The Xenopus Chk1 protein kinase mediates a caffeine-sensitive pathway of checkpoint control in cell-free extracts.

We have analyzed the role of the protein kinase Chk1 in checkpoint control by using cell-free extracts from Xenopus eggs. Recombinant Xenopus Chk1 (Xchk1) phosphorylates the mitotic inducer Cdc25 in vitro on multiple sites including Ser-287. The Xchk1-catalyzed phosphorylation of Cdc25 on Ser-287 is sufficient to confer the binding of 14-3-3 proteins. Egg extracts from which Xchk1 has been removed by immunodepletion are strongly but not totally compromised in their ability to undergo a cell cycle delay in response to the presence of unreplicated DNA. Cdc25 in Xchk1-depleted extracts remains bound to 14-3-3 due to the action of a distinct Ser-287-specific kinase in addition to Xchk1. Xchk1 is highly phosphorylated in the presence of unreplicated or damaged DNA, and this phosphorylation is abolished by caffeine, an agent which attenuates checkpoint control. The checkpoint response to unreplicated DNA in this system involves both caffeine-sensitive and caffeine-insensitive steps. Our results indicate that caffeine disrupts the checkpoint pathway containing Xchk1.

Sp1 activation of a TATA-less promoter requires a species-specific interaction involving transcription factor IID.

Sp1 is a ubiquitous activator of numerous TATA-containing and TATA-less promoters within the human genome. This transcription factor is distinct from several other mammalian activators because it cannot stimulate transcription of reporter genes when ectopically expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae . Here we report that in cultured cells from Drosophila melanogaster human Sp1 efficiently activates transcription from synthetic promoters containing TATA boxes, but not from promoters that contain an initiator instead of a TATA box. The inability of Sp1 to activate initiator-mediated transcription did not result from inactivity of the consensus initiator element used for the experiments, as other initiator functions were conserved in Drosophila cells. Interestingly, a difference between the Drosophila and human TFIID complexes was found to be responsible for the selective inability of Sp1 to activate initiator-mediated transcription in Drosophila; in a complementation assay with a TFIID-depleted HeLa cell extract both the Drosophila and human TFIID complexes supported TATA-mediated transcription, but only the human complex supported initiator-mediated transcription. These results suggest that a species-specific interaction is required for activation of TATA-less promoters by Sp1, revealing a difference in transcriptional activation mechanisms between vertebrates and invertebrates.

Mechanism of synergy between TATA and initiator: synergistic binding of TFIID following a putative TFIIA-induced isomerization.

The TFIID complex interacts with at least three types of core promoter elements within protein-coding genes, including TATA, initiator (Inr), and downstream promoter elements. We have begun to explore the mechanism by which the TFIID-Inr interaction leads to functional synergy between TATA and Inr elements during both basal and activated transcription. In DNase I footprinting assays, GAL4-VP16 recruited TFIID-TFIIA to core promoters containing either a TATA box, an Inr, or both TATA and Inr elements, with synergistic interactions apparent on the TATA-Inr promoter. Appropriate spacing between the two elements was essential for the synergistic binding. Despite the sequence-specific TFIID-Inr interactions, gel shift experiments revealed that TFIID alone possesses similar affinities for the TATA-Inr and TATA promoters. Interestingly, however, recombinant TFIIA strongly and selectively enhanced TFIID binding to the TATA-Inr promoter, with little effect on binding to the TATA promoter. Studies of the natural adenovirus major late promoter confirmed these findings, despite the existence of specific but nonfunctional TFIID interactions downstream of the Inr in that promoter. These results suggest that a TFIIA-induced conformational change is essential for the sequence-specific TFIID-Inr interaction to occur with sufficient affinity to support the functional synergism between TATA and Inr elements.

Core promoter specificities of the Sp1 and VP16 transcriptional activation domains.

The core promoter compositions of mammalian protein-coding genes are highly variable; some contain TATA boxes, some contain initiator (Inr) elements, and others contain both or neither of these basal elements. The underlying reason for this heterogeneity remains a mystery, as recent studies have suggested that TATA-containing and Inr-containing core promoters direct transcription initiation by similar mechanisms and respond similarly to a wide variety of upstream activators. To analyze in greater detail the influence of core promoter structure on transcriptional activation, we compared activation by GAL4-VP16 and Sp1 through synthetic core promoters containing a TATA box, an Inr, or both TATA and Inr. Striking differences were found between the two activators, most notably in the relative strengths of the TATA/Inr and Inr core promoters: the TATA/Inr promoter was much stronger than the Inr promoter when transcription was activated by GAL4-VP16, but the strengths of the two promoters were more comparable when transcription was activated by Sp1. To define the domains of Sp1 responsible for efficient activation through an Inr, several Sp1 deletion mutants were tested as GAL4 fusion proteins. The results reveal that the glutamine-rich activation domains, which previously were found to interact with Drosophila TAF110, preferentially stimulate Inr-containing core promoters. In contrast, efficient activation through TATA appears to require additional domains of Sp1. These results demonstrate that activation domains differ in their abilities to function with specific core promoters, suggesting that the core promoter structure found in a given gene may reflect a preference of the regulators of that gene. Furthermore, the core promoter preference of an activation domain may be related to a specific mechanism of action, which may provide a functional criterion for grouping activation domains into distinct classes.

A synergistic increase in potency of a multimerized VP16 transcriptional activation domain.

Transcriptional synergy in eucaryotes provides a means to control both the level and diversity of gene expression. The mechanism by which multiple activators elicit such effects is unknown. To address this problem we considered whether multimerizing an activation domain was equivalent to oligomerizing an activator's binding sites on DNA. Synthetic activators bearing one, two or four VP16 'core' activation domains, fused to the GAL4 DNA binding domain, were co-transfected into Cos-1 cells with CAT gene reporter templates containing one, two or five upstream GAL4 binding sites. Our results demonstrate that all of the activators elicit synergistic effects when comparing the amounts of transcription on multiple sites versus a single site. In contrast, the multimerized activation domains did not stimulate transcription significantly on a template bearing a single site; a synergistic increase in potency was, however, apparent on a template bearing two sites. Introducing the flexible lambda repressor linker region in between the activation domains increased the ability of activators bearing two or four VP16 domains to stimulate transcription from the single-site template. We discuss the mechanistic implications of this study on gene activation and synergy.