Identification of Transcription Factor-Binding Sites in the Mouse FOXO1 Promoter

  • Christopher P. CardozoEmail author
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1890)


One critical determinant of levels of gene expression is binding of transcription factors to cognate DNA sequences in promoter and enhancer regions of target genes. Transcription factors are DNA-binding proteins to which transcriptional co-regulators are bound, ultimately resulting in histone modifications that change chromatin structure to regulate transcription. Examples of transcription factors include hormone-activated transcription factors such as the glucocorticoid receptor, transcription factors regulated by cell surface receptors such as FOXO1 and Smad2/Smad3, and many others. Promoter regions typically contain multiple, diverse transcription factor-binding sites. Binding sites for cell-type-specific transcription factors involved in cell fate determination such as Runx2, MyoD, or myogenin are frequently observed. Promoter regions are located within ~2 kb upstream of the transcriptional start site, whereas enhancers may be located at some distance from promoter sequences and exert long-range effects. Here, we will discuss classical and emerging technologies by which one can understand the role of binding of specific transcription factors in regulation of transcription of FOXO genes.

Key words

Promoter Enhancer Transcription factor Transcriptional effector Glucocorticoids Glucocorticoid receptor Chromatin Epigenetics Histones 



This work was supported by VA Rehabilitation Research and Development Grant B-2020-C.


  1. 1.
    Kadmiel M, Cidlowski JA (2013) Glucocorticoid receptor signaling in health and disease. Trends Pharmacol Sci 34:518–530. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weikum ER, Knuesel MT, Ortlund EA, Yamamoto KR (2017) Glucocorticoid receptor control of transcription: precision and plasticity via allostery. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 18:159–174. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Jaime-Soguero A, Abreu de Oliveira WA, Lluis F (2018) The Pleiotropic effects of the canonical Wnt pathway in early development and pluripotency. Genes (Basel) 9(2). pii: E93. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Masek J, Andersson ER (2017) The developmental biology of genetic Notch disorders. Development 144:1743–1763. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parchure A, Vyas N, Mayor S (2018) Wnt and hedgehog: secretion of lipid-modified morphogens. Trends Cell Biol 28:157–170. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siebel C, Lendahl U (2017) Notch signaling in development, tissue homeostasis, and disease. Physiol Rev 97:1235–1294. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sarfstein R, Werner H (2013) Minireview: nuclear insulin and insulin-like growth factor-1 receptors: a novel paradigm in signal transduction. Endocrinology 154:1672–1679. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Qin W, Pan J, Qin Y, Lee DN, Bauman WA, Cardozo C (2014) Identification of functional glucocorticoid response elements in the mouse FoxO1 promoter. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 450:979–983. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhao W, Pan J, Wang X, Wu Y, Bauman WA, Cardozo CP (2008) Expression of the muscle atrophy factor muscle atrophy F-box is suppressed by testosterone. Endocrinology 149:5449–5460. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wu Y et al (2007) Identification of androgen response elements in the insulin-like growth factor I upstream promoter. Endocrinology 148:2984–2993. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wu Y et al (2007) Identification of androgen response elements in the IGF-1 upstream promoter. Endocrinology 148:2984–2993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu XH, De Gasperi R, Bauman WA, Cardozo CP (2018) Nandrolone-induced nuclear accumulation of MyoD protein is mediated by Numb, a Notch inhibitor, in C2C12 myoblasts. Physiol Rep 6. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu Y, Ruggiero CL, Bauman WA, Cardozo C (2013) Ankrd1 is a transcriptional repressor for the androgen receptor that is downregulated by testosterone. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 437:355–360. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu XH et al (2013) Androgens up-regulate transcription of the Notch inhibitor Numb in C2C12 myoblasts via Wnt/beta-catenin signaling to T cell factor elements in the Numb promoter. J Biol Chem 288:17990–17998. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim TK, Shiekhattar R (2015) Architectural and functional commonalities between enhancers and promoters. Cell 162:948–959. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Furey TS (2012) ChIP-seq and beyond: new and improved methodologies to detect and characterize protein-DNA interactions. Nat Rev Genet 13:840–852. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ghavi-Helm Y, Zhao B, Furlong EE (2016) Chromatin immunoprecipitation for analyzing transcription factor binding and histone modifications in drosophila. Methods Mol Biol 1478:263–277. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park PJ (2009) ChIP-seq: advantages and challenges of a maturing technology. Nat Rev Genet 10:669–680. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yan H, Tian S, Slager SL, Sun Z (2016) ChIP-seq in studying epigenetic mechanisms of disease and promoting precision medicine: progresses and future directions. Epigenomics 8:1239–1258. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Biterge B, Schneider R (2014) Histone variants: key players of chromatin. Cell Tissue Res 356:457–466. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Graff J, Tsai LH (2013) Histone acetylation: molecular mnemonics on the chromatin. Nat Rev Neurosci 14:97–111. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tessarz P, Kouzarides T (2014) Histone core modifications regulating nucleosome structure and dynamics. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 15:703–708. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Baek S, Sung MH (2016) Genome-scale analysis of cell-specific regulatory codes using nuclear enzymes. Methods Mol Biol 1418:225–240. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Degner JF et al (2012) DNase I sensitivity QTLs are a major determinant of human expression variation. Nature 482:390–394. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Filichkin SA, Megraw M (2017) DNase I SIM: a simplified in-nucleus method for DNase I hypersensitive site sequencing. Methods Mol Biol 1629:141–154. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Medical Consequences of Spinal Cord Injury, James J Peters Medical CenterBronxUSA
  2. 2.Icahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations