Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, October 2006, p. 7056-7067, Vol. 26, No. 19
0270-7306/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.01033-06
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Shin-Il Kim,1,
Melissa L. Martowicz,1
Saumen Pal,1
Gerd A. Blobel,2 and
Emery H. Bresnick1*
University of Wisconsin Medical School, Department of Pharmacology, 1300 University Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53706,1 The Children's Hospital of Pennsylvania, Division of Hematology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 191042
Received 8 June 2006/ Accepted 12 July 2006
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Despite certain distinct biological functions, GATA-1 and GATA-2 redundantly regulate the development and/or survival of mouse embryonic erythroblasts (16) and share common molecular mechanisms. The C-terminal zinc fingers of both factors bind the (A/T)GATA(A/G) DNA motif (26, 34, 36). The N-terminal zinc fingers bind the coregulator Friend of GATA-1 (FOG-1) (8, 60) and have intrinsic DNA binding activity, with a preference for GATC and AGATCT, respectively (18, 40, 45). The GATA-1 zinc finger region also binds the histone acetyltransferases CBP/p300 (2).
Targeted deletion of Fog1 blocks erythroid maturation similarly to the Gata1 knockout (59, 60). Taken together with data obtained from altered-specificity mutants (8), the results establish FOG-1 as a key GATA-1 coregulator. GATA-1-mediated transcriptional activation often requires FOG-1, whereas GATA-1-mediated repression appears to always be FOG-1 dependent (8). Mutation of four of the nine FOG-1 zinc fingers abrogates GATA-1 binding (5), and the integrity of a single residue, V205, within the N-terminal zinc finger of GATA-1 is required for FOG-1 binding (8, 41). The FOG-1 N terminus binds the nucleosome remodeling and histone deacetylase complex (21), a common mediator of transcriptional repression (65). Three of the nine zinc fingers of FOG-1 bind transforming acidic coiled coil protein 3, which regulates FOG-1 subcellular localization (17, 52).
Although FOG-1 has not been reported to have sequence-specific DNA binding activity or to affect GATA-1 DNA binding activity, FOG-1 facilitates GATA-1 chromatin occupancy (30, 43) and GATA-2 displacement from certain chromatin sites (43). Analysis of chromatin occupancy in erythroid cells expressing endogenous GATA-2 or physiological levels of an estrogen receptor ligand binding domain fusion to GATA-1 (ER-GATA-1) revealed occupancy at identical regions of the ß-globin locus (23, 24). Only a small subset of the WGATAR motifs were occupied, suggesting an essential role for chromatin organization in regulating occupancy. FOG-1-dependent occupancy sites include the ßmajor promoter (30), which is transcribed in adult erythroid cells. FOG-1 is also required for GATA-1 to bring the far-upstream ß-globin locus control region (LCR) into proximity of the ßmajor promoter (61), which might reflect a FOG-1 requirement for full GATA-1 occupancy (30, 43) or a previously undescribed function.
Studies on Gata2 and ß-globin transcriptional regulation revealed the chromatin occupancy facilitator activity of FOG-1 (30, 43). GATA-1 directly represses Gata2 transcription by assembling complexes on 3.9 and 2.8 kb, and to a lesser extent 1.8 kb, regions relative to the Gata2 1S hematopoietic promoter (19, 35, 43). As GATA-2 occupies these regions in the transcriptionally active state, we proposed that GATA-2 confers positive autoregulation, and displacement of GATA-2 by GATA-1, termed a "GATA switch," abrogates autoregulation and induces broad histone deacetylation (19). FOG-1 is required for both the GATA switch (43) and post-GATA switch repression (21). GATA switches occur at multiple loci in erythroid cells (1, 43, 44).
The GATA
motifs of the 2.8 kb region of the Gata2 chromosomal
locus are functional in transfection
(35) and mouse
transgenesis (27) assays.
Gata2 promoter-lacZ transgenes require GATA motifs
within the 2.8 kb region for expression in multipotent
hematopoietic precursor cells
(27). However, bacterial
artificial chromosome transgenesis experiments indicate that sequences
100 to 150 kb upstream of Gata2 are required for
rescue of hematopoiesis in Gata2-null mice
(66), and previous
studies analyzed only GATA-1 occupancy and histone H3 and H4
acetylation (acH3 and acH4) to
40 kb upstream of the 1S
promoter (19,
35). We describe
far-upstream and intronic GATA factor-dependent enhancer elements at
which GATA switches occur and reveal unique mechanistic insights
regarding GATA factor function through dispersed complexes within an
endogenous chromosomal locus.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Primers. Primer sequences are available upon request.
Cell culture. G1E (63) and G1E-ER-GATA-1 stably expressing a GATA-1 fusion to the human estrogen receptor ligand binding domain (20) cells were maintained in Iscove's modified Dulbecco's medium (GIBCO/BRL) containing 2% penicillin-streptomycin (GIBCO/BRL), 2 U/ml erythropoietin, 120 nM monothioglycerol (Sigma), 0.6% conditioned medium from a Kit ligand-producing CHO cell line, and 15% fetal bovine serum (GIBCO/BRL). G1E-ER-GATA-1 cell medium contained 1 µg/ml puromycin. Mouse erythroleukemia (MEL) cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Biofluids) containing 5% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 5% calf serum, and 1% antibiotic-antimycotic (all components from GIBCO/BRL). NIH 3T3 cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Biofluids) containing 10% fetal bovine serum and 1% antibiotic-antimycotic.
Quantitative ChIP assay.
Real-time PCR
quantitative chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) analysis was
conducted as described previously
(22). Chromatin fragments
averaged
400 bp. Before ß-estradiol treatment, cells
were grown for at least 24 h in medium containing 15%
charcoal-stripped FBS to eliminate steroids. Cells were cultured in
medium containing 15% FBS with or without 1 µM
ß-estradiol (Sigma) for 48 h. Immunoprecipitated DNA
was analyzed by real-time PCR (ABI Prism 7000, PE Applied Biosystems).
Primers were designed by PRIMER EXPRESS 1.0 (PE Applied Biosystems) to
amplify 50- to 150-bp amplicons and were based on sequence from GenBank
accession no. AB009272 and sequences in Ensembl
(www.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/geneview?gene=ENSMUSG00000015053).
Samples from three or more independent experiments were analyzed.
Product was measured by SYBR green fluorescence in 15-µl
reaction volumes. The amount of product was determined relative to a
standard curve of input chromatin. Dissociation curves confirmed the
homogeneity of PCR products.
RNA isolation and RT-PCR. RNA was prepared from the same cultures used for ChIP. Total RNA was purified with TRIzol (GIBCO/BRL). Before cDNA synthesis, RNA (1.2 µg) was treated with RQ1 DNase (Promega) for 30 min at 37°C. cDNA was prepared by annealing RNA (1 µg) with 250 ng of a 5:1 mixture of random and oligo(dT) primers preheated at 68°C for 10 min. This was followed by incubation with reverse transcriptase (Superscript II; GIBCO/BRL) combined with 10 mM dithiothreitol (DTT), RNasin (Promega), and 0.5 mM deoxynucleoside triphosphates at 42°C for 1 h. Reactions were diluted to a final volume of 150 µl and heat inactivated at 98°C for 5 min. Reactions (15 µl) contained 2.0 µl of cDNA, 7.5 µl SYBR Green (Applied Biosystems), and the appropriate primers. Product accumulation was monitored by using SYBR Green fluorescence. Control reactions lacking reverse transcriptase (RT) yielded very little to no signal. Relative expression levels were determined from a standard curve of serial dilutions of untreated G1E-ER-GATA cDNA samples. Forward and reverse primers for real-time RT-PCR (5'-3'): Gapdh, GAAGGTACGGAGTCAACGGATTT and GAATTTGACCATGGGTGGAAT; Gata2-exon3/4, GCAGAGAAGCAAGGCTCGC and CAGTTGACACACTCCCGGC; Rpn1-exon 4/5, CTGACAGTGGGATCTCCTCCAT and CAATCTCATCCCGGTAATAGACATC; Rab7-exon3/4, GGTGATGGTGGACGACAGACT and GCCACACCAAGAGACTGGAAC.
Transient transfection and luciferase assays. DNA (4 µg) was diluted in 500 µl of Opti-MEM1 reduced-serum medium per well. DMRIE-C (4 µl) (Invitrogen) was diluted in 500 µl Opti-MEM1 reduced-serum medium per well. The DNA solution was combined with the DMRIE-C solution and incubated at room temperature for 30 min. G1E and MEL cells were isolated by centrifugation at 240 x g for 8 min at 4°C. Cells were diluted to 5 x 106 per ml with Opti-MEM1 reduced-serum medium. One million cells were added per well and incubated for 4.5 h at 37°C. Iscove's modified Dulbecco's medium supplemented with 15% FBS (G1E) or Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 7.5% FBS and 7.5% calf serum (MEL) was added (2 ml). Cells were incubated for 48 h at 37°C, isolated by centrifugation at 240 x g at 4°C, and washed with phosphate-buffered saline. Lysates were analyzed for luciferase activity and protein concentration, and luciferase activity was normalized by the protein concentration of the lysate.
Microarray amplicon generation and ChIP-chip analysis. The generation of amplicons from the individual ChIPs was adapted from published protocols (25, 47). Briefly, G1E-ER-GATA cells were grown in charcoal-stripped FBS-containing medium, as described above, before treatment with 1 µM ß-estradiol for 48 h. Cells were cross-linked with 1% formaldehyde for 10 min. DNA isolated from ChIP was blunted with T4 DNA polymerase. Two unidirectional linkers, oligoJW102 (GCGGTGACCCGGGAGATCTGAATTC) and oligoJW103 (GAATTCAGATC) were annealed and ligated to the blunted DNA samples. Amplicons were created by PCR; each sample consisted of 5 µl of 10x Taq polymerase buffer, 1 µl of 40 mM deoxynucleoside triphosphates, 3 µl of 25 mM MgCl2, 6.5 µl of 5 M betaine, 1 µl of oligoJW102 (20 µM), 1 µl of Taq (Promega, M1861), and 25 µl of the blunt-ended and ligated chromatin. PCR was run with one cycle at 95°C for 2 min, 55°C for 2 min, and 72°C for 5 min. Twenty-six cycles were then run at 95°C for 0.5 min, 55°C for 0.5 min, and 72°C for 1 min. Finally the products were extended at 72°C for 4 min and then held at 4°C until purified using the QIAquick PCR purification kit according to the manufacturer's instructions. DNA was reamplified (2 µl) for 20 cycles under the conditions above and purified. Samples were quantitated and analyzed via hybridization by Nimblegen. A tiled microarray containing a portion of chromosome 6 (88,423,000 to 88,643,000) containing the Gata2 locus (88,528,257 to 88,541,604) was generated by Nimblegen. The microarray was constructed using 50-bp probes with a 3-bp interval between the 5' end of a probe and the 5' end of the next probe on the microarray.
3C assay.
