres, or at least activate the enzyme once bound to telomeres, through interactions with other proteins (17, 37). A putative human ortholog of Cdc13p (termed hPot1) was recently cloned (4). This protein shares sequence similarity with the DNA-binding domain of the 
subunit of the telomere end-binding proteins from ciliates, which are functional and structural orthologs of Cdc13p (21, 24, 26, 31). hPot1 binds specifically to the G-rich single-stranded DNA of human telomeres in vitro (4) and (when overexpressed) colocalizes with the telomere-binding protein hTRF2 in vivo (5). Lastly, the presence of a null POT1 allele in the fission yeast S. pombe leads to dramatic telomere shortening and destabilized chromosome ends (4) whereas a similar loss of CDC13 in budding yeast leads to a catastrophic decrease of C-strand telomeric DNA and a RAD9-dependent growth arrest (17, 20, 35, 39). Collectively, these data suggest that hPot1 is a telomere-binding protein and that if the function of this protein is evolutionarily conserved, hPot1 should protect telomeres and positively regulate telomere length.
We now show that human Pot1 binds to telomeres in vivo and promotes elongation of telomeres in telomerase-positive human cells (in contrast to other human telomere DNA-binding proteins, which promote telomere shortening when overexpressed) (36, 38). Given that hPot1 binds single-stranded telomeric DNA, the substrate of telomerase, and promotes telomere elongation, we queried whether an N-terminal DAT mutant of hTERT could be rescued upon fusion to hPot1. We now show that this is the case but also find that this rescue does not depend entirely upon the DNA-binding activity of hPot1 but instead upon association with telomere chromatin. These results suggest the interesting possibility that the DAT domain might not be required for precise telomere binding but rather for general targeting to the telomere.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
OB (29) was generated by subcloning into full-length hPot1 a PCR fragment containing BamHI, SnaBI, and NheI sites upstream of a Flag epitope tag adjacent to amino acid 127, thus creating pBabepuro-Flag-hPot1OB. The SnaBI fragment of Flag-hPot13A or Flag-Pot1OB was then introduced into the same site in pBabepuro-Flag-hTERT and pBabepuro-Flag-hTERT+128 to generate pBabepuro-Flag-hPot13A-Flag-hTERT, pBabepuro-Flag-hPot13A-Flag-hTERT+128, pBabepuro-Flag-hPot1OB-Flag-hTERT, and pBabepuro-Flag-hPot1OB-Flag-hTERT+128. Flag-hPot1, Flag-hPot13A, and Flag-hPot1OB were digested with NheI and SalI and subcloned into the same sites of pCIneo (Promega) for use in the G-strand binding assays. pBabehygro-myc-hTRF2-YFP (used for colocalization experiments) was previously described (2). Cell lines. HA5 cells, telomerase-negative human embryonic kidney (HEK) cells expressing the early region of simian virus 40 (15), or 293 cells (telomerase-positive HEK cells transfected with the E1 region of Ad5) (15) were stably infected with retroviruses derived from the pBabe plasmids described above, after which polyclonal populations were selected by treatment with 1.0 µg of puromycin/ml or 100 µg of hygromycin/ml as previously described (2). A population-doubling (pd) value of 0 was arbitrarily assigned to the first confluent plate under selection. HA5 or 293 cell lines were continually grown in dilutions of 1:8 or 1:16, respectively. Crisis was defined as the period when HA5 cell lines failed to become confluent within 3 weeks and displayed massive cell death. HA5 cell lines were considered to have an extended life span when they proliferated more than the number of population doublings required for two to three times vector control cells to reach crisis.
Chromatin immunoprecipitation assay.
