Advertisement

Molecular mechanisms of the protein-protein interaction–regulated binding specificity of basic-region leucine zipper transcription factors

  • Qing Li
  • Le Xiong
  • Jun GaoEmail author
  • Hong-Yu ZhangEmail author
Original Paper
  • 75 Downloads

Abstract

It is well known that the DNA-binding specificity of transcription factors (TFs) is influenced by protein-protein interactions (PPIs). However, the underlying molecular mechanisms remain largely unknown. In this work, we adopted the cAMP-response element-binding protein (CREB) of the basic leucine zipper (bZIP) TF family as a model system, and a workflow of combined bioinformatics and molecular modeling analysis of protein-DNA interaction was tested. First, the multiple sequence alignment and SDPsite method were used to find potential bZIP family binding specificity determining positions (SDPs) within the protein-protein interaction region. Second, the mutation system was analyzed using molecular dynamics simulation. Molecular mechanics Poisson-Boltzmann surface area (MM/PBSA) free energy calculations confirmed the enhancement of the binding affinity of the mutation, which was in agreement with experimental results. The root mean square fluctuation (RMSF) and hydrogen bonding changes suggested an open and close protein dimerization process after the system was mutated, which resulted in the change of the hydrogen bonding of the protein-DNA interface and a slight conformational change. We believe that this work will contribute to understanding the protein-protein interaction–regulated binding specificity of bZIP transcription factors.

Keywords

Transcription factors Binding specificity Protein-protein interactions Specificity determining positions Molecular dynamics simulation 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFB0203405), National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 21873034, 31670779), Fundamental Research for the Central Universities (Project 2662018JC027), and Huazhong Agricultural University Scientific & Technological Self Innovation Foundation (Program No. 2015RC008).