Chromosome conformation capture (3C)
analysis was conducted as described previously, except that NcoI was
used to digest chromatin
(61). The following
primers were used to analyze ligation products: 109 kb,
TAGGATTGATTGAGCTGTCAGCAGAGCTGG; 77 kb,
GCTGGGATTACACCACACTCAACCAGAAAG; 23 kb,
AGCCTACACCTCCACATTATAGTCCATCAC; 2.8 kb,
TCAGTGTCAACCAAAGCAATAGCTCCGCAG; 1S,
AAAGAGGGAAATTACCTGCTCCGGGCGAG; +9.5 kb,
TGCCGGTCCGGAAACAGATACACGAAGTTT; +25 kb
ACTTCTCCAATGGCTACCTGCATTATCCGC;
-tubulin,
TGCATGGTGGCTCTTCTTAGCTCTGGATAG and
AGAATTCCAGACCAACCTGGTACCCTACT; ß-globin
HS3, AGTTCTGCAGATCAGTGCCCAACAGTTCAG;
ßmajor and ßminor,
TCAGGATCCACATGCAGCTTGTCACAGTG.
DNase I hypersensitive site analysis. G1E-ER-GATA-1 cells were treated with 1 µM tamoxifen or left untreated for 23 h. Cells (2 x 107 per condition) were collected by centrifugation at 240 x g for 10 min at 4°C. Cells were washed with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline and resuspended in 1.5 volumes of lysis buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl, 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl2, 0.2% NP-40, 5 mM DTT, 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 20 µg/ml leupeptin, pH 7.5) and incubated for 5 min on ice. Nuclei were collected by centrifugation at 500 x g for 5 min at 4°C, resuspended in 1.5 volumes of nuclei wash buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl, 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl2, 5 mM DTT, 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 20 µg/ml leupeptin, pH 7.5), and collected by centrifugation. Nuclei were resuspended in 1 ml nuclei wash buffer and were divided into 200-µl aliquots, and DNase I digestion was initiated by addition of 0, 5, 7.5, or 15 U DNase I (Worthington). Reactions were incubated for 8 min at 37°C and terminated by addition of 0.5 ml SDS stop buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl, 25 mM EDTA, 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate, pH 8.0) with vigorous mixing. Proteinase K (Promega) was added to a final concentration of 0.4 mg/ml, and reactions were incubated for at least 15 h at 37°C. Genomic DNA (20 µg) was digested with 5 U/µg EcoRI in a 100-µl volume for 15 h at 37°C. Genomic DNA fragments were used as size markers. The fragments were generated by sequential digestion of genomic DNA with BanI followed by XhoI, XbaI, or BanI alone. Equal amounts of DNA (20 µg or 4 µg for markers) were resolved on a 1.0% agarose gel and analyzed by Southern blotting with a high-specific-activity random-primed 32P-labeled probe. After high-stringency washing, radioactivity was measured by PhosphorImager analysis with ImageQuant software (Molecular Dynamics). The probe spanning the 74.2 kb to 77.9 kb region of Gata2 was generated by PCR amplification of plasmid DNA containing a portion of the upstream sequence of the Gata2 locus using the primers (5' to 3') GCACCCATGCCTGTTTGTGCCCTTTG and GGTGATCTGAGAAATCAGTGTCATAAAGCCAGAC.
| RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
100 kb upstream and downstream for ChIP-chip analysis to
comprehensively analyze ER-GATA-1 occupancy at the endogenous
Gata2 locus in GATA-1-null G1E cells stably expressing
ER-GATA-1 (G1E-ER-GATA-1). Cross-linked
ER-GATA-1-chromatin complexes were immunoprecipitated with
anti-GATA-1 antibody. DNA immunoprecipitated with preimmune or
anti-GATA-1 antibodies was hybridized to the Gata2 locus
microarray using established ChIP-chip methodology
(25).
ER-GATA-1
occupied the 3.9 to 2.8 kb region (Fig.
1), as expected from our previous quantitative ChIP analyses
(19,
35). ER-GATA-1
also occupied a highly conserved region 77 kb upstream of the 1S
promoter (Fig. 1).
Occupancy was not detected, however, at other highly conserved regions,
both upstream and downstream of Gata2 (Fig.
1). Based on the
simplicity of the WGATAR motif, 264 motifs reside within the
220-kb tiled sequence. GATA-1 can also bind simple derivatives
of this motif on naked DNA templates; 382, 465, and 688 nGATAR, WGATAn,
and nGATAn motifs, respectively, reside within the tiled region. Thus,
the exquisite specificity of GATA motif occupancy at a small subset of
the regions containing GATA motifs is analogous to results from studies
of ER-GATA-1 and endogenous GATA-2 occupancy at the
ß-globin locus
(23,
24).
|
|
The
77 kb region resides
33 kb downstream of the
Rpn1 promoter, and Rab7 is
39 kb upstream of
Rpn1. Conceivably, the GATA switch at the 77 kb
region might regulate Rpn1 and Rab7 transcription
rather than that of Gata2. A rigorous Affymetrix microarray
analysis of ER-GATA-1-mediated gene expression changes showed
that Rpn1 decreased slightly (
2-fold) by 14
h of ß-estradiol treatment and did not change further by
30 h (64).
Rab7 expression was constant for up to 30 h. To
ensure that these microarray results are relevant to our culture
conditions, real-time RT-PCR was used to quantitate Rab7 and
Rpn1 mRNA levels. Rab7 and Rpn1 expression
was constant under conditions in which ER-GATA-1 activation
strongly repressed Gata2 transcription (Fig.
3). These results are inconsistent with a role for the 77 kb GATA
factor complexes in regulating Rab7 and
Rpn1.
|
It is instructive to compare how ER-GATA-1 instigates Gata2 repression versus ßmajor activation. At the ß-globin locus, ER-GATA-1 occupies the DNase I hypersensitive sites (HSs) of the LCR prior to the ßmajor promoter. Moreover, low-level ER-GATA-1 activity is sufficient for occupancy at the HSs but not the promoter (23). We tested whether ER-GATA-1 occupies the 77 kb region prior to the 3.9, 2.8, and +9.5 kb regions, analogous to the sequential occupancy at the ß-globin locus, or if occupancy at the 77, 3.9, 2.8, and +9.5 kb regions occurs concomitantly (Fig. 4A). Graded ER-GATA-1 activation with increasing concentrations of ß-estradiol resulted in concentration-dependent occupancy at the 77 kb region, which differed only slightly from the 3.9, 2.8, and +9.5 kb regions (Fig. 4B). Thus, by contrast to the ß-globin locus, comparable ER-GATA-1 activity is required for occupancy at the multiple GATA switch sites of the Gata2 locus.
|
As described previously
(19), ER-GATA-1
activation decreased acH3 and acH4 at the Gata2 1S promoter,
open reading frame, and extending
4 kb upstream of the
promoter (Fig. 5A to
C). By contrast, enriched acH3 and acH4 at the 77 kb region was
insensitive to ER-GATA-1 activation. H3-dimeK4 was constant at
most sites but increased twofold or less at the 1G promoter (Fig.
5D). Intriguingly,
ER-GATA-1 occupancy exerts spatially restricted deacetylation
at GATA switch sites near the 1S promoter but not at the 77 kb
region. Treatment of uninduced G1E-ER-GATA-1 cells for 2 h
with the transcriptional elongation inhibitor
5,6-dichloro-1-ß-D-ribofuranosylbenzimidazole, which
abrogated RNA polymerase II accumulation within Gata2 exon 3,
did not significantly reduce acH3 and acH4 at the 2.8 kb,
77 kb, and exon 3 regions (data not shown). This result
suggests that ER-GATA-1-dependent deacetylation at and near
Gata2 is not a consequence of reduced transcriptional
elongation.
|
GATA factor occupancy sites in chromatin are commonly DNase I HSs, and HSs often demarcate functional complexes. We tested whether the 77 kb GATA switch site corresponds to an HS. High-resolution Southern blot analysis indicated the presence of an HS at the 77 kb region (77.1 to 77.2) in both the active and repressed locus, with the signals being slightly higher at the repressed locus (Fig. 6).
|
The
77 kb region contains TGATAA, GGATAC, and TGATAGATAG motifs
(Fig.
7A), which could potentially mediate the GATA factor occupancy described in
Fig. 1 and
2. The 77 kb
region, with or without mutations of these motifs, was cloned upstream
of the Gata2 1S promoter fused to a luciferase reporter gene.
The 77 kb region stimulated reporter activity in both G1E and
MEL cells (Fig. 7B).
Mutation of the TGATAA motif abrogated enhancer activity, whereas
mutations of the GGATAC and TGATAGATAG motifs had no effect. Thus, a
single GATA motif within the 77 kb region confers enhancer
activity in GATA-1- and GATA-2-expressing cells; the additional GATA
motifs had no apparent functional role. Furthermore, the results
indicate that GATA-2 and GATA-1 function redundantly through this
isolated element in the transfection assay. As described previously
(35), the 3.9 kb
region conferred enhancer activity in MEL, but not G1E, cells (Fig.
7B). The enhancer activity
of the 77 kb region in both G1E and MEL cells also differs
from the 2.8 and 1.8 kb regions analyzed previously
(35) (Fig.
7C). Unlike other GATA
switch sites, the +9.5 kb region exhibited very strong enhancer
activity in G1E cells (30-fold), stronger than any other enhancers
studied in this system. The +9.5 kb region also conferred
enhancer activity in MEL cells, comparable to that of the 77
kb region, but the magnitude of this activity was
5-fold less
than in G1E cells.
|
Based on the differential ER-GATA-1
sensitivities of acH3 and acH4 and differential enhancer activities of
the 77 kb region versus the downstream GATA switch sites, we
tested whether the composition of ER-GATA-1-dependent
nucleoprotein complexes assembled at these regions differ. Previously,
we showed that ER-GATA-1 decreased CBP/p300 occupancy at the
1.8 kb region, which correlated with loss of DNase I
hypersensitivity at this region
(19,
35). CBP/p300 occupancy
at the 3.9 kb region increased slightly upon ER-GATA-1
activation after 24 h. Quantitative ChIP was used to
determine whether CBP/p300 occupies the 77 kb region prior to
and after ER-GATA-1 activation in G1E-ER-GATA-1 cells. CBP/p300
occupied the 77 kb region at a higher level than at the
3.9, 1.8, and +9.5 GATA switch sites in
untreated cells (Fig.
8). Few to no signals were detected at a 46 kb amplicon, which
lacks known regulatory sequences. ER-GATA-1 activation for
48 h increased occupancy at the 3.9 and +9.5
kb GATA switch sites (twofold or less). Occupancy at the 77
region was relatively constant, whereas occupancy at the 1.8
kb region decreased
2-fold. As the ER-GATA-1-dependent
changes in CBP/p300 occupancy (Fig.
