Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “REPRESSION”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 487 records · Page 27Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

The Set2 methyltransferase associates with Ssn6 yet Tup1-Ssn6 repression is independent of histone methylation.

The Tup1-Ssn6 corepressor regulates the expression of diverse classes of genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Chromatin is an important component of Tup1-Ssn6-mediated repression. Tup1 binds to underacetylated tails of histones H3 and H4, and requires multiple histone deacetylases for the repression. Here we examine if histone methylation, in addition to histone deacetylation, plays a role in Tup1-Ssn6 repression. We found that like other genes, Tup1-Ssn6 target genes exhibit increased levels of histone H3 lysine 4 trimethylation upon activation. However, deletion of individual or multiple histone methyltransferases and other SET-domain containing genes has no apparent effect on Tup1-Ssn6-mediated repression of a number of well-defined targets. Interestingly, we discovered that Ssn6 interacts with Set2. Although deletion of SET2 does not affect Tup1-Ssn6 repression of a number of target genes, Ssn6 may utilize Set2 in specific contexts to regulate gene repression.

DNA-Binding Proteins↗
PubMed2006

RET finger protein enhances MBD2- and MBD4-dependent transcriptional repression.

We recently demonstrated that MBD4 possesses the ability to repress transcription through methyl-CpG and is associated with methylated promoters in the CDKN2A and MLH1 genes. In order to further investigate the role of MBD4 in methylation-based transcriptional repression, a yeast two-hybrid screening was performed, and the RET finger protein (RFP) was found to be one of the major proteins that interact with the transcriptional repression domain in MBD4. The effect of the MBD4-mediated transcriptional repression in methylated CDKN2A and MLH1 promoters was extremely enhanced by the overexpression of RFP. Furthermore, RFP forms a protein complex not only with MBD4 but also with MBD2 or MBD3 and was shown to enhance transcriptional repression through MBD2. These results suggest that RFP is a mediator connecting several MBD proteins and allowing the formation of a more potent transcriptional repressor complex. Because RFP has been detected at high levels in a variety of tumor cell lines as well as testis, and embryos, RFP may have an important role in the enhancement of transcriptional repression through MBD proteins in tumorigenesis, spermatogenesis, and embryogenesis.

DNA-Binding Proteins↗
PubMed2006

Retinoic acid receptor beta2 is epigenetically silenced either by DNA methylation or repressive histone modifications at the promoter in cervical cancer cells.

To elucidate the silencing mechanism of retinoic acid receptor beta2 (RAR beta2) in cervical carcinogenesis, we investigated RAR beta2 expression and the status of both DNA methylation and histone modifications at the promoter in cervical cancer cell lines. RAR beta2 was frequently repressed in cancer cell lines and in primary cancers of the cervix. Although the majority of RAR beta2-negative cancers had methylated promoter, RAR beta2 was repressed with hypomethylated promoter in a substantial fraction of the cancers. The RAR beta2-negative cells with hypomethylated promoters showed a repressive histone modification pattern at the promoter. RAR beta2 was reactivated by a histone deacetylase inhibitor, accompanied by formation of active histone modifications. The repressive modification was also observed in cells repressed with hypermethylated promoter, but RAR beta2 was reactivated only by DNA demethylating agent and not by histone deacetylase inhibitor. Our results suggest that RAR beta2 is silenced by either of the two key epigenetic pathways, DNA methylation or repressive histone modifications, depending on the individual cancer cells.

Base Sequence↗
PubMed2004

CreA-mediated carbon catabolite repression of beta-galactosidase formation in Aspergillus nidulans is growth rate dependent.

