Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America logoLink to Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
. 1996 Apr 30;93(9):4311–4315. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.9.4311

Modulation of promoter occupancy by cooperative DNA binding and activation-domain function is a major determinant of transcriptional regulation by activators in vivo.

M Tanaka 1
PMCID: PMC39532  PMID: 8633061

Abstract

Binding of transcriptional activators to a promoter is a prerequisite process in transcriptional activation. It is well established that the efficiency of activator binding to a promoter is determined by the affinity of direct interactions between the DNA-binding domain of an activator and its specific target sequences. However, I describe here that activator binding to a promoter is augmented in vivo by the effects of two other determinants that have not been generally appreciated: (i) the number of activator binding sites present in a promoter and (ii) the potency of activation domains of activators. Multiple sites within a promoter can cooperatively recruit cognate factors regardless of whether they contain an effective activation domain. This cooperativity can result in the synergistic activation of transcription. The second effect is the enhancement of activator binding to a promoter by the presence of activation domains. In this case, activation domains are not simply tethered to the promoter by the DNA-binding domain but instead assist the DNA-binding domain being tethered onto the promoter. This effect of activation domains on DNA binding is instrumental in determining how potent activators can induce steep transcriptional increases at low concentrations.

Full text

PDF

Images in this article

4312Fig. 1
on p.4312
4313Fig. 2
on p.4313
4314Fig. 3
on p.4314

Selected References

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

  1. Adams C. C., Workman J. L. Binding of disparate transcriptional activators to nucleosomal DNA is inherently cooperative. Mol Cell Biol. 1995 Mar;15(3):1405–1421. doi: 10.1128/mcb.15.3.1405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carey M., Kolman J., Katz D. A., Gradoville L., Barberis L., Miller G. Transcriptional synergy by the Epstein-Barr virus transactivator ZEBRA. J Virol. 1992 Aug;66(8):4803–4813. doi: 10.1128/jvi.66.8.4803-4813.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. 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]
  4. Carlson M., Laurent B. C. The SNF/SWI family of global transcriptional activators. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1994 Jun;6(3):396–402. doi: 10.1016/0955-0674(94)90032-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chang C., Gralla J. D. A critical role for chromatin in mounting a synergistic transcriptional response to GAL4-VP16. Mol Cell Biol. 1994 Aug;14(8):5175–5181. doi: 10.1128/mcb.14.8.5175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chi T., Lieberman P., Ellwood K., Carey M. A general mechanism for transcriptional synergy by eukaryotic activators. Nature. 1995 Sep 21;377(6546):254–257. doi: 10.1038/377254a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Choy B., Green M. R. Eukaryotic activators function during multiple steps of preinitiation complex assembly. Nature. 1993 Dec 9;366(6455):531–536. doi: 10.1038/366531a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cleary M. A., Stern S., Tanaka M., Herr W. Differential positive control by Oct-1 and Oct-2: activation of a transcriptionally silent motif through Oct-1 and VP16 corecruitment. Genes Dev. 1993 Jan;7(1):72–83. doi: 10.1101/gad.7.1.72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Clerc R. G., Corcoran L. M., LeBowitz J. H., Baltimore D., Sharp P. A. The B-cell-specific Oct-2 protein contains POU box- and homeo box-type domains. Genes Dev. 1988 Dec;2(12A):1570–1581. doi: 10.1101/gad.2.12a.1570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cress W. D., Triezenberg S. J. Critical structural elements of the VP16 transcriptional activation domain. Science. 1991 Jan 4;251(4989):87–90. doi: 10.1126/science.1846049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Driever W., Thoma G., Nüsslein-Volhard C. Determination of spatial domains of zygotic gene expression in the Drosophila embryo by the affinity of binding sites for the bicoid morphogen. Nature. 1989 Aug 3;340(6232):363–367. doi: 10.1038/340363a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Emami K. H., Carey M. A synergistic increase in potency of a multimerized VP16 transcriptional activation domain. EMBO J. 1992 Dec;11(13):5005–5012. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1992.tb05607.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Field J., Nikawa J., Broek D., MacDonald B., Rodgers L., Wilson I. A., Lerner R. A., Wigler M. Purification of a RAS-responsive adenylyl cyclase complex from Saccharomyces cerevisiae by use of an epitope addition method. Mol Cell Biol. 1988 May;8(5):2159–2165. doi: 10.1128/mcb.8.5.2159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Giniger E., Ptashne M. Cooperative DNA binding of the yeast transcriptional activator GAL4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988 Jan;85(2):382–386. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.2.382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Giniger E., Varnum S. M., Ptashne M. Specific DNA binding of GAL4, a positive regulatory protein of yeast. Cell. 1985 Apr;40(4):767–774. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90336-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Guarente L., Mason T. Heme regulates transcription of the CYC1 gene of S. cerevisiae via an upstream activation site. Cell. 1983 Apr;32(4):1279–1286. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90309-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hori R., Carey M. The role of activators in assembly of RNA polymerase II transcription complexes. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1994 Apr;4(2):236–244. doi: 10.1016/s0959-437x(05)80050-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kolodziej P. A., Young R. A. Epitope tagging and protein surveillance. Methods Enzymol. 1991;194:508–519. doi: 10.1016/0076-6879(91)94038-e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kwon H., Imbalzano A. N., Khavari P. A., Kingston R. E., Green M. R. Nucleosome disruption and enhancement of activator binding by a human SW1/SNF complex. Nature. 1994 Aug 11;370(6489):477–481. doi: 10.1038/370477a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Mueller P. R., Wold B. In vivo footprinting of a muscle specific enhancer by ligation mediated PCR. Science. 1989 Nov 10;246(4931):780–786. doi: 10.1126/science.2814500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nelson M., Silver P. Context affects nuclear protein localization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol. 1989 Feb;9(2):384–389. doi: 10.1128/mcb.9.2.384. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ptashne M. How eukaryotic transcriptional activators work. Nature. 1988 Oct 20;335(6192):683–689. doi: 10.1038/335683a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Seipel K., Georgiev O., Schaffner W. Different activation domains stimulate transcription from remote ('enhancer') and proximal ('promoter') positions. EMBO J. 1992 Dec;11(13):4961–4968. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1992.tb05603.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Sikorski R. S., Hieter P. A system of shuttle vectors and yeast host strains designed for efficient manipulation of DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics. 1989 May;122(1):19–27. doi: 10.1093/genetics/122.1.19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Struhl G., Struhl K., Macdonald P. M. The gradient morphogen bicoid is a concentration-dependent transcriptional activator. Cell. 1989 Jun 30;57(7):1259–1273. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90062-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Svaren J., Schmitz J., Hörz W. The transactivation domain of Pho4 is required for nucleosome disruption at the PHO5 promoter. EMBO J. 1994 Oct 17;13(20):4856–4862. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1994.tb06812.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Taylor I. C., Workman J. L., Schuetz T. J., Kingston R. E. Facilitated binding of GAL4 and heat shock factor to nucleosomal templates: differential function of DNA-binding domains. Genes Dev. 1991 Jul;5(7):1285–1298. doi: 10.1101/gad.5.7.1285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Triezenberg S. J. Structure and function of transcriptional activation domains. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1995 Apr;5(2):190–196. doi: 10.1016/0959-437x(95)80007-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Zawel L., Reinberg D. Common themes in assembly and function of eukaryotic transcription complexes. Annu Rev Biochem. 1995;64:533–561. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bi.64.070195.002533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America are provided here courtesy of National Academy of Sciences

RESOURCES