Supplementary material

894_2019_4138_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (149 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 148 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Levine M, Tjian R (2003) Transcription regulation and animal diversity. Nature 424(6945):147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levine M, Cattoglio C, Tjian R (2014) Looping back to leap forward: transcription enters a new era. Cell 157(1):13–25PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Klemm JD, Schreiber SL, Crabtree GR (1998) Dimerization as a regulatory mechanism in signal transduction. Annu Rev Immunol 16(1):569–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jolma A, Yin Y, Nitta KR, Dave K, Popov A, Taipale M, Enge M, Kivioja T, Morgunova E, Taipale J (2015) DNA-dependent formation of transcription factor pairs alters their binding specificity. Nature 527(7578):384–388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slattery M, Riley T, Liu P, Abe N, Gomezalcala P, Dror I, Zhou T, Rohs R, Honig B, Bussemaker HJ (2011) Cofactor binding evokes latent differences in DNA binding specificity between Hox proteins. Cell 147(6):1270–1282PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amoutzias GD, Veron AS, Robinson-Rechavi M, Bornberg-Bauer E, Oliver SG, Robertson DL (2006) One billion years of bZIP transcription factor evolution: conservation and change in dimerization and DNA-binding site specificity. Mol Biol Evol 24(3):827–835PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Newman JR, Keating AE (2003) Comprehensive identification of human bZIP interactions with coiled-coil arrays. Science 300(5628):2097–2101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deppmann CD, Alvania RS, Taparowsky EJ (2006) Cross-species annotation of basic leucine zipper factor interactions: insight into the evolution of closed interaction networks. Mol Biol Evol 23(8):1480–1492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Potapov V, Kaplan JB, Keating AE (2015) Data-driven prediction and design of bZIP coiled-coil interactions. PLoS Comput Biol 11(2):e1004046PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vinson C, Acharya A, Taparowsky EJ (2006) Deciphering B-ZIP transcription factor interactions in vitro and in vivo. Biochim Biophys Acta Gene Struct Expr 1759(1–2):4–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Montclare JK, Sloan LS, Schepartz A (2001) Electrostatic control of half-site spacing preferences by the cyclic AMP response element-binding protein CREB. Nucleic Acids Res 29(16):3311–3319PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu J, Zheng Q, Deng Y, Cheng C-S, Kallenbach NR, Lu M (2006) A seven-helix coiled coil. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(42):15457–15462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fujii Y, Shimizu T, Toda T, Yanagida M, Hakoshima T (2000) Structural basis for the diversity of DNA recognition by bZIP transcription factors. Nat Struct Biol 7(10):889PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson PF (1993) Identification of C/EBP basic region residues involved in DNA sequence recognition and half-site spacing preference. Mol Cell Biol 13(11):6919PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim J, Tzamarias D, Ellenberger T, Harrison SC, Struhl K (1993) Adaptability at the protein-DNA interface is an important aspect of sequence recognition by bZIP proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci 90(10):4513–4517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kurokawa H, Motohashi H, Sueno S, Kimura M, Takagawa H, Kanno Y, Yamamoto M, Tanaka T (2009) Structural basis of alternative DNA recognition by Maf transcription factors. Mol Cell Biol 29(23):6232–6244PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Metallo SJ, Schepartz A (1994) Distribution of labor among bZIP segments in the control of DNA affinity and specificity. Chem Biol 1(3):143–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suckow M, Von WB, Müllerhill B (1993) Identification of three residues in the basic regions of the bZIP proteins GCN4, C/EBP and TAF-1 that are involved in specific DNA binding. EMBO J 12(3):1193–1200PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hai T, Curran T (1991) Cross-family dimerization of transcription factors Fos/Jun and ATF/CREB alters DNA binding specificity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 88(9):3720–3724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kouzarides T, Ziff E (1989) Leucine zippers of fos, jun and GCN4 dictate dimerization specificity and thereby control DNA binding. Nature 340(6234):568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pogenberg V, Textor LC, Vanhille L, Holton SJ, Sieweke MH, Wilmanns M (2014) Design of a bZip transcription factor with homo/heterodimer-induced DNA-binding preference. Structure 22(3):466–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reinke AW, Baek J, Ashenberg O, Keating AE (2013) Networks of bZIP protein-protein interactions diversified over a billion years of evolution. Science 340(6133):730–734PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chu WY, Huang YF, Huang CC, Cheng YS, Huang CK, Oyang YJ (2009) ProteDNA: a sequence-based predictor of sequence-specific DNA-binding residues in transcription factors. Nucleic Acids Res 37(suppl_2):396–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Donald JE, Shakhnovich EI (2005) Predicting specificity-determining residues in two large eukaryotic transcription factor families. Nucleic Acids Res 33(14):4455–4465PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ka-Chun W, Yue L, Peng C, Moses AM, Zhang Z (2015) Computational learning on specificity-determining residue-nucleotide interactions. Nucleic Acids Res 43(21):10180–10189Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Merino F, Bouvier B, Cojocaru V (2015) Cooperative DNA recognition modulated by an interplay between protein-protein interactions and DNA-mediated allostery. PLoS Comput Biol 11(6):e1004287PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pan Y, Nussinov R (2011) The role of response elements organization in transcription factor selectivity: the IFN-β enhanceosome example. PLoS Comput Biol 7(6):e1002077PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chakraborty A, Chakrabarti S (2014) A survey on prediction of specificity-determining sites in proteins. Brief Bioinform 16(1):71–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    De JD, Pazos F, Valencia A (2013) Emerging methods in protein co-evolution. Nat Rev Genet 14(4):249Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kalinina OV, Gelfand MS, Russell RB (2009) Combining specificity determining and conserved residues improves functional site prediction. BMC Bioinf 10(1):174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Edgar RC (2004) MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res 32(5):1792–1797PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol 30(12):2725–2729PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Viktor H, Robert A, Asim O, Bentley S, Adrian R, Carlos S (2006) Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf 65(3):712–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Temiz NA, Donohue DE, Bacolla A, Luke BT, Collins JR (2012) The role of methylation in the intrinsic dynamics of B- and Z-DNA. PLoS One 7(4):e35558PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Steinmann C, Olsson MA, Ryde U (2018) Relative ligand-binding free energies calculated from multiple short QM/MM MD simulations. J Chem Theory Comput 14(6):3228–3237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Genheden S, Ryde U (2015) The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities. Expert Opin Drug Discovery 10(5):449–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hou T, Wang J, Li Y, Wang W (2011) Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 1. The accuracy of binding free energy calculations based on molecular dynamics simulations. J Chem Inf Model 51(1):69–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Iii BRM, Jr MG, Swails JM, Homeyer N, Gohlke H, Roitberg AE (2012) MMPBSA.py: an efficient program for end-state free energy calculations. J Chem Theory Comput 8(9):3314–3321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Humphrey WF, Dalke A, Schulten K (1996) VMD: visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graph 14(1):33–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bie L, Du L, Yuan Q, Gao J (2018) How a single 5-methylation of cytosine regulates the recognition of C/EBPβ transcription factor: a molecular dynamic simulation study. J Mol Model 24(7):159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sun H, Li Y, Shen M, Tian S, Xu L, Pan P, Guan Y, Hou T (2014) Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 5. Improved docking performance using high solute dielectric constant MM/GBSA and MM/PBSA rescoring. Phys Chem Chem Phys 16(40):22035–22045PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wu GZ, Asai S, Sumita M, Yui H (2002) Entropy penalty-induced self-assembly in carbon black or carbon fiber filled polymer blends. Macromolecules 35(3):945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Slattery M, Zhou T, Yang L, Dantas Machado AC, Gordan R, Rohs R (2014) Absence of a simple code: how transcription factors read the genome. Trends Biochem Sci 39(9):381–399PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chen J, Zhang Z, Li L, Chen BC, Revyakin A, Hajj B, Legant W, Dahan M, Lionnet T, Betzig E, Tjian R, Liu Z (2014) Single-molecule dynamics of enhanceosome assembly in embryonic stem cells. Cell 156(6):1274–1285PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shimamoto N (1999) One-dimensional diffusion of proteins along DNA. J Biol Chem 274(22):15293–15296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hubei Key Laboratory of Agricultural Bioinformatics, College of InformaticsHuazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations