E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation

Paul R. Van Ginkel, Kuang Ming Hsiao, Hilde Schjerven, Peggy J. Farnham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

56 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous studies have indicated that the presence of an E2F site is not sufficient for G1/S phase transcriptional regulation. For example, the E2F sites in the E2F1 promoter are necessary, but not sufficient, to mediate differential promoter activity in G0 and S phase. We have now utilized the E2F1 minimal promoter to test several hypotheses that could account for these observations. To test the hypothesis that G1/S phase regulation is achieved via E2F-mediated repression of a strong promoter, a variety of transactivation domains were brought to the E2F1 minimal promoter. Although many of these factors caused increased promoter activity, growth regulation was not observed, suggesting that a general repression model is incorrect. However, constructs having CCAAT or YY1 sites or certain GC boxes cloned upstream of the E2F1 minimal promoter displayed E2F site-dependent regulation. Further analysis of the promoter activity suggested that E2F requires cooperation with another factor to activate transcription in S phase. However, we found that the requirement for E2F to cooperate with additional factors to achieve growth regulation could be relieved by bringing the E2F1 activation domain to the promoter via a Ga14 DNA binding domain. Our results suggest a model that explains why some, but not all, promoters that contain E2F sites display growth regulation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18367-18374
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Biological Chemistry
Volume272
Issue number29
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 18 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

S Phase
Phase control
Transcription Factors
G1 Phase
Growth
Transcription
Cell Cycle Resting Phase
Chemical activation
Transcriptional Activation
DNA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry

Cite this

Van Ginkel, P. R., Hsiao, K. M., Schjerven, H., & Farnham, P. J. (1997). E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 272(29), 18367-18374. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.272.29.18367

E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation. / Van Ginkel, Paul R.; Hsiao, Kuang Ming; Schjerven, Hilde; Farnham, Peggy J.

In: Journal of Biological Chemistry, Vol. 272, No. 29, 18.07.1997, p. 18367-18374.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Ginkel, PR, Hsiao, KM, Schjerven, H & Farnham, PJ 1997, 'E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation', Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 272, no. 29, pp. 18367-18374. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.272.29.18367
Van Ginkel, Paul R. ; Hsiao, Kuang Ming ; Schjerven, Hilde ; Farnham, Peggy J. / E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation. In: Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1997 ; Vol. 272, No. 29. pp. 18367-18374.
@article{c62457d7a0874ad881e16693fd4015b0,
title = "E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation",
abstract = "Previous studies have indicated that the presence of an E2F site is not sufficient for G1/S phase transcriptional regulation. For example, the E2F sites in the E2F1 promoter are necessary, but not sufficient, to mediate differential promoter activity in G0 and S phase. We have now utilized the E2F1 minimal promoter to test several hypotheses that could account for these observations. To test the hypothesis that G1/S phase regulation is achieved via E2F-mediated repression of a strong promoter, a variety of transactivation domains were brought to the E2F1 minimal promoter. Although many of these factors caused increased promoter activity, growth regulation was not observed, suggesting that a general repression model is incorrect. However, constructs having CCAAT or YY1 sites or certain GC boxes cloned upstream of the E2F1 minimal promoter displayed E2F site-dependent regulation. Further analysis of the promoter activity suggested that E2F requires cooperation with another factor to activate transcription in S phase. However, we found that the requirement for E2F to cooperate with additional factors to achieve growth regulation could be relieved by bringing the E2F1 activation domain to the promoter via a Ga14 DNA binding domain. Our results suggest a model that explains why some, but not all, promoters that contain E2F sites display growth regulation.",
author = "{Van Ginkel}, {Paul R.} and Hsiao, {Kuang Ming} and Hilde Schjerven and Farnham, {Peggy J.}",
year = "1997",
month = "7",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1074/jbc.272.29.18367",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "272",
pages = "18367--18374",
journal = "Journal of Biological Chemistry",
issn = "0021-9258",
publisher = "American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Inc.",
number = "29",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - E2F-mediated growth regulation requires transcription factor cooperation

AU - Van Ginkel, Paul R.

AU - Hsiao, Kuang Ming

AU - Schjerven, Hilde

AU - Farnham, Peggy J.

PY - 1997/7/18

Y1 - 1997/7/18

N2 - Previous studies have indicated that the presence of an E2F site is not sufficient for G1/S phase transcriptional regulation. For example, the E2F sites in the E2F1 promoter are necessary, but not sufficient, to mediate differential promoter activity in G0 and S phase. We have now utilized the E2F1 minimal promoter to test several hypotheses that could account for these observations. To test the hypothesis that G1/S phase regulation is achieved via E2F-mediated repression of a strong promoter, a variety of transactivation domains were brought to the E2F1 minimal promoter. Although many of these factors caused increased promoter activity, growth regulation was not observed, suggesting that a general repression model is incorrect. However, constructs having CCAAT or YY1 sites or certain GC boxes cloned upstream of the E2F1 minimal promoter displayed E2F site-dependent regulation. Further analysis of the promoter activity suggested that E2F requires cooperation with another factor to activate transcription in S phase. However, we found that the requirement for E2F to cooperate with additional factors to achieve growth regulation could be relieved by bringing the E2F1 activation domain to the promoter via a Ga14 DNA binding domain. Our results suggest a model that explains why some, but not all, promoters that contain E2F sites display growth regulation.

AB - Previous studies have indicated that the presence of an E2F site is not sufficient for G1/S phase transcriptional regulation. For example, the E2F sites in the E2F1 promoter are necessary, but not sufficient, to mediate differential promoter activity in G0 and S phase. We have now utilized the E2F1 minimal promoter to test several hypotheses that could account for these observations. To test the hypothesis that G1/S phase regulation is achieved via E2F-mediated repression of a strong promoter, a variety of transactivation domains were brought to the E2F1 minimal promoter. Although many of these factors caused increased promoter activity, growth regulation was not observed, suggesting that a general repression model is incorrect. However, constructs having CCAAT or YY1 sites or certain GC boxes cloned upstream of the E2F1 minimal promoter displayed E2F site-dependent regulation. Further analysis of the promoter activity suggested that E2F requires cooperation with another factor to activate transcription in S phase. However, we found that the requirement for E2F to cooperate with additional factors to achieve growth regulation could be relieved by bringing the E2F1 activation domain to the promoter via a Ga14 DNA binding domain. Our results suggest a model that explains why some, but not all, promoters that contain E2F sites display growth regulation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030789435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030789435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1074/jbc.272.29.18367

DO - 10.1074/jbc.272.29.18367

M3 - Article

VL - 272

SP - 18367

EP - 18374

JO - Journal of Biological Chemistry

JF - Journal of Biological Chemistry

SN - 0021-9258

IS - 29

ER -