Literature DB >> 29605182

Divergence in DNA Specificity among Paralogous Transcription Factors Contributes to Their Differential In Vivo Binding.

Ning Shen1, Jingkang Zhao2, Joshua L Schipper3, Yuning Zhang4, Tristan Bepler5, Dan Leehr5, John Bradley5, John Horton3, Hilmar Lapp5, Raluca Gordan6.   

Abstract

Paralogous transcription factors (TFs) are oftentimes reported to have identical DNA-binding motifs, despite the fact that they perform distinct regulatory functions. Differential genomic targeting by paralogous TFs is generally assumed to be due to interactions with protein co-factors or the chromatin environment. Using a computational-experimental framework called iMADS (integrative modeling and analysis of differential specificity), we show that, contrary to previous assumptions, paralogous TFs bind differently to genomic target sites even in vitro. We used iMADS to quantify, model, and analyze specificity differences between 11 TFs from 4 protein families. We found that paralogous TFs have diverged mainly at medium- and low-affinity sites, which are poorly captured by current motif models. We identify sequence and shape features differentially preferred by paralogous TFs, and we show that the intrinsic differences in specificity among paralogous TFs contribute to their differential in vivo binding. Thus, our study represents a step forward in deciphering the molecular mechanisms of differential specificity in TF families.
Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  E2F; ETS; RUNX; bHLH; differential protein-DNA binding; divergence in DNA specificity; genetic variation; iMADS; paralogous transcription factors

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29605182      PMCID: PMC6008103          DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2018.02.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Syst        ISSN: 2405-4712            Impact factor:   10.304


  96 in total

1.  Compact, universal DNA microarrays to comprehensively determine transcription-factor binding site specificities.

Authors:  Michael F Berger; Anthony A Philippakis; Aaron M Qureshi; Fangxue S He; Preston W Estep; Martha L Bulyk
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2006-09-24       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Distinguishing direct versus indirect transcription factor-DNA interactions.

Authors:  Raluca Gordân; Alexander J Hartemink; Martha L Bulyk
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2009-08-03       Impact factor: 9.043

3.  SMiLE-seq identifies binding motifs of single and dimeric transcription factors.

Authors:  Alina Isakova; Romain Groux; Michael Imbeault; Pernille Rainer; Daniel Alpern; Riccardo Dainese; Giovanna Ambrosini; Didier Trono; Philipp Bucher; Bart Deplancke
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 28.547

4.  Cofactor binding evokes latent differences in DNA binding specificity between Hox proteins.

Authors:  Matthew Slattery; Todd Riley; Peng Liu; Namiko Abe; Pilar Gomez-Alcala; Iris Dror; Tianyin Zhou; Remo Rohs; Barry Honig; Harmen J Bussemaker; Richard S Mann
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2011-12-09       Impact factor: 41.582

5.  Runx1 is essential for hematopoietic commitment at the hemangioblast stage of development in vitro.

Authors:  Georges Lacaud; Lia Gore; Marion Kennedy; Valerie Kouskoff; Paul Kingsley; Christopher Hogan; Leif Carlsson; Nancy Speck; James Palis; Gordon Keller
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2002-07-15       Impact factor: 22.113

6.  Factorbook.org: a Wiki-based database for transcription factor-binding data generated by the ENCODE consortium.

Authors:  Jie Wang; Jiali Zhuang; Sowmya Iyer; Xin-Ying Lin; Melissa C Greven; Bong-Hyun Kim; Jill Moore; Brian G Pierce; Xianjun Dong; Daniel Virgil; Ewan Birney; Jui-Hung Hung; Zhiping Weng
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 16.971

7.  Non-DNA-binding cofactors enhance DNA-binding specificity of a transcriptional regulatory complex.

Authors:  Trevor Siggers; Michael H Duyzend; Jessica Reddy; Sidra Khan; Martha L Bulyk
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 11.429

8.  Runx1 is required for hematopoietic defects and leukemogenesis in Cbfb-MYH11 knock-in mice.

Authors:  R K Hyde; L Zhao; L Alemu; P P Liu
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 11.528

9.  Stability selection for regression-based models of transcription factor-DNA binding specificity.

Authors:  Fantine Mordelet; John Horton; Alexander J Hartemink; Barbara E Engelhardt; Raluca Gordân
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-07-01       Impact factor: 6.937

10.  In vivo formaldehyde cross-linking: it is time for black box analysis.

Authors:  Alexey Gavrilov; Sergey V Razin; Giacomo Cavalli
Journal:  Brief Funct Genomics       Date:  2014-09-19       Impact factor: 4.241

View more
  15 in total

1.  Homotypic cooperativity and collective binding are determinants of bHLH specificity and function.

Authors:  Christian A Shively; Jiayue Liu; Xuhua Chen; Kaiser Loell; Robi D Mitra
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Quantitative analysis of transcription factor binding and expression using calling cards reporter arrays.

Authors:  Jiayue Liu; Christian A Shively; Robi D Mitra
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  QBiC-Pred: quantitative predictions of transcription factor binding changes due to sequence variants.

Authors:  Vincentius Martin; Jingkang Zhao; Ariel Afek; Zachery Mielko; Raluca Gordân
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 16.971

Review 4.  Low-Affinity Binding Sites and the Transcription Factor Specificity Paradox in Eukaryotes.

Authors:  Judith F Kribelbauer; Chaitanya Rastogi; Harmen J Bussemaker; Richard S Mann
Journal:  Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 13.827

Review 5.  Sequence and chromatin determinants of transcription factor binding and the establishment of cell type-specific binding patterns.

Authors:  Divyanshi Srivastava; Shaun Mahony
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Regul Mech       Date:  2019-10-19       Impact factor: 4.490

6.  Competition for DNA binding between paralogous transcription factors determines their genomic occupancy and regulatory functions.

Authors:  Yuning Zhang; Tiffany D Ho; Nicolas E Buchler; Raluca Gordân
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  HCF-2 inhibits cell proliferation and activates differentiation-gene expression programs.

Authors:  Daria Gudkova; Oleksandr Dergai; Viviane Praz; Winship Herr
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 16.971

8.  Chromatin Environment and Cellular Context Specify Compensatory Activity of Paralogous MEF2 Transcription Factors.

Authors:  Shahriyar P Majidi; Naveen C Reddy; Michael J Moore; Hao Chen; Tomoko Yamada; Milena M Andzelm; Timothy J Cherry; Linda S Hu; Michael E Greenberg; Azad Bonni
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 9.423

9.  The MYCL and MXD1 transcription factors regulate the fitness of murine dendritic cells.

Authors:  David A Anderson; Theresa L Murphy; Robert N Eisenman; Kenneth M Murphy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-02-18       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  DNA mismatches reveal conformational penalties in protein-DNA recognition.

Authors:  Ariel Afek; Honglue Shi; Atul Rangadurai; Harshit Sahay; Alon Senitzki; Suela Xhani; Mimi Fang; Raul Salinas; Zachery Mielko; Miles A Pufall; Gregory M K Poon; Tali E Haran; Maria A Schumacher; Hashim M Al-Hashimi; Raluca Gordân
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 49.962

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.