Carbon catabolite repression by the CreA-transcriptional repressor is widespread in filamentous fungi, but the mechanism by which glucose triggers carbon catabolite repression is still poorly understood. We investigated the hypothesis that the growth rate on glucose may control CreA-dependent carbon catabolite repression by using glucose-limited chemostat cultures and the intracellular beta-galactosidase activity of Aspergillus nidulans, which is repressed by glucose, as a model system. Chemostat cultures at four different dilution rates (D = 0.095, 0.068, 0.045 and 0.015 h-1) showed that formation of beta-galactosidase activity is repressed at the two highest Ds, but increasingly derepressed at the lower Ds, the activity at 0.015 h-1 equalling that in derepressed batch cultures. Chemostat cultures with the carbon catabolite derepressed A. nidulans mutant strain creADelta4 revealed a dilution-rate independent constant beta-galactosidase activity of the same range as that found in the wild-type strain at D = 0.015 h-1. Two other enzymes--isocitrate lyase, which is almost absent on glucose due to a CreA-independent mechanism; and galactokinase, which is formed constitutively and independent of CreA--were measured as controls. They were formed at constant activity at each dilution rate, both in the wild-type strain as well as in the carbon catabolite derepressed mutant strain. We conclude that the growth rate on glucose is a determinant of carbon catabolite repression in A. nidulans, and that below a certain growth rate carbon catabolite derepression occurs.

Aspergillus nidulans↗
PubMed2006

Gene repression by Pax5 in B cells is essential for blood cell homeostasis and is reversed in plasma cells.

The transcription factor Pax5 represses lineage-inappropriate genes and activates B cell-specific genes in B lymphocytes. By identifying 110 Pax5-repressed genes, we now demonstrate that Pax5 downregulates diverse biological activities including receptor signaling, cell adhesion, migration, transcriptional control, and cellular metabolism at B cell commitment. The T lymphoid or myeloid expression of these genes demonstrates that Pax5(-/-) pro-B cells and common lymphoid progenitors display lymphoid and myeloid promiscuity of gene expression. These lineage-inappropriate genes require continuous Pax5 activity for their repression, as they are reactivated in committed pro-B cells and mature B cells following conditional Pax5 deletion. Pax5-repressed genes are also reexpressed in plasma cells, which depend for normal function on Cd28 and Ccr2 reactivation. The loss of Pax5 during terminal differentiation thus contributes to the plasma cell transcription program. Finally, ectopic expression of the Pax5-repressed chemokine gene Ccl3 in B cells results in increased osteoclast formation and bone loss, demonstrating that Pax5-mediated gene repression is essential for normal homeostasis of hematopoietic development.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Repression of cancer protective genes by 17beta-estradiol: ligand-dependent interaction between human Nrf2 and estrogen receptor alpha.

Repression of cancer-protective phase II enzymes may help explain why estrogen exposure leads to the development of cancer. In an earlier report we described the ability of 17beta-estradiol (E(2)) to repress phase II enzyme activity in vivo. Phase II enzymes are coordinately regulated via the presence of the antioxidant response element (ARE) in their promoter. We wanted to determine if estrogen receptors (ER) repress ARE-dependent gene expression through a mechanism that requires interaction with Nrf2, the transcription factor that regulates ARE-mediated gene transcription. E(2)-bound ERalpha, but not ERbeta, represses ARE-regulated gene expression in the presence of exogenously expressed Nrf2 as well as when the transactivation domain of Nrf2 was fused to a heterologous DNA-binding domain. Deletion of the activation function-2 (AF-2) and the ligand-binding domain of ERalpha result in a constitutive repression of Nrf2-mediated transcription. Finally, E(2)-bound ERalpha co-immunoprecipitates with Nrf2. Repression of Nrf2-mediated transcription by E(2)-bound ERalpha expands our knowledge of E(2)-regulated genes and provides a potential drug-screening target for the development of selective estrogen receptor modulators with a lower risk of causing cancer.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Ligand-activated PPARbeta efficiently represses the induction of LXR-dependent promoter activity through competition with RXR.

Angiopoietin-like protein 3 (angptl3), a member of the vascular endothelial growth factor family, was shown to play an important role in regulating lipid metabolism. To elucidate the mechanism by which PPARbeta represses angptl3 promoter activity, reporter constructs were prepared and transfection analysis carried out. PPARbeta repressed angptl3-Luc promoter activity and activation of PPARbeta by L-165041, a PPARbeta-specific ligand, increased the extent of repression. The repression by L-165041 was lost in angptl3-Luc plasmids having a deleted or mutated LXRalpha binding site (DR4). PPARbetaL405R, deficient in RXRalpha binding, had no effect on angptl3-Luc promoter activity. PPARbeta did not repress the activity of GAL4-LXRalpha which activates of GAL4DBD TK-Luc independent of RXR. Addition of RXRalpha completely abolished the repression of angptl3-Luc activity by PPARbeta. Mammalian two-hybrid analysis revealed that PPARbeta ligand binding enhanced the dissociation of the LXRalpha-RXRalpha heterodimer. Gel shift assays also indicated that PPARbeta ligand binding increased dissociation of LXRalpha/RXRalpha binding to a DR4 oligonucleotide probe; addition of RXRalpha restored the binding lost by addition of PPARbeta. Collectively, these results suggest that the binding of PPARbeta-specific ligand enhances the affinity between RXRalpha and activated PPARbeta and thus may regulate angptl3 gene expression through a DR4 element by competing with LXRalpha for RXRalpha.

Acetates↗
PubMed2006

Distinct roles of unliganded and liganded estrogen receptors in transcriptional repression.

The decline in estrogen levels during menopause is associated with increased cytokine production and inflammatory diseases. Estrogens exert anti-inflammatory effects by repressing cytokine genes, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha). The mechanisms involved in transcriptional repression by estrogens are virtually unknown. Here, we used chromatin immunoprecipitation to investigate how estrogens repress the autoinduction of the TNFalpha gene. TNFalpha assembled a transcriptional activation complex at the TNFalpha promoter that includes c-jun, p50-NFkappaB, p65-NFkappaB, CBP, Hsp90, and unliganded estrogen receptor (ER). Estradiol repressed TNFalpha gene expression by reversing the ligand-independent activation by ERalpha and the stimulatory actions of c-jun, NFkappaB, and CBP on transcription. Silencing of GRIP1 reversed the repression of TNFalpha and other cytokine genes by estradiol, demonstrating that GRIP1 is required for transcriptional repression and can act as a corepressor. Our study demonstrates that ERalpha is a TNFalpha-induced coactivator that becomes a repressor in the presence of estradiol by recruiting GRIP1.

CREB-Binding Protein↗
PubMed2005

The cyclooxygenase inhibitor indomethacin modulates gene expression and represses the extracellular matrix protein laminin gamma1 in human glioblastoma cells.

The induction of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression is associated with more aggressive gliomas and poor survival. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit COX activity and have antitumorigenic properties. In this report, our initial aim was to determine if indomethacin would alter gene expression as measured by suppression subtractive hybridization (SSH). Three up-regulated and four down-regulated genes by indomethacin treatment were identified. Laminin gamma1, an extracellular matrix molecule, was the most significantly repressed gene. The repression of laminin gamma1 by indomethacin was confirmed by Northern and Western blot analyses and occurred in a concentration- and time-dependent manner at the protein level. Among several NSAIDs tested, only sulindac sulfide and indomethacin suppressed laminin gamma1 protein expression, and this repression was observed in both COX-expressing and -deficient cell lines, suggesting that laminin gamma1 repression by COX inhibitors was independent of COX. Indomethacin, at a concentration that represses laminin gamma1, inhibited glioblastoma cell invasion that was partially restored with additional human laminin protein containing gamma1 chain. The repression of laminin gamma1 by NSAIDs may be related to attenuation of invasion of brain tumors. These findings are important in understanding the chemopreventive activity of some NSAIDs and could be relevant for designing therapeutic strategies against glioblastoma.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed1998

Transcription activation and repression by interaction of a regulator with the alpha subunit of RNA polymerase: the model of phage phi 29 protein p4.

