Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by Yeast Hypoxic Genes and Chromatin-Independent Exclusion of TATA Binding Protein

Thomas A. Mennella, Lee G. Klinkenberg, Richard S. Zitomer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The Tupl-Ssn6 general repression complex in Saccharomyces cerevisiae represses a wide variety of regulons. Regulon-specific DNA binding proteins recruit the repression complex, and their synthesis, activity, or localization controls the conditions for repression. Rox1 is the hypoxic regulon-specific protein, and a second DNA binding protein, Mot3, augments repression at tightly controlled genes. We addressed the requirements for Tupl-Ssn6 recruitment to two hypoxic genes, ANB1 and HEM13, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Either Rox1 or Mot3 could recruit Ssn6, but Tup1 recruitment required Ssn6 and Rox1. We also monitored events during derepression. Rox1 and Mot3 dissociated from DNA quickly, accounting for the rapid accumulation of ANB1 and HEM13 RNAs, suggesting a simple explanation for induction. However, Tup1 remained associated with these genes, suggesting that the localization of Tup1-Ssn6 is not the sole determinant of repression. We could not reproduce the observation that deletion of the Tup1-Ssn6-interacting protein Cti6 was required for induction. Finally, Tup1 is capable of repression through a chromatin-dependent mechanism, the positioning of a nucleosome over the TATA box, or a chromatin-independent mechanism. We found that the rate of derepression was independent of the positioned nucleosome and that the TATA binding protein was excluded from ANB1 even in the absence of the positioned nucleosome. The mediator factor Srb7 has been shown to interact with Tup1 and to play a role in repression at several regulons, but we found that significant levels of repression remained in srb7 mutants even when the chromatin-dependent repression mechanism was eliminated. These findings suggest that the repression of different regulons or genes may invoke different mechanisms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1288-1303
Number of pages16
JournalEukaryotic Cell
Volume2
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

TATA-Box Binding Protein
Regulon
regulon
Chromatin
chromatin
binding proteins
Yeasts
nucleosomes
Nucleosomes
yeasts
DNA-binding proteins
Genes
DNA-Binding Proteins
genes
TATA box
TATA Box
Chromatin Immunoprecipitation
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Proteins
proteins

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Microbiology

Cite this

Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by Yeast Hypoxic Genes and Chromatin-Independent Exclusion of TATA Binding Protein. / Mennella, Thomas A.; Klinkenberg, Lee G.; Zitomer, Richard S.

In: Eukaryotic Cell, Vol. 2, No. 6, 12.2003, p. 1288-1303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mennella, Thomas A. ; Klinkenberg, Lee G. ; Zitomer, Richard S. / Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by Yeast Hypoxic Genes and Chromatin-Independent Exclusion of TATA Binding Protein. In: Eukaryotic Cell. 2003 ; Vol. 2, No. 6. pp. 1288-1303.
@article{5bd6ddb8131c452292bf1d89fb278f26,
title = "Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by Yeast Hypoxic Genes and Chromatin-Independent Exclusion of TATA Binding Protein",
abstract = "The Tupl-Ssn6 general repression complex in Saccharomyces cerevisiae represses a wide variety of regulons. Regulon-specific DNA binding proteins recruit the repression complex, and their synthesis, activity, or localization controls the conditions for repression. Rox1 is the hypoxic regulon-specific protein, and a second DNA binding protein, Mot3, augments repression at tightly controlled genes. We addressed the requirements for Tupl-Ssn6 recruitment to two hypoxic genes, ANB1 and HEM13, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Either Rox1 or Mot3 could recruit Ssn6, but Tup1 recruitment required Ssn6 and Rox1. We also monitored events during derepression. Rox1 and Mot3 dissociated from DNA quickly, accounting for the rapid accumulation of ANB1 and HEM13 RNAs, suggesting a simple explanation for induction. However, Tup1 remained associated with these genes, suggesting that the localization of Tup1-Ssn6 is not the sole determinant of repression. We could not reproduce the observation that deletion of the Tup1-Ssn6-interacting protein Cti6 was required for induction. Finally, Tup1 is capable of repression through a chromatin-dependent mechanism, the positioning of a nucleosome over the TATA box, or a chromatin-independent mechanism. We found that the rate of derepression was independent of the positioned nucleosome and that the TATA binding protein was excluded from ANB1 even in the absence of the positioned nucleosome. The mediator factor Srb7 has been shown to interact with Tup1 and to play a role in repression at several regulons, but we found that significant levels of repression remained in srb7 mutants even when the chromatin-dependent repression mechanism was eliminated. These findings suggest that the repression of different regulons or genes may invoke different mechanisms.",
author = "Mennella, {Thomas A.} and Klinkenberg, {Lee G.} and Zitomer, {Richard S.}",
year = "2003",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1128/EC.2.6.1288-1303.2003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "1288--1303",
journal = "Eukaryotic Cell",
issn = "1535-9778",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recruitment of Tup1-Ssn6 by Yeast Hypoxic Genes and Chromatin-Independent Exclusion of TATA Binding Protein

AU - Mennella, Thomas A.

AU - Klinkenberg, Lee G.

AU - Zitomer, Richard S.

PY - 2003/12

Y1 - 2003/12

N2 - The Tupl-Ssn6 general repression complex in Saccharomyces cerevisiae represses a wide variety of regulons. Regulon-specific DNA binding proteins recruit the repression complex, and their synthesis, activity, or localization controls the conditions for repression. Rox1 is the hypoxic regulon-specific protein, and a second DNA binding protein, Mot3, augments repression at tightly controlled genes. We addressed the requirements for Tupl-Ssn6 recruitment to two hypoxic genes, ANB1 and HEM13, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Either Rox1 or Mot3 could recruit Ssn6, but Tup1 recruitment required Ssn6 and Rox1. We also monitored events during derepression. Rox1 and Mot3 dissociated from DNA quickly, accounting for the rapid accumulation of ANB1 and HEM13 RNAs, suggesting a simple explanation for induction. However, Tup1 remained associated with these genes, suggesting that the localization of Tup1-Ssn6 is not the sole determinant of repression. We could not reproduce the observation that deletion of the Tup1-Ssn6-interacting protein Cti6 was required for induction. Finally, Tup1 is capable of repression through a chromatin-dependent mechanism, the positioning of a nucleosome over the TATA box, or a chromatin-independent mechanism. We found that the rate of derepression was independent of the positioned nucleosome and that the TATA binding protein was excluded from ANB1 even in the absence of the positioned nucleosome. The mediator factor Srb7 has been shown to interact with Tup1 and to play a role in repression at several regulons, but we found that significant levels of repression remained in srb7 mutants even when the chromatin-dependent repression mechanism was eliminated. These findings suggest that the repression of different regulons or genes may invoke different mechanisms.

AB - The Tupl-Ssn6 general repression complex in Saccharomyces cerevisiae represses a wide variety of regulons. Regulon-specific DNA binding proteins recruit the repression complex, and their synthesis, activity, or localization controls the conditions for repression. Rox1 is the hypoxic regulon-specific protein, and a second DNA binding protein, Mot3, augments repression at tightly controlled genes. We addressed the requirements for Tupl-Ssn6 recruitment to two hypoxic genes, ANB1 and HEM13, by using chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Either Rox1 or Mot3 could recruit Ssn6, but Tup1 recruitment required Ssn6 and Rox1. We also monitored events during derepression. Rox1 and Mot3 dissociated from DNA quickly, accounting for the rapid accumulation of ANB1 and HEM13 RNAs, suggesting a simple explanation for induction. However, Tup1 remained associated with these genes, suggesting that the localization of Tup1-Ssn6 is not the sole determinant of repression. We could not reproduce the observation that deletion of the Tup1-Ssn6-interacting protein Cti6 was required for induction. Finally, Tup1 is capable of repression through a chromatin-dependent mechanism, the positioning of a nucleosome over the TATA box, or a chromatin-independent mechanism. We found that the rate of derepression was independent of the positioned nucleosome and that the TATA binding protein was excluded from ANB1 even in the absence of the positioned nucleosome. The mediator factor Srb7 has been shown to interact with Tup1 and to play a role in repression at several regulons, but we found that significant levels of repression remained in srb7 mutants even when the chromatin-dependent repression mechanism was eliminated. These findings suggest that the repression of different regulons or genes may invoke different mechanisms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0346433724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0346433724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/EC.2.6.1288-1303.2003

DO - 10.1128/EC.2.6.1288-1303.2003

M3 - Article

C2 - 14665463

AN - SCOPUS:0346433724

VL - 2

SP - 1288

EP - 1303

JO - Eukaryotic Cell

JF - Eukaryotic Cell

SN - 1535-9778

IS - 6

ER -