Chromatin immunoprecipitations were performed as previously described (reference 13 and reference therein) with the following modifications. A Branson sonifier microtip (Branson Ultrasonics) was used for sonication (output 3; duty cycle, 30% for five 10-s bursts), after which insoluble material was pelleted by microcentrifugation (13,000 x g for 5 min at 4°C), the remaining lysate was diluted in lysis buffer (1:2), and 40 µl of 50% slurry-precoupled anti-Flag M2 agarose affinity gel (Sigma) was added. Proteinase K digestion was also reduced to 2 h at 45°C. Lastly, duplicate dot blots were hybridized either with a 32P-labeled oligonucleotide telomeric probe [(T2AG3)4] in Church's buffer overnight at 50°C followed by two washes with 4x SSC (1x SSC is 0.15 M NaCl plus 0.015 M sodium citrate) containing 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) or with an satellite probe (derived from plasmid p82H (30) in Church's buffer overnight at 60°C followed by two washes with 0.1x SSC containing 0.1% SDS. Hybridization of the probes was confirmed through the use of 10 µg of total genomic DNA blotted on each membrane.
hPot1 G-strand in vitro binding assay.
35S-labeled hPot1 proteins were synthesized in vitro using a T7 quick-coupled TNT system by incubating 1 µg of pCIneo-Flag-hPot1, pCIneo-Flag-hPot1-HA, pCIneo-Flag-hPot13A, or pCIneo-Flag-hPot1OB in rabbit reticulocyte lysate following the manufacturer's instructions (Ambion). Flag-hPot1 proteins were then immunoprecipitated using 50 µl of anti-Flag M2 agarose affinity gel per construct in 1x phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) containing 0.1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride for 1 h at room temperature. Resin was then washed three times in 1x PBS for 5 min at room temperature, after which one-fifth of the immunoprecipitate was incubated for 30 min at room temperature in 20 µl of binding buffer (4) containing 10 nM of a G-strand oligonucleotide [(T2AG3)5], which was 32P labeled by T4 polynucleotide kinase (Invitrogen) and purified from unincorporated 32P with G-25 gel filtration Mini spin columns (Promega). Unbound G strand was removed by washing resin three times in 1 ml of 1x PBS for 5 min at room temperature. SDS loading buffer (1x) was added to samples and boiled; constituents were separated by electrophoresis on an SDS-6 to 20% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis gradient gel, after which products were visualized by exposure to a Phosphorimager.
Telomere length and telomerase activity analysis. Lysates isolated from the described cells were diluted and assayed for telomerase activity as previously described (27). Telomere-containing terminal restriction fragments were visualized by resolving 5 µg of genomic DNA digested with HinfI and RsaI on 0.5% agarose gels, which were hybridized with a 32P-labeled (CCCTAA)3 probe followed by three washes with 15x SSC and then exposed to a Phosphorimager screen to visualize telomere-containing fragments, as previously described (15). Telomere lengths were recorded as the modal (peak) signals of the telomere-containing fragments.
Immunoblot analysis. A total of 150 µg of soluble lysate from HA5 stable cell lines was separated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and subjected to immunoblotting as previously described (2) with the primary mouse monoclonal antibodies anti-Flag M2 (Sigma), anti-HA 12CA5 (Roche), anti-ß-tubulin (Sigma), and anti-ß-actin AC15 (Sigma) to detect Flag-hTERT, Flag-hPot1-Flag-hTERT (both wild-type and mutant configurations), Flag-hPot1-HA, tubulin, and actin, respectively, followed by incubation with goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin G-horseradish peroxidase (catalog no. 81-6520; Zymed Laboratories). Proteins were detected with ECL reagent (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), following the manufacturer's protocol. Lysates were similarly prepared to detect Flag-hPot1 in 293 cells except that standard radioimmunoprecipitation buffer supplemented with 5 mM EDTA-2 µg of aprotinin/ml-1 µg of leupeptin/ml-1 µg of pepstatin A/ml-0.1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride-1 mM Na3VO4-1 mM dithiothreitol was used. To immunoprecipitate Flag-tagged hPot1, 2 mg of soluble lysate was incubated with 10 µl of anti-Flag M2 agarose affinity gel at room temperature for 1 h in 1x PBS containing the aforementioned protease inhibitors. Similarly, HA-tagged hPot1 proteins were incubated with 10 µl of anti-HA affinity matrix (Roche). Resins were washed three times at room temperature for 5 min each time in 1x PBS buffer, after which the total resin was boiled in 1x SDS loading dye, resolved, and subjected to immunoblotting with the anti-Flag M2 antibody as described above. In the coexpression experiments, Flag-hPot1 proteins were similarly detected from HA5 cells through the use of 0.5 mg of total cell lysate.
Immunofluorescence. U2OS cells, a human cancer cell line with long telomeres (12), were stably infected with pBabepuro-Flag-hPot1 or pBabepuro-Flag-hPot1-Flag-hTERT and transiently transfected with pBabehygro-myc-hTRF2-YFP through the use of FuGENE 6 reagent (Roche). At 48 h posttransfection, cells were fixed, permeabilized, and blocked as previously described (2) except that 0.1% Triton X-100 was used to permeabilize the cells. Flag-tagged hPot1 and hPot1-hTERT proteins were detected with the anti-Flag M2 antibody recognized by a donkey anti-mouse antibody conjugated with Rhodamine RedX (Jackson ImmunoResearch). hTRF2-YFP was visualized by virtue of its fluorescence. Goat anti-PML (Santa Cruz Biotechnologies) was used in conjunction with donkey anti-goat conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate (Jackson ImmunoResearch) to detect endogenous PML bodies. Cells were examined at x630 magnification on an Olympus IX70 confocal fluorescent microscope.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
|
It had recently been shown that expression of hPot1 with an N-terminal deletion to remove the DNA-binding domain results in telomere elongation in telomerase-positive cells (29). To rule out the formal possibility that the elongation observed to result from expressing full-length hPot1 in 293 cells was due to the generation of a truncated product defective in DNA binding (which would not be detected by an antibody against the N-terminal epitope tag), an HA epitope tag was engineered into the C terminus of the Flag-tagged hPot1 and the resultant protein was stably expressed in 293 cells. Immunoblot analysis following immunoprecipitation using the anti-HA antibody confirmed that only the full-length N- and C-terminal epitope-tagged hPot1 was stably expressed (Fig. 1B). Southern blot analysis confirmed that the 293 cells expressing this protein exhibited an increase in telomere length over time (Fig. 1C). Thus, ectopic expression of full-length hPot1 results in telomere elongation, at least in some telomerase-positive cell types.
Fusion of hPot1 to hTERT targets telomerase to telomeres.
Having demonstrated that hPot1 binds telomeric DNA in vivo and having characterized the effect of overexpressing this protein, we could next address whether fusion of hPot1 could rescue the inability of hTERT harboring a mutation in the DAT domain (mutant +128) to elongate telomeres in vivo and extend cell life span. Flag-tagged hPot1 cDNA was therefore fused in frame with the cDNA encoding Flag-tagged wild-type hTERT or the DAT mutant hTERT+128. To determine whether this association altered hPot1 function, we monitored the telomere localization of hPot1 alone or fused to hTERT or hTERT+128 in human U2OS cells, which have long telomeres (12), facilitating the detection of proteins bound to telomeres by immunofluorescence. Expression of these proteins was confirmed by immunoprecipitation followed by immunoblotting with an anti-Flag antibody (Fig. 2A). The telomere localization of hPot1, hPot1-hTERT, and hPot1-hTERT+128 was then assayed by comparing the subcellular distribution of these proteins with that of transfected YFP-tagged hTRF2 (8, 11), a known telomere-binding protein. We found in all cases that hPot1 or derived fusion proteins colocalized with hTRF2-YFP (Fig. 2B). hTRF2 is presumably also associated with PML bodies in U2OS cells, which employ an alternative mechanism of telomere elongation (12, 42). We ruled out the possibility that hPot1-hTERT was at PML bodies instead of telomeres, because hPot1, hPot1-hTERT, and hPot1-hTERT+128 colocalize with hTRF2 nearly 100% of the time but with PML bodies only 
10 to 20% of the time (data not shown). Fusion of hTERT to hPot1 therefore does not disrupt the association of hPot1 to telomeres but instead redirects hTERT to chromosome ends.
|
|
|
|
6 kb), in similarity to control hPot1-hTERT cells (Fig. 3). Targeting of hTERT+128 to telomeres by hPot1 appears not only to rescue the inability of the crippled enzyme to replicate telomeres but also to enhance the ability of telomerase to elongate telomeric DNA. Similar results were found when these cell lines were independently derived and again assayed for protein expression, telomerase activity, cellular life span, and telomere length or when cells expressing low levels of hPot1-hTERT+128 were analyzed (data not shown).
The telomere-binding activity of hPot1 is required for rescue of hTERT+128.
To test whether the telomere-binding activity of hPot1 is required for rescue of hTERT+128, we generated Flag epitope-tagged mutants hPot1OB (lacking the OB-fold region of the protein) (29) and hPot13A (in which three conserved amino acids in the OB-fold region were mutated to alanines) (Fig. 4A). Both had a greatly reduced affinity for telomeric DNA in vitro, as there was a 10-fold decrease in the amount of hPot13A or hPot1OB recombinant proteins bound to the G-strand telomeric oligonucleotide despite the fact that wild-type hPot1 readily associated with this DNA in manner specific for the G strand, but not the C strand, of telomeric DNA (Fig. 4B and data not shown). Flag-tagged hPot1OB fused to Flag-tagged hTERT or hTERT+128 was still found to be telomeric by immunofluorescence analysis (data not shown), as expected on the basis of the association of this mutant with telomeric proteins (29). On the other hand, hPot13A fusion proteins failed to show punctate nuclear staining characteristic of telomere-binding proteins, suggesting a defect in telomere association, although this interpretation is tempered by the finding that hPot13A fusion proteins were more difficult to express in cells (Fig. 5A) and more cytoplasmic than hPot1-hTERT fusion proteins (data not shown).
|
OB-hTERT+128 (or, as a control, hPot13A-hTERT, hPot1OB-hTERT, hPot1-hTERT, or no transgene [vector]) was stably expressed in HA5 cells, as assessed by immunoblotting for the Flag epitope (Fig. 5A). These fusion proteins restored similar levels of telomerase activity to hTERT and hTERT+128, as assessed by dilution experiments (with the exception of hPot13A-hTERT+128, which exhibited a threefold decrease in enzyme activity compared to hTERT+128) (Fig. 5B). However, the presence of hPot13A does not appear to be detrimental to hTERT function in vivo, as expression of hPot13A-hTERT both extended the life span and stabilized the telomeres of HA5 cells. Fusion of hPot13A to hTERT+128 failed to prevent HA5 cells from losing telomeric DNA and entering crisis (Fig. 5C and D). These data suggest that telomere targeting of hPot1 is important for the rescue of the DAT mutant of hTERT, although the lower levels of telomerase activity and poorer expression might also contribute to the inability of hPot13A-hTERT+128 to arrest telomere shortening.
HA5 cells expressing hPot1OB-hTERT proliferated extensively (Fig. 5C) and had telomeres as long as those detected in cells expressing hPot1-hTERT (Fig. 3A and 5D), reflecting either efficient targeting of the fusion protein to telomeres or the ability of hPot1OB to independently promote telomere elongation or both. Consistent with these results, the same cells expressing hPot1OB-hTERT+128 proliferated beyond the point of crisis at which vector control and hTERT+128- and hPot13A-hTERT+128-expressing cells died, although we note an increase in the doubling time of the culture (Fig. 5C). Telomeres of hPot1OB-hTERT+128-expressing cells were initially long but then underwent a gradual decline over time (Fig. 5D) (unlike cells expressing hPot1-hTERT+128 or hPot1OB-hTERT, in which telomeres were stably maintained at a long length) (Fig. 3A and 5D). It therefore appears that fusion with hPot1OB rescues hTERT+128 by targeting the enzyme to telomere chromatin and not directly to telomeric DNA. However, this was not equivalent to the rescue by fusion with hPot1, which was more efficient at elongating telomeres and extending life span.
Rescue of hTERT+128 requires direct fusion to hPot1.
Expression of hPot1 in telomerase-positive 293 cells caused telomere elongation (Fig. 1B). This raises the possibility that the rescue of the DAT mutant of hTERT by fusion with hPot1 might be due to overexpression of hPot1 (in the form of a fusion protein), which alters telomere structure to favor access of telomerase to telomeres. In contradiction to such a model, hPot1 needs to be physically tethered to hTERT+128 to rescue the inability of this mutant protein to extend cell life span. HA5 cells stably expressing hPot1 and hTERT+128 in trans entered crisis and died with short telomeres in a fashion identical to that seen with control cells expressing hTERT+128 (Fig. 6). Even when telomeric chromatin was converted to an open state by the expression of hPot1OB, hTERT+128 could not extend cell life span. Specifically, telomeres were greatly elongated and cell life span was extended in HA5 cells coexpressing hPot1OB and wild-type hTERT (indicating altered telomere chromatin), whereas the same cells coexpressing hPot1OB and hTERT+128 were mortal and had short telomeres (Fig. 6).
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
OB was, as expected (29), also found to elongate telomeres, although we note that this mutant was more robust at increasing telomere length than wild-type hPot1 when expressed in 293 and HA5 (plus hTERT) cells, leading us to speculate that perhaps these two constructs induce telomere elongation by different mechanisms. For example, hPot1OB may disrupt the overall conformation of the telomere (i.e., the T loop) by inhibiting appropriate formation of telomere protein complexes. Conversely, hPot1 may displace G-strand DNA at the D loop, making the region more accessible to telomerase, or (since Cdc13p helps recruit telomerase to telomeres) (17) hPot1 may target telomerase to G-strand telomeric DNA. In the latter case, it is worth noting that fusion of both Cdc13p to S. cerevisiae TERT (Est2p) and hPot1 to hTERT led to telomere elongation (Fig. 3B) (17). Alternatively, it is also possible that overexpression of both proteins perturbs the same telomere protein complexes; because hPot1OB is not sequestered to the G strand, however, more of this protein is available to disrupt such complexes.
We suggest that the DAT domain is involved in telomere-telomerase associations in vivo. First, the phenotype of cells expressing hTERT with mutations in the DAT domain is consistent with an inability of hTERT to properly associate with telomeres in vivo (1, 3). Second, overexpression of proteins that associate with telomeres can rescue DAT mutants in yeast (19). Third, hTERT+128 fusion to two completely different telomere-binding proteins that bind to very different regions of telomeres rescues the inability of this mutant hTERT to elongate telomeres (Fig. 3) (2). This rescue depended on the ability of both fusion proteins to associate with telomeres in vivo (Fig. 5) (2) and could not be ascribed to the fusion generating a mutant telomere-binding protein that altered telomeric chromatin to favor access of telomerase to telomeres. How the DAT domain performs this function is not known. We show that targeting the hTERT+128 mutant to the telomere G-strand extension is the most efficient approach for rescue of the defects of this mutant. However, since the same mutant can be rescued almost as well by simply increasing the association of hTERT+128 with telomere chromatin (via fusion with hPot1OB), the DAT domain may be involved in a more general association with telomeres.
The DAT domain is nestled within a larger conserved N-terminal region termed domain I (18) or the GQ domain (41). This larger region can complement catalytic activity in trans of N-terminally deleted hTERT (6), and mutations to this region generally abolish catalytic activity or decrease enzyme processivity (1, 7, 28), possibly related the fact that domain I has a weak affinity for the hTR RNA component of telomerase (33). The N terminus of hTERT therefore appears to encode an essential activity—perhaps processivity (7). Although the DAT domain resides in domain I, the +128 mutant (or nearby mutants) has little or no effect on telomerase activity (1, 28) and, in the case of the +128 mutant, is rescued by targeting to telomere chromatin. We speculate that the DAT domain may be related to an essential function of domain I, possibly by promoting an association with telomere chromatin in vivo through interactions with telomeric proteins. In this regard, it is worth noting that DAT mutants in yeast are complemented by proteins that facilitate telomere-telomerase association (19).
|
ADDENDUM |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by NIH grant CA82481. B.N.A. is supported by a Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Predoctoral Fellowship. C.M.C. is a Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Scholar.
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionAddendumReferences |
|---|
2. Armbruster, B. N., K. T. Etheridge, D. Broccoli, and C. M. Counter. 2003. Putative telomere-recruiting domain in the catalytic subunit of human telomerase. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23:3237-3246.
3. Banik, S. S., C. Guo, A. C. Smith, S. S. Margolis, D. A. Richardson, C. A. Tirado, and C. M. Counter. 2002. C-terminal regions of the human telomerase catalytic subunit essential for in vivo enzyme activity. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:6234-6246.
4. Baumann, P., and T. R. Cech. 2001. Pot1, the putative telomere end-binding protein in fission yeast and humans. Science 292:1171-1175.
5. Baumann, P., E. Podell, and T. R. Cech. 2002. Human Pot1 (protection of telomeres) protein: cytolocalization, gene structure, and alternative splicing. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:8079-8087.
6. Beattie, T. L., W. Zhou, M. O. Robinson, and L. Harrington. 2001. Functional multimerization of the human telomerase reverse transcriptase. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21:6151-6160.
7. Beattie, T. L., W. Zhou, M. O. Robinson, and L. Harrington. 2000. Polymerization defects within human telomerase are distinct from telomerase RNA and TEP1 binding. Mol. Biol. Cell 11:3329-3340.
8. Bilaud, T., C. Brun, K. Ancelin, C. E. Koering, T. Laroche, and E. Gilson. 1997. Telomeric localization of TRF2, a novel human telobox protein. Nat. Genet. 17:236-239.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Blackburn, E. H. 1991. Structure and function of telomeres. Nature 350:569-573.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Blackburn, E. H. 2001. Switching and signaling at the telomere. Cell 106:661-673.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Broccoli, D., A. Smogorzewska, L. Chong, and T. de Lange. 1997. Human telomeres contain two distinct Myb-related proteins, TRF1 and TRF2. Nat. Genet. 17:231-235.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Bryan, T. M., A. Englezou, L. Dalla-Pozza, M. A. Dunham, and R. R. Reddel. 1997. Evidence for an alternative mechanism for maintaining telomere length in human tumors and tumor-derived cell lines. Nat. Med. 3:1271-1274.[CrossRef][Medline]
13. Cheung, P., K. G. Tanner, W. L. Cheung, P. Sassone-Corsi, J. M. Denu, and C. D. Allis. 2000. Synergistic coupling of histone H3 phosphorylation and acetylation in response to epidermal growth factor stimulation. Mol. Cell 5:905-915.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Colgin, L. M., K. Baran, P. Baumann, T. R. Cech, and R. R. Reddel. 2003. Human POT1 facilitates telomere elongation by telomerase. Curr. Biol. 13:942-946.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Counter, C. M., A. A. Avilion, C. E. Le Feuvre, N. G. Stewart, C. W. Greider, C. B. Harley, and S. Bacchetti. 1992. Telomere shortening associated with chromosome instability is arrested in immortal cells which express telomerase activity. EMBO J. 11:1921-1929.[Medline]
16. de Lange, T. 2002. Protection of mammalian telomeres. Oncogene 21:532-540.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Evans, S. K., and V. Lundblad. 1999. Est1 and Cdc13 as comediators of telomerase access. Science 286:117-120.
18. Friedman, K. L., and T. R. Cech. 1999. Essential functions of amino-terminal domains in the yeast telomerase catalytic subunit revealed by selection for viable mutants. Genes Dev. 13:2863-2874.
19. Friedman, K. L., J. J. Heit, D. M. Long, and T. R. Cech. 2003. N-terminal domain of yeast telomerase reverse transcriptase: recruitment of Est3p to the telomerase complex. Mol. Biol. Cell 14:1-13.
20. Garvik, B., M. Carson, and L. Hartwell. 1995. Single-stranded DNA arising at telomeres in cdc13 mutants may constitute a specific signal for the RAD9 checkpoint. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:6128-6138.[Abstract]
21. Gottschling, D. E., and V. A. Zakian. 1986. Telomere proteins: specific recognition and protection of the natural termini of Oxytricha macronuclear DNA. Cell 47:195-205.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Grandin, N., C. Damon, and M. Charbonneau. 2001. Ten1 functions in telomere end protection and length regulation in association with Stn1 and Cdc13. EMBO J. 20:1173-1183.[CrossRef][Medline]
23. Grandin, N., S. I. Reed, and M. Charbonneau. 1997. Stn1, a new Saccharomyces cerevisiae protein, is implicated in telomere size regulation in association with Cdc13. Genes Dev. 11:512-527.
24. Gray, J. T., D. W. Celander, C. M. Price, and T. R. Cech. 1991. Cloning and expression of genes for the Oxytricha telomere-binding protein: specific subunit interactions in the telomeric complex. Cell 67:807-814.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Griffith, J. D., L. Comeau, S. Rosenfield, R. M. Stansel, A. Bianchi, H. Moss, and T. de Lange. 1999. Mammalian telomeres end in a large duplex loop. Cell 97:503-514.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Horvath, M. P., V. L. Schweiker, J. M. Bevilacqua, J. A. Ruggles, and S. C. Schultz. 1998. Crystal structure of the Oxytricha nova telomere end binding protein complexed with single strand DNA. Cell 95:963-974.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Kim, N. W., and F. Wu. 1997. Advances in quantification and characterization of telomerase activity by the telomeric repeat amplification protocol (TRAP). Nucleic Acids Res. 25:2595-2597.
28. Lee, S. R., J. M. Y. Wong, and K. Collins. 2003. Human telomerase reverse transcriptase motifs required for elongation of a telomeric substrate. J. Biol. Chem. 278:52531-52536. [Online.]
29. Loayza, D., and T. De Lange. 2003. POT1 as a terminal transducer of TRF1 telomere length control. Nature 424:1013-1018.[CrossRef][Medline]
30. Mitchell, A. R., J. R. Gosden, and D. A. Miller. 1985. A cloned sequence, p82H, of the alphoid repeated DNA family found at the centromeres of all human chromosomes. Chromosoma 92:369-377.[CrossRef][Medline]
31. Mitton-Fry, R. M., E. M. Anderson, T. R. Hughes, V. Lundblad, and D. S. Wuttke. 2002. Conserved structure for single-stranded telomeric DNA recognition. Science 296:145-147.
32. Morgenstern, J. P., and H. Land. 1990. Advanced mammalian gene transfer: high titre retroviral vectors with multiple drug selection markers and a complementary helper-free packaging cell line. Nucleic Acids Res. 18:3587-3596.
33. Moriarty, T. J., S. Huard, S. Dupuis, and C. Autexier. 2002. Functional multimerization of human telomerase requires an RNA interaction domain in the N terminus of the catalytic subunit. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22:1253-1265.
34. Nakamura, T. M., and T. R. Cech. 1998. Reversing time: origin of telomerase. Cell 92:587-590.[Medline]
35. Pennock, E., K. Buckley, and V. Lundblad. 2001. Cdc13 delivers separate complexes to the telomere for end protection and replication. Cell 104:387-396.[CrossRef][Medline]
36. Smogorzewska, A., B. van Steensel, A. Bianchi, S. Oelmann, M. R. Schaefer, G. Schnapp, and T. de Lange. 2000. Control of human telomere length by TRF1 and TRF2. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:1659-1668.
37. Taggart, A. K., S. C. Teng, and V. A. Zakian. 2002. Est1p as a cell cycle-regulated activator of telomere-bound telomerase. Science 297:1023-1026.
38. van Steensel, B., and T. de Lange. 1997. Control of telomere length by the human telomeric protein TRF1. Nature 385:740-743.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Weinert, T. A., G. L. Kiser, and L. H. Hartwell. 1994. Mitotic checkpoint genes in budding yeast and the dependence of mitosis on DNA replication and repair. Genes Dev. 8:652-665.
40. Wong, J. M. Y., L. Kusdra, and K. Collins. 2002. Subnuclear shuttling of human telomerase induced by transformation and DNA damage. Nat. Cell Biol. 4:731-736.[CrossRef][Medline]
41. Xia, J., Y. Peng, I. S. Mian, and N. F. Lue. 2000. Identification of functionally important domains in the N-terminal region of telomerase reverse transcriptase. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:5196-5207.
42. Yeager, T. R., A. A. Neumann, A. Englezou, L. I. Huschtscha, J. R. Noble, and R. R. Reddel. 1999. Telomerase-negative immortalized human cells contain a novel type of promyelocytic leukemia (PML) body. Cancer Res. 59:4175-4179.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|
], hPot1
], hPot1
]; controls: hPot1-hTERT [
], hPot1-hTERT+128 [
], [hTERT+128 [
]) (C) and telomere length (as measured by Southern blotting analysis with a telomeric probe) (D) were monitored over time.
