4.8 Article

Analysis of the DNA-Binding Profile and Function of TALE Homeoproteins Reveals Their Specialization and Specific Interactions with Hox Genes/Proteins

期刊

CELL REPORTS
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 1321-1333

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.03.029

关键词

-

资金

  1. AIRC (Associazione Italiana Ricerche sul Cancro) [8929]
  2. Ministero dell'Universita e Ricerca (MERIT
  3. EU FP7 Prepobedia) [MIUR-FIRB RBNE08NKH7]
  4. Cariplo Foundation
  5. Italian Ministry of Health
  6. Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (MINECO) [RD06/0010/0008, BFU2009-08331/BMC]
  7. Consejeria de Educacion de la Comunidad de Madrid
  8. European Social Fund
  9. Russian Ministry of Education and Science [02.740.11.0872]
  10. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [12-04-01659-a]
  11. Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro start-up grant [4780]
  12. MINECO
  13. pro-CNIC Foundation
  14. FIRC (Fondazione Italiana Ricerche sul Cancro)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The interactions of Meis, Prep, and Pbx1 TALE homeoproteins with Hox proteins are essential for development and disease. Although Meis and Prep behave similarly in vitro, their in vivo activities remain largely unexplored. We show that Prep and Meis interact with largely independent sets of genomic sites and select different DNA-binding sequences, Prep associating mostly with promoters and housekeeping genes and Meis with promoter-remote regions and developmental genes. Hox target sequences associate strongly with Meis but not with Prep binding sites, while Pbx1 cooperates with both Prep and Meis. Accordingly, Meis1 shows strong genetic interaction with Pbx1 but not with Prep1. Meis1 and Prep1 nonetheless coregulate a subset of genes, predominantly through opposing effects. Notably, the TALE homeoprotein binding profile subdivides Hox clusters into two domains differentially regulated by Meis1 and Prep1. During evolution, Meis and Prep thus specialized their interactions but maintained significant regulatory coordination.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据