Click here to close
Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly.
We suggest using a current version of Chrome,
FireFox, or Safari.
PLoS One
2015 Feb 10;102:e0116177. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116177.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Evolution of p53 transactivation specificity through the lens of a yeast-based functional assay.
Lion M
,
Raimondi I
,
Donati S
,
Jousson O
,
Ciribilli Y
,
Inga A
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Co-evolution of transcription factors (TFs) with their respective cis-regulatory network enhances functional diversity in the course of evolution. We present a new approach to investigate transactivation capacity of sequence-specific TFs in evolutionary studies. Saccharomyces cerevisiae was used as an in vivo test tube and p53 proteins derived from human and five commonly used animal models were chosen as proof of concept. p53 is a highly conserved master regulator of environmental stress responses. Previous reports indicated conserved p53 DNA binding specificity in vitro, even for evolutionary distant species. We used isogenic yeast strains where p53-dependent transactivation was measured towards chromosomally integrated p53 response elements (REs). Ten REs were chosen to sample a wide range of DNA binding affinity and transactivation capacity for human p53 and proteins were expressed at two levels using an inducible expression system. We showed that the assay is amenable to study thermo-sensitivity of frog p53, and that chimeric constructs containing an ectopic transactivation domain could be rapidly developed to enhance the activity of proteins, such as fruit fly p53, that are poorly effective in engaging the yeast transcriptional machinery. Changes in the profile of relative transactivation towards the ten REs were measured for each p53 protein and compared to the profile obtained with human p53. These results, which are largely independent from relative p53 protein levels, revealed widespread evolutionary divergence of p53 transactivation specificity, even between human and mouse p53. Fruit fly and human p53 exhibited the largest discrimination among REs while zebrafish p53 was the least selective.
???displayArticle.pubmedLink???
25668429
???displayArticle.pmcLink???PMC4323202 ???displayArticle.link???PLoS One
Fig 2. Yeast-based transactivation analysis of p53 proteins towards a 10 RE panel.Results were obtained as indicated in Material and Methods. Presented are the averages of relative light units (RLU), defined as the light unit normalized by the optical density at 600nm and after the subtraction of the empty values, i.e. the p53-independent expression of the reporter. Error bars plot the standard deviation of at least four independent replicates. The activity of p53 proteins from the indicated species was measured after 6 hrs incubation at 30°C in media containing two concentrations of galactose (0.008% and 0.064%), that regulates the expression of the p53 transgene. Results obtained with fruit fly p53 and worm p53 are plotted with a different scale due to the low induction of the reporter. The p53 REs used are indicated in the X-axis (see Table 3).
Fig 3. Evolutionary changes in p53 transactivation specificity.Transactivation potentials for the ten REs tested are presented as radar plot graphs in Log10 scale, relative to the results obtained with CON1 (set to 1). The resulting images represent the transactivation specificity for the indicated p53 proteins and that of human p53 is also overlaid (gray line) in every panel to facilitate comparisons. The yeast-based transactivation results at 0.064% of galactose concentration were used. Results obtained at 0.008% galactose are presented in S1 File.
Fig 4. Influence of temperature on the transactivation potential of p53 proteins.The ability of p53 proteins to transactivate from the five natural REs at different expression levels was measured culturing yeast cells at 24°C (white bars) or 37°C (black bars) in media containing the indicated amount of galactose. Data obtained at 30°C (Fig. 2) were re-plotted (gray bars) for comparison. The experiments were performed and data were analyzed and presented as for Fig. 2.
Fig 5. Chimeric Dm_p53 exhibited higher transactivation potential but no changes in transactivation specificity.A) schematic view of the two types of chimeric constructs tested, as described in Material and Methods. B, C) Transactivation activity of Dm_p53, hN63-Dm_p53 and hN92-ΔNDm_p53, and Hs_p53 proteins on five human natural p53 binding sites (see Table 3). Two galactose concentrations (0.008% and 0.064%) were tested. D) Radar plot charts in Log10 scale of relative transactivation potential of chimeric Dm_p53 (black line) relative to the results with the p21 RE (set to 1). Results with non-chimeric Dm_p53 are overlaid (gray line).
Fig 6. Wild type Cep-1 is functional on a C. elegans natural RE.Transactivation activity of Hs_p53 and Cep-1 proteins on the human natural p21, used as a positive control (see Table 3), and the worm natural ced-13 binding sites. Results were obtained as indicated for Fig. 2, except for a 4-hour incubation time in galactose-containing media. Two galactose concentrations (0.008% and 0.064%) were tested. Caenorhabditis elegans Cep-1 binding site of ced-13 is the following: AAACATGTTT(N)28AAACATGTTT.
Fig 1. p53 DNA binding domain sequence alignment of Homo sapiens, Mus musculus, Xenopus laevis, Danio rerio, Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans.Sequences were aligned using ClustalW tool [74] and the alignment was visualized using Jalview (http://www.jalview.org) [39]. The three shades of blue highlight different percentage agreement, respectively from darker to lighter in this order: >80%, >60%, >40%. A percentage agreement ≤40% is not highlighted. The alignment shows the conservation of human functional residues involved in DNA-protein interaction (solid box), zinc-binding (dashed box), DBD stability (asterisk, *), protein-protein interface (empty circle, #) and DBD thermostability (hash mark, #). Human zinc-binding and DNA-binding residue positions are also typed. On the top of the alignment, human p53 Loop, Sheet, Helix motifs (L, dashed lines; S, left-right double arrows; H, two-dimensional arrows) are also presented. Conservation and consensus graphs are shown. Conservation is visualized as a histogram with the relative score for each column. Conserved columns are indicated with an asterisk, and columns with mutations, where all properties are conserved, are marked with a plus. Consensus is displayed as the percentage of the modal residue per column. The plus symbol is used instead of displaying multiple characters in a single character space. A consensus logo is also generated and the scale of the letter is in agreement with the conservation of the residues.
Altenhoff,
OMA 2011: orthology inference among 1000 complete genomes.
2011, Pubmed
Altenhoff,
OMA 2011: orthology inference among 1000 complete genomes.
2011,
Pubmed
Andreotti,
p53 transactivation and the impact of mutations, cofactors and small molecules using a simplified yeast-based screening system.
2011,
Pubmed
Beckerman,
Transcriptional regulation by p53.
2010,
Pubmed
Beno,
Sequence-dependent cooperative binding of p53 to DNA targets and its relationship to the structural properties of the DNA targets.
2011,
Pubmed
Bensaad,
Change of conformation of the DNA-binding domain of p53 is the only key element for binding of and interference with p73.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Besaratinia,
Applications of the human p53 knock-in (Hupki) mouse model for human carcinogen testing.
2010,
Pubmed
Bisio,
Identification of new p53 target microRNAs by bioinformatics and functional analysis.
2013,
Pubmed
Bode,
Post-translational modification of p53 in tumorigenesis.
2004,
Pubmed
Brandt,
Stability of p53 homologs.
2012,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Brandt,
Conservation of DNA-binding specificity and oligomerisation properties within the p53 family.
2009,
Pubmed
Ciribilli,
Transactivation specificity is conserved among p53 family proteins and depends on a response element sequence code.
2013,
Pubmed
Cui,
Impact of Alu repeats on the evolution of human p53 binding sites.
2011,
Pubmed
D'Erchia,
The fatty acid synthase gene is a conserved p53 family target from worm to human.
2006,
Pubmed
Deutsch,
DNA damage in oocytes induces a switch of the quality control factor TAp63α from dimer to tetramer.
2011,
Pubmed
Dowell,
Transcription factor binding variation in the evolution of gene regulation.
2010,
Pubmed
Dötsch,
p63 and p73, the ancestors of p53.
2010,
Pubmed
Espinosa,
Mechanisms of regulatory diversity within the p53 transcriptional network.
2008,
Pubmed
Ethayathulla,
Crystal structures of the DNA-binding domain tetramer of the p53 tumor suppressor family member p73 bound to different full-site response elements.
2013,
Pubmed
Flaman,
A simple p53 functional assay for screening cell lines, blood, and tumors.
1995,
Pubmed
Gietz,
Studies on the transformation of intact yeast cells by the LiAc/SS-DNA/PEG procedure.
1995,
Pubmed
Gordon,
Tempo and mode in evolution of transcriptional regulation.
2012,
Pubmed
Herzog,
Evaluating Drosophila p53 as a model system for studying cancer mutations.
2012,
Pubmed
Horvath,
Divergent evolution of human p53 binding sites: cell cycle versus apoptosis.
2007,
Pubmed
Huson,
Dendroscope 3: an interactive tool for rooted phylogenetic trees and networks.
2012,
Pubmed
Huyen,
Structural differences in the DNA binding domains of human p53 and its C. elegans ortholog Cep-1.
2004,
Pubmed
Inga,
Differential transactivation by the p53 transcription factor is highly dependent on p53 level and promoter target sequence.
2002,
Pubmed
James,
Warmer is better: thermal sensitivity of both maximal and sustained power output in the iliotibialis muscle isolated from adult Xenopus tropicalis.
2012,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Jegga,
Functional evolution of the p53 regulatory network through its target response elements.
2008,
Pubmed
Joerger,
Structural evolution of p53, p63, and p73: implication for heterotetramer formation.
2009,
Pubmed
Joerger,
The tumor suppressor p53: from structures to drug discovery.
2010,
Pubmed
Jordan,
Noncanonical DNA motifs as transactivation targets by wild type and mutant p53.
2008,
Pubmed
Kennedy,
Mammalian transcription factors in yeast: strangers in a familiar land.
2002,
Pubmed
Kitayner,
Diversity in DNA recognition by p53 revealed by crystal structures with Hoogsteen base pairs.
2010,
Pubmed
Kitayner,
Structural basis of DNA recognition by p53 tetramers.
2006,
Pubmed
Lang,
Stress-induced, tissue-specific enrichment of hsp70 mRNA accumulation in Xenopus laevis embryos.
2000,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Larkin,
Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0.
2007,
Pubmed
Levine,
The first 30 years of p53: growing ever more complex.
2009,
Pubmed
Lion,
Interaction between p53 and estradiol pathways in transcriptional responses to chemotherapeutics.
2013,
Pubmed
Lozano,
Mouse models of p53 functions.
2010,
Pubmed
Lu,
p53 ancestry: gazing through an evolutionary lens.
2009,
Pubmed
Maeso,
Deep conservation of cis-regulatory elements in metazoans.
2013,
Pubmed
Marcel,
Biological functions of p53 isoforms through evolution: lessons from animal and cellular models.
2011,
Pubmed
Menendez,
Diverse stresses dramatically alter genome-wide p53 binding and transactivation landscape in human cancer cells.
2013,
Pubmed
Menendez,
The expanding universe of p53 targets.
2009,
Pubmed
Menendez,
Potentiating the p53 network.
2010,
Pubmed
Mercier,
Xenopus heat shock factor 1 is a nuclear protein before heat stress.
1997,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Micale,
A fish-specific transposable element shapes the repertoire of p53 target genes in zebrafish.
2012,
Pubmed
Monti,
∆N-P63α and TA-P63α exhibit intrinsic differences in transactivation specificities that depend on distinct features of DNA target sites.
2014,
Pubmed
Nagasawa,
Significant modulation of the hepatic proteome induced by exposure to low temperature in Xenopus laevis.
2013,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Nikolova,
Semirational design of active tumor suppressor p53 DNA binding domain with enhanced stability.
1998,
Pubmed
Ollmann,
Drosophila p53 is a structural and functional homolog of the tumor suppressor p53.
2000,
Pubmed
Ou,
Structural evolution of C-terminal domains in the p53 family.
2007,
Pubmed
Pagano,
Structure and stability insights into tumour suppressor p53 evolutionary related proteins.
2013,
Pubmed
Pan,
Comparison of the human and worm p53 structures suggests a way for enhancing stability.
2006,
Pubmed
Raimondi,
P53 family members modulate the expression of PRODH, but not PRODH2, via intronic p53 response elements.
2013,
Pubmed
Reamon-Buettner,
A loss-of-function mutation in the binding domain of HAND1 predicts hypoplasia of the human hearts.
2008,
Pubmed
Resnick,
Functional mutants of the sequence-specific transcription factor p53 and implications for master genes of diversity.
2003,
Pubmed
Rubinstein,
Evolution of transcriptional enhancers and animal diversity.
2013,
Pubmed
Rutkowski,
Phylogeny and function of the invertebrate p53 superfamily.
2010,
Pubmed
Schumacher,
The C. elegans homolog of the p53 tumor suppressor is required for DNA damage-induced apoptosis.
2001,
Pubmed
Schumacher,
C. elegans ced-13 can promote apoptosis and is induced in response to DNA damage.
2005,
Pubmed
Sievers,
Fast, scalable generation of high-quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega.
2011,
Pubmed
Sikorski,
A system of shuttle vectors and yeast host strains designed for efficient manipulation of DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
1989,
Pubmed
Simeonova,
Fuzzy tandem repeats containing p53 response elements may define species-specific p53 target genes.
2012,
Pubmed
Storer,
Zebrafish models of p53 functions.
2010,
Pubmed
Sullivan,
The p53 circuit board.
2012,
Pubmed
Tamura,
MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0.
2013,
Pubmed
Veprintsev,
Algorithm for prediction of tumour suppressor p53 affinity for binding sites in DNA.
2008,
Pubmed
Vousden,
Blinded by the Light: The Growing Complexity of p53.
2009,
Pubmed
Wagner,
The gene regulatory logic of transcription factor evolution.
2008,
Pubmed
Wang,
Redefining the p53 response element.
2009,
Pubmed
Wang,
Species-specific endogenous retroviruses shape the transcriptional network of the human tumor suppressor protein p53.
2007,
Pubmed
Waterhouse,
Jalview Version 2--a multiple sequence alignment editor and analysis workbench.
2009,
Pubmed
Wittkopp,
Cis-regulatory elements: molecular mechanisms and evolutionary processes underlying divergence.
2011,
Pubmed