Literature DB >> 15451667

DNA binding and bending by HMG boxes: energetic determinants of specificity.

Anatoly I Dragan1, Christopher M Read, Elena N Makeyeva, Ekaterina I Milgotina, Mair E A Churchill, Colyn Crane-Robinson, Peter L Privalov.   

Abstract

To clarify the physical basis of DNA binding specificity, the thermodynamic properties and DNA binding and bending abilities of the DNA binding domains (DBDs) of sequence-specific (SS) and non-sequence-specific (NSS) HMG box proteins were studied with various DNA recognition sequences using micro-calorimetric and optical methods. Temperature-induced unfolding of the free DBDs showed that their structure does not represent a single cooperative unit but is subdivided into two (in the case of NSS DBDs) or three (in the case of SS DBDs) sub-domains, which differ in stability. Both types of HMG box, most particularly SS, are partially unfolded even at room temperature but association with DNA results in stabilization and cooperation of all the sub-domains. Binding and bending measurements using fluorescence spectroscopy over a range of ionic strengths, combined with calorimetric data, allowed separation of the electrostatic and non-electrostatic components of the Gibbs energies of DNA binding, yielding their enthalpic and entropic terms and an estimate of their contributions to DNA binding and bending. In all cases electrostatic interactions dominate non-electrostatic in the association of a DBD with DNA. The main difference between SS and NSS complexes is that SS are formed with an enthalpy close to zero and a negative heat capacity effect, while NSS are formed with a very positive enthalpy and a positive heat capacity effect. This indicates that formation of SS HMG box-DNA complexes is specified by extensive van der Waals contacts between apolar groups, i.e. a more tightly packed interface forms than in NSS complexes. The other principal difference is that DNA bending by the NSS DBDs is driven almost entirely by the electrostatic component of the binding energy, while DNA bending by SS DBDs is driven mainly by the non-electrostatic component. The basic extensions of both categories of HMG box play a similar role in DNA binding and bending, making solely electrostatic interactions with the DNA.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15451667     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.08.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Biol        ISSN: 0022-2836            Impact factor:   5.469


  59 in total

1.  Differential geometry based solvation model II: Lagrangian formulation.

Authors:  Zhan Chen; Nathan A Baker; G W Wei
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2011-01-30       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  Nonspecific DNA binding and bending by HUαβ: interfaces of the three binding modes characterized by salt-dependent thermodynamics.

Authors:  Junseock Koh; Irina Shkel; Ruth M Saecker; M Thomas Record
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 5.469

3.  DNA-binding domain of GCN4 induces bending of both the ATF/CREB and AP-1 binding sites of DNA.

Authors:  Anatoly I Dragan; Yingyun Liu; Elena N Makeyeva; Peter L Privalov
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2004-09-30       Impact factor: 16.971

4.  SYBR Green I: fluorescence properties and interaction with DNA.

Authors:  A I Dragan; R Pavlovic; J B McGivney; J R Casas-Finet; E S Bishop; R J Strouse; M A Schenerman; C D Geddes
Journal:  J Fluoresc       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 2.217

5.  Characterization of PicoGreen interaction with dsDNA and the origin of its fluorescence enhancement upon binding.

Authors:  A I Dragan; J R Casas-Finet; E S Bishop; R J Strouse; M A Schenerman; C D Geddes
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 4.033

6.  Parameter optimization in differential geometry based solvation models.

Authors:  Bao Wang; G W Wei
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 3.488

7.  Endonuclease-like activity of heme proteins.

Authors:  Willy B Tan; Wunhuey Cheng; Andrew Webber; Akhilesh Bhambhani; Michael R Duff; Challa V Kumar; George L McLendon
Journal:  J Biol Inorg Chem       Date:  2005-11-08       Impact factor: 3.358

Review 8.  What drives proteins into the major or minor grooves of DNA?

Authors:  Peter L Privalov; Anatoly I Dragan; Colyn Crane-Robinson; Kenneth J Breslauer; David P Remeta; Conceição A S A Minetti
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 5.469

Review 9.  Optical tweezers experiments resolve distinct modes of DNA-protein binding.

Authors:  Micah J McCauley; Mark C Williams
Journal:  Biopolymers       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.505

10.  Enhancement of DNA flexibility in vitro and in vivo by HMGB box A proteins carrying box B residues.

Authors:  Nadia T Sebastian; Emily M Bystry; Nicole A Becker; L James Maher
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 3.162

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.