Skip to main content
PMC home page
Molecular and Cellular Biology logoLink to Molecular and Cellular Biology
. 1997 Aug;17(8):4820–4829. doi: 10.1128/mcb.17.8.4820

Two evolutionarily conserved repression domains in the Drosophila Kruppel protein differ in activator specificity.

W Hanna-Rose 1, J D Licht 1, U Hansen 1
PMCID: PMC232334  PMID: 9234738

Abstract

To identify biologically functional regions in the product of the Drosophila melanogaster gene Kruppel, we cloned the Kruppel homolog from Drosophila virilis. Both the previously identified amino (N)-terminal repression region and the DNA-binding region of the D. virilis Kruppel protein are greater than 96% identical to those of the D. melanogaster Kruppel protein, demonstrating a selective pressure to maintain the integrity of each region during 60 million to 80 million years of evolution. An additional region in the carboxyl (C) terminus of Kruppel that was most highly conserved was examined further. A 42-amino-acid stretch within the conserved C-terminal region also encoded a transferable repression domain. The short, C-terminal repression region is a composite of three subregions of distinct amino acid composition, each containing a high proportion of either basic, proline, or acidic residues. Mutagenesis experiments demonstrated, unexpectedly, that the acidic residues contribute to repression function. Both the N-terminal and C-terminal repression regions were tested for the ability to affect transcription mediated by a variety of activator proteins. The N-terminal repression region was able to inhibit transcription in the presence of multiple activators. However, the C-terminal repression region inhibited transcription by only a subset of the activator proteins. The different activator specificities of the two regions suggest that they repress transcription by different mechanisms and may play distinct biological roles during Drosophila development.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (276.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Blackman R. K., Meselson M. Interspecific nucleotide sequence comparisons used to identify regulatory and structural features of the Drosophila hsp82 gene. J Mol Biol. 1986 Apr 20;188(4):499–515. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(86)80001-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brent R., Ptashne M. A eukaryotic transcriptional activator bearing the DNA specificity of a prokaryotic repressor. Cell. 1985 Dec;43(3 Pt 2):729–736. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90246-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown M., Figge J., Hansen U., Wright C., Jeang K. T., Khoury G., Livingston D. M., Roberts T. M. lac repressor can regulate expression from a hybrid SV40 early promoter containing a lac operator in animal cells. Cell. 1987 Jun 5;49(5):603–612. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(87)90536-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Buratowski S. Mechanisms of gene activation. Science. 1995 Dec 15;270(5243):1773–1774. doi: 10.1126/science.270.5243.1773. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Carey M., Lin Y. S., Green M. R., Ptashne M. A mechanism for synergistic activation of a mammalian gene by GAL4 derivatives. Nature. 1990 May 24;345(6273):361–364. doi: 10.1038/345361a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cowell I. G., Hurst H. C. Transcriptional repression by the human bZIP factor E4BP4: definition of a minimal repression domain. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994 Jan 11;22(1):59–65. doi: 10.1093/nar/22.1.59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cowell I. G. Repression versus activation in the control of gene transcription. Trends Biochem Sci. 1994 Jan;19(1):38–42. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(94)90172-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Emili A., Greenblatt J., Ingles C. J. Species-specific interaction of the glutamine-rich activation domains of Sp1 with the TATA box-binding protein. Mol Cell Biol. 1994 Mar;14(3):1582–1593. doi: 10.1128/mcb.14.3.1582. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Estruch F. The yeast putative transcriptional repressor RGM1 is a proline-rich zinc finger protein. Nucleic Acids Res. 1991 Sep 25;19(18):4873–4877. doi: 10.1093/nar/19.18.4873. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Ferreri K., Gill G., Montminy M. The cAMP-regulated transcription factor CREB interacts with a component of the TFIID complex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Feb 15;91(4):1210–1213. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.4.1210. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fibi M., Zink B., Kessel M., Colberg-Poley A. M., Labeit S., Lehrach H., Gruss P. Coding sequence and expression of the homeobox gene Hox 1.3. Development. 1988 Feb;102(2):349–359. doi: 10.1242/dev.102.2.349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Figge J., Wright C., Collins C. J., Roberts T. M., Livingston D. M. Stringent regulation of stably integrated chloramphenicol acetyl transferase genes by E. coli lac repressor in monkey cells. Cell. 1988 Mar 11;52(5):713–722. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90409-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Gill G., Pascal E., Tseng Z. H., Tjian R. A glutamine-rich hydrophobic patch in transcription factor Sp1 contacts the dTAFII110 component of the Drosophila TFIID complex and mediates transcriptional activation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Jan 4;91(1):192–196. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.1.192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Giniger E., Ptashne M. Transcription in yeast activated by a putative amphipathic alpha helix linked to a DNA binding unit. Nature. 1987 Dec 17;330(6149):670–672. doi: 10.1038/330670a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Goodrich J. A., Hoey T., Thut C. J., Admon A., Tjian R. Drosophila TAFII40 interacts with both a VP16 activation domain and the basal transcription factor TFIIB. Cell. 1993 Nov 5;75(3):519–530. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90386-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gorman C. M., Moffat L. F., Howard B. H. Recombinant genomes which express chloramphenicol acetyltransferase in mammalian cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1982 Sep;2(9):1044–1051. doi: 10.1128/mcb.2.9.1044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gray S., Levine M. Short-range transcriptional repressors mediate both quenching and direct repression within complex loci in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 1996 Mar 15;10(6):700–710. doi: 10.1101/gad.10.6.700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Han K., Manley J. L. Transcriptional repression by the Drosophila even-skipped protein: definition of a minimal repression domain. Genes Dev. 1993 Mar;7(3):491–503. doi: 10.1101/gad.7.3.491. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hanna-Rose W., Hansen U. Active repression mechanisms of eukaryotic transcription repressors. Trends Genet. 1996 Jun;12(6):229–234. doi: 10.1016/0168-9525(96)10022-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hoey T., Weinzierl R. O., Gill G., Chen J. L., Dynlacht B. D., Tjian R. Molecular cloning and functional analysis of Drosophila TAF110 reveal properties expected of coactivators. Cell. 1993 Jan 29;72(2):247–260. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90664-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Holmes M. C., Antoni F. A., Aguilera G., Catt K. J. Magnocellular axons in passage through the median eminence release vasopressin. Nature. 1986 Jan 23;319(6051):326–329. doi: 10.1038/319326a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Johnson A. D. The price of repression. Cell. 1995 Jun 2;81(5):655–658. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90524-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kakidani H., Ptashne M. GAL4 activates gene expression in mammalian cells. Cell. 1988 Jan 29;52(2):161–167. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(88)90504-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kassis J. A., Poole S. J., Wright D. K., O'Farrell P. H. Sequence conservation in the protein coding and intron regions of the engrailed transcription unit. EMBO J. 1986 Dec 20;5(13):3583–3589. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1986.tb04686.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Levine M., Manley J. L. Transcriptional repression of eukaryotic promoters. Cell. 1989 Nov 3;59(3):405–408. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90024-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Licht J. D., Grossel M. J., Figge J., Hansen U. M. Drosophila Krüppel protein is a transcriptional repressor. Nature. 1990 Jul 5;346(6279):76–79. doi: 10.1038/346076a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Licht J. D., Hanna-Rose W., Reddy J. C., English M. A., Ro M., Grossel M., Shaknovich R., Hansen U. Mapping and mutagenesis of the amino-terminal transcriptional repression domain of the Drosophila Krüppel protein. Mol Cell Biol. 1994 Jun;14(6):4057–4066. doi: 10.1128/mcb.14.6.4057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Licht J. D., Ro M., English M. A., Grossel M., Hansen U. Selective repression of transcriptional activators at a distance by the Drosophila Krüppel protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Dec 1;90(23):11361–11365. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.23.11361. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Luckow B., Schütz G. CAT constructions with multiple unique restriction sites for the functional analysis of eukaryotic promoters and regulatory elements. Nucleic Acids Res. 1987 Jul 10;15(13):5490–5490. doi: 10.1093/nar/15.13.5490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Madden S. L., Cook D. M., Rauscher F. J., 3rd A structure-function analysis of transcriptional repression mediated by the WT1, Wilms' tumor suppressor protein. Oncogene. 1993 Jul;8(7):1713–1720. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Margolin J. F., Friedman J. R., Meyer W. K., Vissing H., Thiesen H. J., Rauscher F. J., 3rd Krüppel-associated boxes are potent transcriptional repression domains. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 May 10;91(10):4509–4513. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.10.4509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ollo R., Maniatis T. Drosophila Krüppel gene product produced in a baculovirus expression system is a nuclear phosphoprotein that binds to DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1987 Aug;84(16):5700–5704. doi: 10.1073/pnas.84.16.5700. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Pankratz M. J., Hoch M., Seifert E., Jäckle H. Krüppel requirement for knirps enhancement reflects overlapping gap gene activities in the Drosophila embryo. Nature. 1989 Sep 28;341(6240):337–340. doi: 10.1038/341337a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Regier J. L., Shen F., Triezenberg S. J. Pattern of aromatic and hydrophobic amino acids critical for one of two subdomains of the VP16 transcriptional activator. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Feb 1;90(3):883–887. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.3.883. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Renkawitz R. Transcriptional repression in eukaryotes. Trends Genet. 1990 Jun;6(6):192–197. doi: 10.1016/0168-9525(90)90176-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Saha S., Brickman J. M., Lehming N., Ptashne M. New eukaryotic transcriptional repressors. Nature. 1993 Jun 17;363(6430):648–652. doi: 10.1038/363648a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Sauer F., Fondell J. D., Ohkuma Y., Roeder R. G., Jäckle H. Control of transcription by Krüppel through interactions with TFIIB and TFIIE beta. Nature. 1995 May 11;375(6527):162–164. doi: 10.1038/375162a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Sauer F., Jäckle H. Concentration-dependent transcriptional activation or repression by Krüppel from a single binding site. Nature. 1991 Oct 10;353(6344):563–566. doi: 10.1038/353563a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Sauer F., Jäckle H. Dimerization and the control of transcription by Krüppel. Nature. 1993 Jul 29;364(6436):454–457. doi: 10.1038/364454a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Sauer F., Jäckle H. Heterodimeric Drosophila gap gene protein complexes acting as transcriptional repressors. EMBO J. 1995 Oct 2;14(19):4773–4780. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb00159.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Selden R. F., Howie K. B., Rowe M. E., Goodman H. M., Moore D. D. Human growth hormone as a reporter gene in regulation studies employing transient gene expression. Mol Cell Biol. 1986 Sep;6(9):3173–3179. doi: 10.1128/mcb.6.9.3173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Stanojević D., Hoey T., Levine M. Sequence-specific DNA-binding activities of the gap proteins encoded by hunchback and Krüppel in Drosophila. Nature. 1989 Sep 28;341(6240):331–335. doi: 10.1038/341331a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Stringer K. F., Ingles C. J., Greenblatt J. Direct and selective binding of an acidic transcriptional activation domain to the TATA-box factor TFIID. Nature. 1990 Jun 28;345(6278):783–786. doi: 10.1038/345783a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Tautz D., Tautz C., Webb D., Dover G. A. Evolutionary divergence of promoters and spacers in the rDNA family of four Drosophila species. Implications for molecular coevolution in multigene families. J Mol Biol. 1987 Jun 5;195(3):525–542. doi: 10.1016/0022-2836(87)90181-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Tautz D., Trick M., Dover G. A. Cryptic simplicity in DNA is a major source of genetic variation. Nature. 1986 Aug 14;322(6080):652–656. doi: 10.1038/322652a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Thut C. J., Chen J. L., Klemm R., Tjian R. p53 transcriptional activation mediated by coactivators TAFII40 and TAFII60. Science. 1995 Jan 6;267(5194):100–104. doi: 10.1126/science.7809597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Tjian R., Maniatis T. Transcriptional activation: a complex puzzle with few easy pieces. Cell. 1994 Apr 8;77(1):5–8. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(94)90227-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Tong X., Wang F., Thut C. J., Kieff E. The Epstein-Barr virus nuclear protein 2 acidic domain can interact with TFIIB, TAF40, and RPA70 but not with TATA-binding protein. J Virol. 1995 Jan;69(1):585–588. doi: 10.1128/jvi.69.1.585-588.1995. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Treier M., Pfeifle C., Tautz D. Comparison of the gap segmentation gene hunchback between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis reveals novel modes of evolutionary change. EMBO J. 1989 May;8(5):1517–1525. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1989.tb03536.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Treisman J., Desplan C. The products of the Drosophila gap genes hunchback and Krüppel bind to the hunchback promoters. Nature. 1989 Sep 28;341(6240):335–337. doi: 10.1038/341335a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Triezenberg S. J., Kingsbury R. C., McKnight S. L. Functional dissection of VP16, the trans-activator of herpes simplex virus immediate early gene expression. Genes Dev. 1988 Jun;2(6):718–729. doi: 10.1101/gad.2.6.718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Wang Z. Y., Qiu Q. Q., Gurrieri M., Huang J., Deuel T. F. WT1, the Wilms' tumor suppressor gene product, represses transcription through an interactive nuclear protein. Oncogene. 1995 Mar 16;10(6):1243–1247. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Witzgall R., O'Leary E., Leaf A., Onaldi D., Bonventre J. V. The Krüppel-associated box-A (KRAB-A) domain of zinc finger proteins mediates transcriptional repression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 May 10;91(10):4514–4518. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.10.4514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Zhao J. J., Lazzarini R. A., Pick L. The mouse Hox-1.3 gene is functionally equivalent to the Drosophila Sex combs reduced gene. Genes Dev. 1993 Mar;7(3):343–354. doi: 10.1101/gad.7.3.343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Zuo P., Stanojević D., Colgan J., Han K., Levine M., Manley J. L. Activation and repression of transcription by the gap proteins hunchback and Krüppel in cultured Drosophila cells. Genes Dev. 1991 Feb;5(2):254–264. doi: 10.1101/gad.5.2.254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Molecular and Cellular Biology are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES