Skip to main content
Log in

High affinity DNA-microtubule interactions: evidence for a conserved DNA-MAP interaction involving unusual high CsCl density repetitious DNA families

  • Published:
Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We have examined high affinity interactions of chick brain microtubule proteins with 35S labelled tracer DNAs from chick, mouse and D. melanogaster under equilibrium conditions by the nitrocellulose filter binding technique. Ternary reaction mixtures of the above two components and a third component, an excess of unlabelled competitor DNA from either E. coli., mouse, D. melanogaster or chick, were used to measure small fractions of DNA in each case (1–4%) bound to microtubule protein under high stringency- large competitor DNA concentration and 0.5 M NaCl. As seen in part previously (Marx, K.A. and Denial, T. (1985) in The Molecular Basis of Cancer, 172B, 65–75 (Rein, ed), A. Liss, N.Y.) the measured order of competitor DNA strengths was identical for all three tracer DNAs. That is: chick > mouse > D. melanogaster > E. coli competitor DNA. Since the homologous interaction, chick competitor DNA with chick brain microtubule protein, is always the strongest interaction measured, we interpret this as evidence for a conserved protein-DNA sequence interaction. 35S chick DNA tracer sequences, isolated from nitrocellulose filters following the stringent binding in the presence of 0.9 mM−1 E. coli. competitor DNA, was used in driven reassociation reactions with total chick driver DNA. This fraction was found to be significantly enriched in repetitive chick DNA sequences. Since we have observed a similar phenomenon in mouse, we then compared the stringent binding mouse sequences and showed that the bulk of these sequences did not cross-hybridize with total chick DNA. Finally, all three 35S tracer DNAs binding to nitrocellulose were isolated and sedimented to equilibrium on CsCl density gradients. The CsCl density distributions from all three DNAs showed significant (100-fold) enrichment in classical satellite DNAs as well as higher enrichment in two very unusual high CsCl density families of DNA (1.720–1.740 g/cm3; 1.750–1.765 g/cm3). These families are never observed as distinct bands in total DNA CsCl gradients, nor could we isolate them in purified tubulin control binding experiments. This apparently general phenomena may be identifying some of the sequence families involved in the high affinity microtubule interaction, which appears to be conserved in evolution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sluder G: Functional Properties of kinetochores in animal cells. Current Opinion in Cell Biology 2: 23–27, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pluta AF, Cooke CA, Earnshaw WC: Structure of the Human Centromere at metaphase. Trends in Biochem Sci 15: 181–185, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lechner J, Carbon J: A 240 kd Multisubunit Protein Complex, CBF3, Is a Major Component of the Budding Yeast Centromere. Cell 64: 717–725, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rieder CL: The Formation, Structure and Composition of the mammalian kinetochore and kinetochore fibre. Int Rev Cytol 79: 1–58, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  5. Corces VG, Salas J, Salas ML, Avila J: Binding of Microtubule Proteins to DNA: Specificity of the Interaction: Eur J Biochem 86: 473–479, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  6. Corces VG, Manso R, Dela Torre J, Avila J, Nasr A, Wiche G: Effects of DNA on Microtubule Assembly. Eur J Biochem 105: 7–16, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  7. Villasante A, Corces VG, Manso-Martinez R, Avila J: Binding of Microtubule Protein to DNA and Chromatin: Possibility of Simultaneous Linkage of Microtubule to Nucleic Acid and Assembly of the Microtubule Structure: Nuc Acids Res 9: 895–908, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  8. Avila J, Montejo de Garcini E, Wandosell F, Villasante A, Sogo JM, Villanueva N: Microtubule Associated Protein MAP2 Preferentially binds to a dA/dT Sequence Present in Mouse Satellite DNA: The EMBO J. 2, 1229–1234, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hancock JM, Burns RG: Specificity and Biological Significance of microtubule associated protein-DNA Interactions: Biochim Biophys Acta 927: 163–168, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  10. Shelanski ML, Gaskin F, Cantor CR: Isolation of Functional Microtubule Protein From Eukaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA: 70: 765–768, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  11. Marx KA, Denial T, Keller T: High Affinity Microtubule Protein-Higher Organism DNA Complexes: Many Fold Enrichment in Repetitive Mouse DNA Sequences comprised of Satellite DNA DNAs. Biochim Biophys Acta 783: 383–392, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  12. Marx KA: High Affinity DNA-Microtubule Associated Protein Interaction: Mol. and Cell. Biochemistry 113: 55–61, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  13. Marx KA, Denial T: Chromosomal Segregation, Kinetochores and DNA-Microtubule Interaction: A Preferential Satellite DNA-MAP Interaction may be Conserved in Evolution. In: Molecular Basis of Cancer 172B, Alan R. Liss. Inc., 65–75, 1985

  14. Eden FC, Hendrick JP: Unusual Sequence Organization of DNA Sequences in the Chicken: Biochemistry. 17: 5838–5844, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mayfield JE: A Comparison of the Differential DNA Melting Profiles with the CsCl Density Profiles of DNA from E. coli., Cow, Mouse, Rat and Chicken: Biochim Biophys Acta 477: 97–101, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  16. Colbert DA, Edwards K, Coleman JR: Minor Satellite DNAs in Drosophila. Differentiation 5: 91–96, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cortadas J, Olofsson B, Meunier-Rotival M, Macaya G, Bernar di G: The DNA Components of the Chicken Genome: Eur J Biochem 99: 179–186, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shen CJ, Wiesehahn G, Hearst J: Cleavage Patterns of Drosophila melanogaster satellite DNA by restriction enzymes: Nucl Acids Res 3: 931–951, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mello C, Marx KA: The Affinity of DNA-Microtubule Associated Protein Complexes and their Disruption by Tubulin Binding Drugs: J Biomolecular Structure & Dynamics. 9: 791–805, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fitzgerald-Hayes M, Clarke L, Carbon J: Nucleotide Sequence Comparisons and Functional Analysis of Yeast Centromere DNAs. Cell 29: 235–244, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  21. CRC Handbook of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology II, G. Fasman ed. CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio, p. 380

  22. Marx KA: Differential Condensation of DNA Families in Mouse Chromatin: Accessibility to Nuclease Probes: Biochem Biophys Res Comm 78: 777–784, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rattner JB, Krystal G, Hamkalo BA: Electron Microscopic Visualization of Nuclease Digested Metaphase Chromosomes. Chromosoma 66: 259–268, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  24. Balczon R, Brinkley BR: Tubulin Interaction with Kinetochore Proteins: Analysis by in vitro Assembly and Chemical Crosslinking. J Cell Bio 105: 855–862, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  25. Aizawa J, Kawasaki H, Murofushi H, Kotani S, Suzuki K, Sakai H: Microtubule binding domain of tau proteins. J Biol Chem 263: 7703–7707, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  26. Vallee RB: Molecular Characterization of High Molecular Weight Microtubule-Associated Proteins: Some Answers, Many Questions. Cell Motility and the Cytoskeleton. 15: 204–209, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wiche G: High Mr microtubule-associated proteins: properties and functions. Biochem J 259: 1–12, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  28. Harrison A, Hyams JS: Mapping MAP-2. J Cell Science 96: 347–349, 1990

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marx, K.A., Denial, T. High affinity DNA-microtubule interactions: evidence for a conserved DNA-MAP interaction involving unusual high CsCl density repetitious DNA families. Mol Cell Biochem 118, 39–48 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00249693

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00249693

Key words

Navigation