8) and histone acetylation
(Fig. 5) do not correlate
precisely, it is highly unlikely that CBP/p300 is the sole coregulator
mediating establishment of the histone acetylation pattern of the
Gata2 locus. Importantly, the differential CBP/p300
recruitment to the 77, 3.9, and +9.5 kb
regions versus the 1.8 kb region further highlights intrinsic
qualitative differences in the GATA switch site
activities.
|
To distinguish among the potential mechanisms described above, 3C analysis (9-11) was conducted to measure the proximity of the 77 kb region relative to the 2.8 and +9.5 kb GATA switch sites, the 1S promoter, and 23 and +25 kb regions lacking known regulatory elements (Fig. 9A). Real-time PCR analysis of NcoI cleavage efficiencies revealed similar efficiencies at the various sites, except the 25 kb site, in which cleavage was lower (Fig. 9B). A decrease in the relative proximity of 77 versus 2.8 and the 1S promoter was detected in all experiments (Fig. 9C). A declining 3C signal as a function of distance is diagnostic of a scenario whereby upstream and downstream regions are not in close proximity (10). By contrast, analysis of the relative proximity of the 77 and +9.5 kb regions yielded a reproducible upward shift in the curve, consistent with the 77 kb region residing closer to the +9.5 kb region relative to other regions tested. The differential ligation of NcoI fragments cannot be explained by variable cleavage (Fig. 9B). Importantly, these results provide evidence for the existence of a chromatin loop in which the upstream 77 kb region communicates with Gata2.
|
Although only a limited number of loci have been studied by 3C, loci can adopt static higher-order structures in both transcriptionally active and inactive states (53), or such structures can be dynamically regulated (13, 61). Ifng adopts a common higher-order chromatin conformation in neutral, Th1, and Th2 T-cells, but secondary stimulation of the cells is associated with remodeling of the common conformation (14). Of course, an apparent static structure might be highly dynamic and/or subject to more subtle structural transitions not detectable by 3C. The static higher-order chromatin scenario is conceptually analogous to the Drosophila melanogaster hsp26 locus, a considerably simpler scenario in which a positioned nucleosome at the promoter serves an architectural function to bring regulatory elements in close proximity, thereby creating a permissive chromatin structure (33, 54). Thus, permissive structures involving a single nucleosome or a broad segment of a locus facilitate transcriptional activation, but establishment of the structure is insufficient to induce preinitiation complex assembly.
It is attractive to propose that the ER-GATA-1 insensitivity of the higher-order chromatin interaction is explained by the presence of GATA-2 and FOG-1 at the GATA switch sites in untreated G1E-ER-GATA-1 cells. Either GATA-2 or ER-GATA-1, in conjunction with FOG-1, would therefore establish the higher-order chromatin conformation. However, since GATA-2 and ER-GATA-1 reside at the GATA switch sites near the 1S promoter and the 77 kb region exhibited a closer apparent proximity to the +9.5 kb GATA switch site than to those near the promoter, the mere presence of GATA factor-FOG-1 complexes appears insufficient to establish a higher-order chromatin interaction, based on what can be measured via 3C analysis.
Chromatin domain regulation via qualitatively distinct activities of dispersed GATA factor complexes. Herein, we described the identification of a far upstream GATA switch site at the endogenous Gata2 locus. The ER-GATA-1-insensitivity of the upstream Rpn1 and Rab7 genes, the capacity of the 77 kb region to enhance Gata2 1S promoter activity, and the proximity of the 77 kb region to Gata2 provide strong evidence that the 77 kb region regulates Gata2 transcription. Intriguingly, measurements of the ER-GATA-1 sensitivity of histone acetylation, enhancer activities, and nucleoprotein structure indicate that the GATA switch sites of the Gata2 locus have important intrinsic differences, which might reflect qualitatively distinct functions. The multiple lines of evidence implicating the 77 kb region in Gata2 transcriptional regulation, combined with the bacterial artificial chromosome transgenesis data discussed earlier (66), strongly support a model in which Gata2 transcriptional regulation requires long-range chromatin interactions.
Although long-range regulation conferred by dispersed GATA factor complexes appears to be common to both ß-globin locus and Gata2 transcriptional regulation (3), our studies have identified important distinctions. ER-GATA-1 occupies upstream and downstream regions of the Gata2 locus concomitantly (Fig. 4), whereas occupancy at upstream and downstream regions of the ß-globin chromatin domain occurs sequentially (23). Furthermore, by contrast to the ß-globin locus in which ER-GATA-1 solely enhances CBP/p300 occupancy (31), ER-GATA-1 has variable effects on CBP/p300 occupancy at the Gata2 locus: little to no effect at the 77 kb region, increased occupancy at the 3.9 and +9.5 kb regions, and decreased occupancy at the 1.8 kb region (Fig. 8). It will be particularly instructive to extend the comparison of ER-GATA-1-mediated ß-globin activation with Gata2 repression to include a larger cohort of GATA factor target genes and to consider the impact of higher-order chromatin structure transitions in the context of the three-dimensional space of the nucleus.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was funded by NIH grants DK50107 and DK68634. Saumen Pal is a postdoctoral fellow of the American Heart Association.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
These authors contributed equally to this work. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Blobel,
G. A., T. Nakajima, R. Eckner, M. Montminy, and S.
H. Orkin. 1998. CREB-binding protein cooperates with
transcription factor GATA-1 and is required for erythroid
differentiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:2061-2066.
3. Bresnick, E. H., K. D. Johnson, S.-I. Kim, and H. Im.2006 . Establishment and regulation of chromatin domains: mechanistic insights from studies of hemoglobin synthesis. Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol. 81:435-471.
4. Bresnick, E. H., M. L. Martowicz, S. Pal, and K. D. Johnson. 2005. Developmental control via GATA factor interplay at chromatin domains. J. Cell. Physiol. 205:1-9.[CrossRef][Medline]
5. Cantor,
A. B., S. G. Katz, and S. H. Orkin.2002
. Distinct domains of the GATA-1 cofactor
FOG-1 differentially influence erythroid versus megakaryocytic
maturation. Mol. Cell. Biol.
22:4268-4279.
6. Cantor, A. B., and S. H. Orkin. 2002. Transcriptional regulation of erythropoiesis: an affair involving multiple partners. Oncogene 21:3368-3376.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Carter, D., L. Chakalova, C. S. Osborne, Y. F. Dai, and P. Fraser. 2002. Long-range chromatin regulatory interactions in vivo. Nat. Genet. 32:623-626.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Crispino, J. D., M. B. Lodish, J. P. MacKay, and S. H. Orkin. 1999. Use of altered specificity mutants to probe a specific protein-protein interaction in differentiation: the GATA-1:FOG complex. Mol. Cell 3:219-228.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Cullen,
K. E., M. P. Kladde, and M. A.
Seyfred. 1993. Interaction between transcriptional
regulatory elements of prolactin chromatin. Science
261:203-206.
10. Dekker, J. 2006. The three cs of chromosome conformation capture: controls, controls, controls. Nat. Methods 3:17-21.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Dekker,
J., K. Rippe, M. Dekker, and N. Kleckner. 2002.
Capturing chromosome conformation. Science
295:1306-1311.
12. Dorfman,
D. M., D. B. Wilson, G. A. Bruns, and
S. H. Orkin. 1992. Human transcription
factor GATA-2. Evidence for regulation of preproendothelin-1 gene
expression in endothelial cells. J. Biol.
Chem.
267:1279-1285.
13. Drissen,
R., R. J. Palstra, N. Gillemans, E. Splinter, F. Grosveld, S.
Philipsen, and W. de Laat. 2004.
The active spatial organization of the beta-globin locus requires the
transcription factor EKLF. Genes Dev.
18:2485-2490.
14. Eivazova,
E. R., and T. M. Aune. 2004.
Dynamic alterations in the conformation of the Ifng gene region during
T helper cell differentiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA
101:251-256.
15. Evans, T., and G. Felsenfeld. 1989. The erythroid-specific transcription factor Eryf1: a new finger protein. Cell 58:877-885.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Fujiwara,
Y., A. N. Chang, A. M. Williams, and S.
H. Orkin. 2004. Functional overlap of GATA-1 and
GATA-2 in primitive hematopoietic development. Blood
103:583-585.
17. Garriga-Canut,
M., and S. H. Orkin. 2004. Transforming
acidic coiled-coil protein 3 (TACC3) controls friend of GATA-1 (FOG-1)
subcellular localization and regulates the association between GATA-1
and FOG-1 during hematopoiesis. J. Biol. Chem.
279:23597-23605.
18. Ghirlando,
R., and C. D. Trainor. 2003. Determinants of
GATA-1 binding to DNA: the role of non-finger residues.J. Biol. Chem.
278:45620-45628.
19. Grass,
J. A., M. E. Boyer, S. Paul, J. Wu, M. J.
Weiss, and E. H. Bresnick. 2003.
GATA-1-dependent transcriptional repression of GATA-2 via disruption of
positive autoregulation and domain-wide chromatin remodeling.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
100:8811-8816.
20. Gregory,
T., C. Yu, A. Ma, S. H. Orkin, G. A. Blobel, and
M. J. Weiss. 1999. GATA-1 and erythropoietin
cooperate to promote erythroid cell survival by regulating bcl-xl
expression. Blood
94:87-96.
21. Hong, W., M. Nakazawa, Y. Y. Chen, R. Kori, C. R. Vakoc, C. Rakowski, and G. A. Blobel. 2005. FOG-1 recruits the NuRD repressor complex to mediate transcriptional repression by GATA-1. EMBO J. 24:67-78.
22. Im, H., J. A. Grass, K. D. Johnson, M. E. Boyer, J. Wu, and E. H. Bresnick. 2004. Measurement of protein-DNA interactions in vivo by chromatin immunoprecipitation. Methods Mol. Biol. 284:129-146.[Medline]
23. Im,
H., J. A. Grass, K. D. Johnson, S.-I. Kim,
M. E. Boyer, A. N. Imbalzano, J. J.
Bieker, and E. H. Bresnick. 2005. Chromatin
domain activation via GATA-1 utilization of a small subset of dispersed
GATA motifs within a broad chromosomal region. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA
102:17065-17070.
24. Johnson,
K. D., J. D. Grass, M. E. Boyer,
C. M. Kiekhaefer, G. A. Blobel, M. J.
Weiss, and E. H. Bresnick. 2002. Cooperative
activities of hematopoietic regulators recruit RNA polymerase II to a
tissue-specific chromatin domain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA
99:11760-11765.
25. Kirmizis,
A., S. M. Bartley, A. Kuzmichev, R. Margueron, D. Reinberg,
R. Green, and P. J. Farnham. 2004. Silencing
of human polycomb target genes is associated with methylation of
histone H3 Lys 27. Genes Dev.
18:1592-1605.
26. Ko,
L. J., and J. D. Engel. 1993.
DNA-binding specificities of the GATA transcription factor family.Mol. Cell. Biol.
13:4011-4022.
27. Kobayashi-Osaki,
M., O. Ohneda, N. Suzuki, N. Minegishi, T. Yokomizo, S. Takahashi,
K.-C. Lim, J. D. Engel, and M. Yamamoto.2005
. GATA motifs regulate early hematopoietic
lineage-specific expression of the Gata2 gene. Mol.
Cell. Biol.
25:7005-7020.
28. Lee,
M. E., D. H. Temizer, J. A. Clifford, and
T. Quertermous. 1991. Cloning of the GATA binding
protein that regulates endothelin-1 gene expression in endothelial
cells. J. Biol. Chem.
266:16188-16192.
29. Leonard,
M., M. Brice, J. D. Engel, and T. Papayannopoulou.1993
. Dynamics of GATA transcription factor expression
during erythroid differentiation. Blood
82:1071-1079.
30. Letting,
D. L., Y. Y. Chen, C. Rakowski, S. Reedy, and
G. A. Blobel. 2004. Context-dependent
regulation of GATA-1 by friend of GATA-1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA
101:476-481.
31. Letting,
D. L., C. Rakowski, M. J. Weiss, and G.
A. Blobel. 2003. Formation of a tissue-specific
histone acetylation pattern by the hematopoietic transcription factor
GATA-1. Mol. Cell. Biol.
23:1334-1340.
32. Ling,
K. W., K. Ottersbach, J. P. van Hamburg, A.
Oziemlak, F. Y. Tsai, S. H. Orkin, R. Ploemacher,
R. W. Hendriks, and E. Dzierzak. 2004.
GATA-2 plays two functionally distinct roles during the ontogeny of
hematopoietic stem cells. J. Exp. Med.
200:871-882.
33. Lu, Q., L. L. Wallrath, and S. C. Elgin.1995 . The role of a positioned nucleosome at the Drosophila melanogaster hsp26 promoter. EMBO J. 14:4738-4746.[Medline]
34. Martin,
D. I., and S. H. Orkin. 1990.
Transcriptional activation and DNA binding by the erythroid factor
GF-1/NF-E1/Eryf 1. Genes Dev.
4:1886-1898.
35. Martowicz,
M. L., J. A. Grass, M. E. Boyer, H.
Guend, and E. H. Bresnick. 2005. Dynamic
GATA factor interplay at a multi-component regulatory region of the
GATA-2 locus. J. Biol. Chem.
280:1724-1732.
36. Merika,
M., and S. H. Orkin. 1993. DNA-binding
specificity of GATA family transcription factors. Mol. Cell.
Biol.
13:3999-4010.
37. Minegishi,
N., J. Ohta, H. Yamagiwa, N. Suzuki, S. Kawauchi, Y. Zhou, S.
Takahashi, N. Hayashi, J. D. Engel, and M. Yamamoto.1999
. The mouse GATA-2 gene is expressed in the
para-aortic splanchnopleura and aorta-gonads and mesonephros region.Blood
93:4196-4207.
38. Mouthon,
M. A., O. Bernard, M. T. Mitjavila, P. H.
Romeo, W. Vainchenker, and D. Mathieu-Mahul. 1993.
Expression of Tal-1 and GATA-binding proteins during human
hematopoiesis. Blood
81:647-655.
39. Nardelli, J., D. Thiesson, Y. Fujiwara, F.-Y. Tsai, and S. H. Orkin. 1999. Expression and genetic interaction of transcription factors GATA-2 and GATA-3 during development of the mouse central nervous system. Dev. Biol. 210:305-321.[CrossRef][Medline]
40. Newton,
A., J. P. MacKay, and M. Crossley. 2001. The
N-terminal zinc finger of the erythroid transcription factor GATA-1
binds GATC motifs in DNA. J. Biol. Chem.
276:35794-35801.
41. Nichols, K. E., J. D. Crispino, M. Poncz, J. G. White, S. H. Orkin, J. M. Maris, and M. J. Weiss. 2000. Familial dyserythropoietic anaemia and thrombocytopenia due to an inherited mutation in GATA-1. Nat. Genet. 24:266-270.[CrossRef][Medline]
42. Orlic,
D., S. Anderson, L. G. Biesecker, B. P. Sorrentino,
and D. M. Bodine. 1995. Pluripotent
hematopoietic stem cells contain high levels of mRNA for c Kit, GATA-2,
p45 NF-E2, and myb and low levels or no RNA for c-fms and the
receptors for granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor and
interleukins 5 and 7. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:4601.
43. Pal,
S., A. B. Cantor, K. D. Johnson, T. Moran,
M. E. Boyer, S. H. Orkin, and E. H.
Bresnick. 2004. Coregulator-dependent facilitation of
chromatin occupancy by GATA-1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA
101:980-985.
44. Pal,
S., M. J. Nemeth, D. M. Bodine, J. L.
Miller, J. Svaren, S. L. Thein, P. J. Lowry, and
E. H. Bresnick. 2004. Neurokinin-B
transcription in erythroid cells: direct activation by the
hematopoietic transcription factor GATA-1. J. Biol.
Chem.
279:31348-31356.
45. Pedone, P. V., J. G. Omichinski, P. Nony, C. Trainor, A. M. Gronenborn, G. M. Clore, and G. Felsenfeld. 1997. The N-terminal fingers of chicken GATA-2 and GATA-3 are independent sequence-specific DNA binding domains. EMBO J. 16:2874-2882.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Pevny, L., M. C. Simon, E. Robertson, W. H. Klein, S. F. Tsai, V. D'Agati, S. H. Orkin, and F. Costantini. 1991. Erythroid differentiation in chimaeric mice blocked by a targeted mutation in the gene for transcription factor GATA-1. Nature 349:257-260.[CrossRef][Medline]
47. Ren,
B., F. Robert, J. J. Wyrick, O. Aparicio, E. G.
Jennings, I. Simon, J. Zeitlinger, J. Schreiber, N. Hannett, E. Kanin,
T. L. Volkert, C. J. Wilson, S. P. Bell,
and R. A. Young. 2000. Genome-wide location
and function of DNA binding proteins. Science
290:2306-2309.
48. Reznikoff,
C. A., D. W. Brankow, and C. Heidelberger.1973
. Establishment and characterization of a cloned line
of C3H mouse embryo cells sensitive to postconfluence inhibition of
division. Cancer Res.
33:3231-3238.
49. Rodriquez, P., E. Bonte, J. Krijgsveld, K. E. Kolodziej, B. Guyot, A. J. Heck, P. Vyas, E. de Boer, F. Grosveld, and J. Strouboulis. 2005. GATA-1 forms distinct activating and repressive complexes in erythroid cells. EMBO J. 24:2354-2366.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Schleif, R. 1992. DNA looping. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 61:199-223.[CrossRef][Medline]
51. Simon, M. C., L. Pevny, M. V. Wiles, G. Keller, F. Costantini, and S. H. Orkin.1992 . Rescue of erythroid development in gene targeted GATA-1- mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat. Genet. 1:92-98.[CrossRef][Medline]
52. Simpson,
R. J., S. H. Yi Lee, N. Bartle, E. Y.
Sum, J. E. Visvader, J. M. Matthews, J.
P. MacKay, and M. Crossley. 2004. A classic zinc
finger from friend of GATA mediates an interaction with the coiled-coil
of transforming acidic coiled-coil 3. J. Biol.
Chem.
279:39789-39797.
53. Spilianakis, C. G., and R. A. Flavell. 2004. Long-range intrachromosomal interactions in the T helper type 2 cytokine locus. Nat. Immunol. 5:1017-1027.[CrossRef][Medline]
54. Thomas, G. H., and S. C. Elgin. 1988. Protein/DNA architecture of the DNaseI hypersensitive region of the Drosophila hsp26 promoter. EMBO J. 7:2191-2201.[Medline]
55. Tolhuis, B., R. J. Palstra, E. Splinter, F. Grosveld, and W. de Laat. 2002. Looping and interaction between hypersensitive sites in the active beta-globin locus. Mol. Cell 10:1453-1475.[CrossRef][Medline]
56. Tsai,
F.-Y., and S. H. Orkin. 1997. Transcription
factor GATA-2 is required for proliferation/survival of early
hematopoietic cells and mast cell formation, but not for erythroid and
myeloid terminal differentiation. Blood
89:3636-3643.
57. Tsai, F. Y., G. Keller, F. C. Kuo, M. Weiss, J. Chen, M. Rosenblatt, F. W. Alt, and S. H. Orkin. 1994. An early haematopoietic defect in mice lacking the transcription factor GATA-2. Nature 371:221-226.[CrossRef][Medline]
58. Tsai, S. F., D. I. Martin, L. I. Zon, A. D. D'Andrea, G. G. Wong, and S. H. Orkin. 1989. Cloning of cDNA for the major DNA-binding protein of the erythroid lineage through expression in mammalian cells.Nature 339:446-451.[CrossRef][Medline]
59. Tsang,
A. P., Y. Fujiwara, D. B. Hom, and S. H.
Orkin. 1998. Failure of megakaryopoiesis and arrested
erythropoiesis in mice lacking the GATA-1 transcriptional cofactor FOG.Genes Dev.
12:1176-1188.
60. Tsang, A. P., J. E. Visvader, C. A. Turner, Y. Fujuwara, C. Yu, M. J. Weiss, M. Crossley, and S. H. Orkin. 1997. FOG, a multitype zinc finger protein as a cofactor for transcription factor GATA-1 in erythroid and megakaryocytic differentiation. Cell 90:109-119.[CrossRef][Medline]
61. Vakoc, C. R., D. L. Letting, N. Gheldof, T. Sawado, M. A. Bender, M. Groudine, M. J. Weiss, J. Dekker, and G. A. Blobel. 2005. Proximity among distant regulatory elements at the beta globin locus requires GATA-1 and FOG-1. Mol. Cell 17:453-462.[CrossRef][Medline]
62. Weiss,
M. J., G. Keller, and S. H. Orkin.1994
. Novel insights into erythroid development revealed
through in vitro differentiation of GATA-1 embryonic stem cells.Genes Dev.
8:1184-1197.
63. Weiss, M. J., C. Yu, and S. H. Orkin.1997 . Erythroid-cell-specific properties of transcription factor GATA-1 revealed by phenotypic rescue of a gene-targeted cell line. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17:1642-1651.[Abstract]
64. Welch,
J. J., J. A. Watts, C. R. Vakoc, Y. Yao,
H. Wang, R. C. Hardison, G. A. Blobel, L.
A. Chodosh, and M. J. Weiss. 2004. Global
regulation of erythroid gene expression by transcription factor GATA-1.Blood
104:3136-3147.
65. Zhang,
Y., H. H. Ng, H. Erdjument-Bromage, P. Tempst, A. Bird, and
D. Reinberg. 1999. Analysis of the NuRD subunits
reveals a histone deacetylase core complex and a connection with DNA
methylation. Genes Dev.
13:1924-1935.
66. Zhou, Y., K. C. Lim, K. Onodera, S. Takahashi, J. Ohta, N. Minegishi, F. Y. Tsai, S. H. Orkin, M. Yamamoto, and J. D. Engel. 1998. Rescue of the embryonic lethal hematopoietic defect reveals a critical role for GATA-2 in urogenital development. EMBO J. 17:6689-6700.[CrossRef][Medline]
67. Zon,
L. I., M. F. Gurish, R. L. Stevens, C.
Mather, D. S. Reynolds, K. F. Austen, and
S. H. Orkin. 1991. GATA-binding
transcription factors in mast cells regulate the promoter of the mast
cell carboxypeptidase A gene. J. Biol. Chem.
266:22948-22953.
68. Zon,
L. I., Y. Yamaguchi, K. Yee, E. A. Albee, A.
Kimura, J. C. Bennett, S. H. Orkin, and
S. J. Ackerman. 1993. Expression of mRNA for
the GATA-binding proteins in human eosinophils and basophils: potential
role in gene transcription. Blood
81:3234-3241.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||