Regulatory protein p4, encoded by Bacillus subtilis phage phi 29, has proved to be a very useful model to analyze the molecular mechanisms of transcription regulation. Protein p4 modulates the transcription of phage phi 29 genome by activating the late A3 promoter (PA3) and simultaneously repressing the two main early promoters, A2b and A2c (or PA2b and PA2c). This review describes in detail the regulatory mechanism leading to activation or repression, and discusses them in the context of the recent findings on the role of the RNA polymerase alpha subunit in transcription regulation. Activation of PA3 implies the p4-mediated stabilization of RNA polymerase at the promoter as a closed complex. Repression of the early A2b promoter occurs by binding of protein p4 to a site that partially overlaps the -35 consensus region of the promoter, therefore preventing the binding of RNA polymerase to the promoter. Repression of the A2c promoter, located 96 bp downstream from PA2b, occurs by a different mechanism that implies the simultaneous binding of protein p4 and RNA polymerase to the promoter in such a way that promoter clearance is inhibited. Interestingly, activation of PA3 and repression of PA2c require an interaction between protein p4 and RNA polymerase, and in both cases this interaction occurs between the same surface of protein p4 and the C-terminal domain of the alpha subunit of RNA polymerase, which provides new insights into how a protein can activate or repress transcription by subtle variations in the protein-DNA complexes formed at promoters.

Bacillus Phages↗
PubMed1997

Repression by Ume6 involves recruitment of a complex containing Sin3 corepressor and Rpd3 histone deacetylase to target promoters.

Sin3 and Rpd3 negatively regulate a diverse set of yeast genes. A mouse Sin3-related protein is a transcriptional corepressor, and a human Rpd3 homolog is a histone deacetylase. Here, we show that Sin3 and Rpd3 are specifically required for transcriptional repression by Ume6, a DNA-binding protein that regulates genes involved in meiosis. A short region of Ume6 is sufficient to repress transcription, and this repression domain mediates a two-hybrid and physical interaction with Sin3. Coimmunoprecipitation and two-hybrid experiments indicate that Sin3 and Rpd3 are associated in a complex distinct from TFIID and Pol II holoenzyme. Rpd3 is specifically required for repression by Sin3, and artificial recruitment of Rpd3 results in repression. These results suggest that repression by Ume6 involves recruitment of a Sin3-Rpd3 complex and targeted histone deacetylation.

DNA-Binding Proteins↗
PubMed1997

Repression participates in mammary tissue-specific activation of the caprine beta-lactoglobulin promoter.

Activation of the beta-lactoglobulin (BLG) gene promoter is restricted to overtly differentiated mammary tissue. To understand the mechanism underlying such tissue-specificity, activity of the caprine BLG promoter was analyzed comparatively in cultured mammary HC11 cells and non-mammary HeLa and CV-1 cells. The BLG promoter flanked by the 5'-regulatory sequence below -205 was strongly activated in the cells, regardless of the cell type. In non-mammary HeLa and CV-1 cells, this activation was repressed completely by the upper regulatory sequence. Weak repression was also observed in mammary HC11 cells kept non-confluent. As the mammary HC11 cells grew confluent and maintained the stabilized state, however, repression by the upper regulatory sequence was switched to activation. The repressive upstream flanking sequence was strongly recognized by the binding factors in non-mammary HeLa and CV-1 cells in an in vitro binding assay. Binding intensity and competition strength of the upstream regulatory regions were in a close correlation to their transcriptional repression activities in the cultured cells. The results suggest that the restricted activation of the caprine BLG promoter in differentiated mammary tissue is guaranteed by repression in non-mammary and undifferentiated mammary cells.

Animals↗
PubMed2003

A Crh-specific function in carbon catabolite repression in Bacillus subtilis.

Carbon catabolite repression in Bacillus subtilis is mediated by phosphorylation of the phosphoenolpyruvate:carbohydrate phosphotransferase system intermediate HPr at a serine residue catalyzed by HPr kinase. The orthologous protein Crh functions in a similar way, but, unlike HPr, it is not functional in carbohydrate uptake. A specific function for Crh is not known. The role of HPr and Crh in repressing the citM gene encoding the Mg(2+)-citrate transporter was investigated during growth of B. subtilis on different carbon sources. In glucose minimal medium, full repression was supported by both HPr and Crh. Strains deficient in Crh or the regulatory function of HPr revealed the same repression as the wild-type strain. In contrast, in a medium containing succinate and glutamate, repression was specifically mediated via Crh. Repression was relieved in the Crh-deficient strain, but still present in the HPr mutant strain. The data are the first demonstration of a Crh-specific function in B. subtilis and suggest a role for Crh in regulation of expression during growth on substrates other than carbohydrates.

Bacillus subtilis↗
PubMed1997

Junk DNA and sectorial gene repression.

Transcriptional repression in eukaryotes often involves tens or hundreds of kilobase pairs, two to three orders of magnitude more than the bacterial operator/repressor model does. Classical repression, represented by this model, was maintained over the whole span of evolution under different guises, and consists of repressor factors interacting primarily with promoters and, in later evolution, also with enhancers. The use of much larger amounts of DNA in the other mode of repression, here called the sectorial mode ('superrepression'), results in the conceptual transfer of so-called junk DNA to the domain of functional DNA. This contribution to the solution of the c-value paradox involves perhaps 15% of genomic 'junk,' and encompasses the bulk of the introns, thought to fill a stabilizing role in sectorially repressed chromatin structures. In the case of developmental genes, such structures appear to be heterochromatoid in character. However, solid clues regarding general structural features of superrepressed terminal differentiation genes remain elusive. The competition among superrepressible DNA sectors for sectorially binding factors offers, in principle, a molecular mechanism for developmental switches. Position effect variegation may be considered an abnormal manifestation of normal processes that underly development and involve heterochromatoid sectorial repression, which is apparently required for local elimination or modulation of morphological features (morpholysis). Sectorial repression of genes participating either in development or in terminal differentiation is considered instrumental in establishing stable cell types, and provides a basis for the distinction between determination and cell type specification. The gamut of possible stable cell types may have been broadened by the appearance in evolution of heavy isochores. Additional types of relatively frequent GC-rich cis-acting DNA motifs may offer reiterated binding sites to factors endowed with a selective (though not individually strong) affinity for these motifs. The majority of sequence motifs thought to be used in superrepression need not be individually maintained by natural selection. It is re-emphasized that the dispensability of sequences is not an indicator of their nonfunctionality and that in many cases, along noncoding sequences, nucleotides tend to fill functions collectively, rather than individually.

Animals↗
PubMed1997

DNA methylation directs a time-dependent repression of transcription initiation.

BACKGROUND: The regulation of DNA methylation is required for differential expression of imprinted genes during vertebrate development. Earlier studies that monitored the activity of the Herpes simplex virus (HSV) thymidine kinase (tk) gene after injection into rodent cells have suggested that assembly of chromatin influences the methylation-dependent repression of gene activity. Here, we examine the mechanism of methylation-dependent HSV tk gene regulation by direct determination of nucleoprotein organization during the establishment of a transcriptionally silenced state after microinjection of templates with defined methylation states into Xenopus oocyte nuclei. RESULTS: The transcriptional silencing conferred by a methylated DNA segment was not immediate, as methylated templates were initially assembled into active transcription complexes. The eventual loss of DNase I hypersenitive sites and inhibition of transcription at the HSV tk promoter only occurred after several hours. Flanking methylated vector DNA silenced the adjacent unmethylated HSV tk promoter, indicative of a dominant transmissible repression originating from a center of methylation. The resulting repressive nucleoprotein structure silenced transcription in the presence of activators that are able to overcome repression of transcription by nucleosomes. CONCLUSIONS: Silencing of transcription by DNA methylation is achieved at the level of transcription initiation and involves the removal of transcriptional machinery from active templates. This transcriptional repression can occur by indirect mechanisms involving the time-dependent assembly of repressive nucleoprotein complexes, which are able to inhibit transcription more effectively than nucleosomes alone.

Binding Sites↗
PubMed2003

P300 transcriptional repression is mediated by SUMO modification.

p300 and CREB binding protein can both activate and repress transcription. Here, we locate the CRD1 transcriptional repression domain between residues 1017 and 1029 of p300. This region contains two copies of the sequence psiKxE that are modified by the ubiquitin-like protein SUMO-1. Mutations that reduce SUMO modification increase p300-mediated transcriptional activity and expression of a SUMO-specific protease or catalytically inactive Ubc9 relieved repression, demonstrating that p300 repression was mediated by SUMO conjugation. SUMO-modified CRD1 domain bound HDAC6 in vitro, and p300 repression was relieved by histone deacetylase inhibition and siRNA-mediated ablation of HDAC6 expression. These results reveal a mechanism controlling p300 function and suggest that SUMO-dependent repression is mediated by recruitment of HDAC6.

Amino Acid Sequence↗
PubMed2004

SUMO promotes HDAC-mediated transcriptional repression.

Recently, SUMO modification has been shown to impart repressive properties on several transcriptional regulatory proteins. Indeed, the ETS domain transcription factor Elk-1 is modified by SUMO, and this modification is reversed by ERK MAP kinase pathway activation. This causes a switch from a repressive to activated state. However, the mechanism(s) of SUMO-mediated transcriptional repression is unclear. Here, we have investigated how sumoylation of Elk-1 leads to transcriptional repression. We demonstrate that sumoylation of Elk-1 results in the recruitment of histone deacetylase activity to promoters. In particular, our data point to a key role for HDAC-2. This recruitment leads to decreased histone acetylation and hence transcriptional repression at Elk-1 target genes. Thus, our data demonstrate an important integration point for two protein-modifying pathways in the cell, the SUMO and deacetylation pathways, that combine to promote transcriptional repression.

Blotting, Western↗
PubMed1995

Sp1 trans-activation of cell cycle regulated promoters is selectively repressed by Sp3.

The transcription factor Sp1 plays a key role in the activation of many cellular and viral gene promoters, including those that are regulated during the cell cycle. However, recent evidence indicates that Sp1 belongs to a larger family of factors which bind G/C box elements in order to either activate or repress transcription. Sp3, a member of this family, functions to repress transcriptional activation in two viral promoters, most likely by competing with Sp1 for GC box/Sp binding sites. However, the physiological role of Sp3 in the repression of endogenous cellular promoters has not been experimentally addressed. In the present study, we analyze the activity and binding of Sp3 on several eukaryotic promoters that contain G/C boxes and are known to be regulated during cellular proliferation and the cell cycle. Using antibodies specific for Sp1 and Sp3, we observe that both of these factors localize to the cell nucleus and have a similar, dispersed subnuclear distribution. Further, using gel mobility shift assays, we show that both Sp1 and Sp3 interact specifically with the histone H4 promoter. Transient cotransfections of Drosophila cells with Sp1 and Sp3 expression vectors and with the histone H4, thymidine kinase (TK), or dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) promoters show that only the DHFR promoter, containing multiple functional GC boxes, displays Sp3 repression of Sp1 activation. In contrast, the single G/C boxes within the histone H4 or TK promoters, which confer transcriptional activation via Sp1 binding, are not responsive to repression by Sp3. Therefore, we demonstrate that the endogenous cellular DHFR promoter is selectively responsive to Sp3 repression. The data suggest that Sp3 may contribute to the control of proliferation- and/or cell-regulated promoters depending upon the context and/or number of functional Sp1 binding sites.

Animals↗